« PrethodnaNastavi »
claim on the Caliph's forces, that it was obviously to the interest of Theophilus to make an effort to support it, when it seemed likely to be crushed. On grounds of policy, it must
, be adınitted that he was justified in reopening hostilities in A.D. 837. In choosing the direction of his attack he was probably influenced by the hope of coming into touch with the insurgents of Armenia and Adarbiyan.” He invaded the regions of the Upper Euphrates with a large army.* He captured and burned the fortress of Zapetra, putting to death the male population and carrying off the women and children. He appeared before Melitene, threatening it with the fate of Zapetra if it did not surrender. The chief men of the place, however, induced him to spare it; they came forth, offered him gifts, and restored to liberty Roman prisoners who were in the town. He crossed the Euphrates, and besieged and burned Arsamosata." But of all his achievements, the conquest of Zapetra was regarded by both the Moslems and the Christians as the principal result of the campaign.
The expedition of Theophilus into western Armenia deserves particular notice, for, though the Greek writers betray no consciousness of this side of his policy, there is some evidence that the situation in the Armenian highlands and the Caucasian region constantly engaged his attention and that his endeavours to strengthen the Empire on its north-eastern frontier met with considerable success. In A.D. 830 he had sent an expedition under Theophobos and Bardas against Abasgia, which had proclaimed itself independent of the Empire, but this enterprise ended in failure.' He was more fortunate elsewhere. We may surmise that it is to the campaign of A.D. 837 that an Armenian historian : refers who narrates that Theophilus went to Pontic Chaldea, captured many Armenian prisoners, took tribute from Theodosiopolis, and conferred the proconsular patriciate on Ashot, its ruler.3 It was probably in connexion with this expedition that the Emperor separated eastern Pontus from the Armeniac province, and constituted it an independent Theme,' under a stratêgos who resided at Trapezus. The Theme of Chaldia reached southward to the Euphrates, includled Keltzene and part of Little Sophene, while to the north-cast, on the Boas (Chorok-Su), it embraced the district of Sper. It is at least evident that the Imperial conquests of A.D. 837 in Little Arinenia would have furnished a motive for the creation of a new military province.
Michael Syr. 88 (Ann. Sel. 1148 corresponds to the modern Shimshat. =A.D, 836-837). Tabari and Yakubi Melitene was attacked when the crroneously place this expedition in the Emperor returned from the excursion following year. A.D. 837 had already into Armenia. Curt. Th, is here well been adopted by Weil and Vasil'ev. informed ; Zapetra is mentioned allas 2 Michael, ib., says that he sent into
τε δύο πόλεις (124). Great Armenia, demanding tribute,
Having taken Arsamosata the and threatening to devastate it in
Romans passed into Armenia and
This case of refusal. The tribute was paid.
ravaged there (Michael, ib.).
probably means Little Sophene, north 3 'Tabari, 29, says, “100,000 accord.
of Anzitene and the Murad-Chai ; for ing to some; while others say that
the Armenian historians relate that lie the fighting men exceeded 70,000.". took the fort of Chozan (Stephen of
• Michael, 89. (Yakubi and Bala. Taron, 108; Samuel of Ani, 707). For dhuri mention only Zapetra ; Tabari the district of Chozan, cp. Constantine, mentions lelitenc also.) Simeon (Add. De adm. imp. 226 ; Gelzer, ib. 173 ; Georg. 798, eros. Slar. 96) names thu Adonts, Arncniin v opokh 16 Iustinianue. τε Ζάπετρον και το Σαμόσατον, con. (1908), 38, where the distinction here founding Arsamosata with Samosata. tween Little Sophono to tho north. That Arsamosata is meant is shown west, and Great Sophone to the south. by Michacl's statement that tho in. cast, of Anzitene, is clearly explaincel. vaders entered Hanazit, 1.c. Anzitenc. Samuel (ib.) says that, having taken The position of the town is discussed Zapetra, Theophilus went to Armenia by Golzer iu Georgius Cyprius, 171.172. and took Palin (a fort in Palinc, which It lay on the road loading oastward lics cast of Chozan), Mezkert (in from Meliteno to Aklat on Lako Van; Sopheno, on the Murad-S1), and Arikl cast of Kharput and near the left lank (in Dêgik = Digisene, which lay be of the Murid . Chai (Arsanias). It · tween Sophone and Sophanene).
The triumph. with which Theophilus celebrated the devastation which he had wrought within the borders of his foe was a repetition of the pageants and ceremonial
1 Cont. Th. 137. 2
Stephen of Taron, 107. Cp. Mar. quart, Streifzüge, 421, who connects this notice with the disastrous Abas. gian expedition of 830. But Theo philus did not accompany that expedition.
