Feminism in Byzantine Empire - Essay Example

Academia - Research December 2009 Feminism in Byzantium: Three Empresses and their Political Power Power, political duties and devious intrigue were to be expected by any woman whose husband, father or son was crowned Emperor in Byzantium. The Empresses Irene, Theodora and Zoe all marked their reigns with deeds that emphasized the might of important women of their time. This discussion will illustrate their attitudes and abilities to understand and equal the powerful men they encountered and dealt with during their lives. Although Emperors were visible and famous, and it was their face that appeared on coins, and their image that was put first on mosaics and other decorations of the Empire, the women by their side had as much to do with the wars, military movements, sieges, and financial business of their times. They also had a lot to do with installations and depositions of emperors (Sewter/Psellus 1997). To understand them better, it is important to note that these three Empresses lived at the time following the birth of Christendom, from about 770 to the middle of the second century, when the Roman Empire had its main base and 'headquarters' in Byzantium, a place we now know as Istanbul, in Turkey. It was a strategic place, in a prime position on the coast of the important Mediterranean Sea (Sewter/Psellus 1979). With part of its area firmly in Europe, and the other at the gateway to the Holy Lands (known now as the Middle East) and Asia, this area could dominate in terms of wealth, politics and power. Syria, whose cities of Aleppo, Damascus and Antioch were centers of trade and knowledge, was so close by that the men - and the important women - of this age and time had a lot of resources at their disposal, both in material wealth and in clever advisors, and this enabled them to mark history with their own names in all matters that had to do with culture, the military and without any doubt, the economy. Chronologically, the first of these women, Irene, was a powerful monarch in her own right, and it is an indication of her attitude that she chose to call herself by the masculine term 'Basileus' or Emperor (Garland 1999). After being expelled from the marriage-bed because of hiding icons when the Emperor had banned them, she became involved in a number of conspiracies. Intelligent and wily - probably because of her doubtful social status before she was married - she wielded power from behind the scenes, coming into her full might when she became regent for her son on the death of her husband Leo IV. Her son was to become Constantine VI, but while he was younger, his mother took advantage of the position of regent to enforce her beliefs in Christianity and the Pope. She used her wiles to promote some men and get rid of others. A famous action of hers was the idea of ordaining those who threatened the throne. Being priests disqualified them from being candidates (Sewter/Psellus ibid). No stranger to intrigue, she made her son extremely uncomfortable with her exploits when he came into power. There are several important political events of her time that have Irene's unmistakable signature: she liked underhanded dealings and plots. But, ironically, she became most famous for restoring worship of icons and other religious images. (Garland 1999). This seems to indicate that she felt her power came from her faith and that it absolved her of a lot of unethical or improper dealings. She deposed her own son and had him exiled, after which she ruled in her own right for five years. This grand conspiracy caused deep factions in the Church and the empire court. When she had her son's eyes gouged out, which killed him, people believed the heavens were angry, because the sky darkened for a number of days (Garland 1999). People believed she had enough power to affect more than just politics. She was revered just like a saint after her death, probably because of her political power that restored worship to those who wanted it. She has never been canonized. Irene was ultimately taken off the throne and had to spend the last of her days in a monastery that she had helped to establish herself when she was at the height of her powers.(Garland 1999) Her role in some of the world's most historic politics is legendary. The daughter of Constantine VIII and Helena, Zoe Porphyrogenneta was born royal, as her name suggests, 'born to the purple'. She is not to be confused with another Zoe, who was the mistress of Leo, daughter of Zaoutzes (Garland 1999). The Porphyrogenneta's life spanned the years 1026 to 1050. She was not allowed to marry by her father - for political and fearful reasons - until she was sent off, almost a middle-aged woman, to Rome to marry Otto. She arrived too late, however: her bridegroom was dead. This incident probably gave Zoe the bold and tough attitude she used for the rest of her life. (Sewter/Psellus 1979) Known for her stunning beauty and her efforts to stay attractive, she had many husbands. Because of her station, she was later allowed to choose them herself, but she never had children due to her elderly age when she married, because of her father's delays. Her power to influence politics was probably generated when her adopted son, Michael, exiled her to a convent on an island