Help & Information

List of Byzantine emperors

Posted on by Sam Williams

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Emperor and Autocrat of the Romans

Imperial

Last to reign
Constantine XI
6 January 1449 – 29 May 1453
Details
First monarch Constantine the Great (historiographical convention)
Last monarch Constantine XI Palaiologos
Formation 11 May 330
Abolition 29 May 1453
Residence Great Palace, Blachernae Palace
Appointer Unspecified, de facto hereditary[1][a]

The foundation of Constantinople in 330 AD marks the conventional start of the Eastern Roman Empire, which fell to the Ottoman Empire in 1453 AD. Only the emperors who were recognized as legitimate rulers and exercised sovereign authority are included, to the exclusion of junior co-emperors who never attained the status of sole or senior ruler, as well as of the various usurpers or rebels who claimed the imperial title.

The following list starts with Constantine the Great, the first Christian emperor, who rebuilt the city of Byzantium as an imperial capital, Constantinople, and who was regarded by the later emperors as the model ruler. Modern historians distinguish this later phase of the Roman Empire as Byzantine due to the imperial seat moving from Rome to Byzantium, the Empire’s integration of Christianity, and the predominance of Greek instead of Latin.

The Byzantine Empire was the direct legal continuation of the eastern half of the Roman Empire following the division of the Roman Empire in 395. Emperors listed below up to Theodosius I in 395 were sole or joint rulers of the entire Roman Empire. The Western Roman Empire continued until 476. Byzantine emperors considered themselves to be Roman emperors in direct succession from Augustus;[2] the term “Byzantine” became convention in Western historiography in the 19th century. The use of the title “Roman Emperor” by those ruling from Constantinople was not contested until after the papal coronation of the Frankish Charlemagne as Holy Roman emperor (25 December 800).

The title of all emperors preceding Heraclius was officially “Augustus“[b], although other titles such as Dominus were also used. Their names were preceded by Imperator Caesar and followed by Augustus. Following Heraclius, the title commonly became the Greek Basileus (Gr. Βασιλεύς), which had formerly meant sovereign, though Augustus continued to be used in a reduced capacity. Following the establishment of the rival Holy Roman Empire in Western Europe, the title “Autokrator” (Gr. Αὐτοκράτωρ) was increasingly used. In later centuries, the emperor could be referred to by Western Christians as the “emperor of the Greeks”. Towards the end of the Empire, the standard imperial formula of the Byzantine ruler was “[Emperor’s name] in Christ, Emperor and Autocrat of the Romans” (cf. Ῥωμαῖοι and Rûm).[3]

Dynasties were a common tradition and structure for rulers and government systems in the Medieval period. The principle or formal requirement for hereditary succession was not a part of the Empire’s governance;[4] hereditary succession was a custom and tradition, carried on as habit and benefited from some sense of legitimacy, but not as a “rule” or inviolable requirement for office at the time.[1]

Constantinian dynasty (306–363)

[edit]

  (#) – Ambiguous legitimacy[c]

Valentinianic dynasty (364–392)

[edit]

  (#) – Ambiguous legitimacy[c]

Theodosian dynasty (379–457)

[edit]

  (#) – Ambiguous legitimacy[c]

Leonid dynasty (457–518)

[edit]

Justinian dynasty (518–602)

[edit]

Heraclian dynasty (610–695)

[edit]

Twenty Years’ Anarchy (695–717)

[edit]

Isaurian (Syrian) dynasty (717–802)

[edit]

  (#) – Ambiguous legitimacy[c]

Nikephorian dynasty (802–813)

[edit]

Amorian dynasty (820–867)

[edit]

Macedonian dynasty (867–1056)

[edit]

Doukas dynasty (1059–1078)

[edit]

  (§) – Varying ascribed status[l]

Komnenos dynasty (1081–1185)

[edit]

Angelos dynasty (1185–1204)

[edit]

Laskaris dynasty (1205–1261)

[edit]

Note: Roman rule in Constantinople was interrupted with the capture and sack of the city by the crusaders in 1204, which led to the establishment of the Frankokratia. Though the crusaders created a new line of Latin emperors in the city, modern historians recognize the line of emperors of the Laskaris dynasty, reigning in Nicaea, as the legitimate Roman emperors during the struggle for Constantinople because the Nicene Empire eventually retook the city.[89] For other lines of claimant emperors, see List of Trapezuntine emperors and List of Thessalonian emperors.

