The Bulgar and the Frank Kingdoms

The Bulgarian kingdom proved to be a different matter. Constantine V had inflicted a series of defeats on the Bulgar- Slav forces but Bulgaria survived to fight another day. Early in the 9th century a 30-year-old by the name of Krum assumed the title of “Sublime Khagan of Bulgaria.” His predecessor had taken part in Charlemagne s destruction of the Avar state thus enlarging the western Bulgar possessions.

In the same year an Imperial theme army had gathered by the river Strymon to receive its annual pay. Krum was advised of the situation and advancing quietly he fell on the Romanians in a surprise attack, capturing 1100 pounds of gold and killing a great number of Imperial soldiers and officers, including the commanding general. Many officers from other themes were also present and Theophanes noted “every one of them who was there was lost.” Next Krum fixed his attention on the last remaining Romanian stronghold of Serdica which fell with the loss of6,000 imperial troops, and Krums position was further strengthened by the desertion of seasoned officers from the im­perial army.

In the spring of 811 the empire struck back. While Krum was away a large imperial force left Constantinople and attacked his capital Pliska, which being undefended fell after a short siege. No mercy was shown by the Christian forces and all in­habitants were slaughtered, including women and children, a particular act of savagery being when babies were hurled into threshing machines. Krum found himself largely outnumbered and began to retreat biding his time. His chance lay in luring Nicephorus through the deep gorge which formed the only pas­sage through the mountains separating their two forces. On July 24, confident of his strength, Nicephorus began to lead his army through the rocky pass where they halted to camp for the night. As dawn broke the Romanians realized they were trapped. During the night both narrow ends of the pass had been blocked with wooden palisades, and as the legions began to fight their way out they were annihilated by Krum s men, many who had lost their women and children in the slaughter of Pliska. Only a few cavalry units managed to break out of the gorge which were pursued by the waiting Bulgar cavalry, with only a handful making it back to Constantinople to tell the tale. Nicephorus himself was killed and his head impaled on a stake in front of Krum s tent, with his skull converted into a gold- inlaid traditional Scythian drinking cup. Not since Valen s death at Adrianople in 378 had an Emperor fallen in battle against barbarian forces.

On 2 October 811 a new Basilevs was crowned in the per­son of Michael I, as Krum continued his advance south, cap­turing towns and fortresses along the way with many offering little, if any, resistance. Gathering another army from across his Empire, Michael set out to confront Krum. On 22 June 813 the two armies met on the field of Versinicia near Adrianople.

In the battle the Christians failed badly terribly. The enemy was so overwhelmingly victorious that most of the Christians did not even see their first assault, but incontinently fled. Krum, amazed, thought this happened in order to set the ambush, and checked his men in their pursuit, after a short distance. But when he saw Romanians definitely had fled, he pursued and killed a great many. His men also over-ran the Romanians’ baggage train and took it away as booty.

Michael made it back to Constantinople and abdicated, retiring to a monastery as a monk.

With the victory at Versinicia Krum had reached the peak of a successful campaign. He was responsible for the death of two Emperors and the downfall of a third, and had defeated two major Imperial armies. Advancing towards Constantinople he halted before the great walls and as the price of peace de­manded the customary tribute. In the meantime Michael was replaced by Leo the Armenian, who had managed to make his way back following the battle. Leo V proved to be a treacherous and a vicious choice for Emperor. He now proposed a meeting with Krum to discuss conditions, both men to be unarmed and accompanied by a handful of similarly unarmed retainers. The meeting would take place at the northern part of the wall where it met the Golden Horn, with Krum arriving by land and Leo by water.

The following day the Bulgarians began to burn and de­stroy the city’s suburbs, and collecting booty and slaves Krum headed north to join his brother’s forces which were besieging Adrianople. Gathering a fresh army Emperor Leo also headed north and informed that a Bulgarian army was stationed at Mesembria he ordered his men to advance quietly on the enemy camp. Having suffered bad defeats at the hands of the outnum­bered Slav-Bulgar army, the Romanians were not prepared to take a chance on another pitched battle, and waiting until night­fall Leo’s men crept up on the unsuspecting enemy and massa­cred them in their sleep. Then advancing deep into Bulgarian territory Leo followed his cowardly victory by an act of atrocity which even by the standards of his day would not have been sanctioned by any Christian authority. Sparing the adult pop­ulation he ordered that all children be seized and killed by having their heads dashed against the rocks. We don’t know the motivation for the senseless slaughter but if it was intended to break the enemy’s morale it backfired. Outraged by the atrocity Krum swore to destroy Constantinople no matter what. By the spring of 814 he had assembled all the necessary equipment to break down and scale the massive walls—numerous lad­ders, battering rams, towering siege engines and catapults ca­pable ofhurling huge boulders and flaming firebrands. The siege, however, was not to be. On 13 April 814, just as his army was preparing to march, Krum suffered a seizure and within minutes was dead, probably a victim of a poison administered in his drink.

