The Conquest of the Eastern Roman Empire

What had precipitated the sudden and unexpected Slavic attacks on the Eastern Roman Empire? The economies of the Slavs in the mixed forest/prairie belt, stretching from the Carpathian Mountains eastwards had become based on farming and animal husbandry.

Whatever the causes which had brought the Slavic tribes to the shores of the Blue Danube there was little the Empire could do to stop them. Following the Slavvictory at Adrianople, a major incursion occurred in 559 when a Slav and Bulgar force crossed the frozen Danube and invaded Moesia and Thrace, launching a three-pronged attack southward.

Justinians reign ended in 565 with the arrival of yet another nomadic force of mounted archers and lancers, the Turkic Avars. Coming originally from Central Asia they were on the lower Danube by the year 561, destroying the Bulgar Utigur and Kutrigur tribes as well as the Slavic Antae. Several years later, together with the Longobardi they proceeded to decimate the Germanic Gepids before turning on their allies and pushing them westwards into the Italian Peninsula. The Avars established themselves in the Pannonian plain in today s Hungary, soon becoming the new “Huns” of Europe. Next they confronted the Slavs. A record left by Menander the Guardsman states that the Avar Kagan (King) Bayan began to demand tribute from the Sclaveni, whose land was “full of gold since the Roman Empire had long been plundered by the Slavs, whose own land never had been raided by any other people at all.”

The Sclaveni leader Dauritas refused to pay the tribute, replaying to the Avar emissaries that “others do not conquer our land, we conquer theirs; and so it shall always be for us, as long as there are wars and weapons.”³² The emissaries were then put to death “with haughty and stubborn spirit,” and Bayan turned to Constantinople for help, shortly after signing a peace treaty with the Romanians.

That same year, being the third after the death of King Justin, was famous also for the invasion of an accursed people, called Slavo­nians, who arose and passed through the whole of Hellades (Greece) and the country of the Thessalonians, and all Thrace, and captured the cities and took numerous forts and devastated and burnt, and reduced the people to slavery, and made them­selves masters of the whole country, and settled in it by main force, and dwelt in it as though it had been their own, without fear. And four years have now elapsed and still because the king is engaged in war with the Persians and has sent all his forces to the East, they live at their ease in the land and dwell in it and spread themselves far and wide as God permits them and ravage and burn and take captives. And to such an extent do they carry their ravages that they have even ridden up to the outer walls of the city (Constantinople) and driven away all the king’s herds of horses, many thousands in number, and whatever else they could find. And even to this day... they still encamp and dwell there and live in peace in the Romanian territories, free from anxiety and fear, and lead captives and slay and burn. And they have grown rich in gold and silver and herds of horses and arms, and have learnt to fight better than the Romanians, though at first they were but rude savages who did not venture to show them­selves outside the woods and the cover of trees. And as for arms, they did not even know what they were, with the exception of two or three Javelins or darts.³³

The success of the Slavic invasion was also due to the ac­quisition of Roman weapons and military technology, a process which ironically would soon change direction.

... the Medes (Persians) and Saracens (Arabs) had ravaged the greater part of Asia (Turkey and the Near East), and the Huns (the Bulgars), Slavs and Antae the whole of Europe (Balkan Peninsula and Greece); they have razed some of the cities to the ground, and compelled to pay-up almost to the last penny; they had carried off the population into slavery with all their posses­sions, and had emptied every district of its inhabitants by their daily raids.³⁴

With the capture and destruction of strategic imperial cities such as Sirmium in 582 by the Avars and the Slovenians, the Eastern Empire was on its last legs. The Avars had introduced the powerful Chinese “trebuchet” catapult and only a few cities such as Thessalonica were able to hold out. To make the situa­tion worse, Tiberius Constantine who became Emperor in 578 had begun to remit more than one-fourth of all taxes back to the people in three years, distributing more than 20,000 pounds of gold. Such an unprecedented act of generosity had the pre­dictable effect of virtually bankrupting the Imperial treasury, so by the time Tiberius appointed the young commander Mau­rice as Emperor a weekbefore his death the coffers were almost empty. The military situation began to improve, however. In 591 Maurice helped the young Persian successor Chosroes II regain his throne, and in return the grateful Persian ceded Ar­menia and eastern Mesopotamia and signed a peace treaty with Maurice the following year. The emperor could now transfer a large number of seasoned troops to the Balkan Peninsula; and in addition, the Antae Slavs had become Romanian allies.

