The History of Greece from its conquest by the Crusaders to its conquest by the Turks, and of the Empire of Trebizond 1204-1461

Front matter

MEDIEVAL GREECE AND TREBIZOND PRINTED BY WILLIAM BLACKAVOOD AND SONS, EDINBURGH THE HISTORY OF GREECE FROM ITS CONQUEST BY THE CRUSADERS TO ITS CONQUEST BY THE TURKS AND OF THE EMPIRE OF TREBIZOND 1204-1461 BY GEORGE FINLAY HONORARY MEMBER OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF LITERATURE vO\€ios oarts ttjs tOTOplas WILLIAM BLACK WOOD AND SONS EDINBURGH AND LONDON MDCCCLI IN AS I II WILLIAM MABTIN LEAKE, F.E.S. LATE LIEUTENANT-COLONEL OF THE ROYAL ARTILLERY, HON. D. C. L- IN THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD, ONE OF THE VICE-PRESIDENTS OF THE ROTAL SOCIETY OF LITERATURE, MEMBER OF THE ROYAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES AT BERLIN, corresponding member of the national institute at paris. etc. etc etc. WHOSE LONG AND LABORIOUS EXERTIONS CLEARING THE ANCIENT HISTORY OF GREECE FROM OBSCURITY, AND THE MODERN FROM MISREPRESENTATION, HAVE MERITED THE APPLAUSE OF BRITAIN AND THE GRATITUDE OF GREECE, THE FOLLOWING PAGES ARE INSCRIBED A TESTIMONIAL OF PERSONAL RESPECT AND LITERARY HOMAGE, BY THE AUTHOR

ADVERTISEMENT.

This work is an attempt to fill up a vacancy in English literature. It may, perhaps, form a useful supplementary volume to the work of Gibbon, until something more worthy to be placed beside the writings of the great historian shall replace it. The author has found it impossible to follow rigidly any fixed system in the orthography of Greek names. Our best authorities do not agree in their mode of writing them. Had a fixed rule been generally adopted, it would have been conformed to in this work. The names of the emperors of Trebizond are always written in their Greek form, as a convenient mode of distinguishing them from the Byzantine sovereigns. Other names are given in their English, Latin, or semi-Greek form, as accident may appear to render most suitable. A desire to avoid both confusion and singularity, has made etymology yield to sound in one case, and given sound a preference over etymology in another. Athens, June 1851. CONTENTS

Chapter I. Changes Of The Population In Greece After The Decline Of

THE ROMAN EMPIRE. A. D. 540-1460. Page § 1. Observations on the early population, ..... 1 2. Depopulation under the Roman government. Causes of the introduction of Sclavonian settlers, ...... 7 3. Sclavonians in the Peloponnesus, . . . . .14 4. Sclavonian names in the geographical nomenclature of Greece, . 27 5. Colonies of Asiatic race settled by the Byzantine emperors in Thrace and Macedonia, ....... 31 6. Bulgarians and Vallachians in Greece, ..... 33 7. Albanians, ........ 36 8. Tzacones or Lacones, ....... 39 9. Summary, . . . . . . . .41

Chapter II. Causes Of Hostile Feelings Between The Byzantine Greeks And The

WESTERN EUROPEANS. — A. D. 867-1204. §1. Political condition of the Byzantine empire, .... 45 2. Social condition of the Greeks in the twelfth century, . . 52 3. Stationary condition of the agricultural population throughout Europe during the middle ages, ...... 58 4. Condition of the Normans when they conquered the Byzantine possessions in Italy, . . . . . . . .60 5. Normans invade the Byzantine empire. Their ravages in Greece, . 64 6. Separation of the Greek and Latin churches, .... CONTENTS. X Page § 7. Great increase of the papal power during the eleventh and twelfth centriirics p ■ • * " 8. Predominant position of the races speaking the French language in the west of Europe during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, . 77

Chapter III. Overthrow Of The Byzantine Empire By The Crusaders

A.D. 1096-1204. § 1. The Crusades, ....••■• 79 2. Quarrels with the Byzantine emperors during the first and second Crusades. Conquest of Cyprus by Richard I. of England during the third Crusade, . . . • ■ • .85 3. Fourth Crusade. Conquest of the Byzantine empire, ... 94

