The Byzantines never forgot the first siege of Constantinople. In the hot summer days of 626, their capital was besieged by a huge horde of the Avars, Slavs, Bulgars, and others from land and sea. Moreover, the allied Persian army, led by the victorious commander Shahrbaraz, stood on the opposite side of the Bosphorus, ready to engage in this hard fight. The heroic ten-day-long defence lasted from Tuesday, 29 July, to Thursday, 7 August. The final victory of the Roman forces on the last day of the siege had a significant impact on contemporaries and transformed this historic event into a legend.
Its most visible sign wasâmore than anything elseâthe total destruction of the large âfleetâ of dug-out canoes of the enemy in the bay of the Golden Horn. All people of the capital believed that this miraculous rescue of Constantinople was caused by the unexpected action of the Virgin Mary. The 7 August began to be regularly commemorated in the Byzantine liturgy and the short historical notices highlighting that divine help was read out in the church of Blachernai, the major Marian shrine in the capital, and later in other churches of Byzantium as well. This local commemoration was later replaced by the splendid Feast which united the memory of the three historical sieges of Constantinople. The people of the empire were told how the Mother of God had saved the Byzantine capital not only from the Avars but also from their successors, the Arabs, who twice unsuccessfully tried to conquer that God-protected city. This intense feeling was felt by all who entered the sacred space and listened to the Akathistos, the most famous Marian hymn ever. It was due to popularity of this song that this homonymous feast soon crossed the borders of the Byzantine empire and became part of the shared cultural heritage of all countries of the Byzantine oikoumene . In such a way, the memory of the Avar attack is regularly reflected in the Byzantine liturgy and permanently preserved on frescoes and icons in various countries of the Greek Orthodox world. All these aspects make this event a unique historical moment in history: a moment in which the modern story overlaps with legend, with far-reaching ideological effect.
For the inhabitants of the Byzantine Empire, these two liturgical commemorations on the siege of 626 provided the only tangible memory on the Avars and their continuous devastating raids on the cities and provinces of the Balkans lasting from the second half of the sixth to the early seventh century.1 The common belief that the divine protectors would again come to help Constantinople became a repeatedly experienced reality with every new threat. It gradually found reflection not only in the Byzantine liturgical texts but also in various other literary genres. The story of the Avar attack, as an unforgettable event in the history of Constantinople, was repeatedly recalled in times of trouble and military threat. But its written history soon emerged in a new garbled form. Instead of the Avars, the more amorphous Scythians appeared in the sources, while the Slavs, Bulgars and Gepids were often omitted from them. And in some cases, only the Persians are referred to as the only actors of that siege.2
The echoes of the Avar siege were still present in Constantinople centuries later, even though they had gradually adopted blurred contours. An anonymous Latin visitor of the Byzantine capital from the end of the eleventh century mentioned an attack of two armies, both on land and sea.3 In the middle of the fourteenth century, a pious Russian pilgrim saw a stack of exposed human bones near the disused harbour of Vlanga at the Marmara coast. He heard, probably from a local guide, that these remnants belonged to dead Persian soldiers who had perished when their vessels crashed against the city walls after the glorious intervention of the Mother of God.4 This story could not be true, but the inhabitants of Constantinople did not put much stress on the individual attacks of the barbarians.5 They rather focused on the spiritual presence of the Mother of God in âherâ city as one anonymous Byzantine literate from the beginning of the fifteenth century. He even ascribed to her the ultimate victory of the last great nomad conqueror Timur (Tamerlane) over the Ottoman Sultan Bayezid in the glorious battle of Ankara in 1402. The anonymous author mentioned that this miracle was greater than all the previous ones, including the one that had occurred during the attack of the Scythians (the Avars) and the Arabs on Constantinople, when the Mother of God âimmersed them into the depth of the sea, destroyed them with death and hunger, and scourged them with other violent punishmentâ.6 The author of these words was convinced that the present hopeless situation of the Byzantines could not be compared to previous misfortunes because the recent miracle of the Virgin Mary surpassed all previous ones. Not only the arch-enemy, Bayezid, was captured, but also the innumerable hordes of Timur were later decimated by plague which prevented them to attack Constantinople. Even during the last hours of the Christian city on the Bosphorus, the ordinary people reportedly implored for divine help against the Turks, recalling the previous interventions of their patroness against the (Avar) khagan and the Arabs.7
All these reflections have their origin in the final day of the Avar siege. After departure of the Avars and their allies from the city, the people of Constantinople gathered in the main Marian shrine at Blachernai. In the interior of this sacral space, they thanked their patron whom they attributed the complete destruction of the enemy. Here begins the story of how the Avar attack became a part of the Byzantine identity. The transformation of this historical event into a legend is already visible in the works of two contemporary witnesses of the siegeâGeorge of Pisidia and Theodore Synkellos. They both definitively created the concept of a city protected by God with its chief patron in the person of the all-holy Mother of God. For Synkellos, Constantinople became the New Jerusalem, in other words, the better spiritual centre of the New Christian Israel.