Krum had made Bulgaria one of the great powers of Eu­rope. Following his death civil strife broke out in the form of a revolt by the military aristocracy, and sensing his weakness, Krum’s son Omurtag signed a peace treaty with Constantinople. In 820 Emperor Leo V himself fell victim to treachery, mur­dered by his close associate Michael who proceeded to ascend the throne as Michael II. In the following year a commander by the name of “Thomas the Slav” rose in revolt claiming to be Constantine, who supposedly had survived his blinding by his mother the Empress Irene. The rebels soon gained control of much oflmperial territory and began to lay siege to Constan­tinople. Honoring the peace treaty Omurtag decided to come to Michael’s aid. In the spring of 823 the rebel forces were smashed by a Bulgarian army, and a few months later “Thomas the Slav” was handed over to Michael by his own men. In time- honored fashion his hands and feet were cut off and his body impaled on a stake.

Michael died six years later in his bed and was succeeded by his son Theophilus. Financed by a new supply of gold— probably from a gold mine in the Caucasus—Theophilus spent lavishly, embarking on a great building program and a strength­ening of Constantinople’s great walls. An admirer of Caliph Harun al-Rashid and the Islamic culture, most of his reign was ironically spent in Conflictwith the Caliphate. Theophilus died soon after of dysentery at the age of 38 and his wife Theodora became Regent on behalf of their two-year-old son. The real effective ruler, however, became one Theoctistus who was ap­pointed Caesar. Ahighly cultured man, he devoted much of his time to improving education, which in the East had always been of great importance. Secular learning was restored, together with an expansion of the University of Constantinople and the appointment of Leo the Mathematician as senior scholar. A man of great learning, besides mathematics he had an inter­est in the natural sciences and mechanics, becoming rector of the university in 863.

Romanian authorities gradually gaining control over the scat­tered Slavic settlements. Theoctistus and Theodora would also be remembered for launching the first campaign against the Paulician heretics, so-called due to their special devotion to St. Paul.⁵⁵

Orthodox Christianity had always been an integral part of the Imperial state, with Patriarchs and Popes basking in ex­tensive temporal powers and Emperors rejoicing in titles such as “God s Vice-Gerent (assistant manager) on Earth,” the “Elect of Heaven,” and the “Equal of the Apostles.” Popular opposition to imperial Christianity, which had existed since Emperor Con­stantine, now took on a different interpretation known as the Armenian Paulician Heresy. Drawing their views from what they considered to be the true Christian virtues—social justice, a pity for innocent suffering, and a rigorous moral righteous­ness—their support came from those who were generally hostile towards the repressive semi-feudal conditions supported by the Church. By the second half of the 9th century their mil­itary power had reached a point where they could advance through Asia Minor as far as the Aegean Sea. Theywere viewed as a threat to the Empire due to their frequent alliances with the Muslims, and Theoctistus proceeded to put together a large military expedition confiscating Paulician land and property and massacring some 100,000 individuals. Ironically some Paulician leaders were executed by crucifixion. Their power was far from broken, however, and their influence would last for several centuries, terminating in the Patarene and Albi­gensian (Cathar, Bogomil) movements in Italy and France re­spectively which would require a Papal Crusade to destroy. A Paulician offshoot, the Bogomil movement in Bulgaria and the Balkans would become the first puritanical protestant move­ment in Europe. Unlike the Paulicians they rejected violence and preached a doctrine of civil disobedience directed against the established order of the Church and State.⁵⁶

Theoctistus was assassinated by the Empress’s brother Bardas and her son would become Emperor Michael III. Bardas continued the anti-Muslim and anti-Paulician expeditions with his first victory against Caliph Omar ibn-Abdullah who was killed in the battle with most of his men. Raised in the luxuries of the imperial palaces, Michael proved to be a disappointment preferring a life of pleasure and drinking parties with a circle of companions. One of these was Basil the Macedonian, an illiterate peasant of Armenian parents, reputed to possess great physical strength and a way with horses. It was Basils ability to control Michaels spirited stallion that caught the Emperor s at­tention, and he became a close companion. Theyboth decided to get rid ofBardas who was murdered in 865, and the following year Basilwas appointed by Michael as co-Emperor. Itwas only nine years since Basil had left the stables, but he was now making the real decisions with Michael spending most of his time with drinking companions. Basil now decided to get rid ofMichael as well, and in September 867 following dinner the drunken Michael was assassinated in his sleep by a group of eight men led by Basil.