Chapter IV. Empire Of Romania

A.D. 1204-1261. § 1. Election of the first Latin emperor of Constantinople by the Crusaders and Venetians, ....... 101 2. Establishment of the feudal system in Greece, . . . .108 3. Baldwin I., 113 4. Henry of Flanders. Ecclesiastical arrangements. Parliament of Ravenika, 115 5. Peter of Courtenay. Robert. John de Brienne. Baldwin II. Extinction of the empire of Romania, ...... 129

Chapter VI. Despotat Of Epirus

EMPIRE OF THESSALONICA. A.D. 1204-1469. § 1. Establishment of an independent Greek principality in Epirus, . 141 2. Empire of Thessalonica, . . . . . .144 3. Despotat of Epirus. Principality of Vallachian Thessaly. Family of Tocco, ........ 147

Chapter VII. Dukes Of Athens

1205-1456. § 1 . Athens becomes a fief of the empire of Romania, . .153 2. State of Athens under the house of de la Roche, . CONTENTS. XI Page § 3. Walter of Brienne. Catalan Grand Company, . . .169 4. Dukes of Athens and Neopatras of the Sicilian branch of the house of Aragon, ........ 177 5. Dukes of the family of Acciaiuoli of Florence. Termination of the Frank domination at Athens, ...... 182 6. Condition of the Greek population under the Dukes of Athens, . 193

Chapter VIII. Principality Of Achaia Or The Morea

— 1205-1387. § 1. Conquest of Achaia, by William de Champlitte. Feudal organisation of the principality, ....... 202 2. Acquisition of the principality by Geffrey de Villehardoin. Geffrey I. Geffrey II., . . . ' . . . .217 3. William Villehardoin completes the conquest of the Morea. Cedes Monemvasia, Misithra, and Maina, to the Emperor Michael VIII., 226 4. Alliance and feudal connection of Achaia with the kingdom of Naples, 239 5. Isabella de Villehardoin. Florenz of Hainault. Philip of Savoy, . 244 6. Maud of Hainault and Louis of Burgundy, .... 254 7. Achaia under the Neapolitan princes. Ruin of the principality, . 258

Chapter IX. Byzantine Province In The Peloponnesus

A.D. 1262-1460. § 1 . Early state of the Byzantine province. Government of the despot Theodore I., ....... . 268 2. The emperor Manuel II. attempts to ameliorate the Byzantine administration in the Peloponnesus, ...... 277 3. Division of the Morea among the brothers of the emperor John VI., viz., Theodore II., Constantine, and Thomas. War of Constantiue and I Thomas with the Othoman Turks in 1446, . . .284 4. Disorders in the Morea. Albanian revolution, . . . 297 5. First expedition of sultan Mohammed II. into the Morea, . . 304 6. Final conquest of the Morea by the Turks, .... 310

Chapter X. Dukes Of The Archipelago Or Of Naxos

— A.D. 1207-1566. § 1. Observations on the Venetian establishments in the empire of Romania, 320 2. Dukes of the Archipelago of the families of Sanudo and Dalle Carceri, 324 3. Dukes of Naxos of the family of Crispo, .... 339 4. Causes of the prolonged existence of the Frank power in the Archipelago, ........ CONTENTS. XII EMPIRE OF TREBIZOND 1204-1461.

Chapter I. Foundation Of The Empire

— A.D. 1204-1222. Page § 1. Early history of Trebizond, ...... 353 2. Origin of the family of Grand-Komnenos, .... 364 3. Reign of Alexios L, . • • . • .370

Chapter II. Trebizond Tributary To The Seljouk Sultans And The Mongols

1222-1280. § 1 . Reigns of Andronikos I. and Joannes I., .... 384 2. Reigns of Manuel I., Andronikos II., Georgios, . . . 392

Chapter III. Trebizond Independent

INTERNAL FACTIONS. — 1280-1349. § 1. Reign of Joannes II. Alliance with the empire of Constantinople, . 396 2. Reign of Alexios II. Commercial importance of Trebizond. Trade of Genoa, ........ 405 3. Anarchy and civil wars. Reigns of Andronikos III., Manuel II, Basilios, Irene, Anna, Joannes III., Michael, . . . .416