Emperor Maurice was now ready to launch a major cam­paign across the Danube led by the able commander Priscus. The imperial forces had changed a great deal since the old Roman days, when infantry armies confronted each other in ranked formations on an open field. Now Maurice began to adapt Slavic and Avar weapons and tactics.

Ifbattle existed during the classical Graeco-Roman period as a moral proving ground for manly virtues such as bravery, skill and self-sacrifice, the notion had already disappeared by the 6th century. War had become a struggle of survival for the professional mercenary soldiers and a question of victory at all cost, as explained by the Strategikon:

To form the whole army simply in one line facing the enemy for a general cavalry battle, and to hold nothing in reserve for various eventualities in case of a reverse, is the mark of an inexperienced and absolutely reckless man. For it is not, as some layman might imagine, by the number of bodies, by unquestioning boldness, or by plain assault that battles are decided but, under God, by strat­egy and skill. Strategy makes use of times and places, surprises and various tricks to outwit the enemy, with the idea of achieving its objectives even without actual fighting. Strategy is essential to survival, and is the true characteristic of an intelligent and coura­geous general. Skill enables the army to maintain discipline and coordination, as well as its own safety, while varying its battle for­mations and attacks, and not only to foil the wiles of the enemy but to turn them against them.³⁶

The Greeks and Romans had already learned the impor­tance of nomad-style mounted archers and lancers and the Strategikon outlines the method of their training. A cavalry­man

... should also shoot rapidly mounted on his horse at a run to the front, the rear, the right, the left. He should practice leaping onto the horse. On horseback at a run he should fire one or two ar­rows rapidly and put the strung bow in its case... and then he should grab the spear which he has been carrying on his back. With the strung bow in its case he should hold the spear in his hand, then quickly replace it on his back, and grab the bow.³⁷

The manual also provides a list of armaments and equip­ment which should be issued to the men: “cavalry lances of the Avar type with leather thongs in the middle of the shaft and with pennons (long narrow flags); swords; round neckpieces of the Avar type made with linen fringes outside and wool in­side.” And for the horses: “protective pieces of iron armor about their heads, and breast plates of iron or felt, or else breast and neck coverings such as Avars use...

The Slavs also contributed to the imperial arsenal and strategy since.. Slavic spears should be provided for men who don’t have bows or are inexperienced archers.” The reason for the short spears seems to have been the confined spaces in which Slavwarriors chose to fight: “For a successful expedition against an enemy in wooded areas and rough terrain and narrow passes, especially against the Sclavenes and Antes, the troops should be lightly equipped and without many horsemen.”

From the commentary of the Strategikon, it is clear that the Slavs were the main problem rather than the Avars. Book XI of the Strategikon is in fact the only detailed account of the Slavs which has survived, written by someone who had a detailed knowledge of them. It goes on to describe some of the customs and lifestyles of the Slavic tribes who were attacking the Eastern Roman Empire.

The nations of the Sclavenes and the Antae live in the same way and have the same customs. They are both independent, ab­solutely refusing to be enslaved or governed, least of all in their own land. They are populous and hardy, bearing readily heat, cold, rain, nakedness and scarcity of provisions.

Rare praise indeed, coming from a senior Graeco-Roman com­mander.³⁸ The Strategikon continues:

they are kind and hospitable to travelers in their country, and conduct them safely from one place to another.... If the stranger should suffer some harm because of his host’s negligence, the one who first commended him will wage war against that host, regarding vengeance for the stranger as a religious duty.... They possess an abundance of all sorts of livestock and produce which they store in heaps, especially... millet.... Their women are more sensitive than any others in the world. When, for example, their husband dies, many look upon it as their own death and freely smother themselves, not wanting to continue their lives as widows.

The pagan Slavs incinerated their dead in huge bonfires, and other sources describe women throwing themselves on their husband’s pyres. The account confirms the observations made by previous Roman authors such as Procopius.

Maurice goes on to describe the Slavmethods of fighting, some of which were adopted by the imperial army. We are told that when raiding their enemies (which could be other Slav tribes) they made

... effective use of ambushes, sudden attacks and raids, devising many different methods by night and by day... when attacking an enemy they have no ordered formations but advance in groups, seeing if the enemy gives way. If not, they retreat and try to lure the enemy into the woods, where they have a great advan­tage because of their skill in fighting in such cramped quarters.

