Siege of Constantinople (1260)

Last updated
Siege of Constantinople (1260)
Part of the Nicaean–Latin wars
Byzantine Constantinople-en.png
Map showing Constantinople and its walls during the Byzantine era
Date1260
Location
Result

Latin victory

Nicaean army fails to capture Constantinople.
Belligerents
Empire of Nicaea Latin Empire
Commanders and leaders
Michael VIII Baldwin II
Strength
unknown unknown
Casualties and losses
unknown unknown

The siege of Constantinople in 1260 was the failed attempt by the Nicene Empire, the major remnant of the fractured Byzantine Empire, to retake Constantinople from the Latin Empire and re-establish the City as the political, cultural and spiritual capital of a revived Byzantine Empire.

Contents

Background

Following the Sack of Constantinople by the Fourth Crusade in April 1204, the Byzantine Empire was divided among Latin Crusader states and a few Byzantine Greek remnants, the chief of which were the Despotate of Epirus in western Greece and Albania, and the Nicaean Empire in western and northwestern Asia Minor. Both of the latter claimed to represent the legitimate Empire, and in view of the weakness of the Latin Empire, vied for the recovery of Constantinople. At first it seemed as if the city would fall to Epirus, whose ruler Theodore Komnenos Doukas crowned himself emperor at Thessalonica in 1225/1227. Epirote power however was broken at the Battle of Klokotnitsa in 1230 against Bulgaria. [1] [2]

Thus the path opened up for Nicaea, under John III Doukas Vatatzes (r. 1221–1254), to intervene in Europe. Allied with the Bulgarians, Vatatzes established a first foothold in Thrace in 1234. Together with the Bulgarians, he then undertook an unsuccessful siege of the city in 1235–6. [3] [4] Thereafter, the Nicaean ruler switched his aim to increasing his territory in Europe. Under Vatatzes, the Nicaeans seized most of Thrace and Macedonia from Epirus and Bulgaria, becoming the strongest state of the region. [5] [6] Reduced to Constantinople and the territory immediately surrounding it, surrounded on east and west by Nicaea and without sufficient funds to attract any armed support, the Latin Empire seemed ripe for the taking by the time of Vatatzes' death. Even the papacy seemed willing to accept the inevitable in exchange for concessions in theological matters and the question of papal primacy. [7] The Latin Empire gained a short reprieve with Vatatzes' death, as his son and successor Theodore II Laskaris (r. 1254–1258) was forced to confront numerous attacks on his territories in the Balkans. [8]

Soon after Theodore II's death, the ambitious Michael VIII Palaiologos (r. 1259–1282) ascended the throne, at first ostensibly as guardian of the infant John IV Laskaris (r. 1259–1261). At this juncture, a coalition of Nicaea's enemies was formed, comprising Epirus, the Principality of Achaea, and the Kingdom of Sicily. The alliance however was dealt a crushing blow at the Battle of Pelagonia in summer 1259. With his chief enemies either dead, in captivity or temporary exile after Pelagonia, Palaiologos was free to turn his sight towards Constantinople. [9] [10]

Siege

After wintering in Lampsacus, in January 1260 Palaiologos crossed the Hellespont with his army and headed towards Constantinople. [11] The accounts of the Byzantine chroniclers on the subsequent events however differ greatly with each other.

According to the account of George Akropolites, the emperor relied on the promises of treason of a certain Latin noble "Asel" (variously identified either with Ansel de Toucy or Ansel de Cahieu), who owned a house adjacent to the city walls and had promised to open up a gate to the Nicaean troops. Consequently, the expedition was not large enough for a serious assault on the city. Michael led his men to encamp at Galata, ostensibly preparing to attack the fortress of Galata on the northern shore of the Golden Horn, while he awaited Asel's treason. Asel however did not act, and claimed that his keys had been taken by the city's ruler. Akropolites then says that Michael obtained a one-year truce and abandoned the siege. [12] [13]

The other chroniclers (George Pachymeres, Nikephoros Gregoras, and others) present the expedition in a very different light, as a large-scale undertaking, with a determined and prolonged effort against the city itself. It involved a preliminary campaign to isolate the city by capturing the outlying forts and settlements controlling the approaches, as far as Selymbria (some 60 km from the city), as well as a direct assault on Galata. This was a large-scale affair, supervised personally by Michael from a conspicuous elevated place, with siege engines and attempts at undermining the wall. Galata however held due to the determined resistance of its inhabitants and the reinforcements shipped over from the city in rowboats. In the face of this, and worried by news of imminent relief for the besieged, Michael lifted the siege. [14] [15]

The difference in the two accounts is attributed by modern scholars to Akropolites' known tendency to minimize the failures of Michael VIII. The two narratives, which both feature an attempt against Galata, are clearly referring to the same event, and the plot of Asel may indeed reflect a genuine episode of the siege which was given undue prominence by Akropolites. [14] [16]

