Reinventing the Capital: The Ideological Use of Monumental Architecture in Michael VIII Palaiologos’ Constantinople (1261–1282)

After the recapture of Constantinople (1261), Michael VIII Palaiologos (1259–82) re-shaped the city through extensive building activities. Though scholars have previously considered the involvement of Emperor Michael in the urban restoration of the capital, no attention has been devoted to the links between the different aspects of this programme of renewal. This paper advocates for the presence of an ambitious and systematic urban plan behind Michael VIII’s commissions focussed on the restoration of the southern shore of Constantinople and related to the political, religious, ideological, and aesthetic policies of this emperor. 24]), Graece Latine , edited by Ludwig Schopen and Immanuel Bekker (Bonn: Weber, 1829–1955 [Corpus scriptorum historiae byzantinae 25–7]). From now on, these texts will be cited as Pachymeres and Gregoras respectively. This work is part of my PhD research on Palaiologan Constantinople (1261–1453):

(probably executed between 1277 and 1281) were in the refectory of the monastery of the Peribleptos, and they recorded the names of Michael VIII, Theodora, and their son Constantine Porphyrogennetos (Fig. 1).5 According to Leunclavius' report, and Du Cange's reproduction that cites it, an inscription accompanied them, and in its Latin version, it mentioned Michael as 5 For one of the several reproductions of this portrait, see Osborne, John and  'Novus Constantinus' .6 Moreover, the seal of the tribunal of the sekreton held at the Numismatic Museum of Athens celebrates Michael, again, as 'New Constantine' and re-founder of this institution.7 Thus, the ideological association between the Constantinian foundation of Constantinople and Michael VIII's re-conquest was very well established through material culture. As a 'New Constantine' , Michael VIII could not neglect the Church of the Holy Apostles, the mausoleum of Constantine the Great and subsequent emperors.8 However, according to written sources, Michael's intervention did not specifically concern the structure of the church but was more symbolic. Close to the building, he ordered the erection of a column crowned at the top with a sculptural group representing him offering the model of the city to the Archangel Michael, his namesake saint.9 The erection of the column recalls the city's foundation columns of the Late Antique emperors and namely Constantine's famous column in Constantinople. In Michael's case, however, it is justifiable to imagine that the structure of the column was not a single marble piece as in Late Antiquity, but a 'column-like pedestal' made of masonry, as implied by Pachymeres, while the sculpture was possibly cast in bronze or made of repoussé sheets of copper which were later gilded.10 6 Hanns Leweenklaw (1584/5)  Next, as expected, Michael restored and redecorated the damaged imperial palace, the Blachernai, which was the main dwelling of the Komnenoi and the Latin emperors; but before accomplishing this task, he resided circa ten years at the Great Palace, showing that the latter did not lose its role as an imperial residence in the Palaiologan era.11 Similarly, the nearby church of Hagia Sophia was taken into consideration for Michael's restoration of Constantinople. Thanks to Pachymeres and Holobolos, we know that Michael VIII restored Hagia Sophia and entrusted the monk Rouchas with this task.12 Michael's renewal involved the restoration of the ambo, the solea, and the bema, and the redecoration of the inner surfaces with sacred panels. According to Cormack, the monumental deesis of the southern gallery was also part of Michael VIII's refurbishment of Hagia Sophia, and specifically a celebration of the return of the cathedral to Orthodox hands after the Latin rule.13 However, the dating of this mosaic, together with other early Palaiologan portions of mosaic within the inner surfaces of the galleries,14 remains problematic and unfortunately too specific to be further explored in this article.
A chrysobull of Michael VIII, probably dated to around 1272, devoted specific attention to the status and possessions of the Great Church.15 Its purpose was to re-establish its former prosperity and patrimony, by donating territories and properties, some of which were located in the neighbouring area. In parallel, archaeological data confirms Palaiologan interventions involving specifically the area between Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene.16 Moreover, in this area was the famous hospital of Sampson, which in the Palaiologan era became a  194-5, 200, 207, 225. 21 Pachymeres: II, IV.14, pp. 368-9.
period.22 The fragment suggests that renovations were undertaken in this area during the late period, but it cannot be attributed to any known monuments with certainty.