Rather than follow a predetermined battle plan, the Slav chiefs or “voivodas” relied on mobile and improvised strategies, seek­ing advantage in heavily wooded terrain where they felt more at home. They also make good use of the waterways.

Their experience in crossing rivers surpasses that of all men, and they are extremely good at spending a lot of time in the water. Often enough, when they are in their own country and are caught by surprise and in a tight spot, they dive to the bottom of a body of water. There they take long hollow reeds they have pre­pared for such a situation and hold them in their mouths, the reeds extending to the surface of the water. Lying on their backs on the bottom they breathe through them and hold out for many hours without anyone suspecting where they are. An inexperi­enced person who notices the reeds from above would simply think they were growing there in the water.

As will be seen later, such a method of concealment would con­tinue to be used many centuries later in the waterways of East­ern Europe.

Before acquiring Romanweapons and armor Slavwarriors fought with short spears, usually two to a man. Some carried “good looking but unwieldy shields” for protection purposes, and bows were also used with short poisoned arrows which re­quired a prior antidote to save a man’s life. The Slavs lived in small settlements within a tribal unit but without a hereditary ruling aristocracy, or other permanent authority. As was de­scribed by Maurice, this was reflected in their style of warfare which was often conducted against other Slavs.

Owing to their lack of government and their ill feeling toward one another, they are not acquainted with an order of battle.... They are completely faithless and have no regard for treaties which they agree to more out of fear than by gifts. When a differ­ence of opinion prevails among them, either they come to no agreement at all, or when some of them do come to an agreement the others quickly go against what was decided. They are always at odds with each other and nobody is willing to yield to another.

The entrenched traditions amongst the Slavs accounts for their relativelylate inter-tribal state formations, as well as their ultimate failure to gain control of Greece and what is today’s Rumania and Albania. Their numerical weakness also made a complete conquest difficult, for although Romanian sources describe the Sclaveni and the Antae as a “numerous people” this refers to the number of settlements and not to the entire population.³⁹ The disorganized and undisciplined nature of Slavic societies is also described some time later by the Jewish traveler and writer from Muslim Spain Ibrahim Ibn-Yakub who had occasion to travel amongst them: “Slavs are a brave people able for war. If it was not for lack of accord amongst their nu­merous and scattered tribes no nation in the world could meas­ure up to them.”

Borrowing Slavic methods of small-unit fighting, by 593 the Romanians began to send raiding parties across the Danube issued with “crossbows with short arrows” and “javelins or spears of the Slavic type.”⁴⁰ A 200-man raiding party, for exam­ple, led by Priscus caught the Sclavene “voivoda” Ardagast(us) in a surprise night attack following a Slav celebration, scattering his inebriated men and causing heavy casualties. The raid seems to have been a preemptive strike since Ardagast(us) and his men were also preparing to leave for Imperial Romanian terri­tory. A somewhat larger 3,000-men imperial reconnaissance unit also intercepted and defeated a Sclavene war-party led by oneMusoc(ius). Some Slavwarriors including Musoc (ius) were taken prisoners and executed on the spot, the survivors escaping into the marshes. The victory was short-lived, however, since the Imperial force was soon attacked in turn and barely managed to escape across the Danube. The following year in 594 Em­peror Maurice again launched a campaign against the Sclaves, this time led by his brother Peter. A Romanian advance guard encountered a Sclavene force of some 600 men at Marciano- polis who were returning from a raid in Moesia, wagons loaded with loot. Using “Scythian” tactics the Sclavenes formed a wagon circle, which was breached after stubborn fighting the Slavwarriors fighting to the last man in the knowledge that cap­tives would be executed. Peter^,s victorious forces continued north and crossed the Danube, with the intention of bringing the fight to enemy territory.

