2 Prédicaton et propagande an Moyen Age ee ee en dre gets emig (aes Smee lnm fn a ee i en a ser hc a nc ae il er wee dae atest ata ny ce i er ro oa ld filo ro a ST Pa teed aces HB rg et ae er oethipy senate tod Sead ee i el he Si tame tal oa ae Toa SiC, ta pt oe eign 3 er fl cr i ra of ce sn oe ceca eke tl Come ee CGoonge Maxprst, Dominique Sovanet, Janine Souxpst-Tuou®, Certain Traits of Imperial Propaganda in the Byzantine Empire from the Eighth to the Fifteenth Centuries Alexander Kazhdan TL G. Bock has recently formulated a very important concept of Byzantine politcal orthodoxy. According to him, this orth included, atleast theoretically, a mandatory uniformity in both dogma, tnd ritual observances, with the stato authority serving as its effective guardian and garantor. Needless to say, Byzantine political orthodoxy ‘was not restricted to dogmatic and ritualist iatues, but also encompassed ‘the ideology of imperial power, the so-called Kaisridee, creating @ ‘uniform concept of eutocracy. Moreover, the term “politieal orthodoxy” ‘ean be properly applied to this ideology of imperial power, while for ‘the religious sphere the notion of dogmatic orthodoxy would be more fitting. Both phenomena belonged to the same mental outlook, both ‘were ritualized, and the emperor-bacileus was surrounded on earth, 2 ‘the Lord of the Heaven, by the eult, by the sacred observances that in their entirety shaped the ceremonial ofthe Great Palace. Both were, ‘to use another of Beck's words, ambivalent, that is incredibly stable and, at the same time, dynamic and open to change, consittent in their core and nevertheless “interruptive” and mutable. Both were dominant throughout the imperial territory, but could not extirpate Iheterodoxy, and both needed propaganda in order to implant them= salvee in both oubjects and neighbors ‘Byzantine propaganda was ubiquitous, embodied in object, actions sand words. Coins were widely used as a vehicle of propaganda, and 1 A. R. Bellinger has porcoptively observed, they visibly served the aeeds of the court, as icons visibly served the parallel cult, that of ‘the Church. He also streised that the function of propaganda vas Derformed in Byzantium first and foremost by gold, and the government ‘was concerned with conveying its message to “olficialdom and. aris- ‘ocruey", remaining indifferent to the opinion ofthe general public”a“ Prédication ot propagande au Moyen Age ‘The most triking example of Byzantine imperial propaganda conveyed “huvugh coinage i, perhaps, the gold coinage of lene (1057-59) For three centuries after Leo Is reign (217-1), Byzantine emperors were {epresented on their coim wearing civil conte, and only in the “Ioventh century military garment was reintroduce on tho efigy. For Tsaae ther are two types of Htamenon: on one i presented wearing ‘cout of mal with he Tek hand on the hilt of the sheathed sword: ‘le onthe other, the emperor grasps the seabbard with his left hand Und holds the watheathed sword on the right shoulder with bis xight hand? We pose a contemporary somenent on thin coin which i of ieee, Acnrding tothe Chronicle of Skylitacs Conti Rhatus (ed, Eu, Telakcr, p. 108.94), the emperor ordered that he be Feprerented on the names holding @ sword tus ascribing his succes Eu e Cod but to his evn power and to ht military experienc. The ‘hroniler’s statement itt natural reaction against an unusual type Sf imperial efigys it teri to the fact that intelligent Byeantins Srould rend the message on ex a ootright political propaganda, We Trust noe be surprised tht Skyltes Contnaatur interpreted innovation as inuicative cf pare imperial wily tho medieval observer ould not know thet military garments on the coin signed general, ‘Rif of plitalideclogy inthe cloveth centary, when military virtues ‘were introduced into the lst of values of the princely mirror. "After the work of A. Crabar, fe would be ruperiaous to prove the persistence ofthe