close to Constantinople (Sewter/Psellus Ibid). This was an aware woman, who had sharp political understanding, with which she was so discreet she is only down as having one famous exploit in the reign of Romanas (Garland 1999 p138). It is hard to believe that such an astute woman would have done nothing else to influence the political, military and financial affairs that were taking place around her except at this one time. She had infamous arrogance and a very quick temper (Sewter/Psellus 1998), and was known as The Macedonian princess: not mild-mannered like the Greeks or quiet and calm like the Romans. Well-loved by the people, there was a riot when her son Michael sent Zoe away. Returning in 1042 with her sister Theodora, a plot was hatched to do something about Michael. It was probably Zoe's plan that they should get rid of the adopted son she now saw as overbearing. She understood that he was a very unpopular ruler and that the majority of the people were behind her. The conspiracy was by no means a solitary plot by Zoe and her henchmen: many were of the same opinion. Michael was blinded and deposed, like others before him. (Gregory 2005, p228) Zoe ruled with her sister for only a few months. There was a lot of jealousy and vying for power and influence (Gregory 2005, p228). The ill-fated alliance was doomed from the start. They were not young women by this time: both had discovered the advantages of being able to influence others politically when still young. They had been sent off to a monastery with their other three siblings. Banishment of this kind was not unusual, but being in close quarters with her sister Zoe was never a success. Even as young women they had the opportunity to pitch themselves against each other. When Theodora was offered as a bride to Romanos Argyros, the heir to the throne, she refused outright to marry him. Zoe was to become his bride instead. This affair could not have made great friends of the sisters. Theodora had a strong personality, but she was also known to be ascetic and rather serious (Garland 1999). So she allowed her short reign with her sister to come to an end in a political decision to let her sister's new husband rule. Zoe had married Constantine the Ninth, and he took over (Gregory 2005). Theodora probably knew that her time of influence was not over. The history books all have her ruling alongside her sister and her Emperor husband. According to Lynda Garland, the court of the new Emperor was 'a jolly place'(p182). There were frequent practical jokes, foolery and regular jesters employed to make the royal family laugh. One of these clowns, called Boilas, was probably the reason the old sisters started to get along a little better. Because of his daring tricks and very funny rude jokes, which they both enjoyed, he was allowed to come and go in the palace as he pleased, using secret doors (Sewter/Psellus 1997). Many historians have made suggestions about what he got up to with this freedom that allowed him entry at any time of day or night to both male and female quarters. Theodora and Zoe had 'laughter-loving habits' and would often be amused and distracted by the comical ribald entertainment that Zoe's husband was careful to arrange for them (Garland p184). Perhaps he understood exactly how powerful and scheming they both were, and did not want to end up like some other male members of the royal house. Zoe and Constantine both died before Theodora, who returned to power in her own right as an old woman when she asserted her rights. She was still vigorous and feisty, and ruled with an iron fist, which made her lose a bit of popularity. Wanting to remain powerful after death, and having no children, she chose a successor in Michael VI, who was not even related to her. She was best known for her severity and control of unruly officials in her time. History remembers her as the last Empress from the Macedonian dynasty. Partly due to the influence of these women, the Byzantine Empire rose to greater power, especially during the renowned Macedonian dynasty. It was the strongest power in the Eastern Mediterranean basin. There were wars against the Bulgarian Empire and King Basil, and Byzantium at its peak stretched far and wide, from Armenia to Southern Italy. These powerful women wielded their strength and used their feminine guile to advantage. Irene, for example, even tried to arrange her own marriage to Charlemagne so she would benefit politically (Garland 1999). It never happened, but her attempt is an illustration of what women could do at the time. It was a glorious time, that Western historians such as Psellus saw as full of decadence, dishonest politics and complicated administration. It deepened the rifts between East and West, but it gave the world a colorful period, especially when it came to the powerful women whose actions and reactions influenced, saved and toppled some equally powerful men (Gregory 2005). * Sources Cited Garland, Lynda (1999). Byzantine Empresses: Women and Power in Byzantium, AD 527- 1204. London: Routledge. Sewter E, (Ed) (1979) Fourteen Byzantine Rulers: The Chronographia of Michael Psellus London: Penguin Gregory, T. (2005) A History of Byzantium London: Wiley Blackwell Academia - Research December 2009 The Comneni: A Dynasty Seeking Stability