Maurice s campaigns seem to have subdued the Sclavenes for a short period of time and Priscus turned his attention to the Avars, led by their Kagan (king) Bayan. With a powerful force he retook Singidunum (Belgrade) on the Danube in 596, and five years later in spite of a peace treaty he crossed the Danube and inflicted a series of defeats on the Avars. Bayan re­treated to the Tisza river (today s Hungary) where followed by Maurice s commander Priscus he was forced to give battle and again suffered a bad defeat. For the first time in several centuries the army of the Eastern Roman Empire stood in triumph on the opposite side of the Danube. Maurice s strategy of taking the fight to the enemy and maintaining a constant pressure on the Slavs was beginning to pay off, since neither the Sclavenes nor the Antae could match for long the resources of the Empire. Led by their “voivoda” Apsich the Antae signed a treaty with Constantinople becoming Romanian allies. In the past the Im­perial Army had not conducted campaigns in the winter but re­tired to its southern winter quarters. The Slavs who had no diffi­culties with winter conditions would simply move in and reoccupy the lost territory. To continue holding the Sclavenes and the Avars at bay, in 602 EmperorMaurice ordered the army to remain north of the Danube rather than retiring to its south­ern winter quarters. This was a fatal error which would cost him his life. The mainly mercenary army rebelled, marched on Constantinople and Overthrewhim, naming one Phocas as the successor. Maurice fled with his family but was soon appre­hended and beheaded, together with four of his eight sons.

Phocas was a complete military and political disaster. Though he was put in power by the army he soon alienated most of its commanders. Suspecting his most able commander Narses of treason he lured him to the capital, had him arrested and burned alive at the stake. Sensing the Graeco-Roman Em­pire s weakness the Persian King Choesroes Struckwith a large army the following year, and in four years occupied much of Asia Minor and the Middle East. By 608 his army stood at the Bosphorus, the night fires of its camps in plain view of Con­stantinople. In a desperate attempt to maintain control Phocas began to resort to mass persecution and executions. He first launched a campaign against the Monophysites and began to forcibly ConvertJews to Orthodox Christianity, which resulted in further chaos and a religious conflict. In response to the re­pression the Jews rose in revolt in Antioch and began to massacre Christians, in the process arresting and inflicting a painful death on Patriarch Anastasius. The hostility between Christians and Jews now erupted into open conflict, with Jews allying themselves with the advancing Persians. By 614 Antioch, Damascus and Jerusalem were captured with hardly any Or­thodox Christians left alive. The True Cross and other relics of the Crucifixion such as the True Lance and Sponge were seized and the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, as well as other Christian shrines were destroyed. Next, Egypt fell to the Persian forces and their allies. The Danubian frontier also collapsed, and seeing their opportunity the Sclavenes and Avars attacked and destroyed the Antae who were still allied with Constantinople. With their rear secured the Sclavenes began to move into Ro­manian and Germanic territory OccupyingMacedonia, Thesaly, Boetia, Epirus, and the Peloponnese in southern Greece. Others headed west into Illyria and the Dalmatian coast in what is today Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia and the Czech Republic. Neverhad the Roman Empire faced such a desperate situation since the collapse of the West two centuries previously.

Unlike the western part of the Roman Empire, however, the East would demonstrate a powerful resilience against ex­ternal threat. In response to the Persian advance a large military force was raised in North Africa and put under the command of two young cousins, Heraclius and Nicetus. It proceeded to sail to Constantinople where Phocas was immediately arrested and executed together with his close followers. That same af­ternoon Heraclius underwent two ceremonies; first he was mar­ried, and then became crowned Emperor. He would become the savior of the Empire, introducing fundamental and far- reaching reforms which would ensure its survival for centuries to come. Drawing his inspiration from past practice the foun­dations of a new type of army and land tenure were laid. All ter­ritory was divided into four self-contained “themes,” each gov­erned by a military commander or “strategos.” Many of the refugees were then settled in these territories receiving perma­nent grants of land in return for hereditary military service. This removed the need for mercenaries and reintroduced the backbone of the traditional army, the citizen-soldier with a vested interest in the defense of the Empire. Secondly, all use of Latin was replaced by Greek, both in the civil and military services, with ^aImperator^w being replaced by ^aBasilevs^w This was a symbolic and final break between the East and the West and one which would be reinforced by the Slavic occupations of the Balkan provinces. Henceforth the West would develop as a collection of Germanic kingdoms, while the East would re­claim its status as the Greek European civilization, with large areas under Slav occupation.

