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..