In the same quarter of the city, during the reign of Michael VIII, and specifically during the patriarchate of Germanos III, the latter refurbished the monks' cells of the monastery of Mangana, the ecclesiastical complex founded by Emperor Constantine Monomachos (1042-55), which was located at the eastern extremity of the peninsula.23 According to Miller and Kidonopoulos, Michael VIII restored the hospital of this complex, but this assumption is based only on Gregory of Cyprus' general mention of Michael's refurbishment of the hospitals of the city.24 However, Germanos was undoubtedly an ally of Michael VIII, and his building activities, as well as his activity in general, must be seen as in perfect agreement with that of the emperor. Thus, though evidence of the involvement of Michael VIII at the Mangana is not decisive, Germanos' interest in the monastery of St. George at Mangana was in any case a reflection of the policy of Michael VIII towards the monuments of the city.
Michael VIII's efforts were not only focussed on the restoration of the most symbolic monuments of Constantinople but were also intended to enhance the safety, economy, and repopulation of the city. In this context, the district of Blanga, today Langa Bostanı (located on the southern shore of the peninsula, where the former harbour of Theodosios lay) serves as a comprehensive case study.25 In the Palaiologan period, a quarter of Jewish inhabitants, mainly employed as tanners, occupied the area of Blanga, and its foundation was the result of a recent migration of Jewish communities controlled by the authorities.26 As Rapp has noted, adjacent to the Jewish quarter of Blanga were a Jewish-Venetian area and a Muslim quarter, as we know from Arab 22 Dark, Ken and Harris, Anthea L., "The Orphanage of Byzantine Constantinople: an archaeological identification", Byzantinoslavica, LXVI (2008) accounts.27 Talbot interpreted the institution of a mosque during the first years of the reign of Michael VIII as a sign of diplomatic good-will towards the Mamluks.28 The location of this mosque remains unknown, but it may be argued that it was located in the Muslim quarter adjacent to Blanga. Thus, it seems that after the conquest of Constantinople, quarters like Blanga hosted heterogeneous groups of people and, consequently, new building activities took place in these districts in order to meet the exigencies of the population. Some of the alterations recorded on the walls and towers in Langa Bostanı have also been dated to the late Byzantine period. Until recently, two towers were still standing and were probably part of Michael VIII's restoration. They disappeared at the very end of the 19th century, but Mary Walker permanently immortalised their profiles in her drawings for Broken Bits of Byzantium.29 These drawings perfectly show the architectural features of the towers, such as the alternation of bricks and stones that composed part of their masonry and the arches and the presence of walkable areas on their tops. The latter have suggested to Paribeni that the towers were originally intended as a belvedere.30 If so, the towers had both residential and recreational purposes, due to the panoramic view enjoyable from this altitude. Similar residential towers with belvederes, dated to the Palaiologan period, were once also present at the Palace of the Blachernai.31 Moreover, the tower of the Mermerkule complex32 and the imperial tower that Cyriacus of Ancona mentioned close to the monastery of Stoudios33 testify (for a later period) to the habit of residing in the proximity of the maritime walls; though the record of aristocratic 27 Rapp residential complexes located on the southern shore, with areas arranged for a sea view, dates back to the early years of the imperial city.34 According to Pachymeres, in Blanga, Michael VIII restored the harbour of the Kontoskalion, which became the main military harbour of Palaiologan Constantinople.35 In fact, this harbour was the Late Antique harbour of Julian, later known as Sophianai, which gradually lost importance when the Golden Horn shore became the economic centre of Constantinople in the 11th century.36 In the Palaiologan era, however, the area of the Kontoskalion was probably more extended to the west, perhaps also including parts of the harbour of Theodosios, in Blanga.37 The development of the harbours on the southern shore was not accidental. According to the same passage of Pachymeres, Michael believed that the harbours of the Golden Horn were too exposed to attacks, and, in general, were also under the control of the Genoese. The Golden Horn, which was the main harbour area before the Latin period, continued to be used as a harbour in the Palaiologan era, hosting skalai and wharves; but it had mainly commercial purposes and, above all, inevitable connections with the Genoese of Galata.38 The new status of the Kontoskalion stemmed directly from Michael VIII's reconfiguration of the harbour area of Constantinople, which perhaps mirrored his great efforts to reconstruct the Byzantine fleet.