Aftermath

In August 1260, an armistice was signed between Michael VIII and Baldwin II for the duration of one year (until August 1261). [17] Although the siege failed, Michael VIII set about making plans for another try. In March 1261, he negotiated with the Republic of Genoa the Treaty of Nymphaeum, which gave him access to their warfleet in exchange for trading rights. The treaty also functioned as a defense pact between the two states against the Republic of Venice, Genoa's main antagonist and the major supporter of the Latin Empire. However, Michael's preparations were rendered redundant, as on 25 July 1261, an advance force sent to scout the city's environs, headed by Alexios Strategopoulos, managed to penetrate the city under the cover of darkness and retake it from the Latins.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Michael VIII Palaiologos</span> Byzantine emperor from 1261 to 1282

Michael VIII Palaiologos or Palaeologus reigned as the co-emperor of the Empire of Nicaea from 1259 to 1261, and as Byzantine emperor from 1261 until his death in 1282. Michael VIII was the founder of the Palaiologan dynasty that would rule the Byzantine Empire until the Fall of Constantinople in 1453. He recovered Constantinople from the Latin Empire in 1261 and transformed the Empire of Nicaea into a restored Byzantine Empire. His reign saw considerable recovery of Byzantine power, including the enlargement of the Byzantine army and navy. It would also include the reconstruction of the city of Constantinople, and the increase of its population. Additionally, he re-established the University of Constantinople, which led to what is regarded as the Palaiologan Renaissance between the 13th and 15th centuries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Theodore II Laskaris</span> Emperor of Nicaea from 1254 to 1258

Theodore II Doukas Laskaris or Ducas Lascaris was Emperor of Nicaea from 1254 to 1258. He was the only child of Emperor John III Doukas Vatatzes and Empress Irene Laskarina. His mother was the eldest daughter of Theodore I Laskaris who had established the Empire of Nicaea as a successor state to the Byzantine Empire in Asia Minor, after the crusaders captured the Byzantine capital, Constantinople, during the Fourth Crusade in 1204. Theodore received an excellent education from two renowned scholars, Nikephoros Blemmydes and George Akropolites. He made friends with young intellectuals, especially with a page of low birth, George Mouzalon. Theodore began to write treatises on theological, historical and philosophical themes in his youth.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">John III Doukas Vatatzes</span> Emperor and Autocrat of the Romans

John III Doukas Vatatzes, Latinized as Ducas Vatatzes, was Emperor of Nicaea from 1221 to 1254. He was succeeded by his son, known as Theodore II Laskaris.

George Akropolites was a Byzantine Greek historian and statesman born at Constantinople.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Latin Empire</span> Crusader state on the lands of the former Byzantine Empire (1204–1261)

The Latin Empire, also referred to as the Latin Empire of Constantinople, was a feudal Crusader state founded by the leaders of the Fourth Crusade on lands captured from the Byzantine Empire. The Latin Empire was intended to replace the Byzantine Empire as the Western-recognized Roman Empire in the east, with a Catholic emperor enthroned in place of the Eastern Orthodox Roman emperors. The main objective of the Latin Empire was planned by Venice, which promoted the creation of this state for self-benefits.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Empire of Nicaea</span> Successor rump state of the Byzantine Empire (1204–61)

The Empire of Nicaea or the Nicene Empire is the conventional historiographic name for the largest of the three Byzantine Greek rump states founded by the aristocracy of the Byzantine/Roman Empire that fled when Constantinople was occupied by Western European and Venetian armed forces during the Fourth Crusade, a military event known as the Sack of Constantinople. Like the other Byzantine rump states that formed due to the 1204 fracturing of the empire, such as the Empire of Trebizond and the Despotate of Epirus, it was a continuation of the eastern half of the Roman Empire that survived well into the medieval period. A fourth state, known in historiography as the Latin Empire, was established by an army of Crusaders and the Republic of Venice after the capture of Constantinople and the surrounding environs.

The Battle of Pelagonia or Battle of Kastoria took place in early summer or autumn 1259, between the Empire of Nicaea and an anti-Nicaean alliance comprising Despotate of Epirus, Kingdom of Sicily and the Principality of Achaea. It was a decisive event in the history of the Eastern Mediterranean, ensuring the eventual reconquest of Constantinople and the end of the Latin Empire in 1261.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Michael II Komnenos Doukas</span> Despot of Epirus

Michael II Komnenos Doukas, Latinized as Comnenus Ducas, often called Michael Angelos in narrative sources, was from 1230 until his death in 1266/68 the ruler of the Despotate of Epirus, which included Epirus in northwestern Greece, the western part of Greek Macedonia and Thessaly, and western Greece as far south as Nafpaktos.

Alexios Komnenos Strategopoulos was a Byzantine aristocrat and general who rose to the rank of megas domestikos and Caesar. Distantly related to the Komnenian dynasty, he appears in the sources already at an advanced age in the early 1250s, leading armies for the Empire of Nicaea against Epirus. After falling out of favour and being imprisoned by Theodore II Laskaris, Strategopoulos sided with the aristocrats around Michael VIII Palaiologos, and supported him in his rise to the throne after Theodore II's death in 1258. He participated in the Pelagonia campaign in 1259, going on to capture Epirus, but his successes were undone in the next year and he was captured by the Epirotes. Released after a few months, he led the unexpected reconquest of Constantinople from the Latin Empire in July 1261, restoring the Byzantine Empire. He was captured again by the Epirotes in the next year and spent several years in captivity in Italy, before being released. He retired from public affairs and died in the early 1270s.