While Michael was still alive the Empire continued to un­dergo a political and cultural revival. In 863 the Muslims were defeated in a major battle in northern Anatolia which signaled a decline in the power of the Caliphate. The revival of secular education continued, and missionary activity of the Church was stepped up particularly amongst the Slavs. In 852 Boris I became the Kagan of Bulgaria following internal strife and a war with Constantinople. As a ruler of diverse tribes and clans he must have noticed the advantages of the Imperial system when it came to administering a state which was just appearing in Bulgaria. In particular it was difficult to have a unified monar­chical state without a common religion since tribal paganism was unsuited for the type of Societywhich was emerging, with a wealthy elite and a widespread peasantry whose conflicting interests were difficult to reconcile. Religion based on the Chris­tian imperial model could fulfill such a function as well as pro­vide unity amongst the various tribes and instill loyalty to the monarch. The Churchs traditional teaching on the source of temporal power was clear as reiterated by the Bulgarian priest Cosmas; “the Tsar (ruler of Bulgaria) and the boyars are estab­lished by God.”⁵⁷

After some reflection Boris I decided to approach Rome for guidance. He chose the West for strategic reasons, and to renew Krum s alliance with the Franks. This was a direct chal­lenge to Constantinople and Michael III immediately dis­patched a large expeditionary force to Bulgaria forcing Boris I to renounce the alliance. At the time the Countrywas suffering from famine and was unable to offer resistance. Realizing he had little choice Boris I was baptized in 866 by a bishop sent from Constantinople together with many prominent boyars and other subjects. Not all boyars were converted and a pagan revolt broke out. Boris acted to swiftly crush the rebels before they gained in strength, and, advised by the newly arrived Greek clergy, he had 52 of the ringleaders put to death, together with their children—an unnecessary Crueltywhich he would come to regret. In the same year Boris I decided to renew his contacts with the West, requesting and receiving from the Pope Frankish missionaries and priests to his negotiations with Constantinople for a Bulgarian Patriarch. At the same time he enclosed 106 questions to Pope Nicholas I requesting advice and guidance as to the correct civic and religious practice which a Christian state should observe. Although the questions themselves have been lost they can be inferred from the Popes answers which have survived, and which provide an interesting insight into Church thought at the time.⁵⁸ The Church was theoretically still a single entity but the Popes answers indicate the degree to which East and West had drifted apart by the 9th century following Charlemagnes reign. Boris I, however, had little interest in theology and was interested in daily practice and customs sanctioned by the Church. Was the Patriarch (of Con­stantinople) right in forbidding baths OnWednesdays and Fri­days? Could one take communion without wearing a belt? And was it permissible to wear trousers? Boris’ chief worry was re­served for military affairs. Given Christianity’s theoretical non­violence and stress on mercy and charity as well as humility and forgiveness, how was he to deal with those who disobeyed military rules and discipline? For example, was there any alter­native to imposing the death sentence on soldiers who run away in battle, or disobey orders to march against the enemy, or whose horse and weapons didn’t pass inspection before battle? And how is one to extract a confession without the use of tor­ture? Must one forgive adulterers, thieves and murderers? If Boris I had any misgivings about Christianity’s lack of firmness they were quickly laid to rest since in both the East and West Christian teaching was not permitted to interfere with the ne­cessities and practicalities of running the state.

Pope Nicholas died on 13 November 867 and was suc­ceeded by Hadrian II, who decided to strike a more conciliatory note with Constantinople. When Basil I called for a Church council to heal a schism which was under way the Pope agreed to send delegates, with the impression that they would preside over the meetings. Basil, however, quickly established his au­thority by taking the chair and imposing Eastern and not West­ern legal procedures. By 870 Boris I had also broken off relations with Rome and placed the Bulgarian Church under the Patri­archate of Constantinople with Serbia soon following. The Norentani tribe of the Dalmatian coast who had been notorious pirates for years converted to Eastern Christianity, and the defeat of a Muslim fleet in 868 which was laying siege to Du­brovnik restored safe shipping to Venice, an Imperial depend­ency. While the fleet was fighting in the Adriatic Sea, Basil I also renewed the campaign against the Paulician rebels and the Muslims. The Paulician home base in Armenia was destroyed and several Muslim strongholds captured in the Euphrates valley. Following Justinian’s example Basil I completed the re­conquest of Southern Italy, and ordered a revision of the laws to bring them up to date. The great St. Sophia Cathedral which had been damaged in the earthquake of 9 January 869 was re­stored to its former glory with other civic buildings, and a new gold-domed cathedral the Nea was erected. Finally, barbarians were beginning to fall under the influence of the Romanian- Greek civilization as acknowledged by Emperor Leo VI who followed Basil I in 886:

Our father ofblessed memory, Basil, the emperor of the Romans, prevailed upon them (the Slavs) to renounce their ancient customs and, having made Greeks of them and subjected them to governors according to the Roman model and bestowed baptism upon them, he freed them from bondage to their own rulers and taught them to make war on the nations that are hostile to the Romans.⁵⁹

The conversion to Christian civilization was not always com­plete. In many areas of Greece and other parts of the Balkans the Slavs retained their language and religion with an insubor­dination to the Imperial Government, all of which would last for centuries.

As the Slavs were invading the Eastern Roman Empire, another important development was unrolling in the West, one which would contribute to the future of European society and the Christian world. This was the rapid expansion of the Franks, a Germanic people who inhabited the mouth and the upper stretch of the Rhine River in what is today Belgium, northwest­ern Germany and Holland. The Franks had a monarchical sys­tem and were ruled by hereditary kings, as were most Germanic tribes. In the 2nd half of the 5th century the Salic tribes as they were known began to vacate their territory along the Sala River in Holland (today the Ijssel) and move into Gaul. Their king Clovis of the Merovingian dynasty defeated a mercenary Roman army in 486, and by the end of the century had ex­panded his domain in northern France up to Brittany. His tol­erant treatment of the Christian inhabitants gained him the support of the local population, and soon he himself converted to Christianity having married Chlodilde, a Christian. Thus unlike other Christian Germanic tribes (who espoused anti­Roman Arianism), by adopting the Nicene Creed the Merovin­gians put themselves firmly in the Roman camp.

Clovis’ next step was to move south and attack the Arian Goths and Burgundians, who were soon defeated with Imperial help. He then turned his attention north to the Ripuarian Franks, who lived along the banks of the Rhine, and convinced King Sigebert^,s son to murder his father. He had the son assas­sinated in turn as punishment for the patricide, and marching on the Ripuarian capital Cologne he was elected by the assem­bly of chiefs as hereditary monarch of the Franks. The Church was not displeased with Clovis’ success for as noted by Gregory of Tours in his “History of the Franks”: “he (Clovis) walked with a right heart before the Lord, and did the things that were pleasing in His sight.” More to the point is the assessment of a recent historian:

Christianity seemed to them (the Merovingians) merely an inex­pensive agency of rule and population pacification; and in “the triumph ofbarbarism and religion” barbarism dominated.... As­sassination, patricide, fratricide, torture, mutilation, treachery, adultery, and incest mitigated the boredom of the rule.⁶⁰

Not that the Merovingians distracted themselves with rul­ing their kingdom. By the time Clotaire II became King much of the administrative duties were performed by the “Major Domus” or the superintendent of the royal household and es­tates. The power of the “Major Domus” began to increase sig­nificantly under Clotaires son Dagobert (628-39) who kept himself so busy with his three wives (and many concubines) that he had little time for the affairs of state.

In 687 Pepin II (“The Younger”) became “Major Domus” of the kingdom, defeating his rivals in the battle of Testry and appointing himself as “Dux et Princeps” (duke and prince) of the realm. It is Pepins illegitimate son Charles, however, who would acquire fame. Although Clotaire IV was the official monarch, it is Charles who as “Major Domus” and Duke of Aus- trasia was in fact the actual ruler. In 732 the Muslim Moors in­vaded Gaul, and together with the Duke of Aquitaine Charles defeated them in a seven day battle on the plain between Tours and Poitiers. Henceforth he became “Carolus Martellus” or Charles the Hammer and hailed as the savior of Christendom in Western Europe.