Chapter IV. Re-establishment Of The Emperor's Supremacy

1349-1446. § 1. Reign of Alexios III. Progress of the Turkomans. Revenge of Lercari. Magnificent ecclesiastical endowments, .... 431 2. Reign of Manuel III. Relations with the empire of Timor, . . 447 3. Reign of Alexios IV. Kara Yousouf, chief of the horde of the Black Turkomans. Family crimes in the house of Grand-Komnenos, . CONTENTS. XIII

Chapter V. Fall Of The Empire

1446-1461. Page § 1. Causes of the rapid rise and vital energy of the Othoman empire, . 464 2. Reign of Joannes IV. called Kalojoannes, .... 471 3. Reign of David. Conquest of Trebizond by Mohammed II., . .481

Appendix

. CHRONOLOGICAL LISTS. I. Emperors of Romania, ...... 499 II. Kings of Saloniki, ....... 500 III. Despots of Epirus. Emperors of Thessalonica. Princes of Vallachian Thessaly, ........ ib. IV. Dukes of Athens, . . . . . . .501 V. Princes of Achaia, ....... 502 VI. Byzantine despots in the Morea, ..... 503 VII. Dukes of the Archipelago and Naxos, ..... 504 VIII. Emperors of Trebizond, . . . . ib. IX. Genealogical list of the family of Grand-Komnenos, . . . 506 X. List of chiefs of the Turkoman horde of the White Sheep, . . 509 INDEX, ......... MEDIEVAL GREECE

Chapter I. Changes Of The Population After The Decline Of The Roman

EMPIRE. A. D. 540-1 4G0. SECT. I. — OBSERVATIONS ON THE EARLY POPULATION OF GREECE The fate of the Greeks, after the loss of their liberty, continues to supply us with lessons of political experience that are to be found iu no other portion of the annals of the human race. The Roman conquest first compressed the Hellenic race into a distinct nation. That union was effected by the destruction of the local patriotism that gives its greatest charm to ancient history. Fortunately, it had been fully accomplished before Greece was invaded by the northern nations ; for though the Greeks repulsed the Goths and Huns, they could not prevent the Sclavo nians from creeping silently into the most secluded valleys of their primeval scats. Two leading facts form the basis of Greek history at the commencement of the Byzantine empire : the dimi nution in the numbers of the Hellenic race, and the A §1 settlement of Sclavonian colonies throughout Greece.

The Byzantine writers inform us, that for several cen turies the Sclavonians formed the bulk of the population in ancient Hellas. The precise extent to which this Sclavonian colonisation was carried has been the subject of warm discussion. One party still maintains that the present inhabitants of Greece are Byzantinised Sclavo nians ; another upholds them to be the lineal descendants of the men who were conquered by the Romans. This latter party generally selects an earlier genealogical era, and talks only of a descent from the subjects of Leonidas and the fellow-citizens of Pericles. Both seem equally far from the truth. But nations affect antiquity of blood and nobility of race as much as individuals ; and surely the Greeks, who have been so long deprived of glory in their immediate progenitors, may be pardoned for dis playing a zealous eagerness to participate directly in the fame of a past world, with which they alone can claim any national connection.

It is not, therefore, surprising that the work of Professor Fallmerayer, who attempted, with great ability, to prove that the Hellenic race in Europe was exterminated by the Sclavonians, deeply wounded both Greek patriotism and Philhellenic enthusiasm.1 Before reviewing the various immigrations into Greece during the middle ages, it is necessary to notice two questions connected with the population in earlier times which still admit of doubt and discussion. Their importance in determining the extent to which the bulk of the popula- 1 The principal work of Fallmerayer is entitled Geschichte der halbinsel Morea wahrend da Mittelalters. A subsequent tract forms a necessary appendix. It is entitled Welcheu Einfluss hatte die Besetzung Griechmlands durch die Slaven aus das Schicksal der StadtAthen? oder die Entstehunrj der heutigen Griechen.