John Doukas Palaiologos was a Byzantine aristocrat, brother to Emperor Michael VIII Palaiologos, who served as the commander-in-chief of the Byzantine army. He played a prominent part in his brother's military campaigns, most notably in the crucial victory at the Battle of Pelagonia, but also in repeated campaigns against Epirus and against the Turks in Asia Minor. He retired from active service after his defeat at Neopatras, and died shortly after.

George Mouzalon was a high official of the Empire of Nicaea under Theodore II Laskaris.

Konostaulos or konostablos, later corrupted to kontostaulos/kontostablos (κοντόσταυλος), was a late Byzantine title, adopted from the Normans. The derivative dignity of megas konostaulos became one of the highest court posts in the Palaiologan period (1261–1453) and was awarded to high-ranking generals.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Battle of Neopatras</span>

The Battle of Neopatras was fought in the early 1270s between a Byzantine army besieging the city of Neopatras and the forces of John I Doukas, ruler of Thessaly. The battle was a rout for the Byzantine army, which was caught by surprise and defeated by a much smaller but more disciplined force.

John Komnenos Raoul Doukas Angelos Petraliphas was a Byzantine noble and military commander during the reign of Emperor Michael VIII Palaiologos.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Reconquest of Constantinople</span> 1261 battle between the Latin and Nicaean Empires

The Reconquest of Constantinople (1261) was the recapture of the city of Constantinople by the forces of the Empire of Nicaea, leading to the re-establishment of the Byzantine Empire under the Palaiologos dynasty, after an interval of 57 years where the city had been the capital of the Latin Empire installed by the Fourth Crusade in 1204.

The Genoese occupation of Rhodes refers to the period between 1248 and late 1249/early 1250 during which the city of Rhodes and parts of the namesake island were under Genoese control. The Genoese took possession of the city and island, a dependency of the Empire of Nicaea, in a surprise attack in 1248, and held it, with aid from the Principality of Achaea, against Nicaean attacks until 1250.

Andronikos Komnenos Palaiologos, was a governor-general of Thessalonica and Grand domestic of the Empire of Nicaea. He was the father of the Byzantine emperor Michael VIII Palaiologos, the founder of the Palaeologue dynasty.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Empire of Thessalonica</span> Byzantine successor state under warlord Theodore Komnenos

The Empire of Thessalonica is a historiographic term used by some modern scholars to refer to the short-lived Byzantine Greek state centred on the city of Thessalonica between 1224 and 1246 and ruled by the Komnenodoukas dynasty of Epirus. At the time of its establishment, the Empire of Thessalonica, under the capable Theodore Komnenos Doukas, rivaled the Empire of Nicaea and the Second Bulgarian Empire as the strongest state in the region, and aspired to capturing Constantinople, putting an end to the Latin Empire, and restoring the Byzantine Empire that had been extinguished in 1204.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nicaean–Latin wars</span> Series of conflicts between the Latin Empire and the Empire of Nicaea from 1204 to 1261

The Nicaean–Latin wars were a series of wars between the Latin Empire and the Empire of Nicaea, starting with the dissolution of the Byzantine Empire by the Fourth Crusade in 1204. The Latin Empire was aided by other Crusader states established on Byzantine territory after the Fourth Crusade, as well as the Republic of Venice, while the Empire of Nicaea was assisted occasionally by the Second Bulgarian Empire, and sought the aid of Venice's rival, the Republic of Genoa. The conflict also involved the Greek state of Epirus, which also claimed the Byzantine inheritance and opposed Nicaean hegemony. The Nicaean reconquest of Constantinople in 1261 AD and the restoration of the Byzantine Empire under the Palaiologos dynasty did not end the conflict, as the Byzantines launched on and off efforts to reconquer Southern Greece and the Aegean islands until the 15th century, while the Latin powers, led by the Angevin Kingdom of Naples, tried to restore the Latin Empire and launched attacks on the Byzantine Empire.

Isaac Doukas Vatatzes was the brother of the Nicaean emperor John III Doukas Vatatzes.

References

  1. Geanakoplos (1959), p. 14
  2. Angold (1999), p. 548
  3. Geanakoplos (1959), p. 15
  4. Macrides (2007), pp. 194–197
  5. Kazhdan (1991), p. 1048
  6. Angold (1999), pp. 548–549
  7. Kazhdan (1991), pp. 1048, 1185
  8. Jacoby (1999), p. 530
  9. Angold (1999), p. 559
  10. Geanakoplos (1959), pp. 41–74
  11. Macrides (2007), p. 367
  12. Geanakoplos (1959), pp. 76–77
  13. Macrides (2007), pp. 367–369
  14. 1 2 Macrides (2007), p. 368
  15. Geanakoplos (1959), pp. 77–78
  16. Geanakoplos (1959), pp. 77–79
  17. Ostrogorsky, 449.

Bibliography

41°01′00″N28°58′37″E / 41.0167°N 28.9769°E / 41.0167; 28.9769