Diplomacy in Byzantium

History of Diplomacy Byzantine Empire

Catherine Chliaras

1

INDEX

Introduction 2

Timeline 3

Practices 4

References 9

2

INTRODUCTION

According to Dictionary.com, Diplomacy is the conduct by government officials, of

negotiations and other relations between nations. It can also refer to the art or science

of conducting such negotiations, or even better, it can concern the certain skill or tact

in managing negotiations, handling people, etc., so that there is little or no ill will.

Diplomacy has a long history of tacts and strategies. In this essay we are going to

study diplomacy in the Byzantium; all of its forms, how they were established and

when they were implemented.

After the fall of Rome, the key challenge to the Byzantine Empire was to maintain a

set of relations between itself and its sundry neighbors, including the Georgians,

Iberians, the Germanic peoples, the Bulgars, the Slavs, the Armenians, the Huns, the

Avars, the Franks, the Lombards, and the Arabs, that embodied and so maintained its

imperial status. All these neighbors lacked a key resource that Byzantium had taken

over from Rome, namely a formalized legal structure.

In order to protect their state, “diplomacy was a weapon as important in the eyes of

the Byzantine government as soldiers or fortifications. The peace on the frontiers was

maintained not only by strong military defences, but by more or less skillful

management of the frontier peoples. In the later Empire this kind of diplomacy; which

may be defined as the science of managing the barbarians, was practiced as a fine art;

its full development was due to Justinian”1. Byzantium's "Bureau of Barbarians" was

the first foreign intelligence agency, gathering information on the empire’s rivals from

every imaginable source.

1 Byzantine Diplomacy. Global Security.org

3

TIMELINE

324 – 642 A.D.

In the early years, there was a cabinet, known as the barbarians’ scrinium, and it was

in the imminent jurisdiction of the Master of the divine officiorum. The centralization

of the imperial diplomatic system was intense. The magister of the officiorum used to

oversee the body of interpreters and greet foreign embassies. Members of the foreign

embassies were able to move into the Byzantine territory as long as the royal mail

accepted the diplomatic reasons of their visit.

Middle Byzantine period

In the 8th

century, the Byzantine Empire needed a new essential key advisor in foreign

affairs, who acted as a Minister of Foreign Affairs. This new institution, that was

considered as the Logothetis of the Road, the person who conducts the speech outside

the palace, was the head of the diplomatic service and was responsible for the

reception of foreign diplomatic missions, for their movement within the empire. The ''

Sekreton'' accommodated a special guestroom, the Mitato, for the residence of

foreigners. Along with his subordinate, the Prothonotary of the Road, they

participated in the welcoming ceremony of foreigners and presented them to the king.

Logothetis of the Road submitted questions, he provided the protocol without being

subject to the Byzantine emperor and he made suggestions about the gifts that were to

be given to the foreigners. Among the advisors of the Byzantine emperor, who had the

first and last word on foreign policy of the Empire, was the clerk.

Late Byzantine period

During this period we have the “Great Logothetis” enacted by Andronikos Komnenos

with tasks suitable for a Minister of Foreign Affairs.

4

PRACTICES

Finance

Research carried out on the total amount paid by the Byzantines to their opponents in

order to avoid war in the early and the middle Byzantine years, presumes a total paid

amount of 7,000,000 gold coins from Constantinople, in the 5th

century. In the 6th

century, the amount of 5,000,000 gold coins was also paid to the Persians, while in

the first quarter of the 7th century the Avars were repulsed by the total amount of

6,000,000 coins. Still, during the period from the late 8th until the 10th century, the

empire paid the amount of 7.5 million coins. Indisputably, for the first time the

Byzantine state had gold reserves larger than any other powerful state. If we compare

the annual costs for the army and for the conduct of war, "the acquisition of peace

have cost for the imperial treasury about 8-10 times cheaper than the conduct of

war"2.

The acquisition policy led to drawbacks for the Byzantine diplomacy:

a) The economics of the acquisition were not always stable due to opponents who

were constantly claiming new and higher amounts: the first agreement between Avars

and Byzantines (574 A.D.) provided that the payment would be 80,000 gold coins. In

582A.D, the renewed agreement stated the same amount yet in 604A.D, it reached the

amount of 150,000 gold coins.

b) The constant will to opt for peaceful settlements deprived the Byzantines’ war

initiatives of strategic advantage.

c) The prestige of the Byzantine Empire was reduced over its rivals: it gave the image

of a state unwilling to show the strength of its army and always looking for

compromise.

The recipients of such payments -chalifes or Tsars- perceived them as subordination

taxes; for the Byzantines they were only a "wise investment."

