DOCSLIB.ORG

The Macedonian Dynasty and the Expanding Empire, Ninth–Tenth Centuries

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Macedonian Dynasty and the Expanding Empire, Ninth–Tenth Centuries chapter 6 The Macedonian Dynasty and the Expanding Empire, Ninth–Tenth Centuries Basil i’s Use of the Elect Nation Concept Basil i seized the throne after having murdered the legitimate emperor Mi- chael iii on 24 September 867.1 In spite of this inglorious rise to power, Basil founded a dynasty which ruled the Byzantine empire for nearly 200 years. The Macedonian dynasty’s legitimacy relied to a great extent on the successful basis of legitimacy which Basil i formed and upon his own personal image, as transmitted through the Macedonian imperial ideology. This chapter will focus on the reign of Basil i. The main thesis of the chapter is that Basil gained his legitimacy as a ruler through the use of the Byzantine enc and its incorporation into the imperial ideology, creating a bond between the ruler and the Byzantine population: both were promoted as two facets and collaborating guardians of the Elect Nation identity, as formed after the Triumph of Orthodoxy in 843. Basil’s Image and Its Relationship to ot Models The image that Basil promoted and its relationship to ot models have been studied extensively by scholars such as Paul Magdalino,2 Gilbert Dagron3 and Leslie Brubaker.4This image was intended to legitimize Basil as a God-sent righ- teous king who rightly succeeded the former emperor, who had gone astray and whom God wished to supplant. Michael iii plays in this narrative the part 1 Basil was crowned by Michael iii as co-emperor on may 26, 866. When Basil felt that his position might be threatened and that Michael might supplant him, he murdered Michael and became sole emperor. 2 P. Magdalino, “Observations on the Nea Ekklesia of Basil i”, in idem, Studies on the History and Topography of Byzantine Constantinople (Aldershot, 2007), no. 5; first published in jöb 37 (1987), 51–64; Idem, “Basil i, Leo vi and the Feast of the Prophet Elijah”, ibid., no. 6; first published in jöb 38 (1988), 193–196. 3 Dagron, Emperor and Priest, pp. 192–201. 4 L. Brubaker,VisionandMeaninginNinth-CenturyByzantium:ImageasExegesisintheHomilies of Gregory of Nazianzus (Cambridge, 1999), pp. 173–193. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2018 | doi: 10.1163/9789004363830_007 the macedonian dynasty and the expanding empire 87 of the biblical Saul whereas Basil is the new David.5 Leslie Brubaker demon- strated the ways in which Basil was further compared to other ot models such as Joseph, Samson and Joshua, so as to “embody the perfect mediating leader who rules both with and through God.”6 Basil related himself to another ot fig- ure, the prophet Elijah, as one of his two patrons, the other being the archangel Gabriel. He dedicated a new imperial church, the Nea Ekklesia, to these two patrons, invested in it the relic of Elijah’s cloak and transformed the prophet’s commemoration on 20 July into an imperially sponsored feast day with the par- ticipation of the senate, the patriarch and the empire’s elite.7 Elijah’s patronage of the new ruler is further exhibited in cod. Par. Gr. 510, fol. Cv, where, in an illu- mination to the Homilies of Gregory Nazianzen, Basil is depicted between his two heavenly patrons, Elijah handing him the Labarum and Gabriel placing a crown upon his head.8 Basil’s reliance on ot imagery does not end here, for the Nea Ekklesia was the repository of several ot relics besides Elijah’s cloak: in the Nea were invested also the horn with which Samuel anointed David, the horn of Abraham’s ram, one of the trumpets of Jericho, Abraham’s table of hospital- ity on which he set food for the three angels, the olive branch of Noah’s dove, a cross made by Noah, carved on the vine which he planted after the flood and ‘Moses’ rod’, added at a later date.9 To that we may add the accounts regarding Solomon’s statue, said to have been previously placed by Justinian in front of the Hagia Sophia; a statue which, according to some of the sources, was burried by Basil i under the foundations of the Nea, thus relating Basil to both Solomon and Justinian, and his church—to Justinian’s Hagia Sophia.10 5 In addition to the above sources see also H. Maguire, “The Art of Comparing in Byzantium”, Art Bulletin 70 (1988), 88–103, pp. 89–93. 6 Brubaker, Vision and Meaning in Ninth-Century Byzantium, p. 199. 