A further focus for Michael VIII in his efforts to improve the security of Constantinople was his desire to strengthen the city's maritime walls, as testified by their symbolic representation on his hyperpyra (Fig. 2).39 Pachymeres informs us that Michael intended to reinforce the walls on two different occasions.40 Immediately after the re-conquest of the city, he ordered their profile to be heightened through the use of panels made of wood and leather. 34 Magdalino A decade later, it seems that he planned the construction of the second circuit of walls that would have made the maritime walls similar to the dual construction of the land walls. The latter intervention either never happened or was made of perishable materials that later deteriorated: nothing of it has survived.41 The works on the maritime walls, together with the newly restored imposing towers, like those of Blanga, gave the southern shore a fortified aspect which now can only be imagined. The fortification and protection of the capital were indeed primary goals for Michael VIII, and through his building activities, he lent Constantinople a powerful appearance visible from afar for those arriving by sea. Last but not least, Michael VIII promoted the restoration of monasteries within and outside the city. According to the typika of these foundations, the emperor was responsible for the reconstruction of the monasteries of St. Michael on Mount St. Auxentios (near Chalcedon) and St. Demetrios 'of the Palaiologoi' in Constantinople, which was paired with the Theotokos Acheiropoietos at Kellibara monastery, on Mt. Latros, on the Asiatic shore and far distant from the capital.42 Saint Demetrios, originally within the city, has 41 Talbot, "Restoration": p. 249. completely disappeared, but its former location was certainly in close proximity to the sea, the Jewish Gate at Blanga, and the monastery of the Myrelaion.43 There are also reasons to believe that the early Palaiologan alterations of the Myrelaion must be dated to the era of Michael instead of the generic 'before 1300' .44 The era of the first Palaiologan emperor is more compatible with the dating of the objects and the features founds during David Talbot Rice's and Cecil L. Striker's excavations and with the overall nature of the complex.45 Previously, the Myrelaion was an imperial mausoleum, specifically of Emperor Romanos I Lekapenos (920-44) and his family, which was built close to the imperial complex called 'Rotunda' . The latter was probably part of the Domus Nobilissimae Arcadiae, the house of the daughter of the Emperor Arkadios (395-408), Arkadia.46 As suggested by the presence of the imperial portrait described above, it is possible that Michael VIII funded the restoration of the Peribleptos monastery, originally built by Romanos III Argyros (1028-34) on the southern shore, In the context of Michael VIII's building activities, it is particularly important to consider the patronage of his two sons, Andronikos and Constantine Porphyrogennetos, of two monasteries in the city. According to Kidonopoulos, Andronikos, during the years of his co-reign with his father (1272-83), probably built a monastery around the Nea Ekklesia of Basil I (867-86), the Nea Moni, located below the Great Palace.52 He later put this monastery under the jurisdiction of the bishop of Herakleia (Pontos), who was the uncle of Nikephoros Gregoras.53 According to the latter, around 1293, Constantine gave a large contribution towards the restoration of the complex of Saint John of Stoudios, before being imprisoned by his brother Andronikos.54 This restoration involved the roof of the church and the walls surrounding the monastery. Palaiologan interventions may be still spotted on the masonry of the church building and fragments of an elaborate sarcophagus found in the area suggested to Peschlow that Constantine initially designated this monastery as his burial place.55 The fragments are pieces of red breccia from Bilecik, and they were part of a representation of a threnos, the lamentation over Christ's dead body. Stylistically, they date to ca. 1300. The sarcophagus was perhaps placed inside the church, but Constantine, in the end, did not use it, since he was buried in the ambulatory of the Theotokos of Lips monastery.56 Though there is no evidence to demonstrate that the burial belonged to an initial project of Constantine Porphyrogennetos, the presence of such an elaborate sarcophagus dating to the early Palaiologan era indicates that in this period the recently refurbished site had a funerary and aristocratic association. These elements, along with the presence of a crypt, align the Stoudios basilica with the churches of the Myrelaion, Saint Demetrios, and perhaps Peribleptos.