Gifts

The diplomatic gift was a common practice not only in Byzantium, but also in the

wider medieval world. The gifts were predestined for the acquisition or maintenance

of peace, as an inducement or reward for joining a coalition. The gift could be

anything that might have had value such as objects, services, offices, dowries in

Byzantine princesses or even entire groups of specialized craftsmen. Furthermore, the

Byzantine ambassadors could bring different gifts to the Head of State or his

2 Ευάγγελος Χρυσός, «Ο πόλεμος έσχατη λύση στο Βυζάντιο : κράτος και κοινωνία-

Μνήμη Νίκου Οικονομίδη» σελ.547

5

associates: jewelry, crystal objects. Some were destined to cover the costs of the

embassy.

Also, luxurious fabrics used to exert a kind of “silky diplomacy”. For these

circumstances, the Palace had special silk in stock and kept it in a designated place,

the ''Eidikon'' (Special), headed by its lord. Silks were transported easily and

symbolized the prestige and power of the Empire. They were famous until 1200,

along with gold and silver, and were classed as highly diplomatic gifts.

Among the gifts that were exchanged were also relics, which, due to their extreme

rarity and their supernatural power, ensured divine protection for the holder and

strengthened their validity. In fact, such a gift could be given only by a Christian ruler

to another Christian. But, not all gifts were valuable: Constantine IX in 1053 sent a

load of wheat to famished Egypt, wanting to prepare future trade relations between

them. The Fatimid caliph of Egypt sent, as a thank-you gift, an elephant and a giraffe.

The recognition of the autonomy of other peoples

Another diplomatic practice was the recognition of the principle of autonomy of the

peoples attending the Byzantine Empire. For instance, in the treaty of 681, the

Bulgarians ensured the continuation of their autonomous political life in Moesia.

Trade

While the Byzantium used to expand trade relations with other peoples, Byzantine

merchants brought information about distant countries. The radiation of Byzantine

civilization was spread through its products, traded by Byzantine merchants to

peoples abroad.

for political and diplomatic reasons, the Byzantium also offered privileges to Italian

maritime cities, such as Venice. For Alexios I, the empire’s survival against the

Norman risk was a major reason these privileges. The granting of trade privileges to

the Italian maritime cities was, indeed, a practice widespread in both the eastern and

the western Mediterranean.

The diffusion of Christianity as a diplomatic tool

The diffusion of Christianity was a meaningful strategy as it favored the interests of

the Empire even in hostile areas. Although the product of individuals and initiatives

without the involvement of the official Church or the Emperor, the Christianization of

the Iberians, Indians (Ethiopians) and Saracens, favored the interests of the empire

6

against the Persians who, during the 4th and 5th centuries, were dangerous enemies.

When the Iberians asked for Constantine’s alliance, he sent them some Byzantine

priests. Another example is the Christianization of Omirites, (Arabs), in southern

Arabia by Constantius II. He chose to build churches in the capital of the state and in

two of the most important ports in Adana, along with a large port at the entrance of

the Persian Bay, aiming to create organized Christian communities that would

facilitate Byzantine merchants’ trade.

Taking advantage of the hostile relations of the opponents

Constantine Porphyrogenitus in ''De Administrando Imperio'' favored the inclination

of Byzantines to turn peoples against their opponents. He also defined which of the

neighbors of the Byzantines could be used against whom. Many diplomatic relations

were made based on the quote ''the enemy of my enemy is my friend ''. For instance,

Alexios III established good diplomatic relations with the Pope Celestine III (1191-

1198) as a counterpart to the strained relations with the Germans: both the Pope and

the Byzantine emperor had problematic relations with German ruler Henry VI and

united despite their traditional differences.

Diplomatic marriages

Diplomatic marriages were once a widespread practice of Byzantine diplomacy.

Weddings were held between Byzantine kings and daughters of foreign sovereigns

such as Constantine V and the Khagan daughter the Khazars, Cicak (733 AD) or

between Michael Z and Martha, Mary’s daughter of Pankratius IV (1071 / 2), king of

Georgia ushering a series of marriages between Byzantine princes and Western

princesses.

The relations between hegemonic courtyards, as they had been formed through

marriage, had been shaped by the interests of the moment that proved stronger than

the family relationship: so, despite the marriage between Justinian and the sister of the

Khan of the Khazars, the last did not hesitate to order two of his trusted men to kill

the groom at the request of the emperor Tiberius. John II Komnenos, although

married to the Hungarian princess from 1104, did not prevent the wars between

Byzantium and Hungary since 1127.