Such claims were further reinforced by every subsequent attack on the Byzantine capital. In the final days of Constantinople, its inhabitants placed all their hope in the miraculous power of their Heavenly Patroness, especially in the time of the growing expansion of the Ottoman Turks. According to the common belief, the power of the Mother of God was mainly concentrated in her sacred icons. One of them, the Hodegetria, was considered as the most sacred palladion of Constantinople.8 At least from the eleventh century onwards, it was believed that it had been rescuing the city continuously since the first major attack by the Avars in 626. When this sacred image was destroyed on 29 May 1453 by Ottoman forces, it seemed as if the legend of the God-protected capital and the Avar siege had come to an end. Strangely enough, this did not happen even though the Byzantine Empire ceased to exist. The legend reappeared in bizarre forms on the walls of monasteries, churches, and icon on Mount Athos as well as in todayâs republics of Macedonia, Romania, and Russia. It presented only a garbled memory of the Avar siege, perhaps except for the motif of the heavenly destruction of the enemy after the intervention of the most effective helper, the Mother of God, who, as in Constantinople, could demonstrate her power in cases of need. Its central element is the mystical belief in a miracle which mirrors the state of humanity at a time of crisis and existential threat.
But, the Avar attack on Constantinople is not only a peculiar testimony of Byzantine identity for its importance lies primarily in history. It is rightfully one of the most significant events of the seventh century and one of the key milestones of late antiquity. Undoubtedly it represents the peak of the expansion of the Avars to the Balkan provinces of the Eastern Roman Empire. This lasted for decades and caused a disruption to its political, military, economic, and religious structures. It would surely not be correct to perceive the Avar siege just as a heroic struggle of civilization against barbarism or as a fight between noble savages and the decadent and fragmented Roman Empire.9 It was not a mere consequence of the predatory politics of the Khaganate, nor was it an isolated, spontaneous, or unpredictable action. The Avars and their allies surrounded Constantinople at the time of the last great rivalry culminating between the traditional powers of late antiquityâthe Eastern Roman Empire and Persia. The main adversariesâEmperor Herakleios and King Khusro IIâmade every effort to draw other actors into this conflict. The results of the siege meant a considerable blow to the power of the Khaganate and a definitive end of Avar hegemony in Southeastern Europe. On the other hand, from the perspective of the Eastern Roman Empire, this was the first serious attack and an attempt to destroy Constantinople, its capital city. It became a turning point of the last RomanâPersian war, also called the last great war of antiquity, a war that helped preserve the remains of the past Roman Empire in a new formâthe Byzantium in the era, characterized by the expansive power of Islam. Therefore, it is not possible to properly interpret the history of the Avar attack unless the whole military and political context of this conflict is taken into consideration.
This book represents the first complex and interdisciplinary synthesis of the history and the legend of the Avar attack on Constantinople in 626 in the historiography. It introduces a comprehensive view of complicated relations between the Avars and other groups of warriors that took part in the attack. Their mutual relations and interaction before and during the siege are outlined. It is followed by careful observations of the international situation in the world of late antiquity with its two dominant powersâthe Eastern Roman Empire and the Persia. The monograph intends to answer the question of the extent to which the Avars and others were part of the âgreat powerâ policy of those times.
Beside of that, the military aspects of the siege have been discussed in detail, including those which have not be...