This article does not have space to examine the extent and characteristics of the Palaiologan restoration of single monuments, but it does examine the significance of Michael VIII's activity as a whole. It may be noted that, except for 52 Laurent, Vitalien, "La vie de Jean, metropolite d'Heraclée du Pont par Nicéphore Grégoras", Ἀρχεῖον Πόντου, VI (1934) the quarter of Hagia Sophia and the acropolis, most of the building works considered above -the harbour, the maritime walls, the structures of the quarter of Blanga, and the monasteries of Studios, Peribleptos, Myrelaion, St. Demetrios, and Nea Moni -are located on the southern shore of Constantinople, facing the Marmara Sea (Fig. 3). Michael VIII's focus on this area is too systematic and thus, it must be considered an intentional strategy. It seems clear that exploiting and re-monumentalising the southern shore of the peninsula was a specific intention of the emperor, which his sons Constantine and, perhaps, Andronikos initially tried to continue. The reasons behind this monumental programme are numerous and relate to the political, religious, ideological, and aesthetic spheres, which will be now briefly explored. As noted in the earlier discussion of the building programmes at Blanga and around the harbour, Michael VIII considered the Golden Horn shore too exposed to the Genoese and their interests. Thus, in order to enhance the fleet and place it in a less vulnerable spot, he rehabilitated the harbour of the Kontoskalion on the southern shore. The latter, across the centuries, had lost its importance in favour of the harbours of the Golden Horn. Indeed, in the Komnenian period, the area around the Blachernai and the Golden Horn shore in general were the most developed sectors of Constantinople, though not exclusively so. By the time of Michael VIII, the settlement of the Genoese at Pera was growing on the other side of the Golden Horn, thanks to the concessions that Michael had to make to them.57 Thus, the focus on that quadrant of the city cannot have continued to be a reasonable strategy. It seems likely that, as a consequence, Michael VIII invested imperial money and energies in the restoration of the opposite side of the peninsula, away from Pera but highly visible to anyone approaching Constantinople by sea and from the West, which was the most considered political horizon of Michael VIII. Moreover, as Madden demonstrated, the second fire of 1203 damaged a large portion of the southern shore.58 This may have meant that most of the buildings still present there in 1261 might have been in need of restoration. Moreover, from the moment of his entrance into Constantinople in 1261, Michael VIII established a sacred topography through his procession from the Golden Gate to the Great Palace and Hagia Sophia. This sacred topography focussed on the southern shore of Constantinople. Puech argued that Michael's entrance was more religious than imperial, due to the emphasis on the role of the Virgin Mary, the patron of the city, personified by the icon of the Hodegetria.59 However, as noted by Macrides, the entrance through the Golden Gate recalls the triumphal adventus ceremony of the Late Antique emperors, and though Hagia Sophia as a final stage continued past processional custom, Michael's first procession interrupted the Komnenian ceremonial custom that initiated imperial procession on the acropolis.60 In short, Michael VIII intentionally switched the sacral and imperial focus from the north-eastern area of the city to the southern one, and was surely fully aware of all the ideological implications of this decision, as expected of a 'New Constantine' . The association with the past and the triumphs of the previous emperors evoked by Michael's entry into the city through the Golden Gate was developed even further by his renovation of the imperial mausolea of Constantinople. Indeed, Michael's building activities involved all the mausolea of the city. Apart from the column at the Holy Apostles and the works that his ally, the patriarch Germanos III, sponsored at the monastery of St. George at Mangana -the mausoleum of Constantine IX Monomachos -Michael refurbished the monastery of the Peribleptos and perhaps the Myrelaion -the mausolea of Romanos III Argyros (and Nikephoros III Botaneiates -1078-81), and Romanos Lekapenos. This does not necessarily mean that Michael wanted to establish a