3 “ Ashot the son of Shapuh," pre. sumably tho nephew of Ashot who founded Kamnkh, as the historian Varilan rocorily. Svo Marquart, ib. 401. Stephen's Theodosiopolis may be Kumaki (in Daranalis), not Er.
The dignity bestowed on Ashot is described as tho Consulate, i.c. tho Patriciate apuhiupat" (dird UNSTWw): this may incun the title Ilypintos (patricinto being a mistiko of Steplon) or the proconsulir putri. ciate, ανθύπατος και πατρίκιος, for whicle
cp. above, p. 126. Stephen relates that in the same year Theophilus in. vaded Syria, took the town of Urpeli, and vanquished the Arabs at Almulat. Then turning eastward to Armenia he took several fortresses in the region of Gelam and made the “ Fourta Armenia & waste deserted by men and boasts" (108).
• For tho ovidenco, soc above, p: 223.
Countantine, Thenus, 30. lle de. scribes the inland parts of Chaldia as i pooíuia of Little Armenia, and men. tions Keltzene (for which see above, p. 176), Evepions, which I suppose to mean Spor or Sber, and to l'ocsávov, which I tako to bo Chozan in Sopheno. Noto that Stephen of Turon, loc. cit., says that Thcophilus loft Ashot in the district of Sper.
which had atteuded his return, six years before, from the achievement of similar though less destructive victories. Troops of children with garlands of flowers went out to meet the Emperor as he entered the capital. In the Hippodrome he competed himself in the first race, driving a white chariot and in the costume of a Blue charioteer; and when he was crowned as winner, the spectators greeted him with the allusive cry, “ Welcome, incomparable champion !
In the autumn of the same year, Babek was at last captured and executed,' and the Caliph Mutasim was free to prepare a scheme of revenge for the destruction of Zapetra and the barbarities which had been committed. He resolved to deal a crushing blow which would appear as a special insult and injury to the present wearer of the Imperial crown. Amorion was the original home of the family of Theophilus, and he resolved that it should be blotted out from the number of inhabited cities. But apart from this consideration, which may have stimulated his purpose, the choice of Amorion was natural on account of its importance. The Saracens considered its capture the great step to an advance on Constantinople. In the seventh century they took it, but only for a moment; in the eighth they attempted it three times in vain. Iii the year of his death, Mamun is said to have intended to besiege it. s An Arabic chronicler describes it as the eye of
Constantine, repi rag. 508. The the same writer we Icarn that a cer. triunıph is also mentioned in one text tain Ibrahim declaimed a poem besoro of the Acla 4 Bart. Amor. (40-42). the Caliph, exciting him to revenge. 2 Simeon (Add. Gcorg.) 799 kalūs
6 Greek writers say that the region ήλθες, ασύγκριτε φακτιονάρη.
of Zapetra was the home of the an.
cestors of the reigning Caliph. This 3 Michael Syr. 90 ; ho fled to Ar. is stated in Gen. 64, Cont. Th; 124. menia, on his way to the Empire, and Simcon (ude. Georg, 798) ascribes was betrayou loy "a patrician named
this honour to Σαμόσατον, A work Stoplanos," in whose house he found
composed soon after A.1). 815 (Actu mm a lolging. Cp. Weil. ii. 301.
Mari. Amor. 40) leaves it open : • Michael, 89, records some minor περιφανείς πόλεις ένθα κτλ. There hostilities of Mutasiin in the winter seems to be no foundation for this ; of 837-338.
the motive of the myth was to balance s That thesc barbarities were chiefly the destruction of the cradle of the committed by the orientals who had Emperor by that of the cradle the joined Theophilus (cp. Weil, ii. 310) Caliph. Cp. Vasil'ev, 116. Nikitin inay possibly be inferred from an in. (Acia cilt. 191) attempts an explana. cidental remark of Michael Syr. 96, tion of the fable. Apart from its “Nasr who had. devastated Zapetra,' connexion with the reigning dynasty, but this may relate to an act ing the selection of Aniorion can be, ex. Nasr's earlier rebellion. Masudi says plained by its importance. that Theophilus had with him Burjatis, • Theoph. 351, 386, 452, 470. Bulgarians, and Slavs (67). From 8 See above, p. 256.
Christendom,' and a Greek contemporary writer ranks it next to the capital.?
Mutasim left his palace at Samarra in April (A.D. 838), and the banners of his immense arıny: were inscribed with the name of Amorion. The Caliph was a warrior of indisputable bravery, but we know not whether it was he or his generals who designed the strategical plan of the invasion. The two most eminent generals who served in this campaign were Ashnas and Afshin. The former was a Turk, and his prominence is significant of the confidence which Mutasim reposed in his new corpe of Turkish guards. Afshin had distinguished himself by suppressing rebellion in Egypt, and he had done much to terminate the war against Babek which had been so long drawn out.