Palaiologos dynasty (1259–1453)

[edit]

Note: The Empire had up to three capitals: Selymbria, Thessalonica and Constantinople.[91]
  1. ^ Historian Donald Nicol writes, “Hereditary succession to the throne was a custom or a convenience in Byzantium, not an inviolable… principle. Emperors, particularly in the later period, would take pains to nominate their sons as co-emperors, for the rule of a dynasty made for stability and continuity. But in theory, the road to the throne was a carriere ouverte aux talents [career open to talents]…”[1]
  2. ^ Sometimes the Greek-language equivalent “Sebastos” was used instead
  3. ^ a b c d Unless otherwise noted to be some other ambiguity, the emperors marked to be of ambiguous legitimacy are those who fulfill one or more of the inclusion criteria above, but who are not universally regarded by scholars to count as legitimate. In most cases, such figures are those who held power only briefly, and/or who in times of more than one emperor held one of the capitals but never achieved the full recognition of the other emperor(s).[5][6][7][8]
  4. ^ From the fourth century, emperors and other high-profile men of non-aristocratic birth often bore the name “Flavius”, the family name of the Constantinian dynasty. Because it was often used as a status marker rather than personal name,[17] “Flavius” will generally be omitted in the following entries for simplicity.
  5. ^ Distinction between nomen, praenomen and cognomen, the core elements of Roman naming conventions, began to fade away from the 3rd century onwards. Given that “new Romans” —that is, barbarians turned citizens— adopted the names of their masters, many citizens adopted the names Julius, Flavius (notable the Constantinians) and Marcus Aurelius (notable the 3rd century emperors), thus making them obsolete as surnames. As a result, most citizens of the Empire, even emperors, reverted back to single-names by the 5th century.[20]
  6. ^ While some historians attribute the division of the Roman Empire into East and West after Theodosius the Great split the throne between his sons, the year 364 probably more accurately marks the point at which the Empire was actually divided.[22]
  7. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s Although they constitutionally held the same supreme power as their senior counterpart, it is customary among scholars of the later empire to only regard those who actually ruled as emperors, omitting junior co-emperors who only exercised power nominally and never governed in their own name.[45][46]
  8. ^ From 629 onwards, Heraclius issued administrative documents in Greek.[60] Latin continued to be used in communication with Western Europe until the end of the empire and coins continued to be struck with Latin inscriptions until the early eighth century.[61]
  9. ^ Heraclius Constantine is often enumerated as ‘Constantine III’,[64] though this name is also often applied to the earlier western emperor and has also been used for Heraclius Constantine’s son Constans II (who actually ruled under the name ‘Constantine’, ‘Constans’ being a nickname).[65]
  10. ^ Latin ceased being used in coin inscriptions under Leo III.[61]