symbolic connection specifically with these emperors. In fact, according to the travellers' account mentioning their foundations, their name and relation to the buildings were only generically remembered in the Palaiologan period.61 As a result, their mausolea were still perceived as imperial, but without a specific association to an emperor in particular. Furthermore, some elements allow me to reconsider the hypothesis that Michael wanted to be buried at St. Demetrios, and therefore at the southern shore, though this cannot be explored here in depth. In the end, Michael was not buried in Constantinople because of the ban imposed on his funeral within the city in response to his religious policies: however, if the circumstances had been different, I would argue that indeed the mausoleum of Michael VIII would have made a visual connection with the other two mausolea of the southern shore, the Myrelaion and the Peribleptos. Moreover, as demonstrated by the Palaiologan reconfiguration of the substructures of the Myrelaion, and perhaps Peribleptos, these mausolea of the Makedonian period were converted into Palaiologan burial sites, reinforcing the funerary significance of the southern shore to the Palaiologoi.
This stress on the Makedonian monuments and the reconfiguration of the whole southern area suggest something about Michael VIII's ideological goal. The first Palaiologos and 'New Constantine' was not interested only in the connection of his name with his immediate (and legitimate) predecessors, the Komnenoi, but aimed at establishing a link with a more ancient past of the city, since a deeper connection with its history would have facilitated the controversial process of the legitimisation of his lineage. 61 As in the cases of Clavijo's passage on the Peribleptos, where he recorded the burial of a generic emperor Romanos, or Mangana, where the author mentioned a lavish burial and connected it to a generic 'empress' (but more probably Monomachos' mistress, Maria Skleraina). Clavijo, Embajada a Tamorlán: pp. 121-2, 133.
Lastly, as the towers of Langa Bostanı indicate, aesthetic elements cannot be dismissed when analysing Michael VIII's transformation of the southern shore of the 'New Constantinople' . As demonstrated by Magdalino, the southern shore of Constantinople offers stunning views and the aristocratic members who built their palaces there during the Late Antique and Middle Byzantine periods undoubtedly took this into account.62 The view was unquestionably considered as an essential element in Palaiologan architecture as well, and Michael VIII was surely aware of it, having resided for ten years at the Great Palace.
In conclusion, Michael VIII's focus on the southern shore of Constantinople indicates -as Magdalino and Macrides have argued for the Komnenian period63 -that interest in the areas around the Great Palace did not end in the Palaiologan period, involving all the southern shore in an urban reconfiguration so systematic that has no parallels in the entire history of Byzantine Constantinople. Although the area around the Blachernai and the Golden Horn shore in general became the central focus of building activities in the city during the reign of Andronikos II, this was exclusively related to the specific political situation inherited by Andronikos, and the reaction of his aristocratic entourage. However, Michael VIII's efforts along the southern shore were not in vain and his legacy endured for the remainder of the Palaiologan period. As in the eighth and 10th centuries, when the urban focus shifted from the harbours of the Golden Horn shore to the southern shore,64 Michael VIII transformed this section of the city into the most representative quarter of the capital. However, he emphasised not only economic or military needs, but also promoted religious and ideological goals. The Palaiologan restoration of the harbours, the maritime walls, the structures of the quarter of Blanga, and the monasteries of Studios, Peribleptos, Myrelaion, St. Demetrios, and Nea Moni, were thus parts of a systematic urban plan which aimed at the renovation of the profile and fame of the Late Antique and Middle Byzantine imperial city of Constantinople, which again became splendid, visibly resilient, and able to display its magnificence to anyone reaching it, by sea, from the bordering lands. 62 Magdalino, "The Maritime Neighborhoods ": pp. 215-7. 63 Id