In both these works, which contain much original matter there is too much latitude in the use of authorities. The ablest opponent of Fallmerayer is Zmkeisen, but his Geschichte Griechenlands is far from a trium phant refutation. It has the merit of exact references to the original autho rities. Two Greeks at Athens have also attempted to reply to Fallmerayer, but their works contain nothing that has not been better stated in Germany. ELEMENTS OF THE POPULATION IN GREECE. 3 CHAP. I, u tion may have been of mixed race during the classic ages is great. The one relates to the proportion in which the Pelasgi, or original inhabitants, combined with the agri cultural classes of the Hellenic race ; the other, to the numbers of the slave population, and to the manner in which slavery declined and disappeared.

A doubt arises whether the agricultural slaves were exterminated by the barbarian invaders of the Hellenic soil, or were absorbed into the mass of the Sclavonian or Byzantine population. These questions prove how uncertain all inquiries into the direct affiliation of whole nations must be. Of what value is the oldest genealogic tree, if a single generation be omitted in the middle 1 Whether the Greeks themselves were not a foreign tribe that intruded themselves on a race of which the Pelasgi were the principal branch, is a question that will probably always remain doubtful. Whether the Greeks exterminated this older race, as our own historians represent the Saxons to have exterminated the Britons, or mingled with them to form one people, like the Saxons and Normans, or whether the difference between the Greeks and Pelasgi was not so great as to exclude all consanguinity, are questions that belong to the realm of conjecture, not of history.

As the two ablest modern historians of Greece, Grote and Thiiiwal, adopt different views on the Pelasgic question, it may be considered as one that is not likely ever to be decided.1 The question concerning the numbers of the slave population hardly admits of a more satisfactory answer. Liberated slaves certainly engrafted themselves into the 1 Thirlwal, History of Greece, vol. i. chap. 2. Grote, History of Greece, vol. ii. 349. The subject is treated with learning and judgment by Mr Mure of Cald well, in his Critical History of the Language and Literature of Greece, vol. i. 48. After all, we have nothing explicit on the language of the Pelasgians but the passage of Herodotus, i. 57 ; aud his words would authorise us to infer that the languages of the ancient Greeks and the Pelasgians were as different as those of the modern Greeks and the Albanians.

Yet it would perhaps be as appli cable if the difference were no greater than that between high and low German, or between Dutch and English. §1 native blood of Greece, to some extent, in Roman times ; but it is difficult to ascertain what proportion of the freedmen that filled Greece were of foreign origin. Sla very was for many ages the principal agent of productive industry in Greece ; the soil was cultivated by slaves, and all manufactured articles were produced by their labour. Throughout the whole country, they formed at least one half of the population.1 Now, although the freedmen and descendants of liberated foreign slaves never formed as important an element in the higher classes of the popu lation of Greece as they did of Rome, still they must have exerted a considerable influence on society.

And here a question forces itself on the attention, — Whether the sin gular corruption which the Greek language has undergone, according to one unvarying type, in every land where it was spoken, from Syracuse to Trebizond, must not be, in great part, attributed to the infusion of foreign elements, which slavery introduced into Hellenic society in number less streams, all flowing from a similar source ? The Thracians and Sclavonians were for centuries to the slave trade of the Greeks what the Georgians and Circassians have been for ages to the Mohaniniedan nations, and the Negroes of the African coast to the European colonies in America. Whatever may have been the operation of these causes in adulterating the purity of the Hellenic race and the Greek language, we know that they did not display any effect until about the middle of the sixth century of our era.

At that time, the population of Greece presented all the external signs of a homogeneous people. In the third century, the Greek language was spoken by the rural population with as much purity as by the inhabirr,J°V £° , -e^ ,™f?r.matl°° on the numbers of the slave population, see ?* rrZj" tw, Cma' I01' ■V 3S1- In comP<iring the numbers of the slaves tha? th ™n, i f *heusl''We Sa*eS 0f North America, we must recollect CHAP. I §1 CORRUPTION OF THE GREEK LANGUAGE. ■5 tants of the towns, and even the ancient peculiarities of dialect were often preserved.1 Nor did the condition of the mass of the population, greatly as it was diminished, undergo any material change until after the time of Jus tinian ; for the invasions of the Goths in the third and fourth centuries were temporary evils, that only caused a permanent decrease in the population in so far as they destroyed the productive powers of the country.