7 Magdalino, “Observations on the Nea”, passim; Dagron, Emperor and Priest, p. 207; Mag- dalino, “Basil i, Leo vi and the Feast of the Prophet Elijah”, suggests that the ceremo- nial procession, as described in Constantine Porphyrogenitos’ Book of Ceremonies, was initiated by Leo vi. Magdalino does not however deny Basil’s initial sponsorship of the prophet’s feast day. 8 Dagron, Emperor and Priest, pp. 193–195; for a thorough survey of the miniature paintings in this ms, see Brubaker, Vision and Meaning in Ninth-Century Byzantium and S. Der Neressian, “The Illustrations of the Homilies of Gregory of Nazianzus Paris Gr. 510”, dop 16 (1962), 195–228. 9 Dagron, Emperor and Priest, p. 210; Magdalino, “Observations on the Nea”, p. 58. 10 Magdalino, “Observations on the Nea”, p. 58, n. 42, relying on Pseudo-Symeon, Chronicle, in tc, ed. I. Bekker, 603–760, p. 692, George the Monk (continued), Georgius Monachus Continuatus, in tc, ed. I. Bekker, cshb (Bonn, 1838), 761–924, p. 844 and Leo Grammatikos, Chronographia, ed. I. Bekker, cshb (Bonn, 1842), p. 257..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Synopsis of Byzantine History, –
    Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-40474-8 - John Skylitzes: A Synopsis of Byzantine History, 811–1057 John Wortley Frontmatter More information JOHN SKYLITZES: A synopsis of Byzantine history, – John Skylitzes’ extraordinary Middle Byzantine chronicle covers the reigns of the Byzantine emperors from the death of Nicephorus I in to the deposition of Michael VI in , and provides the only surviving continuous narrative of the late tenth and early eleventh centuries. A high offi cial living in the late eleventh century, Skylitzes used a number of existing Greek histories (some of them no longer extant) to create a digest of the previous three centuries. It is with- out question the major historical source for the period, cited con- stantly in modern scholarship, and has never before been available in English. Th is edition features introductions by Jean-Claude Cheynet and Bernard Flusin, along with extensive notes by Cheynet. It will be an essential and exciting addition to the libraries of all historians of the Byzantine age. is Professor of History Emeritus at the University of Manitoba. He has published widely on the Byzantine era, and completed several translations to date, including Les Récits édifi - ants de Paul, évêque de Monembasie, et d’autres auteurs (), Th e ‘Spiritual Meadow’ of John Moschos, including the additional tales edited by Nissen and Mioni (), Th e spiritually benefi cial tales of Paul, Bishop of Monembasia and of other authors () and John Skylitzes: A Synopsis of Histories (AD –) , a provisional transla- tion published
    [Show full text]
  • Byzantine Conquests in the East in the 10 Century
    th Byzantine conquests in the East in the 10 century Campaigns of Nikephoros II Phocas and John Tzimiskes as were seen in the Byzantine sources Master thesis Filip Schneider s1006649 15. 6. 2018 Eternal Rome Supervisor: Prof. dr. Maaike van Berkel Master's programme in History Radboud Univerity Front page: Emperor Nikephoros II Phocas entering Constantinople in 963, an illustration from the Madrid Skylitzes. The illuminated manuscript of the work of John Skylitzes was created in the 12th century Sicily. Today it is located in the National Library of Spain in Madrid. Table of contents Introduction 5 Chapter 1 - Byzantine-Arab relations until 963 7 Byzantine-Arab relations in the pre-Islamic era 7 The advance of Islam 8 The Abbasid Caliphate 9 Byzantine Empire under the Macedonian dynasty 10 The development of Byzantine Empire under Macedonian dynasty 11 The land aristocracy 12 The Muslim world in the 9th and 10th century 14 The Hamdamids 15 The Fatimid Caliphate 16 Chapter 2 - Historiography 17 Leo the Deacon 18 Historiography in the Macedonian period 18 Leo the Deacon - biography 19 The History 21 John Skylitzes 24 11th century Byzantium 24 Historiography after Basil II 25 John Skylitzes - biography 26 Synopsis of Histories 27 Chapter 3 - Nikephoros II Phocas 29 Domestikos Nikephoros Phocas and the conquest of Crete 29 Conquest of Aleppo 31 Emperor Nikephoros II Phocas and conquest of Cilicia 33 Conquest of Cyprus 34 Bulgarian question 36 Campaign in Syria 37 Conquest of Antioch 39 Conclusion 40 Chapter 4 - John Tzimiskes 42 Bulgarian problem 42 Campaign in the East 43 A Crusade in the Holy Land? 45 The reasons behind Tzimiskes' eastern campaign 47 Conclusion 49 Conclusion 49 Bibliography 51 Introduction In the 10th century, the Byzantine Empire was ruled by emperors coming from the Macedonian dynasty.