ert noneckiqa in Byzantium, both in monumental Trtandiniluminated nnnsseripts: we an find inthis book the typology OF imperial images (the eoperor av vitor, Kater, tes the emperor preskng over the couneit or adored hy his subjects the invetcre Ur the emperor by Chie; and soon) and the history of the evaltion Steeple and leonography. But if rye and eonograpty change cough {he conare, the ain gal of Byzantine imperil at remain, according fo Gmabur the sme: “Cert Tmpereur ot non pas Tes empereare dans four symbolguet de Teor pouvoir, que ffl ennye de econnatre en iterogeent In roves de Vert des basi- feiss" Ths doce Grabar sate his aim (p. ¥)- ‘hoe no dou tha the Byte praised the Emperor ot 2 symbol of imperial power, at an embodiment of the evelating Empize {Fike omelet Bt itn thi general ea we ca sometimes tet Snore vpetiepropagantine sss conmered—av i the cae of Tou’ zumito~vith the concrete inclinations and gal fs prtclar rer. e's well known that the deposition and execution of Andronicus I ((188"88) wan deveibedby both the Byzantine historian, Niet honiats, snd the Pianian knight, Robert de Clan, whovo works swore creed independenly. Noosthais, the requence of vents Contain Traits of Imperial Propaganda 6 presented fa both works i» stunningly similar, despite the radical Aifoence in syle patterns. The solution tothe problem of th Pusding sinvity isto be found in Robert de Cai, whe slat "Now ffom thet day on which Inaseecsme emperor i wan piotred shove the rortals of the eharees how Iiaae had hecome emperor by 4 miracle, nd Our Lord was shown standing on one ide of im and Oar Eady on the other, placing the crown ou his head, and am angel, was shown eating the cord of the bow with which Andvonieus wanted 40 shot hin."* Tein quite posible thet nov only did Rober follow ‘he sequen of images on the posters” Ieae Tf (1185-95) ordered ‘to be diaplayed “above the portal of the churches", but ave the “Byzantine leoran Tet us return however to Issac Is propagandisic posters as eseribed by Robert They combined the tradition theme ef the smprialinvertitare ofthe tmaperor by th Lord and the Virgat with ‘he conrets history of Isaac's victory over Andronicus, incling the Aetters attempt to shoot Tease fom the gllery of Saint Sophia, when ‘the cord ofthe bow broke? Andronicon wee wal sare of the important rle that painting played in imperial propaganda, Chovater reports thet Andronicus ‘rdore hinsclf to be represented on «large panel nent the Church ‘of the Forty Martyr, which faced the public waar, "not arayed in ‘olden imperial vestaonty ut in the guise of ¢ much-toling laborer {yrant. The panegyrie describes the good deeds of the emperor in the aaermening charisticium have completely overshadowed the few remarks Tine vein aa"he was prevented on the panel at the Forty Martyrs, that crrtuntatKian, which are, however, of great importance, becaure they “T protector of the poor and the just. The text is fall of Biblical ioe ua nlsions and fends to reach mythological eights. So Gpiuinrer exclaims that dearth gave way 9 abundance, and the sil Sought hundred fold harvrts (p. 38073-10), ‘sinter prises the general promperity brooght by Andronis, Even alms Chonines(p. 2251-19) allowing “propheteal Eider" ics), would wt under hie 6 toe and enjoy the fait TiirSina evecybody would collect the products of his sly ent them Ghualy tnd have eweet and cl. dream (p- 325.21-28), Choniats Baty oc that the population became tafe from “tho menace of the Gabetnges nobody would tronble before tex eolectors, nobody, was ree St being roUbeds and afer rendering wnto Cacsar the things SESEN Ste Casurs (Mate, 22321) people were secure in the knowledge TAC MSTise agent would demu their Ire shift, or urge them to Ceuah op thei poor souls, His name ibel, continues Choniates {6.35.25 29) hal eochanted tax collectors 0 that they ave benumbedy tea brads parlyurd, hands that had become accustomed © ping. FE itaot our