It took several years to assemble and train an army strong enough to face the seasoned Persian forces. To finance the re­conquest of the lost territories Heraclius imposed a contri­bution on the Orthodox Church and placed himself in com­mand of all Romanian forces. For the first time in a century and a half an Emperor would lead his men into battle, and sensing his readiness Heraclius launched the campaign against the Per­sians on Easter Monday of622. As Alexander the Great before him he drove through Asia Minor, re-occupied Armenia and began advancing across Azerbaijan towards the Persian capital at Ctesiphon. After capturing and burning the Persian King’s great palace at Ganzak, Heraclius’ forces were cut off by a large Persian army led by their great general Shahr-Baraz. After ma­neuvering around the western shores of the Caspian Sea and through Asia Minor, in the spring of625 Heraclius led his men on a long and desperate march towards the Euphrates River. There at Adana a great battle took place. With the Euphrates separating them the Persian army unexpectedly appeared before the imperial forces drawn-up and ready for battle. Gaining con­trol of a bridge the Romanians charged across the Euphrates pushing the enemy back, who began to retreat. This was part of a carefully prepared trap laid by Shahr-Baraz and now the extended Romanian lines found themselves caught in an am­bush. Charging the trapped Romanian vanguard the Persians shattered its ranks and proceeded to destroy the enemy. Seeing the desperate situation in which his men found themselves and ignoring the hail of arrows unleashed by the Persian archers Heracles led a charge of the rearguard troops across the bridge. The momentum of the charge broke the Persian attack, forcing them into a retreat. The personal courage exhibited by Heraclius had saved the day and created a legendary fame for the Em­peror.

The war was not yet over, however. In an outflanking move designed to drain Heraclius’ forces the Persian King Chosroes decided to launch a powerful force against Constantinople, aware that the situation had not improved for the Romanians in the Balkan provinces. The capital of Dalmatia on the Adriatic Sea, Salona, had been sacked by the Slavs in 612 contributing to a further depopulation of the Balkans. Like all good bar­barians they destroyed towns and cities and settled in the coun­tryside, forming independent territories called Sclavinias by the Greeks. An especially dense area of settlement was in Mace­donia in the region OfThessalonica with the city remaining in Imperial hands, its walls having withstood Slav and Avar sieges.⁴¹ In a move to consolidate his forces in the early 620s Heraclius undertook a reorganization of the entire defense system. Apart of the northern frontier was abandoned and all imperial troops from the Balkans were withdrawn, with the main defenses con­centrated nearer to Constantinople in the form of localized but mobile town-based forces. Elsewhere the destruction inflicted by the Slavs was widespread and thorough. Cities of the interior were sacked with only a few seaside ports remaining intact. Most Imperial administration collapsed and Christianity was completely extinguished in many areas for several centuries to come. Entire stretches of countryside became deserted with in­habitants slaughtered, taken as slaves, or forced to flee. Unlike the Christian Goths, who were seeking a place within the Em­pire, the pagan Slavs were invaders bent on conquering and re­taining as much land as they could, and had no wish to become a part of what even remotely resembled a Graeco-Roman state institution.

Advancing towards Constantinople the Persians now pro­posed an alliance with the Avars and the Slavs. The plan was to launch a coordinated attack on the city from the east and the west, with the Avars siege machinery forcing the western gates between the Golden Horn and the Sea of Marmara. ASlavfleet of ^αmonoxylas,^w or dug-out canoes was also to make its way from the upper end of the Golden Horn and join the Avars by disembarking and attacking the TelativelyweakBlachernae dis­trict. The Persians, in the meantime, were to effect a crossing of the Bosphorus using rafts and the dug-out canoes which the Slavs were to provide once they had disembarked. The Avars had brought advanced siege machinery such as the 50 foot tall Chinese trebuchet catapults which could hurl stones the weight of a small car a distance of ¼ mile, mobile towers to scale walls, and battering rams to break down the thick doors of the gates. This would be the first full-scale attack on Constantinople’s de­fenses. At first all went well, with the Avar cavalry capturing a part of the Blachernae quarter which at the time lay outside of the main walls. Miraculously, the church of the Theotokos (Mother of God) was not harmed in the fighting, with credit given to the holy relics which were stored within. The dis­mounted Avar horsemen, however, could not breach the city’s main land-side Theodosian Wall. The original wall and towers designed by the Praetorian Prefect Anthemius and completed in 423 had been destroyed in the great earthquake 34 years later and were replaced by the stronger defenses which were now under siege, and which would prove to be impregnable.⁴² On the western land-side of the city there were three lines of defense. A besieging force would first come across a moat of 18½ m. (61 feet) wide and 6 m. (20 feet) deep filled with water, with a Iowwall behind it to allow defenders to harass the enemy as he was attempting to cross. Should the enemy succeed in crossing the moat and breaching the first line the besieged force would retreat to the main (second) outer wall, some 61 feet away and between 2 feet and 6½ feet in thickness, depending on the distance from the ground. It stood some 27½ feet above a paved terrace separating it from the moat wall, intended to be a killing ground.⁴³ Bythe time the enemy reached the third and last inner wall, casualties would be so great that he would simply not have enough manpower to continue the assault.