The causes that transformed the ancient Greeks of Justinian's age into the modern Greeks who inhabited the soil of Hellas in the time of the Crusaders, seem, on the whole, to have been internal rather than external. Foreign invaders had less to do with the change than slavery, ignorance, and social degradation. Time alone might claim some share in the transformation ; but time ought to be an improver in every well-constituted com munity ; and the Orthodox Church, which exercised a very powerful social influence on the Greek race during the period in question, must be supposed to have counter acted the progress of corruption. Among an illiterate people like the Greeks of the sixth, seventh, and eighth centuries, each successive generation alters the language of oral communication, by neglecting inflexions and disregard ing grammatical rules.

A corrupted pronunciation con founds orthography, and obscures the comprehension of the grammatical changes which words undergo. Indeed, the whole process of transforming the Hellenic language into the Romaic, or modern Greek dialect, seems to have arisen out of a long neglect of the rules of grammar and orthography ; and the pronunciation, though cor rupted in the confusion it makes of vowels and diphthongs, is evidently based on the ancient, from the tenacity with which it has preserved the Hellenic accentuation, 1 Philostratus, though speaking of an earlier period, may be received as an authority for his own time, which may extend considerably into the third century. See the dialogue with Sostratus in the Life of Herodes Atticus, and the Life of Apollonius of Tyana, lib. viii. § 12. §1 after the disappearance of every trace of quantity.1 The modern language, with its inflexions correctly writteD, might easily be mistaken for a colloquial dialect of some ancient Greek colony, were it possible for a scholar unacquainted with the existence of the nation in modern times to meet with a Romaic translation of Thucydides.

There is as much difference between the language of Homer and the New Testament, as between that of the New Testament and a modern Greek review. Greek and Arabic seem to be the two spoken languages that have suffered the smallest change in the lapse of ages. The inference is plain, that these are the nations which have admitted the smallest infusion of extraneous social elements, and been the least under foreign compulsion in modifying their habits and ideas ; or else, that the ties of blood and race are weaker than those of civilisation and religion, and literature and religion have created Arabs and Greeks out of Syrians or Ethiopians, and Sclavonians or Albanians. Christianity opened the way for a great change in the Hellenic people. The principles of the gospel worked simultaneously with the oppressive administra tion of the Roman government, in breaking down the barriers of caste and pride of race that, in the days of Hellenic liberty, kept the free citizens of each state separated from the strangers who frequented the exchange, and the slaves who laboured in the workshops, tilled the fields, or cultivated art or literature for profit in the city.

The laws of Justinian blended all classes of 1 Ducange traces the progress of corruption in the Latin language, in the preface to his Glossarinm media et infimœ Latinitatis. Hallam, Introduction to the Literature of Europe in Fifteenth, Sixteenth, and Seventeenth Centuries, vol. l. p. 69, Pans edit., notices a MS. in the British Museum, (Cotton. Galba, i. 18,) containing the Lord's Prayer in Greek, written in Anglo-Saxon characters, which proves the pronunciation to have been the same in the eighth century as at present. Turners History of the Anglo-Saxons, iii. 396. See also the German translation of Henrichsen's Tracts in Danish- Ueber die Neugriechische AusprachederHellemschen Sprache,V. 38; and Ueber die sogenanntenpolilischen Verse ou den Griechen, 27. DESTRUCTION OF HELLENIC SOCIETY. 7 CHAP. I. §2. citizens into one mass, and facilitated the acquisition of the boon of freedom by every Christian slave.

The pride of the Hellenic race was stifled, and the Greeks for centuries were proud of the name of Romans, and eager to be ranked with the freedmen and manu mitted slaves of the masters of the world. The Greek church grew up ; and the Greek church was neither Greek nor Roman, but it created to itself a separate power under the name of Orthodox, which, by forming a partnership with the imperial authority, acquired a more energetic existence than any nationality could have conferred : it controlled the actions and the intellects of the Greeks with despotic power. A system of laws at variance with all the prejudices of ancient, private, and political life was framed, and the cousequence was that a new people arose out of the change. Such seems to be the origin of the modern Greeks, a people which displays many appearances of homogeneity in character, though it is widely dispersed in various insulated districts, from Corfu to Trebizond, and from Philippopolis to Cyprus.