goal now to examine the acaracy of Chonists' teat ‘mony, The compline lodged by Nicetar's brother Michael Chonite, Tetgpoltan of Avheos, show thatthe tax division in this regon Temsifed unequal, taxco were calculated unfany, and attempts at fix redutabution or exemptions were canceled by the administration ti Andronioun® What matter now isthe evident contradiction ofthe ugyite tothe other toxt uf Chonstes History. Inthe above cited Tiatntnt, Chonats inst tht daring the reign of Andronicn every Taanowould have wet and eal dreama; But atl ener the Koran Tired conversely that the majoriey ould mot leop without are Ghring in period (p. 328-70, Inthe panegyrio Chante prises the feonmbiey of Andronious the emperor wan imperial end acces fhleto both the poor and the ich he lstaned attentively and with Tidenaading and’ compensted everybody according to his dei {p:39015-81). Howeversin the “main seton, a contradictory state- Staect quite nn opposite attitude toward this institution, Eustatius Jafendol the ofielal Comnenian point of view: due to the foresight of he emperor, the authority (epistasia) of temporal archons was extab- Tihed i Inge monasteries o that acetics could devote themselves to sraee deeds, the archons handling all the manifold problems and jrotecting the monks from the billows of fe (Opuscula, 244.85-38). Bomvereey, in independent monasteries the inhabitants had to perform ou ccclsiertial and ley funetions, and they would hold in their pante'the tenes of injustice and counterfeit coins instead of the Psalter tnd other holy books (Opuscula, 244.49-59). ‘Bustathiua way a distinguished publicist, but he was in no sense ‘an exception, Numerous propegandistc works cireulated in Byzantium, ae thelr tacen cam be found everywhere. tis well known that Andro- Jous Pe characterization by Chonites is ambiguous.® We can endeavor ae burrow beneath this ambigaty and to reconstruct his real judgment Sf the emperor. For Choniates, Andronicus is not only a blood-thiety Sramerervs tyrant and usurper, ke isthe only ruler on the Byzantine Throne welbnigh deprived by Choniates of the title of basileus. Nor ‘nally, dhe historian ie lavish in applying this title tothe ruling emperor. Thus, Tease Tt wat celled basleue 139 times in the history of his reigns TAY esi TIT (1195-1203) 153 times, although both of them were sa poss Other persons are infrequently endowed with thie ttle: there wre 15 cas for Inaac IT's reign, for the German emperor Frederick T (152-90) a» well, and the late ruler Manuel X to whom this title wae Qeibuted in B cases; there are 14 cases for the reign of Alexus TH, {vice for Henry VI (1190-91)—here Manuel in also the most frequenthy Tentioned basileus (5 cases), eave for Alexius TI himself. The ttle ie “plied evento the failed wsurper, John the Fat. The history of Andro- srg ign presents a different picture: Andronicus is called Bosleus ‘aly. Li tan (to this we can add two references to him as a bails fa the hitory of Isanc II), while other rulers are granted this ttle De tinea, and Manuel, with his 9 times, is almost as frequently mentionedey Prédication et propagands au Moyen Age rent is to be found. Says Choniates: “Andronicus could be soen on fixed days only, as though through a curtain and by very few of the courtesans who were particularly close to him, but at any time he ‘was accessible to flte-gils and harlot and enjoyed their compenion- ship” (p. 321.26-30). In the panegyrie Choniates calls a reform by ‘Andronicus “an alteration virtually performed by the divine hand” (p- 829.49), while he uaually streeses the opposition of the divinity to the actions of Andronious (p. 341.64, 944.49, 349.92), tin possible that Choniates used a source nov unavailable £0, ‘an oficial propagandistic pamphlet of the period of Andronicus, per ‘meated with Biblical quotations and intended to present the reign of the usurper as a Paradite on earth. The presumed pamphlet coincided