Baptism & educating the children of foreign leaders

Another practice of Byzantine diplomacy was the baptising and adoptions of foreign

rulers, like the baptism of the Bulgarian ruler, Boris, named Michael, after his

godfather, Michael III. In the early and middle Byzantine period, foreign rulers’ sons

would reside in the palace of Byzantine emperors, where they were educated and

familiarized themselves with the Byzantine habits. In the late Byzantine period, the

situation was reversed. John V, amongst all the sureties offered to Pope Innocent VI,

was his five-year-old son to remain in Pope's courtyard in Avignon.

7

The studied solemnity

The considered solemnity and the richness of the receptions did not play a smaller

role in diplomatic contacts with foreign peoples. For instance, in 949, having visited

the Byzantine capital, Liutprand described the royal hall of Magnaura: the throne

room and the mechanisms used to awe the official guests with gilded roaring lions and

mechanical birds on a tree branch singing. Liutprand boasted to not being impressed,

but admitted to requesting detailed information from those who had seen the spectacle

before.

Manuel Comnenus invited Sultan Kilic Arslan to Constantinople (1161-1162) and

organized an official reception, with sporting events, flashing lights, naval

representations with arson ships with liquid fire and a donation of valuable pitchers.

Arslan was so impressed, that, in the tavern he dared not sit next to the Byzantine

emperor. After lunch that day he was donated all the pitchers from the luncheon.

Unfair practices

Fraudulent breach agreements, overt fraud wickedness and hypocrisy in diplomatic

negotiations were not unknown weapons in the repertoire of Byzantine diplomacy.

The historian Nikita Choniates does not hide his aversion to these practices of

Byzantine diplomacy which resulted in the '' Romans to be more hated by everyone '',

as he noted. Alexios III, without an army, chose the backstage diplomacy: in the raids

of the Bulgarians in Macedonia he responded by creating internal divisions: in 1196

the Asan was murdered, as, also, was Peter in 1197.

8

REFERENCES

Sources in Greek:

1. Ensslin W., (1983). «Ο Αυτοκράτορας και η αυτοκρατορική διοίκηση», Norman

Baynes & H.St.L.B.Moss, Βυζάντιο Εισαγωγή στο Βυζαντινό πολιτισμό, εκδ.

Παπαδήμας, Αθήνα, 1983, σελ . 426

2. Παναγοπούλου Α., (2006) . Οι διπλωματικοί γάμοι στο Βυζάντιο (6ος-12ος αιώνας),

εκδ.Α.Λιβάνης, Αθήνα, σελ.73-76 και 201-215

3. Λιτάβριν Γ., (1995). «Η Διπλωματία του Ύστερου Βυζαντίου», Βυζαντινή Διπλωματία,

εκδ. Ελληνικά Γράμματα, Αθήνα, σελ .114

4. Μέριανος Γ., (2007). «Ο ρόλος του δώρου στη Βυζαντινή διπλωματία», Τεκμήριον,

τομ. 7 , σελ.203, 207, 209-211, 214

5. Τουρλίδης Γ., (1985) «Αι Βυζαντινοτουρκικαί διπλωματικαί σχέσεις κατά την εποχήν

του επισκόπου Μεθώνης Νικολάου (12ος αιών μ.Χ.)-Ευσύνοπτον ιστορικόν

διάγραμμα», Παρουσία-Επιστημονικό Περιοδικό Συλλόγου

Επιστημονικού/διδακτικού προσωπικού Φιλοσοφικής Σχολής ΕΚΠΑ, τομ.3 , σελ.297

6. Χρήστου Ε., (2000). Έργα και ημέρες Δυτικών απεσταλμένων στην

Κωνσταντινούπολη από την εποχή της Εικονομαχίας ως το Σχίσμα, (726-1054), εκδ.

Ίδρυμα Γουλανδρή-Χορν, Αθήνα, σελ.33 κ.εξ.

7. Κυριάκης Ε., (1993). Βυζάντιο και Βούλγαροι (7ος-10ος αι.) - Συμβολή στην

εξωτερική πολιτική του Βυζαντίου, εκδ. Ιστορικές εκδόσεις Δ. Βασιλόπουλος,

Αθήνα, σελ.166

8. Χρυσός Ε., (2003). «Ο πόλεμος έσχατη λύση στο Βυζάντιο : κράτος και κοινωνία-

Μνήμη Νίκου Οικονομίδη» (επίμ. Άννα Αβραμέα-Αγγελική Λαΐου-Ε.Χρυσός), εκδ.

