sign in sign up
<<
Home , Magnaura, Pulcheria

IΔΡΥΜA ΜΕΙΖΟΝΟΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ Συγγραφή : Panayotov Alexander (22/12/2008) Για παραπομπή : Panayotov Alexander , "Jews in (Byzantine period)", 2008, Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Μείζονος Ελληνισμού, Κωνσταντινούπολη URL:

Jews in Constantinople (Byzantine period)

Περίληψη :

1. The sources

A synagogue in the Copper Market of Constantinople is first mentioned by (ca760-12th March 817) in relation to the construction of the of the Mother of God in AD 449-450. According to his description the church was built by Pulcheria the sister of Theodosius II (408-450) and supplanted the existing synagogue. The text of Theophanes’Chronography runs as follows:

Then she built the church of the Copper Market for the holy Mother of God, which had previously been a Jewish synagogue.||

However, later in his work Theophanes returns again to the construction of the church stating this time that it was built in AD 576- 577 by Justin II (565-578) :

In this year the emperor Justin took away the synagogue of the Hebrews, the one in the Chalkoprateia, and built the church of our Lady, the holy Mother of God, which is near the Great Church.

The contradiction between the passages raises questions about the historical reliability of the evidence provided by Theophanes. As Mango has rightly noted, in the latter passage Theophanes re-edits his earlier source on the basis of a later one. A possible explanation for the attribution of the church to Justin II can be found in the description of Constantinople preserved in P£tria K wnstantinoupÒlewj III, 32:

The [church of the] holy Mother of God [in] the Copper Market was previously, under , occupied by Jews who had been there for 132 years and were selling copper handiwork. Theodosius the Little banished them from that place, cleared the site and built the temple of the Mother of God. Then, after an earthquake the temple collapsed, Justin, the former curopalates , built it and donated immovable property.

This tenth century source states that at the time of Constantine the Great (306-337) the Copper Market was associated with the Jewish merchants of copper handiwork who had built a synagogue there. This is confirmed by the notation of the anonymous author that the Jews occupied this part of the city for 132 years; they were there from AD 317. The problem is that the latter date is actually an invention of the Patria and has nothing to do with the date of the Jewish establishment in the Copper Market. It is part of a tradition, which probably originated in the ninth century, that placed the foundation of Constantinople in the twelfth year of the accession of Constantine. In this way, it counts 132 years from the foundation of the city until the end of the reign of Theodosius II. The Patria is notoriously unreliable as a historical source and we can conclude safely only that it gives 449 as the date for the conversion of the synagogue and building the church of . This agrees with Theophanes. The number of years from the hypothetical date of Constantinople’s foundation simply means that the Jews were there when Constantine founded the city. This is possible evidence that the Jewish community had been established in Byzantion before the actual dedication of the city in AD 330. The last statement of the Patria that Justin II restored the church at Chalkoprateia after an earthquake adding a new chapel for its main - the Virgin’s girdle, deserves more attention. It is probably dependent on earlier evidence, provided by George the Monk (or Hamartolos), that the church built by Theodosius II had been destroyed by an earthquake:

He built in the Chalkoprateia the temple of the holy Mother of God, which had previously been a Jewish synagogue. The walls of the inland city and the city itself had been destroyed in two diverse intervals [then] the different walls were restored in sixty days.

George the Monk’s account was written about half a century after the Chronography of Theophanes, but it already incorporates evidence that an earthquake had destroyed the newly built church of the Mother of God. It remains unknown whether his account is

Δημιουργήθηκε στις 26/9/2021 Σελίδα 1/5 IΔΡΥΜA ΜΕΙΖΟΝΟΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ Συγγραφή : Panayotov Alexander (22/12/2008) Για παραπομπή : Panayotov Alexander , "Jews in Constantinople (Byzantine period)", 2008, Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Μείζονος Ελληνισμού, Κωνσταντινούπολη URL:

Jews in Constantinople (Byzantine period) based on earlier evidence or a later tradition designed to explain the second foundation of the church in the Copper Market. George the Monk does agree with Theophanes about the date of the conversion of the synagogue, but disagrees with him concerning the original builder of the church – asserting that this was Theodosius II not his sister Pulcheria. The problem is that it is not clear whether the church was built during the reign of Theodosius II (408-450) or during Pulcheria’s own reign (450-453). As shall be seen later, the Augusta probably converted the synagogue into a church during the last years of her brother’s reign. In accordance with that conclusion, patriarch Nicephorus I Callistus (ca750/758 - 5th April 828), a contemporary of Theophanes, notes that the confiscation of the synagogue and the building of the church took place during the reign of Pulcheria:

Then she constructed the temple in the Chalkoprateia reshaping the Jewish synagogue, it is beautiful and at same time designed with great splendour, a Divine home built for the Mother of God seen all around.