in its inclinations with the visual propagenda of the government of Andronicus, and included concrete details rather than traditional traits of the princely mirror. ‘The memoir of the ex-emperor John VI Cantacuaenus (1947-54) are an exceedingly sophisticated example of imperial propaganda. Tt is @ common and correct opinion that he wrote his book 0 whitewash ‘the charges against his policies during the intermittent Civil Ware ‘of 1521-5h, presenting hit activities in the most favorable light, His mode of presentation was completely now in Byzantine literature. Byzantine authors have always accentuated the tuecess, earthly or spiritual, of their hero, while Cantacazenus created a new approach that could be called “the tragedy of collapec™. In order to attain thie goal, the author had to adhere to two principles: to emphasize the rity and honesty of his hero (that is, of himsel), and to demonstrate ‘the insurmountable forces which frustrated the hero's endeavors. He certainly accepts the traditional image of the ideal prince who posressed forbearance, equity, wisdom and justice (ed. Bonn, III, 19-15-17}; but in his concrete exposition we first of all come across the qualities connected with theidea of personal honesty: Cantacuzenus is presented at ‘amodest man (IT, 7818-23, 613.19-21, et.) sincere (IT 11.19-22, ete), steadfast in his decisions’ (IIT, 154.20, see also I, 107.10-22) and obverving his fealty (II, 42.19-31). Was there ever a reign in the pasty inquires the memoirist, in which an emperor dared, after hit total ‘victory, to set up his former adversaries as his coolers? Even more, to endow them with a major power, with hereditary authority, while hhe himself remained hut provisional administrator? Never! retorts Cantacuzenus in his proud honesty (IU, 44.15-22). Cantacusenus conceals neither accusetions against himself, nor poltieal and military defeats, and by the whole tone of his deiberstely simple and reemingly welldocumented narrative he tree to create the impression of eredibibtye ‘On the other hand, he fashioned the image of the anti-hero, Alexias Certain Traits of Imperial Propaganda 25 Apocaucus, the embodiment of all possible evils, and presented the struggle against Apocaucas not only a1 a contest between different ethical principles, but alse, on a commie level, as the war of super: natural” forces, Apocatcus being identified with Satan or the Devils son (II, 278.18-21, 279.19-20), and Cantacuzenus regarded as having ‘constant divine succor (II, 340.9-11, ete). But one must ack, why, ‘having obtained God's support, was Cantacuzenus defeated in the Givi Warf And the answer comes quite unexpectedly: Tyche (Fortune) and -Ananke (Necessity) were against Cantacusenus (I, 62.11-12, etc); or, ‘to put it differently, his defeat was predetermined by hidden cosmic forces tality of hie time, the four- ‘teenth century, with a considerable Rensissance shading; both the ‘tagedy of collapse and the iden of Fortune playing a decisive part jn historia) development are not typical of medieval Byzantium, “Imperial propaganda had to undergo changes in accordance with new ‘Weological trends, which had paced over the border of the Byzantine ‘empire ‘To sum up. Imperial propaganda in Byzantium was not only propa agenda of the imperial ideal im its most general trm, the eulogy of She Emperor; it also mirrood the shifts tn socal mentality, such as ‘the insertion of ideas of nobility, and particularly of the chivalrous “ire af the ruler into tho mirror of prines ofthe eleventh century. Moreover, it seems’ plausible that the imperial ideal underwent some ‘changes in the fourteenth century, which could he linked with the dmpact ofthe Renaissance. Imperial propaganda in Byzantium included, 4a tome cates, the concrete program of the acting ruler; andthe Bysentins were indeed capable of understanding the politcal ipl ‘ations ofthis propaganda, although they were at times hidden