But to what extent the original Hellenic race was mixed and adulterated with slaves and foreigners, is not very clear from the great patent facts of history. SECT. II. — DEPOPULATION OF GREECE UNDER THE ROMAN GOVERNMENT. CAUSES OF THE

Introduction

OF SCLAVONIAN SETTLERS. The depopulation of Greece under the Roman government, as well as the political oppression to which the people was exposed, and the social demoralisation that was its consequence, force themselves on the attention. This depopulation was increased and perpetuated by the immense landed estates which accumulated in the hands of individual proprietors. The expense of maintaining good roads and other adjuncts of civilisation, necessary for §2, bringing agricultural produce to market, is greater in Greece than in most other countries ; and it would be considered by proprietors of whole provinces as an unprofitable sacrifice. Their neglect consequently pro duced the abandonment of the cultivation of the soil in a great part of the country, and its conversion into pasture land.

From provinces in this condition the Byzantine government often derived very little revenue, for the large proprietors found facilities of gaining exemption from taxation, and the impoverished condition of the farmers or colons rendered the tribute insignificant. The defence of a province so situated became a matter of no interest to the central power at Constantinople, and it was abandoned to the invaders without a struggle. In Greece, the great proprietors seem to have been left to defend themselves against the intrusion or invasion of the Sclavonian nomades without assistance, and the progress of the first Sclavonian colonists may have been facilitated by the numbers of agricultural slaves of Sclavonian race whom they found established in the country. The Sclavonian lands were the great slave marts of the age.

Such was the internal state of pre paration in Greece to encounter the enemy when the Sclavonians attacked the Byzantine empire as a warlike and conquering race. The earliest steps by which the Sclavonians colonised the Hellenic soil are unnoticed in history. Like the subsequent increase in the number of the Greeks which expelled or absorbed them, its very causes pass unre corded, and the greater part of what we know is learned by inferences drawn from incidental notices connected with other facts. Strange to say, this remarkable revolution in the population of Greece excited very little attention among modern historians until recently ; and the great vicissitudes that took place in the numbers of the Greek population of the Byzantine empire in Europe, during DEPOPULATION OF GREECE. CHAP. I. i 2, different periods of the middle ages, is a subject which has not yet been carefully investigated.1 The fabric of the ancient world was broken in pieces during the reign of Justinian, and Greece presented the spectacle of ruined cities and desolate fields.

Procopius, in recording one of the great irruptions of the Hunnish armies, whose course was followed by Sclavonian auxiliaries and subjects, mentions that the barbarians passed the fortifications at Thermopylæ, and spread their ravages over all the continent inhabited by the Greeks, as far as the isthmus of Corinth. This notice places the commence ment of the hostile incursions of the Sclavonians into Greece as early as the year 540. 2 But the colonisation of great part of the Hellenic soil by a foreign race is a fact first noticed long after its occurrence, and whose extent is proved more convincingly by its consequences than by the testimony of historians. In the adulatory work of Procopius on the buildings of Justinian, the conversion of a large part of Greece into pasture lands, by the repeated ravages of the barbarians, is incidentally revealed ; and the necessity of constructing forts, for the protection of the population engaged in the regular agricultural operations of husbandry, is distinctly stated.

The fourth book is filled with an enumeration of forts and castles constructed and repaired for no other object. 1 Colonel Leake, in his Researches in Greece, published in 1814, first pointed out the proofs we have of the long residence of the Sclavonians in every part of Greece, and cited the principal Byzautine authorities which certify the political importance of these colonies, p. 379. Professor Fallmerayer became the champion of Sclavonianism, in his History of the Morea, in 1830 ; and he has ever since defended the cause with great eloquence, learning, aud wit, but with some exaggeration. It was Colonel Leake who first observed that the Sclavo nian names of places in Greece are often the same as those of places in the most distant parts of Russia. By means of this discovery, Fallmerayer endeavours to exterminate the ancient Greeks. 2 Procopius, De Bella Persico, lib. ii. c. 4, p. 95, (Pails edit.)

