1. Historical context

1.1. General

The reign of Leo III the Isaurian (717-741) was a period of political stability. Before that, however, from 695 onwards, the empire was tested by successive feuds between contenders to the throne, who in many cases were general in the themes of Asia Minor; this was because, among other factors, the criterion for an emperor’s endurance on the throne was his ability to protect Asia Minor from the Arab raids. Through the clash of the contenders close ties and enmities developed between the strategoi of the themes and their subordinate soldiers. Under these circumstances, the themes of Asia Minor played an active role in politics. Cooperation between the themes was the result of the rapprochement of their strategoi, which was defined by their loyalty (or lack thereof) to the emperor and concomitantly to the imperial policy on various issues. During the reign of Leo II the theme of Opsikion was on the side of the defeated political camp, for Theodosios III, an emperor elevated to the throne by the Opsikians, was deposed by Leo, the strategos of the theme of Anatolikon, with the support of Artabasdos, strategos of the theme of Armeniakon.¹ Those from the theme of Anatolikon were considered to be most loyal to the dynasty of the former general and emperor.

1.2. The circumstances

When Leo III passed away in 741 and co-emperor Constantine V succeeded him on the throne, it was deemed that central power had been weakened. The Arabs resumed their pillaging incursions in Asia Minor for the first time after ten years, and contenders to the throne emerged in the interior of the empire. They were the protagonists of the movements that had brought Leo III to power but lacked dynastic rights, as did the late emperor, but, as it would become apparent, they were highly ambitious persons. The first to challenge the rightful successor was the son-in-law of Leo III,² the patrikios Artabasdos, comes of Opsikion and kouropalates. In 741 the patrikios Artabasdos was komes of the Opsikion theme but his influence extended also into the Armeniakon theme, due to his Armenian descent, as well as because he had earlier been strategos of that theme. After the death of Leo III, cooperation between the Armeniakon and Anatolikon themes flagged, while there was increased collaboration between the Opsikion and Armeniakon themes, as well as between the Armeniakon and the European ‘Thrakoon’ theme, which was under the command of one of Artabasdos’ sons. On the other side, in the context of Artabasdos’ rebellion, cooperation between the themes of Anatolikon and of Thrakesion was intensified.³

2. The rebellion of Artabasdos

2.1. The outbreak of the rebellion

Following the death of Leo III on June 18, 741,⁴ while Constantine V was on his way through the Opsikion theme to face an Arab invasion, he was unexpectedly attacked by the komes of Opsikion, patrikios Artabasdos at Dorylaeum; he was defeated and sought refuge at Amorion, possibly on June 22. Artabasdos was proclaimed emperor by his army, while his collaborators in Constantinople, the patrikios and magistros Theophanes Monotes and the silintarios Athanasios, spread the rumour that Constantine V was dead; on June 27, 741 they proclaimed Artabasdos emperor, who, as kouropalates, was the de jure successor of the late emperor. It is thought certain that in late July Artabasdos was still in Constantinople. He was crowned emperor of the Romans by Patriarch Anastasios. He enjoyed the support of the Opsikion and of the Armeniakon themes, which he had commanded in the past, as well as of the theme of Thrace, which was made responsible for the defence of Constantinople, under the leadership of his son, patrikios Theophanes Monotes. In the meantime Constantine V had managed to win over the Anatolikon and gain the support of the Thracesian theme, and of its strategos Sisinnios. He attempted to chase Artabasdos to Chrysopolis, but the rebel managed to enter Constantinople, thus the military operations were postponed for the next campaign period.

2.2. Reign of Artabasdos

Artabasdos as well as his supporters ceased to uphold the iconoclastic reformation.⁵ The new emperor minted coins, associated his first-born son to the throne (most probably in the spring of 742, when he had become firmly established) and appointed his second-born Niketasstrategos of the Armeniakon theme and monostrategos of the themes of Asia Minor, i.e. supreme commander of all the thematic armies. On December 10, 741 Pope Zacharias formally recognized Artabasdos. At the same time, the deposed Isaurian, Constantine V, had become an independent ruler in Asia Minor – he even maintained diplomatic relations with Constantinople. During this period the Arabs resumed their raids in Asia Minor.