beneath ‘vey vague expressions and images. They were also capable of counter Bein, of interpreting imps syle and wor and ving vith & perverse sense. Imperial propaganda was far from bing immutable. : sara E t Notes HG. Brox, Das byaaniniche Jlronind, Manic 1978, p. 0110 {A.B Daan, Th Cin ad yamine Tepeal Pac, Sperm, 8, ame "ne Beem Calor he Bonn Cis in he Dambari Oa Clason,26 Prédication et propagande au Moyen Age ‘Robert de Cuan, Le conus de Cosontinpl, Pts, 1926, p28. The Engh teanlaton of Es He MeSaas ie Sllowed heres Robert de Cuan The Conus of (Contemnele, New York, 1986, p56 (As Gaatan opis. TTB, 1, Robert de Cai, p. 70 (Eng. tr p58). The same eptode ip mentioned by ‘Ghost el. A. Vas Dist 346 18°20 but ina altered forth Andreas ‘Booting i the ecw from the tower of Kestearon: Ie pablo that Hebert “Bisteprted the pol ' Nceras Cnoreare,p. 9322-94 Engshtamlaton by C Manco, The At of the Byzantine Spire Hogewood Cs 3, 1972, . 234, Contry to Case, The Legend of Los the Winn, Zara Radova Planting Ivana, 8, 1950, p 8, ee ‘se conten ete the pal tthe Forty Martyr nd the porte f Aadtonest i the dlottons ofthe Lewntne Orde ‘During the dsevtion of this paper at Dumbarton Onks in 1980 P. Kasln- ss ierent explanation af the pane a the Forty Marty. Ia het ‘ha inno cam Golde apie to Osrunor ann ofthe oldere gods. We ve als to te ito conderaton that Cenlte, in soother passage, rf to Andronens a [sponaptre (ps 251.2) the bere 0 4 teapereak, wath an eons allio fo 1. Niceeas Cuosases, p. 3287-4. Ct t, by C. Manco, p. 25. 1, Fora smi and ear prventation ofthe problem, sce. Hncen, Reich sun Mie, Graz, Veana, Cologne, 1965, p 1-85 a tao P. N. Zavononnoy, Niejskaja ‘peri Von, Vicon remennil 89,197, p. 98. Tn A. Tormann, Connantine Poplorogmias and is Worl, Londen, 1913, 16 G. Osmaoconsey, Zar Kaberslbung und Scidesbebung in, spthyzani~ acca KoSonagareeonil, Hiri, 1955, ropvnted in his Zar bysntnsclen ‘Gahihe, Drmatat, 173, p- 166-2. 1S. I Hes, ix Dor Ipvatniche Herscher, Darmstadt, 3915, 5, m. 18 (wt fle iat of a 6c. Waleen, Reiing ymin, 35,1995, p TH. Tr He Hewcum, feih, p04 defines theese of pera exons ws “Propaganda arch Reprint 18. B Hon, Dar Zatlur Jusinion, I, Bern, 1960, p. 141-45 1p Ti. tye etn tin th Heche ast Sled wad the mementone tool of penal propaganda (Pe 122,249) and mentions ool le punng (p18) thatthe pepogsnd haw bee led at “das wich Leb” ‘Stil in Bynantin Tomography, Reve dee Ener "tT, p29, Thin appronch in epbasaed by A. Cans, Conese dass fin propels « finda hele font marmative death Clartnanee, L'imperos (Gianntann. Seri emit, Man, 191, p. 49-6, Fotw survey of sxtvcetary Poe al tea, me F- Dvonsax, Early Chistian nd Bysonsin Poll Philp, te Washington 1965p. 10623. 2. H. Hin, Prooinion, Vienne, 196, p 49-154, Soak J. Bowrane' papet fn this velame,p 19-10 Certain Traits of Imperial Propaganda 2 22, Seu, for instance Pauses, Det RomenDeseun and Joop in ene ‘Yeinin me Agnpts Kialguplegd, Byronnice Zac, 2, 109 p. 6ST Vie Bunraon Najor Pim op hao, Kier, 19, p, 96-85. 1 V~'E, Vartan Ret Jonas kets Tne aden ask SSSR, ‘udeningemenisargch maa, 198, No.2, pln, Sew aso bi Te” Jastinn IC Stevens erste; Deady Aiton oak SSSR, a0, Nop. TN, Woot ‘Stnuoning VaTdecber’s works A. Canaan, An Experts Abicton, Byset: ‘hie 1,916 ps T6L-OT, Cameron anton of ext fled hee, eee Ter Zoran whom Cameron ot. 2A FB Tuarntny Kangrion der Kateri In dr hymn Hiri sph Maaieh, Th 9 5 Be. H. Honcem, Di incaprclche prefna Litwatr der Byzantine, I, Maia, tip. 18-14 Onthegapintbndovslpment of eenanne Herta se dp 121 2H Macrame, Dis Rad ds Jolannes Shap on dn Kater ah He Angle Manik, 1935, p. 1318-38 FW Honus, Theres Podomos.Hinerche Goi, Views, 197, 1p. 69-108 Mone f them are dlisted to John Tt (Now 8, I-12, 15-1}, aad only to Manoel 1. 