  11. ^ a b Emperors began to officially use family names from Constantine IX Monomachos onwards. The sole exception after Constantine IX’s reign is Michael VI, whose family name (Bringas) was far less distinguished than those of the other imperial families and thus does not appear in official use.[80]
  12. ^ Some historians regard Eudokia as an empress regnant, while others consider her as a regent.
  13. ^ Unattested in coinage; Leo is only called emperor in a singular letter, while his brother’s status can only be deduced from the fact that he was born in the purple and that he also used the “imperial tokens”.[84]
  14. ^ Alexios III used the name Alexios Komnenos Angelos (Ἀλέξιος Κομνηνός Ἄγγελος) prior to his accession but reigned as Alexios Komnenos, dropping his own family name in order to stress his matrilineal descent from the Komnenos dynasty.[87]
  1. ^ a b c Nicol 1993, p. 72.
  2. ^ Hooker 2007.
  3. ^ Morrisson 2013, p. 72.
  4. ^ Karayannopoulous 2000, p. 183.
  5. ^ Vagi 1999, pp. 415, 463, 529.
  6. ^ Omissi 2018, p. 24.
  7. ^ Seibt 2018, p. 213.
  8. ^ Tilemachos 2015, p. 243.
  9. ^ Gregory, Timothy E.; Cutler, Anthony (1991). “Constantine I the Great”. In Kazhdan, Alexander (ed.). The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 498–500. ISBN 0-19-504652-8.
  10. ^ Lygo 2022, pp. 25–26.
  11. ^ Pohlsander 1996, pp. 92–93.
  12. ^ Lygo 2022, p. 28.
  13. ^ Gregory, Timothy E. (1991). “Constantius II”. In Kazhdan, Alexander (ed.). The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. p. 524. ISBN 0-19-504652-8.
  14. ^ Lygo 2022, p. 30.
  15. ^ Lygo 2022, pp. 30–31.
  16. ^ Lygo 2022, p. 33.
  17. ^ Cameron 1988, pp. 26, 28, 33.
  18. ^ Elton 2018, p. 119.
  19. ^ a b Elton 2018, p. 120.
  20. ^ Salway 1994.
  21. ^ Lee 2013, pp. 21–22.
  22. ^ Lee 2013, p. 23.
  23. ^ Morgan 2007, pp. 42–43.
  24. ^ Morgan 2007, pp. 43–45.
  25. ^ PLRE, Vol. I, pp. 742–743; Kienast, Eck & Heil, p. 318.
  26. ^ Mitchell 2015, p. 90.
  27. ^ Lygo 2022, p. 42.
  28. ^ Mitchell 2015, p. 94.
  29. ^ Lygo 2022, p. 45.
  30. ^ Lygo 2022, pp. 45–46.
  31. ^ Lygo 2022, pp. 47–48.
  32. ^ Kulikowski 2019, pp. 156–158.
  33. ^ Lygo 2022, p. 50.
  34. ^ Mitchell 2015, pp. 315–316.
  35. ^ Kulikowski 2019, pp. 177–179.
  36. ^ Kulikowski 2019, pp. 179–181.
  37. ^ Kulikowski 2019, pp. 181–182, 184–186.
  38. ^ Mitchell 2015, pp. 104, 107–108.
  39. ^ Stephenson 2022, p. 162.
  40. ^ Wickham 2009, p. 90.
  41. ^ Gregory, Timothy E.; Cutler, Anthony (1991). “Leo I”. In Kazhdan, Alexander (ed.). The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 1206–1207. ISBN 0-19-504652-8.
  42. ^ Lygo 2022, p. 62.
  43. ^ Lee 2013, p. 165.
  44. ^ Gregory, Timothy E. (1991). “Zeno”. In Kazhdan, Alexander (ed.). The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. p. 2223. ISBN 0-19-504652-8.
  45. ^ Foss 2005, p. 101.
  46. ^ ODB, p. 360.
  47. ^ PLRE, Vol. II, pp. 1200–1202; ODB, p. 2223; Grant, pp. 327–329; Croke 2004, p. 572.
  48. ^ Ostrogorski 1969, p. 59.
  49. ^ Lygo 2022, pp. 66–67.
  50. ^ Gregory, Timothy E. (1991). “Anastasios I”. In Kazhdan, Alexander (ed.). The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-504652-8.