The Avar forces arrived before the land walls on the 29th of July 626. After a two day preparation and advancing behind mobile armored shields they launched an attack all along the walls, concentrating their forces on the central section between the gates of St. Romanus and St. Charisius (Top Kapi and Edirn in today s Istanbul). This was the so-called Tnesoteichion/ and was the most vulnerable part of the land defenses. Here the walls and towers descended into the valley of the Lycus stream which entered the Cityhalfwaybetween the two gates, and lay below the high ground on either side of the valley. The Avars deployed the Chinese trebuchet catapults, the first time they would be used in Europe. Commanded by Magister Bonus the defenders at first sortied daily beyond the walls to challenge the enemy, and Through the efficacy of God, as a result of their superiority our men kept the enemy at a distance.” This, how­ever, did not prevent the Avars from closing in on the walls. Covering their trebuchets and siege towers with hides they ad­vanced almost as far as the outworks between the gates of St. Romanus and St. Polyandrian. The siege continued for the next ten days but the Avar siege machinery was unable to put even a dent into the massive Theodosian Walls. The outer and inner facings of the fortifications were constructed from layers of stone and brick with the inside cavity filled with mortared rub­ble. This gave the walls strength, enabling them to absorb the shock of the heavy stones striking the outer facing. Another im­portant factor was the religious fervor and morale of the de­fenders. With the absence of Emperor Heraclius the Patriarch Sergius of the Orthodox Church assumed responsibility, leading a daily procession with the clergy along the whole length of the wall, carrying the “miraculous” icon of the Mother of God.

The decisive encounter between the besieged and the be­siegers came a week later in the waters of the Golden Horn. Some 70-odd warships—the swift “dromones”—had been kept in home waters and sheltered in the harbors behind the pro­tective walls. These large warships, usually propelled by two rows of oars on each side were designed for ramming and grap­pling with enemy ships. Archers were also stationed in wooden towers and once within range could shower the enemy with an uninterrupted hail of arrows (a few decades later Greek Fire would be installed on the top decks, making the imperial navy virtually invincible). Retaining some of the dromones to face the Persians camped across the Bosphorus, the main fleet was sent against the ^aSclavene Wolves” who were advancing towards the city in their dug-out Tnonoxylas.” The fleets met in the Golden Horn but the Slavs stood little chance against the big warships. Their boarding attacks were repulsed with heavy losses, with the dugouts being either scattered or sunk. The Slav tribes which took part in the sea battle must have counted on their entire resources of “manpower” since we are told by the chronicler Nicephorus that judging from the bodies which washed up on shore women were also fighting in the Slav ranks.

Deprived of their reinforcements the Avars broke camp and left, burning all their siege machinery. The Theodosian Wall had stood its first major assault and passed the test with flying colors. The Persians, who were to be ferried across in rafts and Slav canoes never had the opportunity to attack the city. Word came of the Persian defeats by Heraclius and in the spring of the following year they struck camp and departed. The main Persian army was destroyed in the battle of Nineveh with their commander Razates killed by Heraclius in single combat. By the spring of625 the Persians surrendered all con­quered territory and were forced to return the True Cross and other relics of the Crucifixion which they had captured in Jerusalem. Heraclius entered Constantinople on 14 September 628 and in a great procession headed towards the St. Sophia Cathedral, with the True Cross leading the way. He had shown that it was possible to rebound from military disaster and loss of territory by able military leadership, a motivated army and a well defended capital. The victories were hailed as a triumph of Christianity over the pagans with the struggles viewed as holy wars, Constantinople being protected by the Mother of God and Europe under a general divine protection. Never since Justinian s reign was the prestige of the Roman Empire on such a high level.