2.3. Outbreak and unfolding of the civil conflict

The first surprise moves by Artabasdos in June 741, carried out with the support of the Opsikion, Armeniakon and Thrakoon theme, did not secure him complete supremacy over Constantine V, who managed to escape to Amorion, seat of Leo III in the past; from there he organized his efforts to seize the throne back. Constantine he enjoyed the support of the two thematic armies of Asia Minor: of the Thracesian theme, commanded by strategos Sisinnios, and that of the Anatolikon theme, commanded by Constantine himself. Artabasdos’ rebellion became a fierce power struggle that implicated the empire’s troops into a bloody civil war, which costed the lives of many soldiers.

In May 742 the first battle took place; it was fought between the Opsikians under Artabasdos and the Anatoliks under Constantine V close to Sardis. This engagement ended with Artabasdos’ defeat and retreat as far as Kyzikos. On August 742 at Modrine of Bithynia, general Niketas, leading the Armeniaks, was defeated too although he enjoyed numerical superiority over his opponents, Constantine V and strategos Sisinnios, who were leading the armies of the Anatolics and the Thracesians respectively. Now the road to Constantinople lay open. On September 742, general Sisinnios transported his forces through Abydos to the European coast and laid siege to the capital, cutting off lines of communication with Adrianople to the north; at the same time, the naval theme of Kibyrrhaiotai, which had now joined Constantine V’s camp, blockaded the city by sea. There is no information on any operations in Europe, or in general on the implication of the theme of Thrace in the conflict. As soon as the blockade of the capital was arranged, Constantine V camped outside the city walls, and his first action was to show himself to the citizens who believed him dead, coursing the distance from the gate of Charsion to the Golden Gate.

2.4. Suppression of the rebellion

The efforts of the besieged to brake through were met with failure. We are informed that the ships in Artabasdos’ disposal were burned down during these attempts and that many of his soldiers were captured. At some point Artabasdos fought with Constantine V outside the gate of the land wall, but he was defeated and retreated to the besieged city. As was to be expected, gradually the siege was causing a famine. A year after its commencement, the prices of foodstuffs had become astronomical; there were deaths because of the famine, and people started abandoning the city.⁶ Then strategos Niketas crossed to Asia Minor, and rallied his men that had scattered after his defeat at Modrine. But Constantine caught up with him and leading the Anatolikon and a contingent of the Thracesian army he pursued him as far as Nicomedia, were he decisively defeated and arrested him, breaking the morale of the rebels besieged in the capital. Constantine returned to Constantinople and challenged Artabasdos to save his son. The rebel did not react. At midday of November 2, 743 Constantine stormed the city, thus regaining his throne.⁷ Artabasdos fled to Asia Minor accompanied by a small retinue of Opsikians. Constantine V chased him down and finally arrested him at the castle of Poutzana at Bithynia, located south of Nicomedia and Nicaea, where he had found refuge. The suppression of the rebellion was sealed with the punishment of its leaders: Patriarch Anastasios was pilloried and flogged in the Hippodrome; Artabasdos and his sons Nikephoros and Niketas were blinded, while the other protagonists of the movement were mutilated (their hands and legs were cut off).⁸

3. Consequences

The most important consequence of Artabasdos’ rebellion was the civil war fought between the troops of the themes of Asia Minor; this was a protracted conflict with a heavy blood toll, especially for the camp of the Anatoliks, although the fighting was restricted to northwest Asia Minor. Taking advantage of the internal political instability in Byzantium, the Arabs returned to the fore resuming their pillaging raids into Asia Minor immediately after Leo III’s death and for the entire duration of the conflict between Artabasdos and Constantine V. It has been argued that the establishment of the Boukellarion theme should be dated to 743 and should be considered as a punishment of the rebellious Opsikion theme. This view rests on the fact that the new theme included lands taken from Opsikion, resulting in the weakening of the older theme. The victory of the iconoclast Constantine V also signalled the triumph of Iconoclasm, which during this period is beginning to acquire a new ideological foundation and supporters among the soldiers of the themes of Asia Minor. Furthermore, it led to the firm establishment of a dynasty on the Byzantine throne for the first time after a long period in which the hereditary status of the office had become inconsequential.