The city of Ancyra was fixed upon as the first objective of the invasion. An army of the east, under the command of Afshin, advanced by way of Germanicia, and crossed the frontier by the Pass of Hadath on a day which was so fixed as to allow him time to meet the army of the west in the plains of Ancyra.
The purposes of the Caliph were not kept secret. The dispositions of the Emperor show that he was aware of the designs on Ancyra and Amorion. He left Constantinople probably in May; and from Dorylaion, the first great military station on the road to the Saracen frontier, he made provisions for the strengthening of the walls and the garrison of Amorion. The duty of defending the city naturally devolved upon Aetius, : the strategos of the Anatolic Theme, for Amorion was his official residence. The plan of the Emperor was to attack the forces of the enemy on their northward march to Ancyra. Knowing nothing of the eastern army under Afshin, he crossed the Halys and encamped with his army. not far from the river's bank in the extreme south of the Charsian district,
I“And more valued by the Grecks negroes. Masudi (68) says that the than Constantinople" (Tabari, 30); numbers were exaggerated by some to cp. Masudi, 74.
500,000 and reduced by others to ? icla citt. 425 (cp. 1113);
200,000. Tabari (30) says that no According to Michael Syr. 95, Caliph had ever made preparations for Mutasim's army numbered 50,000, war on such a gigantic scale. These Afshin's 30,000. He mentions also statements illustrate the value of 30,000 merchants and providers, numbers in medieval writers. We 50,000 camels, 20,000 mules. Bar. can only trust intelligent contem. Hebraeus (159) says that Mutasim led poraries. Here the numbers of the 220,000 men. Tho Armenian version combatants given by Michael, i.e. of Michael (274) mentions 30,000 Dionysios, are moderate and crelible.
probably near Zoropassos, where there was a bridge. He calculated that the enemy would march from the Cilician Gates to Ancyra by the most direct road, which from Soandos to Parnassos followed the course of the river, and he hoped to attack them on the flank. The Caliph's western army
' advanced northward from Tyana in two divisions, and Ashnas, who was in front, was already near the Halys before the Emperor's proximity was suspected. The Caliph ordered a halt till the position and movements of the Romans should be discovered. But in the ineantime Theophilus had been in. formed of the advance of the eastern army, and the news disconcerted his plans. He was now obliged to divide his forces. Taking, probably, the greater portion with him, he marched himself to oppose Afshin, and left the rest, under the command of a kinsman, to check or harass the progress of the Caliph, Afshin had already passed Sebasteci (Sivas), and was in the district of Dazimon, when he was forced to give battle to the Emperor. Daziinon, the modern Tokat, commands the great eastern road from Constantinople to Sebastea, at the point where another road runs northward to Neo-Caesarea. The town lies at the foot of a hill, at one extremity of which the ruins of the ancient fortress are still to be seen.' Situated near the southern bank of the Iris, it marks the eastern end of a fertile plain stretching to Gaziura (now Turkhal), which in the ancient and middle ages was known as Dazimonitis ; the Turks call it Kaz-Ova. It was probably in this plain that the Saracens encamped. The Emperor, who may have
1 For details of the march of Mutasim and Ashnas, see Bury, Mutasin's March. Tabari's account of the campaign is fuller than any other.
30,000 (Michael Syr. 93, who gives no topographical indications). Afshin is evidently meant by Sinicon's curious Sudce (Sundci, rers. Slav. 97 ; Lovden, Adl. Gcorg. ed. Mur. 712; Loudéu, Leo Gr. 224).
3 Gen. 67 of (the Saracen con. manders) κατά τον Δαξιμώνα συνήχθησαν of paroredevo djevo.. Tabari's date (45) for the battle, July 22, can hardly le right. A longer time must surely have apsed before the
of the siege of Aniorion (Aug. 1). Moreoper, Tabari refutes himself. His date
is “Thursday, Shaban 25." But Shaban 25 = July 22 fell on Monday.
• For the plain of Dazimon, which : seems to have been once part of an Imperial estate, sec Anderson, Stud. Port. i. 68; for Tokat itself and the fortress, Cumont, ib. ii. 240-243.
5 Afshin had been reinforced by the forces of Armenia led by Bagarat, lord (ishkhan) of Vaspurakan, the "prince of princes." This title was rendered in Greek by άρχων των αρχόν. TWN (Constantine, Cer. 687). Genesios has split him into two persons (67) αυτού του αρχ. αρχ. και του ΒεσπαραKavitou (I am not quite sure whether Marquart follows hin, op. cit. 463). Cont. Th. 127 rightly mentions only one person.
Bagarat was a son of