Nevertheless, some sources follow the usual practice of attributing the major building projects in the capital to the reigning emperor. For examples see the later accounts of Georgius Cedrenus and Michael Glycas (XIIth century) and Joel (first half of the XIIIth century) make no exception. However, in the twelfth century chronicle of John Zonaras there is an intriguing story, which implies that the synagogue was built illegally during the reign of (379-394). The text runs as follows:

During the absence of the emperor in the West the Jews paid honour to the prefect of the city Honoratus in order to build a costly synagogue in the Copper Market and he granted his permission, for he professed Hellenic beliefs. Yet, that irritated the people of the city and they cursed the prefect, but he did not pay any attention to their blasphemies. Then, one night, violating the law, they set the synagogue on fire and burned it down. The prefect wrote to the emperor Theodosius about that and he laid penalty on those who had dared to burn the synagogue to pay all the expenses allowing it to be built again. The great Ambrosius learnt about that, since the emperor resided at that time in the city of Milan and was celebrating one of the Dominical feasts in the church, and spoke to the emperor: To what end you emperor are insulting the One who made you a king from a common man, entrusted you with the flock that He remitted with His blood, and who then put a crown on your squalid head, denying Him with your decision, most honoured, to have Christians pay the Jews and coercing them in the middle of the city, in which Christ is proclaimed and the cross adored, to built a synagogue of the murderers of Christ? Ashamed the emperor justified himself: And to allow bishop the lawless and shameless crowd to do as they like in well-ordered cities? But, is it right to permit emperor responded the divine Ambrosius, the Jews to have a synagogue in the centre of a pious city and to whisper blasphemies in the ears of the pious? I do not believe that this was your judgement, orthodox . After that, Theodosius calmed down, revoked the penalty on the Byzantines and strongly prohibited the Jews from possessing a synagogue within the queen of cities.

Zonaras locates his story in the period between AD 390 and 394 when, during his Western campaign, Theodosius I resided in Milan. The text reveals that the Jews of Constantinople bribed the prefect ( parcoj) of the city, Honoratus, in order to gain permission to build synagogue in the Copper Market. The prefect, himself a pagan, granted his approval and even patronised the construction. His decision provoked disturbances in the city and the mob burned the building. The emperor, informed by Honoratus, ruled that the synagogue should be rebuilt at the expense of the arsonists. The law, promulgated by Theodosius I in AD 393 granting protection to Jewish assemblies and synagogues in the empire against Christian assaults testifies that such acts of violence were not exceptional in that period. As Linder has recently observed, the frequent legislation on this matter indicates that the imperial government was less than successful in enforcing these laws. What follows in the narrative of Zonaras is a dialogue between Theodosius and Ambrosius very similar to the one that, according to Sozomen and Theodoret of Cyrrhus, took place after the massacre of AD 390 in Thessalonica. The Emperor, faulted for his decision by Ambrosius, pleaded that it was in accordance with the law, but after a passionate speech delivered from the bishop he rescinded his judgement. Theodosius even forbade the construction of new synagogues in Constantinople, ruling that they can be built only on the city’s outskirts. It is not improbable to consider the last note of Zonaras as a reflection of the conditions under which the Jewish population of Constantinople lived in the twelfth century; the very time of his life and work. However, the story is without doubt legendary and probably belongs to a larger collection of similar anecdota focussed on the relationship between Theodosius I and Ambrosius of Milan. The silence of the sources on this incident and the problematic existence of the prefect Honoratus strengthens this observation. It is not impossible that this particular text was composed for the needs of governmental anti-Jewish propaganda in the twelfth century. Back to the sources. According to the Novels of Justinian, an earlier and reliable source, the building was erected under the auspices of , the wife of (457- 474). Accordingly, the history of the site becomes more complicated and difficult to explain. During the last years there have been

Δημιουργήθηκε στις 26/9/2021 Σελίδα 2/5 IΔΡΥΜA ΜΕΙΖΟΝΟΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ Συγγραφή : Panayotov Alexander (22/12/2008) Για παραπομπή : Panayotov Alexander , "Jews in Constantinople (Byzantine period)", 2008, Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Μείζονος Ελληνισμού, Κωνσταντινούπολη URL:

Jews in Constantinople (Byzantine period) many attempts to settle the question, but it seems that most scholars have adopted the suggestion of David Lathoud. According to Lathoud, Pulcheria converted the synagogue into a church, including a redevelopment of the building completed by Verina some years later. Then, after an earthquake, the church of the Mother of God was erected from the ground by Justin II, which explains the claim that he was the original builder. Very recently, however, Mango has suggested that the building of the church and therefore the conversion of the synagogue in Chalkoprateia should be attributed not to Pulcheria, but to Verina. A possible solution of this problem is to accept that the church of Pulcheria had been destroyed by the great fire of 476, which was set in the Copper Market and destroyed the surrounding area including the city’s . It was then rebuilt by Verina. If that was the case, it is natural to expect the Empress to be named as its original builder in the same way as Justin II was named about hundred years later. The obvious difficulty in this construction is that it would be expected that such a venerated church would be mentioned among the casualties of fire. There is no even a word. Another, but similar, possibility is to posit that the Jewish synagogue in the Copper Market disappeared during the same disaster, which gave Verina or, as a recently published ninth century hagiographic text infers, (474/476-491) the opportunity to build the church. Both suggestions, however, remain tentative because of the shortage of documentary sources.

2. Localisation of the site

The church of the holy Mother of God in Chalkoprateia is situated about 150 m. west of St Sophia and north of the city Basilica. In modern Istanbul the site is identified with the mosque Acem Ağa Mescidi, built over its eastern side, while the surrounding buildings cover the south aisle as well as the baptistery of the church in the north. According to Mathews the architectural plan of the church was similar to that of the Studios basilica, most probably built in AD 453. Nothing survives from the original building of the church, i.e. the converted synagogue, especially after the extensional rebuilding work done by Justin II and (876-886) . The Copper Market of Constantinople is localised between the church of Theotokos and the area presently occupied by the mosque Zeynep Sultan Camii. The market played an important role in the city life of ancient Byzantion. It was established near the agora and subsequently incorporated in the city of Constantine the Great. From the fifth century onwards the Copper Market is recorded as located in the fourth region of Constantinople alongside the city’s Basilica, the baths of Zeuxippos, St Sophia, the Augusteon, Magnaura, the Senate, and the golden .

3. Analysis

The evidence of the Byzantine historians and chronographers concerning the existence of a synagogue in the Copper Market, though meagre and sometimes contradictory, does allow some cautious, if not airtight, suggestions to be made about the early history of Byzantine Jewry. Thus, it is important to start our analysis with an outline of the information omitted in the sources. Firstly, the literary sources do not provide the evidence that can help us to trace the history of the Jewish community of the Copper Market from its origins until the confiscation and conversion of its synagogue. As has already been noted, the obscure saying of the Patria that the Jews had occupied the Copper Market for 132 years, starting from AD 317, indicates only that they were there at, and possibly before, the foundation of Constantinople. The other sources, however, which are related to the new foundation of the city by Constantine the Great, do not provide such information. We are somewhat more fortunate with other aspect of the evidence from the Patria, which states that these Jews were traders of copper handiwork. Theophanes and the later sources unanimously associate the Copper Market with the Jewish merchants. It is not clear, however, whether the Jews there were engaged in manufacturing as well as in trading of copper handiwork. To make the puzzle less complicated we might consider the Jewish establishment in the Copper Market as a community of artisans selling their own products. Similar quarters, occupied by artisans, are well evidenced in Constantinople. The accounts of the presence of a synagogue suggest that we are probably dealing either with a communal building or with the building of collegia, a professional association of Jewish artisans. Whether the Jews also lived in that area is difficult to assume because of the lack of evidence. Though suggestive in this direction, the statement of the Patria remains problematic. However, the Christian legends associated with the sanctuaries in the Copper Market support the possible identification of the area as the Jewish quarter of the city. Thus, the story of the son of a Jewish glass-worker who following the example of his Christian classmates and ate from the communion bread reported both by Gregory of Tours and his contemporary Evagrius apparently took place in the Copper Market of Constantinople. Evagrius dates the story to the episcopacy of Menas (536-552). Similarly, the well-known legend of the miraculous of Christ the Guarantor ('Antifwnht»j) is set again in the Copper

Δημιουργήθηκε στις 26/9/2021 Σελίδα 3/5 IΔΡΥΜA ΜΕΙΖΟΝΟΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ Συγγραφή : Panayotov Alexander (22/12/2008) Για παραπομπή : Panayotov Alexander , "Jews in Constantinople (Byzantine period)", 2008, Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Μείζονος Ελληνισμού, Κωνσταντινούπολη URL:

Jews in Constantinople (Byzantine period) Market. It is not impossible to infer from the text that the Jew Abraham, the generous moneylender of Theodore from the story, resided in the neighbourhood of Chalkoprateia. Magdalino recently suggested that the legend has at its core a real event, which after AD 632 was swiftly absorbed by the imperial propaganda to support the efforts of (610-641) in converting the Jewish population of his empire. There is no need to argue that the legends are unreliable as a historical source. What is important here is that they unanimously, and in agreement with the evidence of the Byzantine historians cited earlier, endorse the tradition that represents the area of the Copper Market as the oldest Jewish quarter of Constantinople. Secondly, the problem with the date of conversion of the synagogue is closely related to the question, ‘who was the builder of the church of the holy Mother of God’– Theodosius II, his sister Pulcheria or Verina. In recent years there were some doubts that the construction of the church was a project patronised by Pulcheria. This scepticism is based, firstly, on obscure circumstances around the confiscation and conversion of the synagogue. In the second place, we have to consider the unsolved question about whether Pulcheria was the original instigator of the conversion or not. Whatever the truth, the evidence strongly suggests that the Augusta influenced the religious policy of Theodosius II. The special interest and devotion of Pulcheria who adopted virginity in her youth to the cult of the Virgin undoubtedly inspired her building projects in Constantinople. The building of churches dedicated to the Mother of God in the words of Holum: “emphasised in monumental architecture the association between the Virgin Theotokos and the virgin Augusta”. Nevertheless, the reason for the conversion of the synagogue remains unclear. A logical solution is to assign this act to the personal prejudices of Pulcheria toward Jews and Judaism. Logical, but a mere speculation as the information on the personal predilections of the Augusta is obscure or lacking. The last statement can also be applied to the other possible builder of the church – the wife of Leo I – empress Verina. What cannot be denied is her devotion to the cult of Virgin Mary, which led her to patronise the establishment of the church of Virgin Mary at . But, whether it is correct or not to attribute to her the conversion of the Jewish synagogue in Chalkoprateia remains an open question. Finally, we should mention that it is not clear whether the synagogue was demolished or converted. Considering the evidence of Theophanes and patriarch Nicephorus I Callistus it seems that Pulcheria actually converted the synagogue into the church of the holy Mother of God, probably making certain additions to the building. However, according to the Patria Theodosius II ordered the place where the synagogue stood to be cleared (¢nakaq£raj) before the building of the church started. The later accounts are not helpful in this matter, noticing only that the church was built on the place previously occupied by a synagogue. On the one hand, this can simply mean that the synagogue was in ruins when the construction of the church commenced. On the other hand, this explains why the site could not produce any archaeological data related to the synagogue. Speculating with the evidence a bit more, we can suggest that the synagogue had been deliberately demolished before the construction of Pulcheria’s church, a process similar to the conversion of the synagogues at Stobi (Macedonia) and Apamea (Syria) in the fifth century. In the years following the death of Theodosius I the right of the Jews to assemble and build new synagogues was drastically limited. The laws issued under the rule of Theodosius II between AD 412 and 423, while concordant with the previous legislation, are a good example of the change of the official policy towards Jews. In AD 415 Gamaliel VI had been prevented by law to construct new synagogues and ordered by the Emperor to destroy those existing in unpopulated places. This new attitude in imperial legislation is probably best expressed in a law promulgated at Constantinople on 15 February 423, in the names of Theodosius II and and addressed to Asclepiodotus, Praefectus Praetorio of the East. The legislator affirms the protection of synagogues against deliberate destruction ordering that the Jewish communities should receive places for the construction of new synagogues to replace those converted illegally into churches. But, at same time, he prohibits the construction of new synagogues. And finally, in 438, Theodosius II enacted a law that, while repeating his previous legislation on Jews and Samaritans, recognised the right of the Church to confiscate newly built synagogues on its own behalf. Thus, the fate of the synagogue in the Copper Market is not a surprise. The central location of the building as well as its closeness to the main sanctuaries and public structures of the imperial city was a sufficient reason for its confiscation and conversion. Moreover, the fact that the synagogue was supplanted by one of the most venerated churches of Constantinople under the auspices of an Augusta explicitly underlined the new policy towards Jews and Judaism in the Eastern .

Δημιουργήθηκε στις 26/9/2021 Σελίδα 4/5 IΔΡΥΜA ΜΕΙΖΟΝΟΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ Συγγραφή : Panayotov Alexander (22/12/2008) Για παραπομπή : Panayotov Alexander , "Jews in Constantinople (Byzantine period)", 2008, Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Μείζονος Ελληνισμού, Κωνσταντινούπολη URL:

Jews in Constantinople (Byzantine period) Βιβλιογραφία :

Δημιουργήθηκε στις 26/9/2021 Σελίδα 5/5