Ινστιτούτο Βυζαντινών Ερευνών/Εθνικό Ίδρυμα Ερευνών, Αθήνα, σελ.545- 547, 549-

552

9

9. Ουντάλτσοβα Ζ , (1995) «Η Διπλωματία από τον 7ο έως το 13ο Αιώνα», στο

Βυζαντινή Διπλωματία, εκδ. Ελληνικά Γράμματα, Αθήνα, σελ .52

10. Ουντάλτσοβα Ζ., (1995) . «Η Διπλωματία της Πρώιμης Βυζαντινής περιόδου

σύμφωνα με τις Πηγές της εποχής», στο Βυζαντινή Διπλωματία, εκδ. Ελληνικά

Γράμματα, Αθήνα, σελ 26

11. Κορρές Θ., (1982) «Σχέσεις Βυζαντίου και Βουλγαρίας στην περίοδο της βασιλείας

του Μιχαήλ Α΄Ραγκαβέ», Βυζαντινά, τομ. 11, σελ 154

12. Καραγιαννόπουλος Ι., (2001) Το Βυζαντινό κράτος, εκδ.Βάνιας, Θεσσαλονίκη,

σελ.318

13. Πλακογιάννης Κ.-Ε., (2001) Τιμητικοί τίτλοι και ενεργά αξιώματα στο Βυζάντιο, εκδ.

Ιανός, Θεσσαλονίκη, σελ.47, 215-216, 218

14. Γερολυμάτου Μ., (2008). Αγορές, έμποροι και εμπόριο στο Βυζάντιο (9ος-12ος

αι.),Ε.Ι.Ε/Ι.Β.Ε, Αθήνα, σελ.187-190

15. Οικονομίδης Ν., (1997). «Το όπλο του χρήματος στο Εμπόλεμο Βυζάντιο»,

Ινστιτούτο Βυζαντινών Ερευνών/Ε.Ι.Ε, Ίδρυμα Γουλανδρή Χορν, Αθήνα, σελ 261-268

16. Μεργιαλή-Σαχά Σ., (2005-2006). «Το άλλο πρόσωπο της αυτοκρατορικής

διπλωματίας: Ο Βυζαντινός αυτοκράτορας στο ρόλο του πρεσβευτή τον 14ο και 15ο

αιώνα», Βυζαντιακά, τομ.25 ,σελ .241-242

17. Πατούρα Σ., (1983) «Εμπορικές σχέσεις της Βυζαντινής Αυτοκρατορίας και των λαών

του Κάτω Δούναβη (4ος-6ος αι.) Αρχαιολογικές μαρτυρίες», στο Δ’ Πανελλήνιο

Ιστορικό Συνέδριο -Πρακτικά, Θεσσαλονίκη, σελ.91-116.

18. Πατούρα Σ. (1987), «Η διάδοση του Χριστιανισμού στα πλαίσια της εξωτερικής

πολιτικής του βυζαντινού κράτους (4ος-5ος αι)», Σύμμεικτα, τομ.7, σελ.217-219

19. Φασουλάκης Σ., (1980) «Οι Βυζαντινογερμανικές σχέσεις επί Αλέξιου Γ΄», Ιστορία

του Ελληνικού Έθνους , τομ. 9, σελ.36

20. Φασουλάκης Σ., (1980) «Σχέσεις Βυζαντίου με τους Βουλγάρους και τους Σέρβους»,

Ιστορία του Ελληνικού Έθνους , τομ. 9 , σελ.36

21. Ράνσιμαν Σ., (1992). Βυζαντινός πολιτισμός, εκδ. Γαλαξίας, Ερμείας, Αθήνα, σελ.182

10

22. Παπασωτηρίου Χ., (2000). Βυζαντινή υψηλή στρατηγική 6ος-11ος αιώνας, εκδ.

Ποιότητα, Αθήνα, σελ.76 κ.εξ

23. Χριστοφιλοπούλου Α., (2004) Το πολίτευμα και οι θεσμοί της Βυζαντινής

Αυτοκρατορίας 324-1204: Κράτος ,διοίκηση, οικονομία, κοινωνία, χ.ε Αθήνα, σελ

223

24. Βλαχοπούλου-Καραμπίνα Ελ., (2006) «Η γοητεία των χρυσοΰφαντων και

χρυσοκέντητων υφασμάτων του Βυζαντίου», Δωδώνη-Επ.Επ.Ιστορ. Αρχ. Φιλοσοφ.

Ιωαννίνων, τομ.35, σελ.243

25. Φασουλάκης Σ., (1980). «Οι σχέσεις με την Ουγγαρία», Ιστορία του Ελληνικού

Έθνους , τομ. 9, σελ.25

Sources in English:

1. Diplomacy – Definition. Dictionary.com. Retrieved from:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/diplomacy

2. Byzantine Diplomacy (n.d.). Global Security.org. Retrieved from:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/byz-diplomacy.htm

3. Antonucci M.(1993, February). "War by Other Means: The Legacy of Byzantium".

History Today . Retrieved from : http://www.historytoday.com/michael-

antonucci/war-other-means-legacy-byzantium