    [Show full text]
  • BYZANTINE CAMEOS and the AESTHETICS of the ICON By
    BYZANTINE CAMEOS AND THE AESTHETICS OF THE ICON by James A. Magruder, III A dissertation submitted to Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Baltimore, Maryland March 2014 © 2014 James A. Magruder, III All rights reserved Abstract Byzantine icons have attracted artists and art historians to what they saw as the flat style of large painted panels. They tend to understand this flatness as a repudiation of the Classical priority to represent Nature and an affirmation of otherworldly spirituality. However, many extant sacred portraits from the Byzantine period were executed in relief in precious materials, such as gemstones, ivory or gold. Byzantine writers describe contemporary icons as lifelike, sometimes even coming to life with divine power. The question is what Byzantine Christians hoped to represent by crafting small icons in precious materials, specifically cameos. The dissertation catalogs and analyzes Byzantine cameos from the end of Iconoclasm (843) until the fall of Constantinople (1453). They have not received comprehensive treatment before, but since they represent saints in iconic poses, they provide a good corpus of icons comparable to icons in other media. Their durability and the difficulty of reworking them also makes them a particularly faithful record of Byzantine priorities regarding the icon as a genre. In addition, the dissertation surveys theological texts that comment on or illustrate stone to understand what role the materiality of Byzantine cameos played in choosing stone relief for icons. Finally, it examines Byzantine epigrams written about or for icons to define the terms that shaped icon production.
    [Show full text]
  • Paul MAGDALINO Domaines De Recherche Adresse Personnelle
    Paul MAGDALINO Professeur émérite de l’Université de St Andrews (Ecosse) Distinguished Research Professor, Koç University, Istanbul Membre de l’Académie Britannique Domaines de recherche Culture littéraire et religieuse de Constantinople Mentalités et représentation du pouvoir Urbanisme métropolitain et provincial Adresse personnelle 2 route de Volage, 01420, Corbonod, France Tél. 04 57 05 10 54 Curriculum vitae Né le 10 mai 1948 Etudes à Oxford, 1967-1977 Doctorat (DPhil) 1977 Enseignant (Maître de conférences, professeur associé, professeur), University of Saint Andrews, 1977-2009 Professeur à l’Université Koç d’Istanbul, 2004-2008 et 2010-2014 Fellow à Dumbarton Oaks, 1974-1975, 1994, 2013, 2015 Andrew Mellon Fellow, Catholic University of America, 1976-1977 A. v. Humboldt- Stipendiat, Frankfurt (1980-1981), Munich (1983), Berlin (2013) Professeur invité, Harvard University, 1995-1996 Directeur d’études invité, EPHE (1997, 2007), EHESS (2005) Chercheur invité à Dumbarton Oaks, 2006 Membre de l’Académie britannique depuis 2002 Membre correspondant de l’Institut de recherches byzantines de l’Université de Thessalonique (depuis 2010) Comités scientifiques et éditoriaux 1992 –Collection 'The Medieval Mediterranean', Brill 1993– Committee for the British Academy project on the Prosopography of the Byzantine Empire. 2001–7 Senior Fellows Committee, Dumbarton Oaks, Program in Byzantine Studies 2002 – Collection ‘Oxford Studies in Byzantium', Oxford University Press. 2006- La Pomme d’or, Geneva, chief editor 2007 – Comoité editorial de la revue Byzantinische Zeitschrift 2013-2014 – Editorial board of Koç University Press Publications Ouvrages 1976 (en collaboration avec Clive Foss) Rome and Byzantium (Oxford, 1976) 1991 Tradition and Transformation in Medieval Byzantium (Aldershot 1992) 1993 The Empire of Manuel I Komnenos, 1143-1180 (Cambridge, 1993).