He men tions frequent incursions of the Sclavonians into Illyria and Thrace ; and in alluding to this very expedition in the secret history, he connects the Huns, Sclavonians, and Antes, together as allies, (c. 18, p. 54.) Several Byzantine historians speak of irruptions of the Huns and Sclavonians, in a united body, into Thrace in 559.— Malalas, 235; Theophanes, 197; Cedrenus, 386; Clinton, Fasti Romani, i. 810. CHANGES OF THE POPULATION. 10 CHAP. I, §2. The care, too, which the emperor devoted to fortifying the isthmus of Corinth, when he found that the greater part of the Peloponnesian cities were not in a state of defence, affords strong proof of the danger of an irruption of barbarous tribes, even into that secluded citadel of the Hellenic race.1 The particular mention of the fortifications necessary to protect the fertile land on the river Rhechios, in Macedonia, and the construction of the city of Kastoria, to replace the ruined Diocletianopolis, while they prove the desertion of great part of Chalcidice and Upper Macedonia by the ancient inhabitants, prepare us for finding these districts occupied by a new race of emigrants.2 Now, it is precisely in these districts that we find the Sclavonians first forming the mass of the inhabitants within the limits once occupied by the Hellenic race.3 In these cases of colonisation, as in many others after wards, it is possible that the Sclavonians occupied their new settlements without any opposition on the part of the Roman government ; and though their countrymen continued to ravage and depopulate the provinces of the empire as enemies, these peaceable settlers may have been allowed to retain their establishments as subjects and tributaries.

It is certain that the Goths, and other Teutonic people who invaded the Eastern Empire, were nothing more than tribes of warriors, who, like the Dorians, the Romans, and the Othoman Turks, became great nations from the extent of their conquests, not from their original numerical strength. But the Sclavonian race, on the contrary, had for ages formed the bulk of the population in the wide -extended territories that spread from the shores of the Adriatic to the sources of the Dnieper and the Volga. In a considerable portion of the countries in which they subsequently appear as 1 Procopius, De Ædificiis, lib. iv. c. 2, p. 71. 2 Ibid. lib. iv. c. 3-4. The Rhechios is supposed to be the river that flows from the Lake Bolbe to the Gulf of Strymon. 3 Tafel, De Thessalonicd ejusque Agro. Proleg. SCLAVONIAN COLONISATION OF GREECE. 11 CHAP. I. §2. conquerors, a kindred race seems to have cultivated the soil, even under the Roman government ; but at what period the Sclavonians began to force themselves southward into the territories once occupied by the Illyrians and the Thracians, is a question of too much obscurity to be examined in this sketch.

The successive decline of the Roman, Gothic, and Hunnish empires, in the provinces along the Danube, allowed the hitherto subject Sclavonians to assume independence, and form themselves into warlike bands, in imitation of their masters. The warlike and agricultural Sclavonians from that time became as distinct as if they belonged to two different nations. A contrast soon arose in their state of civilisation ; and this, added to the immense extent, and disconnected and diversified form of the territory over which the Sclavonian race was scattered, prevented it from ever uniting, so as to form one empire. The Sclavonians always make their appearance in the history of Greece as small independent hordes, or as the subjects of the Huns, Avars, or Bulgarians, and never, except in the Illyrian provinces, form independent states, with a permanent political existence.

Their ravages as enemies are recorded, their peaceful immigrations as friends and clients pass unnoticed. No inconsiderable part of those provinces of the Eastern Empire that were desolated by the repeated inroads of the northern nations were nevertheless repeopled by Sclavonian colonists, who, often fearing to devote themselves to husbandry, lest they should invite fresh incursions, confined their attention to pasturing cattle, and adopted a nomadic life as the only method of securing their property. In this way they became, according to the vicissitudes of the times, the serfs or the enemies of their Greek neighbours in the walled towns. It was a characteristic of the Sclavonian colonists, in the Byzantine empire, for a long period, that they had an aversion to agriculture, and followed it only §2. ou a small scale, deriving their principal support from cattle.1 The great extent of the Sclavonian colonies in Macedonia, at the end of the seventh century, is testified by the number that the Emperor Justinian II. was able to transport into Asia.