pulace of Hiorin, built by Justiniun. The Asiatic suburbs of Constantinople not only included Chrysopolis and Chalcedon, but extended south-eastward along the charming shore which looks to the Prince's Islands, as far as Kartalimen. Proceeding in this direction from Chalcedon, ono came first to the peninsula of lieria (Phanıráki), whero Justinian had chosen the site of his suburban rosidonce. Passing by Rutininino (Jadi-Bostan), ono renched Sutyros, once noted for a temple, soon to be famous for a monastery. The spot chosen by Theophilus for his new palace was at Bryas, which lay between Satyros and Kartalimen (Kartal), and probably corresponds to the modern village of Mul-tépé.' The paluce of Bryas resembled those of Baghdal in shape and in the schemes of decoration. The only deviations from the plan of the original were auditions required in the residence of a Christian ruler, a chapel of the Virgin adjoining the Imperial bedroom, and in the court a church of the triconch shape delicated to Michael the archingel and two female suints. The buildings stood in a park irrigated by watercourses.

Arabian splendour in his material surroundings meant molernity for Theophilus,' and his love of novel curiosities was shown in the mechanical contrivances which he installed in the audience chamber of the palace of Magnaura.' A golden plane-tree overshadowed the throne; birds sat on its branches and on the throne itself, Golden griffins couched at the sides, golden lions at the foot; and there was a gold i

i For those identifications, and the 3 It is to be noticed that he renewed Bithynian pokotela, see Pargoire's all the Imperial wardrobe (Simeon, ib.). admirable Hiériu. Cp. also his • The triklinos, or main hall, of the kufinianes, 467; he would seek the Magnaura (built by Constantine) was sito of the placo in ruins to the c.ist in form a basilica with two aislus, and of the hill of Drakos-tépé.

1

organ in the room.

When a foreign ambassador was introduced to the Emperor's presence, he was amazed and perhaps alarmed at seeing the animals rise up and hearing the lions roar and the birds burst into melodious song. At the sound of the organ there noises ceused, but when the audience was over and the ambussador was withdrawing, the mechanism was again set in motion.”

One of the most remarkable sights in the throne room of the Magnaura was the Pentapyrgion, or cabinet of Five Towers, a piece of furniture which was constructed by Theophilus.” Four towers were grouped round a central and doubtless higher tower; each tower had several, probably four, storeys; * and in the chambers, which were visible to the eye, were exhibited various precious objects, mostly of sacred interest. At the celebration of an Imperial marriage, it was the usage to deposit the nuptial wreaths in the Pentapyrgion. On special occasions, for instance at the Easter festival, it was removed from the Magnaura to adorn the Chrysotriklinos.”

If the Emperor's love of magnificence and taste for art impelled him to spend immense sums on his palaces, he did not neglect works of public utility. One of the most important duties of the government was to maintain the fortifications of the city in repair. Theophilus did not add new defences, like lleraclius and Leo, but no Emperor did inore than he to strengthen and improve the existing walls. The experiences of the siege conducted by Thomas seem to have shown that the sci-walls were not high enough to be impregnable." It was deciiled to raise them in height, and this work, though commenced by his father on the side of the Golden Horn, was mainly the work of Theophilus. Numerous inscriptions

| Two gold organs were made for Theophilus, but only one of them seems to have been kept in the Magnaura. Simeon (Add. Gcury.), 793.

? Constantino, Cer. 608.569 ; Vita Bas. 237 = Cont. Th. 173. For such contrivances at Baghalad see Gibbon, vi. 126.

3 Simeon, ib. (cp. Pseudo-Simeon, 627); it was made by a goldsmith related to the Patriarch Antonius. If not of solid gold, it was doubtless richly decorated with gold. The same

artist made the golden organs and the golden tree (ib.).

Compartments, Mesok ápdia. Seu Cer. 582, cp. 586-687.

• Constantino, Cer. 680, cp. 70.