    [Show full text]
  • The Byzantine State and the Dynatoi
    The Byzantine State and the Dynatoi A struggle for supremacy 867 - 1071 J.J.P. Vrijaldenhoven S0921084 Van Speijkstraat 76-II 2518 GE ’s Gravenhage Tel.: 0628204223 E-mail: [email protected] Master Thesis Europe 1000 - 1800 Prof. Dr. P. Stephenson and Prof. Dr. P.C.M. Hoppenbrouwers History University of Leiden 30-07-2014 CONTENTS GLOSSARY 2 INTRODUCTION 6 CHAPTER 1 THE FIRST STRUGGLE OF THE DYNATOI AND THE STATE 867 – 959 16 STATE 18 Novel (A) of Leo VI 894 – 912 18 Novels (B and C) of Romanos I Lekapenos 922/928 and 934 19 Novels (D, E and G) of Constantine VII Porphyrogenetos 947 - 959 22 CHURCH 24 ARISTOCRACY 27 CONCLUSION 30 CHAPTER 2 LAND OWNERSHIP IN THE PERIOD OF THE WARRIOR EMPERORS 959 - 1025 32 STATE 34 Novel (F) of Romanos II 959 – 963. 34 Novels (H, J, K, L and M) of Nikephoros II Phokas 963 – 969. 34 Novels (N and O) of Basil II 988 – 996 37 CHURCH 42 ARISTOCRACY 45 CONCLUSION 49 CHAPTER 3 THE CHANGING STATE AND THE DYNATOI 1025 – 1071 51 STATE 53 CHURCH 60 ARISTOCRACY 64 Land register of Thebes 65 CONCLUSION 68 CONCLUSION 70 APPENDIX I BYZANTINE EMPERORS 867 - 1081 76 APPENDIX II MAPS 77 BIBLIOGRAPHY 82 1 Glossary Aerikon A judicial fine later changed into a cash payment. Allelengyon Collective responsibility of a tax unit to pay each other’s taxes. Anagraphis / Anagrapheus Fiscal official, or imperial tax assessor, who held a role similar as the epoptes. Their major function was the revision of the tax cadastre. It is implied that they measured land and on imperial order could confiscate lands.
    [Show full text]
  • The Emperor Michael III and the Battle of Bishop's Meadow (A.D. 863) Huxley, George Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Winter 1975; 16, 4; Proquest Pg
    The Emperor Michael III and the Battle of Bishop's Meadow (A.D. 863) Huxley, George Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Winter 1975; 16, 4; ProQuest pg. 443 The Emperor Michael III and the Battle of Bishop's Meadow (A.D. 863) George Huxley HE FOUR BOOKS of Genesios deal with Byzantine history from T the accession of Leo the Armenian to the death of Basil I. In the fourth book Genesios includes an account of the defeat by Petronas, uncle of the emperor Michael III, of the redoubtable cOmar cUbaid Allah al AqtaC of Melitene.1 According to the historian, cOmar (" Af'EP, C Amr) invaded the Armeniak theme and advanced as far as the coast at Amisos where, because he could progress no further, he ordered the sea to be beaten with rods (Genesios here com­ pares the behaviour of Xerxes at the Hellespont). The emperor, being dismayed at the number of prisoners taken by cOmar, appointed Petronas to command the tagma of the Schools with orders to attack the enemy. When news of the coming attack reached cOmar, his subordinates urged him to retreat to his own territory and to fight only if the Byzantine forces overtook them; but the emir, declaring that he was no coward, decided to advance towards Petro­ nas and his army. The opposed forces drew close together in the Abisian district on the borders of the Paphlagonian and Armeniak themes, with a mountain between them, at a place called Porson (ll6pcwv). Both sides tried to occupy the mountain, and in the ensuing battle COmar was killed.