3 Lavon, Rhergu olga : Tro deors de Joes Maropous en 1047, ‘ronaus minora, 6, 1908, p. 285-00 9. ALP. Kaambar, Soeafaye vonreje Mica Atalata, Zhrnik Radova mg ye in opuere sate i aya ly of Ricptorn Phos (8969) boa pend, Evenly, impel itary ear mines tn fo tans, Me A. ANDREEV4, A propos Wage de Temper Jenn i Butte parton fe Thodare 1 Lasers Sinarian: Kenda eum 0,53, p 196 30 Fos rrr bsansnaram, fe Peterburg, 1892p 126.2028, 31: "Waa, Kaos Mant. Kormnaos end die Onreas, Bysotiniche atc, $5196, p. 1.1935. BEF Gavromn Régustoee du paarebo Jan «Antioch conte le chain ints Reeds Bde tyne 33,1975, hsm alow ahaa boggy, Sh. Hoorn, op csp 1H 3k CoM. Beano, Byard Conrot he Won 180-124, Cambsige, Mas, 1968.6 SUMMARY Tmperil propoganda in Byzantiam was not only propaganda of the imperil eal in tn most general frm. Sido by side with this ent mirrored he ahifs in social mentality, wach as che introduction of ideas of nobility Id ofthe lors chivalrous vistues into the princely minor ofthe eleventh ‘eatury. Further, imperil propagands included in some cass the concrete rogram of the acting ruler. Tho Byzantines were capable of understanding ‘Poltcl implistions of this propaganda, although concealed usually ‘ery vague expreaions and image They were capablo as well of cada, of the reinterpretation of imperial symbols and words, Jimporng ever them = perverse meaning.8 Prédicaton ot propagande au Moyen Age RESUME, La propagande impérinle & Bysnnce ne fat pas seulement su service de ‘dla! api vous ea forme la pls géntrale. Tout en cbtiseant& oe dessin, TD sete également leo changements intervenant dans Ie mentalité de la Gocieé byzantine, tel que Tintroduction, dane lee « miroire des princes ‘fot aide, dee ides elatives hla noble et aux qualita chevalereaques { goovernant. Bre plan i propagande impérale St place en quelques ts an programe ‘coneet du towverain régnast. Les Byzantina Galt capables de comprendze Terimpioeows politiques de cete propegunde, bien qu'elle it généralement ‘ake oun dee cxprestionsvaguen ou ntme des ages. étaient fgalement Rpablee @actios de contre-propagande,réinterprétant les eymboles et le ndgege limpériaex, leur attribuant mime partis tne sgniGation contrare, Arabic Poetry as the Vehicle of Religious Propaganda in Early Islam Irfan Shahid ‘Arabic religions poctry is not terra incognita to Arabists and nlamicits, snd yet, when one traverse its Geld ploughed by scholars oth in the East and in the West, especially after wandering along the two other cultural frontiers of Medieval Christendom and after ferting i within the comparative context, one realizes how many and Spacious the opportunities for improvement and refinement are.’ I Tall, therefore, re-traverse this explored and charted territory for a fre statement of some ofthe problems of this theme and will concen ‘rate on features of this poetry that have not reerived adequate appre tion or emphasis, Hence the concentration on a range of problems that have been especially fruitful to examine within the comparative fontert that has distinguished these colloquia. The fist part of this [peper will examine these problems in relation to Islami art and the tecond in relation to Byzantine religious poetry.* "This comparative approsch is thoroughly justifable and eminently sealitic, Just as lam, the military thrust, effected the breakthrough ‘of the Arabs to the shores of the Mediterranean and terminated their Fiolation in that inaccessible Peninsula, so did it bring Arabic poctry ‘ithin the purview of the Mediterranean world and make of Arabic Sand its iseeerure the third coustitwent of the Medieval Lingutsie and Titerazy complex. It eucoceded in doing s0, not only because it gave the Arches Mediterranean imperium adjacent to that of Greek um and the Latin Occident, but, more importantly, beeause twat an Abrahamic religion, and its Holy Book is intimately 20 the Old and the New Tertaments. Thus, Arabic literature, Thad been Peninsular, and unrelated to the literature of the “Mediterranean world, ceased to be so, as it became Qurans- elated tothe two Bibli-centse iterstuzes of Christian Europes