Faced with purely nominal and ineffectual monarchs, Charles Martels son Pepin III (“The Short”) decided to get rid of the Merovingian dynasty altogether. In 751 he sent ambas­sadors to Rome with a question: would it be sinful (and illegit­imate) to depose the Merovingian Childeric III and assume power in his place? With the question went an offer of granting central Italian territory (which the Franks controlled) as a papal state, to be placed under the direct control and supervision of the Pope. Armed with the Popes agreement Pepin “The Short” called an assembly of nobles and prelates, and in 751 at Soissons he was unanimously elected as King of the Franks. The last Merovingian King Childeric III was safely bundled off to a monastery where he spent the rest of his days. Three years later Pope Stephen II traveled to Gaul and in a Ceremonyheld in the abbey of St. Denis outside of Paris Pepin III was anointed as “King by the Grace of God.” The Carolingian dynasty was born and was to last for over two centuries until 987.

Pepin III was a capable ruler and Gaul prospered, slowly evolving into what would become medieval France. It is his son Charles, however, who would achieve fame and go down in his­tory as “Carolus Magnus” or Charlemagne, the greatest king in Europe at the time. Ascending the throne in 771 at the age of 29, during his 33-year reign he would create the largest kingdom in Europe, stretching from northern Spain to central Europe including Italy and most of today s Germany. The territory was gained by a series of military victories over a period of 30 years made possible in large part by Charlemagne s reforms and method of government. Following old Roman tradition he made owning property conditional on military service, and when a call to arms came every freeman had to report to the local Count with full equipment. In turn, every nobleman was responsible for the military fitness of his people. Good treat­ment of his subjects was also important to Charlemagne. He established a legal system, whereby regular open assemblies were held in the open air so the king could interact with his subjects and hear their grievances. A “jurata” was also estab­lished in every region consisting of groups of sworn men who had the power to enquire into local issues and set right any wrongs committed. This would become the future jury system still practiced in many countries. A Magna Carta was also es­tablished in order to protect “the Church, the poor, and wards and widows, and the whole people” from tyranny and other wrong-doing, centuries before a similar document was pro­duced in England for the benefit of the nobility.

Charlemagne s historical significance lies in his coronation by Pope Leo III as the first barbarian (i.e., non-Roman) Em­peror of the Romans. A close relationship between the Papacy and the Franks had already existed for several centuries, culmi­nating in Pepins Donation and the Popes acquiescence in the removal of the Merovingians from power. Now it was the Pope who needed help. Charged by his enemies with adultery, per­jury, and simony, Leo III sought refuge in Charlemagne s court. Traditionally only the Emperor of the Romans had the right to accuse and judge a Pope, but with Constantine IVs death in Constantinople the throne was occupied by his widow Irene; and the Pope would not appeal to a woman whose right to gov­ern was in doubt. Accompanied by the Pope, Charlemagne en­tered Rome on November 24 in a state procession. The synod agreed to drop all charges if Leo would swear an oath denying them, and on December 23, Pope Leo III swore a solemn oath that he was innocent of all the charges leveled against him. Two days later, on December 25, 800, as Charlemagne knelt before St. Peters altar in prayer, Leo placed a jeweled crown on his head and pronounced him “Charles the Augustus, crowned by God, the great and peace-bringing Emperor of the Romans.” Tradition has it that the coronation was unexpected and contrary to Charlemagnes wishes, but this is unlikely. Charles readily accepted his Imperial status and seized the chance to write to Irene with a proposal of marriage, which would have made him the Augustus of the entire Empire. Nothing came of it and in 802 Irene was deposed by Nicephorus I. A period of hostility between East and West followed and in 815 a treaty was signed whereby Charlemagne was recognized as co­Emperor, in return for a confirmation that Venice and southern Italy still belonged to Constantinople.

Charlemagnes coronation also marked a further point of departure between East and West and forms an important wa­tershed in European history. For the past several centuries the Western Empire had gradually been replace by a collection of Germanic kingdoms, ushering in the Dark Ages which would last for the next thousand years. What had taken centuries to develop was now lost within a few generations. Ruled by il­literate kings and an equally illiterate aristocracy education and learning quickly disappeared first with the loss of Greek and mathematics, followed by a collapse of the arts, crafts and most of the technology. Of the major institutions only the Church was preserved. Charlemagnes conquests had created a Ger­manic “Roman” Empire, claiming to follow in the footsteps of Imperial Rome. To be sure the Eastern Empire had also lost its Latin character and culture, remaining Roman in name only.

But whereas the Hellenization of the East was a natural process of evolution, the West had been replaced by an external and mostly alien culture, and the only beneficiary seems to have been the Papacy. Not only did the Pope possess his own lands thanks to Pepin s Donation but the Western Imperial crown would become, to all intents and purposes, his own possession and henceforth the Pope would be seen as standing above em­perors and kings, bestowing the crown on a candidate of his own choosing.