    [Show full text]
  • The Byzantine Empire.Pdf
    1907 4. 29 & 30 BEDFORD STREET, LONDON . BIBLIOTECA AIEZAMANTULUI CULTURAL 66)/ NICOLAE BALCESCU" TEMPLE PRIMERS THE BYZANTINE EMPIRE bY N. JORGA Translated from the French by ALLEN H. POWLES, M.A. All rights reserved AUTHOR'S PREFACE THIs new history of Byzantium, notwithstanding its slender proportions, has been compiled from the original sources. Second-hand materials have only been used to compare the results obtained by the author with those which his pre- decessors have reached. The aim in. view has not been to present one more systematic chronology of Byzantine history, considered as a succession of tragic anecdotes standing out against a permanent background.I have followed the development of Byzantine life in all its length and breadth and wealth, and I have tried to give a series of pictures rather than the customary dry narrative. It may be found possibly that I have given insufficient information on the Slav and Italian neighbours and subjects of the empire.I have thought it my duty to adopt the point of view of the Byzantines themselves and to assign to each nation the place it occupied in the minds of the politicians and thoughtful men of Byzantium.This has been done in such a way as not to prejudicate the explanation of the Byzantine transformations. Much less use than usual has been made of the Oriental sources.These are for the most part late, and inaccuracy is the least of their defects.It is clear that our way of looking v vi AUTHOR'S PREFACE at and appreciatingeventsismuch morethat of the Byzantines than of the Arabs.In the case of these latter it is always necessary to adopt a liberal interpretation, to allow for a rhetoric foreign to our notions, and to correct not merely the explanation, but also the feelings which initiated it.We perpetually come across a superficial civilisation and a completely different race.
    [Show full text]
  • Byzantine Gold Coins and Jewellery
    Byzantine Gold Coins andJewellery A STUDY OF GOLD CONTENTS * Andrew Oddy * and Susan La Niece * Department of Conservation and Technical Service, and Research Laboratory *, British Museum, London, United Kingdom When the capital oftheRoman Empire was transferredfrom Rome to Constantinople in 330 A.D., a new `Rome' was created in the Eastern half oftheEmpire which was initially to rival, and very soon eclipse, the original one. This city became the capital of onehalfof a divided Empire, and as most of the Western half was gradually overrun and fell to `barbariuns'from outside the Empire during the next 150 years, Constantinople became the centre forthesurtrival of `classical' culture. The Byzantine Empire slowly changed, of course, being affected by the emergence ofMedievalEurope to the Westand oflslam to the East andSouth, but despitethepressuresfromthesetwopotentaenemies, the essential culture ofearly Byzantium adhered to Roman traditions, particularly in art, architecture, and all other applied arts, such as coinage. The Byzantine Gold Coinage same in the main mint of Constantinople until the reign of The standard gold coin of the later Roman Empire was the Nicephorus 11 (963-969 A.D.) although the designs changed solidus, first introduced by Constantine the Great in 312 A.D. and dramatically, with the introduction of other members of the struck at 72 to the Roman pound (i.e. an individual weight of about imperial family on either obverse or reverse and, from the first reign 4.5 g). The shape and weight of this coin remained essentially the ofJustinian 11(685-695 A.D.), with a representation of Christ on Fig. 1(above) The Byzantine Gold Coinagefrom A.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Heraclius and the Evolution of Byzantine Strategy Bob Ekkebus Illinois Wesleyan University
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Digital Commons @ Illinois Wesleyan University Constructing the Past Volume 10 | Issue 1 Article 11 2009 Heraclius and the Evolution of Byzantine Strategy Bob Ekkebus Illinois Wesleyan University Recommended Citation Ekkebus, Bob (2009) "Heraclius and the Evolution of Byzantine Strategy," Constructing the Past: Vol. 10: Iss. 1, Article 11. Available at: http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/constructing/vol10/iss1/11 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the History Department at Digital Commons @ IWU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Constructing the Past by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ IWU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ©Copyright is owned by the author of this document. Heraclius and the Evolution of Byzantine Strategy Abstract The yB zantine military strategy expressed in the 10th century treatise On Skirmishing marked a decisive shift in Byzantine strategy and an entirely new mindset in approaching war. What is unique about this strategy is that it was not created during a war against the Arabs, but before they existed as a military power. The foundation was laid during the Emperor Heraclius's Persian campaigns of 622-628. To demonstrate the key contributions of Heraclius, these Persian campaigns shall be analyzed and compared with the advice prescribed in On Skirmishing. Also, the military events recorded by Theophanes of the 7th and 8th centuries will be compared with Heraclius and On Skirmishing to show the development of the strategy after Heraclius and how it measured up to the final form in On Skirmishing.