The defeat of the Avars and Slavs before the walls of Con­stantinople marked the peak of Avar power, which began to de­cline in the following years. The Avar empire had included al­most the whole of central Europe with a large part of the Balkan Peninsula, and political influence which extended even further. Using the excellent road system of the Eastern Roman Empire the Slavs in the meantime continued to occupy much of the Balkan Peninsula, leading a Western chronicler-traveler Isidore of Seville, to remark that in the 5th year of Heraclius^, reign the “Slavs took Greece from the Romans.”⁴⁴ In central Europe, how­ever, the Slavs found themselves in difficulties. Their scattered settlements had fallen under the control of the Avars, to whom they were paying tribute, while their neighbors the Sorbs were subjects of the Frankish Merovingian kings. Soon all this would change when in 623 the Veneti (Wends) elected a merchant from Gaul as their chief. The Merovingian chronicler Fredegar left a record of the events which followed:

In the fortieth year of Chlotar^,s reign (Clotaire II) a... Frank named Samo... joined with other merchants in order to go and do business with those Slavs who are known as Wends. The Slavs had already started to rise against the Avars called Huns, and against their ruler, the Kagan.... Every year the Huns wintered with the Slavs, sleeping with their wives and daughters, and in addition, the Slavs paid tribute and endured many other burdens. (They) eventually found this shameful oppression intolerable... [and] refused to obey their lords and started to rise in rebellion. When they took the field against the Huns, Samo the merchant... went with them and his bravery won their admiration. An as­tonishing number of Huns were put to the sword by the Wends. Recognizing his usefulness the Wends made Samo their King; and he ruled them well for thirty-five years. Several times they fought under his leadership against the Huns and his prudence and courage always brought the Wends victory. Samo had twelve Wendish wives who bore him twenty-two sons and fifteen daughters.⁴⁵

It has been suggested that Samo s name identifies him as a Gaul rather than a Frank. Samo could also have been a Slav since he does not appear to have been a Christian, as the Romanized Gauls or Franks were by this time.

The Franks had not interfered in the Avar-Slav fighting and waited for the final outcome. Their prudence was well- founded and was based on past experience. Some time before, when the Avars and Slavs had begun to penetrate the eastern part of the Frankish Kingdom (today s Austria), a Frankish force which was sent against them had suffered a bad defeat. A second Frankish force led by King Siegebert suffered an even worse de­feat in 562, with the King taken prisoner. A truce was estab­lished between the two sides which lasted until 630, but fol­lowing the defeat of the Avars at the hands of the Slavs, Dagobert I began to demand that Samo pay reparations for the Frankish merchants robbed and killed by the Wends. Samo re­fused, and as recorded by Fredegar, King Dagobert “ordered the raising of a force throughout his kingdom of Austrasia (Aus­tria), to proceed against Samo and the Wends. Three corps set out against the Wends.” The Lombards and the Allemani pro­vided a corps each, with Dagobert himself leading the Aus- trasians. The Allemani and Lombards were victorious, but as described by Fredegar:

Dagobert s Austrasians on the other hand invested the strong­hold OfWogastisburg (in today s Czech Republic?)... and were crushed in a three-day battle. And so they made for home, leav­ing all their tents and equipment behind them in their flight. After this the Wends made many a plundering sortie into Thuringia and the neighboring districts of the kingdom of the Franks. Furthermore, Dervan the Duke of the Sorbs, a people of Slav origin long subject to the Franks, placed himself and his people under the rule of Samo.⁴⁶

Samo remained the Slavs’ ruler until his death some 35 years later. No trace remained of the Slavic kingdom that he estab­lished when it broke up into separate tribes following his death, and it would take several centuries until the Slavs would establish the Great Moravian Kingdom in central Europe.

Other Veneti Slavs settled in the Alpine region between the Danube and the Adriatic Sea in what is today Austria and Sloveniawhile others headed towards north-eastern Italyto the Friulian Marsh, there building villages on piles sunk in the water which would grow into the city of Venice. By the middle of the 7th century the Veneti were launching sea expeditions against Italian cities, and one such raid is described by Paul the Deacon in his 6-volume history of the Germanic Lombards. In 642 a Slav expedition set out against Benevento, a Lombard duchy in southern Italy. The duchy was ruled by one Aio and his broth­ers, Radoald and Grimoald, who were born and raised in Friuli and spoke fluent Slavic.

... the Slavs came with a greater number of ships and set up their camp not far from the city of Sipontum. They made hidden pit­falls around their camp and when Aio came upon them in the ab­sence ofRadoald and Grimoald and attempted to conquer them, his horse fell into one of the pit-falls, the Slavs rushed upon him and he was killed, along with a number of others. When this was announced to Radoald, he came quickly and talked familiarly with these Slavs in their own language.

Having lulled the Slavs into a false sense of security Radoald fell upon them, killing many. Paul the Deacon points out that they had no kings or rulers, and that their political organization did not resemble that of any other people he knew.