For over a hundred years, from 1081 to 1185, the Comneni Dynasty accomplished what many at the time - and many historians afterwards - thought was impossible. They managed to stop the decline of the Byzantine empire by various strategic measures. The empire was in a bad state, and they improved it tremendously. The Comneni came to Byzantium when Michael VI was defeated in battle by Isaac Comnenus, who was proclaimed Emperor after a coup. But the real power was put into place when Alexios I came to the throne. He married Irene Doukos and the empire cruised into a time of comparative stability. Trade and commerce improved, and Alexios and Irene moved to a big palace in Constantinople. Alexios ruled for 37 years and managed to regain parts of Anatolia which had been captured previous to his reign by the Seljuk Turks. It was the time when marauding Turks from the East were raiding the entire eastern board of the Mediterranean Basin. Their spread was so rapid that accounts of the time enumerate several written mentions of the raids. The Crusades were in full swing and peace in the whole region was disrupted time after time. Attacks were not only limited to the Turks. A people called the Pechenegs, who came from territories that stretched from the Don River to the Danube River in the West, made frequent attempts to make inroads into Byzantium. Armies were becoming more adept at overcoming obstacles in climate and landscape, and navies were proficient with their fleets. Balkan armies were occasionally successful in battles and skirmishes in outlying villages. Alexios's son was called John: he ruled for 25 years. John, who basically put himself on the throne, had to endure and fight a large number of incursions by Turks. The first was only a year after he became emperor, in 1119. He freed Phrygia and Laodikaia, and it was considered a success by the people who lived around the Meander River. (Gregory 2005) John realized that the Turks were using invading tactics to take the land of others because they were not very good agriculturalists and had not mastered ways to grow successful crops, so they stole the crops of other territories' farmers. This realization made his strategies work. One of these was to make alliances to the West, namely with the Holy Roman Empire. When his plans worked he thanked God by undergoing a pilgrimage on foot to the capital with a special icon in a carriage making way ahead of him on the road. John's parentage must have given him leanings toward Europe, and an understanding that the French were friends rather than enemies, so he must have known that his views would stabilize the region. John will be remembered in history as having essentially changed the balance of power in the East. He pushed the Turks back, and gave back numerous towns and villages that had been captured to the Byzantines. Unfortunately, he was let down by his allies, the Crusaders, on one of the campaigns, when they refused to fight against the Muslims at a very crucial time. His style of fighting, which was by planning sieges rather than fighting field battles, was so successful he is now seen as a very powerful Comnenus in history. He left the Empire in a better shape than when he ascended the throne, and as a result the population grew considerably. John thought his fourth son Manuel would be a better emperor than his older brother Isaac. Manuel was tested very quickly after he came to the throne by a debacle with Raymond, Prince of Antioch. Manuel - although he was by no means as clever a tactician as his father John - knew he needed Raymond as an ally, and finally got him to come round and be on the side of Byzantium. He was different from his father, yet he managed to get all his followers to be fiercely loyal to him, and is still known as Manuel the Great. His reign was extremely eventful with, among others: a war with Roger of Sicily; troubled negotiations with the Church in Rome; the failure of the union between the Orthodox and the Papal churches; trouble in the Balkans and Sicily that constantly distracted from each other; Russian princes who became divided into two camps: those who were on the side of the Byzantines, and those who were against. He made his way valiantly through all. The Comneni Alexios, John, and Manuel, turned the Byzantine empire into a prosperous place that was safe along its borders. But after Manuel died, stability was in danger. Enemies of Byzantium were on the borders, waiting to attack, especially the Turks in Anatolia. The Normans in Sicily were trying repeatedly to invade. Even the Venetians, who were the most vital western supporters, were on bad terms with Manuel when he passed away in 1180 (Gregory 2005). Byzantium was extremely vulnerable to attack. The fourth crusade sailed to Constantinople. The siege of 1203 is a very well-known historical event that - in spite of the well armed and well manned city - did not go the way of the Byzantines. The Sack of Constantinople is a sad event where desecration and pillage was the order of the day. The city ended up being split between Venice and the crusade's leaders. It was an event that was out of control of everyone, and is still subject to debate to this very day. * Source Cited: Gregory, T. (2005) A History of Byzantium London: Wiley Blackwell Read More