    [Show full text]
  • The Political Opposition to Alexios I Komnenos (1081–1118)
    The Political Opposition to Alexios I Komnenos (1081–1118) Inauguraldissertation zur Erlangung des Akademischen Grades eines Dr. phil., vorgelegt dem Fachbereich 07 Geschichts- und Kulturwissenschaften der Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz von João Vicente de Medeiros Publio Dias aus São Paulo, Brasilien 2020 Dekan: 1. Gutachter: 2. Gutachter: Tag des Prüfungskolloquiums: 18. Juli 2018 Dedicado a Dai Table of Contents Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................... 1 Note on translation and transliteration .................................................................................. 2 i. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 3 i.i. Bibliographic Review ...................................................................................................... 4 i.ii Conceptual and Theoretical Issues on Political Opposition in Byzantium ...................... 7 i.iii Sources .......................................................................................................................... 18 i.iii.i Material for History of Nikephoros Bryennios .......................................................... 24 i.iii.ii The Alexiad of Anna Komnene ................................................................................. 26 i.iii.iii The Epitome Historion of Ioannes Zonaras .............................................................. 30 i.iii.iv The Chronike
    [Show full text]
  • Basil I's Genealogy and Byzantine Historical Memory of The
    Artaxerxes in Constantinople: Basil I’s Genealogy and Byzantine Historical Memory of the Achaemenid Persians Nathan Leidholm HE EMPIRE FOUNDED by Cyrus the Great in 550 BCE proved to be exceptionally long-lasting in its impact on T subsequent polities throughout much of the ancient and medieval world. The memory of ancient Persia and its mean- ing were constantly made and re-made for centuries from Western Europe to India and beyond. Its impact was so great that modern scholars have even coined a term to describe it: ‘Persianism’. Rolf Strootman and Miguel John Versluys have recently collected a number of essays dedicated to the concept, which is designed to encapsulate “the ideas and associations revolving around [Achaemenid] Persia and appropriated in specific contexts for specific (socio-cultural or political) rea- sons.”1 The empire encouraged and accommodated a wide range of ideological purposes across several linguistic, religious, and political communities from antiquity to the present. In- deed, Garth Fowden once described large portions of antiquity as “living in the shadow of Cyrus.”2 Yet the medieval Roman Empire, Byzantium, has been largely absent from these discus- sions. The Byzantines maintained a knowledge of and interest in 1 R. Strootman and M. John Versluys, “From Culture to Concept: The Reception and Appropriation of Persia in Antiquity,” in Persianism in An- tiquity (Stuttgart 2017) 9. 2 G. Fowden, Empire to Commonwealth: Consequences of Monotheism in Late An- tiquity (Princeton 1993) 3–4. ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 60 (2020) 444–471 Article copyright held by the author(s) and made available under the Creative Commons Attribution License CC-BY https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ NATHAN LEIDHOLM 445 the Persian past throughout the empire’s history, employing and drawing from this past in ways that went beyond simple antiquarianism.
    [Show full text]
  • Letters of Gelasius and Nicholas I on Papal Authority
    Manipulating the Message: Letters of Gelasius and Nicholas I on Papal Authority BRONWEN NEIL Macquarie University Abstract: Gelasius I, bishop of Rome during the problematic period of Odoacer’s re- placement as rex Italiae in 493, was greatly concerned with the power of the bishop of Rome. While Gelasius was one of the most significant bishops of the first five hundred years of the Roman church, he is primarily known for his letter to the Byzantine em- peror Anastasius in 494. His Epistula 12 introduced the controversial theory of “two powers” or “two swords.” The idea was taken up in the mid-ninth century by another champion for papal primacy, when Nicholas I embedded a quote from Gelasius in his denunciation of the Byzantine emperor Michael III. I examine the use of political rhet- oric in ecclesiastical contexts in late antiquity and the early Middle Ages, in particular the way that extracts from such letters could go on to have a life of their own in canon law. Finally, I measure the historical impact of each letter as a form of soft diplomacy. hile Gelasius I (492‒96) was one of the most significant bishops of the first five hundred W years of the Roman church, he is primarily known today for one letter. His Epistula 12 introduced the controversial theory of “two powers” or “two swords,” as it came to be known.1 The idea was taken up by another champion for papal primacy, when Nicholas I (858‒67) embedded quotes from it in his excoriation of the Byzantine emperor Michael III.2 In this article I examine the use of political rhetoric in each case, asking three questions.
    [Show full text]