6 Gen. 75 των τειχών .. χθαμαλών όντων και τους πολεμίοις εντεύθεν έμ. παρεχόντων το ευεπίβατον.

îhis follows from two inscriptions of “Michael and Theophilus,' lost ; sco van Millingen, Walls, 185. Other inscriptions existed inscribed "Theophilus and Michael," and there. fore dating from the years 8:39.842.

now

-of which many are still to be seen, many others have disappeared in recent times—recorded his name, which appears more frequently on the walls and towers than that of any other Emperor. The restoration of the seaward defences facing Chrysopolis may specially be noticed : at the ancient gate of St. Barbara (Top-kapussi, close to Seraglio Point), and on the walls and towers to the south, on either side of the gate of unknown name (now Deïrmen-kapussi) near the Kynegion.' Just north of this entrance is a long inscription, in six iambic trimeters, praying that the wall which Theophilus “raised on new foundations” may stand fast and unshaken for ever. It may possibly be a general dedication of all his new fortifications. But the work was not quite completed when Theophilus died." South of the Kynegion and close to the Mangana, a portion of the circuit remained in disrepair, and it was reserved for Bardas, the able minister of Michael III., to restore it some twenty years later.

§ 3. Iconoclasm It was not perhaps in the nature of Theophilus to adopt the passive attitude of his father in the matter of imageworship, or to refrain from making a l'esolute attempt to terminate the schisin which divided the Church. But he appears for some years (perhaps till A.D. 834) to have continued the tolerant policy of Michael, and there may be some reason for believing, as inany believe, that the influence of his friend John the Grammarian, who became Patriarch in A.D. 832, was chiefly responsible for his resolution to suppress icons. He did

a

not summon a new council, and perhaps he did not issue any new cdict; but he endeavoured, by severe measures, to ensure the permanence of the iconoclastic principles which had been established under Leo the Armenian. The lack of contemporary evidence renders it difficult to determine the scope and extent of the persecution of Thcophilus; but a careful examination of such evidence as exists shows that modern historians have exaggerated its compass, if not its severity. So far as we can see, his repressive measures were twofold. He endeavoured to check the propagation of the false doctrine by punishing some lending monks who were actively preaching it; and he sought to abolish religious pictures from Constantinople by forbidding them to be painted at all.”

Of the cases of corporal chastisement inflicted on ecclesiastics for pertinacity in the cause of image-worship, the most famous and genuine is the punishment of the two l'alestinian brothers, Theolore and Theophanes, who had already endured persecution undler Leo V. On Leo's death they returned to Constantinople and did their utmost in the cause of pictures, Theodore by his books and Theophanes by his hymns. But Michael II. treated them like other leaders of the cause; he did not permit them to remain in the city.' Under Theophilus they were imprisoned and scourged, then exiled to Aphusia, one of the | The contemporary

Proconnesian islands. Theophilus was anxious to win them over; the severe treatment which he dealt out to thema proves the influence they exerted; they had, in fact, succeeded Theodore of Studion as the principal champions of icons. The Einperor hoped that after the experience of a protracted exile und imprisonment they would yield to his threats; their opposition seemed to him perhaps the chief obstacle to the unity of the Church. So they were brought to Constantinople and the story of their maltreatment may be told in their own words."

“Why

The Imperial officer arrived at the isle of Aphusia and hurried its away to the City, affirming that he knew not the purpose of the command, only that he luud been sent to execute it very urgently. We arrived in the City on the 8th of July. Our con luctor reported our arrival to the Emperor, and was ordered to shut us up in the Praetorian prison. Six days later (on the 14th) we were summoned to the Imperial presence, Conductel by the Prefect of the City, we reached the door of the Chrysotriklinos, and saw the Emperor with a terribly stern countenance and a number of people standing round. It was the tenth hour. The Prefect retired und left us in the presence of the Emperor, who, when we had made ubeisunce, roughly ordered us to appronch. He asked his “Where were ye born ?" We replied, “ In the land of Moab." came ye here ?" We did not answer, and he vridered our faces to be beuten. After many sore blows, we became dizzy and fell, and if I had !10t yrasped the tunic of the man who smotė me, I should have fallen on the Emperor's footstool. Holding by his dress I stood unmovedd till the Emperor suid “Enough" and repeated his former question. When we still said nothing he addressed the Prefect (who appears to have returneil] in great wrath, “'Take them and engrave on their faces these verses, and then hand them over to two Saracens to conduct them to their own country." One stood near-his name was Christodulos—who held in his hand the iambic verses which he had coinposed. The Emperor baile him read them aloud, addling, "If they are not good, never mind." He saiil this because he knew how they would be ridiculed by us, since we are experts in poetical matters. The man who read them said, “Sir, these fellows are not worthy that the verses should be better."

They were then taken back to the Praetorium, and then once more to the Palace,' where they received a flogging in the