  51. ^ Lygo 2022, p. 67.
  52. ^ Lygo 2022, p. 73.
  53. ^ Kaldellis 2024, pp. 276–277.
  54. ^ Sarris 2023, pp. 122–124.
  55. ^ Stephenson 2022, pp. 103, 222–223.
  56. ^ Stephenson 2022, pp. 223–224.
  57. ^ Stephenson 2022, pp. 224–232.
  58. ^ Stephenson 2022, p. 225.
  59. ^ Stephenson 2022, pp. 231, 236–238.
  60. ^ Kaegi 2003, p. 194.
  61. ^ a b Grierson 1973, p. 177.
  62. ^ Norwich 1989, p. 311.
  63. ^ Lygo 2022, p. 98.
  64. ^ PLRE, Vol. IIIA, p. 349; Grierson 1973, p. 385; Treadgold 1997, p. 308ff; Kaegi 2003, p. 112ff.
  65. ^ Foss 2005, pp. 93–94.
  66. ^ Louth 2008, p. 230.
  67. ^ Louth 2008, pp. 230–231.
  68. ^ Louth 2008, p. 232.
  69. ^ ODB, pp. 56–57; Treadgold 1997, p. 471; Grierson 1973, p. 473–476.
  70. ^ Kazhdan, Alexander; Cutler, Anthony (1991). “Constantine VII Porphyrogennetos”. In Kazhdan, Alexander (ed.). The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 502–503. ISBN 0-19-504652-8.
  71. ^ Gregory 2005, pp. 228–230.
  72. ^ Lygo 2022, pp. 178–180.
  73. ^ Morgan 2007, p. 91.
  74. ^ Morgan 2007, pp. 92–93.
  75. ^ Morgan 2007, pp. 93–94.
  76. ^ Skylitzes 2010, p. 28.
  77. ^ Brand, Charles M.; Cutler, Anthony (1991). “Constantine VIII”. In Kazhdan, Alexander (ed.). The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 503–504. ISBN 0-19-504652-8.
  78. ^ Lygo 2022, p. 199.
  79. ^ Lygo 2022, pp. 199–201.
  80. ^ Grierson 1973, p. 180.
  81. ^ Brand, Charles M.; Cutler, Anthony (1991). “Constantine IX Monomachos”. In Kazhdan, Alexander (ed.). The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. p. 504. ISBN 0-19-504652-8.
  82. ^ ODB, p. 2038; Treadgold 1997, pp. 491, 590.
  83. ^ ODB, pp. 739–740; Treadgold 1997, p. 608; Grierson 1973, pp. 779–780.
  84. ^ PmbZ, Leon 15005..
  85. ^ ODB, pp. 64, 1289; Treadgold 1997, pp. 650–653; Schreiner, p. 176.
  86. ^ ODB, pp. 64, 94, 1012; Treadgold 1997, pp. 653–656; Lascaratos 1999, p. 73.
  87. ^ Cotsonis 2020, pp. 260–261.
  88. ^ ODB, p. 66; Treadgold 1997, pp. 265–266, 665; Schreiner, pp. 185–186.
  89. ^ Treadgold 1997, p. 734.
  90. ^ ODB, pp. 1048–1049; Macrides 2013, p. 303; Angelov 2019, p. 305; PLP, p. 2663 (#14534).
  91. ^ Jeffreys, Elizabeth; Haldon, John F.; Cormack, Robin, eds. (2008). The Oxford Handbook of Byzantine Studies. Oxford University Press. p. 292. ISBN 978-0-19-925246-6.
  92. ^ Lygo 2022, p. 296.
  93. ^ Lygo 2022, pp. 298–300.
  94. ^ Lygo 2022, p. 301.
  95. ^ Talbot, Alice-Mary; Cutler, Anthony (1991). “Michael IX Palaiologos”. In Kazhdan, Alexander (ed.). The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 1367–1368. ISBN 0-19-504652-8.
  96. ^ Reinert 2002, pp. 265–267.
  97. ^ Reinert 2002, pp. 267–268.
  98. ^ Reinert 2002, p. 269.
  99. ^ Reinert 2002, pp. 269–270.
  100. ^ ODB, p. 95; Mladenov 2003, p. 190; Schreiner, pp. 312–321; PLP, p. 3893 (#21438).
  101. ^ Morgan 2007, pp. 121–122.
  102. ^ a b Morgan 2007, p. 122.
  103. ^ Talbot, Alice-Mary (1991). “Constantine XI Palaiologos”. In Kazhdan, Alexander (ed.). The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. p. 505. ISBN 0-19-504652-8.
Sam Williams