Editing Manuel I Komnenos (section)

==Assessments==

===Foreign and military affairs===
As a young man, Manuel had been determined to restore by force of arms the predominance of the Byzantine Empire in the Mediterranean countries. By the time he died in 1180, 37 years had passed since that momentous day in 1143 when, amid the wilds of Cilicia, his father had proclaimed him emperor. These years had seen Manuel involved in conflict with his neighbours on all sides. Manuel's father and grandfather before him had worked patiently to undo the damage done by the battle of Manzikert and its aftermath. Thanks to their efforts, the empire Manuel inherited was stronger and better organised than at any time for a century. While it is clear that Manuel used these assets to the full, it is not so clear how much he added to them, and there is room for doubt as to whether he used them to best effect.<ref name="M3"/>

{| class="toccolours" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 2em; font-size: 85%; background:#c6dbf7; color:black; width:30em; max-width: 40%;" cellspacing="5"
| style="text-align: left;" | "The most singular feature in the character of Manuel is the contrast and vicissitude of labour and sloth, of hardiness and effeminacy. In war he seemed ignorant of peace, in peace he appeared incapable of war."
|-
| style="text-align: left;" | '''''Edward Gibbon'''''<ref name="G74"/>
|}

Manuel had proven himself to be an energetic emperor who saw possibilities everywhere, and whose optimistic outlook had shaped his approach to foreign policy. However, in spite of his military prowess Manuel achieved but a slight degree of his object of restoring the Byzantine Empire. Retrospectively, some commentators have criticised some of Manuel's aims as unrealistic, in particular citing the expeditions he sent to Egypt as proof of dreams of grandeur on an unattainable scale. His greatest military campaign, his grand expedition against the Turkish [[Sultanate]] of Iconium, ended in humiliating defeat, and his greatest diplomatic effort apparently collapsed, when Pope Alexander III became reconciled to the German emperor Frederick Barbarossa at the [[Peace of Venice]]. Historian Mark C. Bartusis argues that Manuel (and his father as well) tried to rebuild a national army, but his reforms were adequate for neither his ambitions nor his needs; the defeat at Myriokephalon underscored the fundamental weakness of his policies.<ref name="B5-6">M. Bartusis, ''The Late Byzantine Army'', 5–6</ref> According to [[Edward Gibbon]], Manuel's victories were not productive of any permanent or useful conquest.<ref name="G74">Gibbon, ''The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'', p. 74.</ref>

His advisors on western church affairs included the Pisan scholar [[Hugh Eteriano]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Hamilton |first1=Bernard |title="The Latin Empire and Western Contacts in Asia" in Contact and Conflict in Frankish Greece and the Aegean |date=2014 |publisher=Ashgate |page=220 |isbn=9781409439264 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yGF9BAAAQBAJ&dq=manuel+I+advisers+Pisan+scholar+Hugh+Eteriano&pg=PA220 |access-date=15 December 2022}}</ref>

===Internal affairs===
Choniates criticised Manuel for raising taxes and pointed to Manuel's reign as a period of excess; according to Choniates, the money thus raised was spent lavishly at the cost of his citizens. Whether one reads the Greek [[encomium|encomiastic]] sources, or the Latin and oriental sources, the impression is consistent with Choniates' picture of an emperor who spent lavishly in all available ways, rarely economising in one sector in order to develop another.<ref name="P121"/> Manuel spared no expense on the army, the navy, diplomacy, ceremonial, palace-building, the Komnenian family, and other seekers of patronage. A significant amount of this expenditure was pure financial loss to the Empire, like the subsidies poured into Italy and the crusader states, and the sums spent on the failed expeditions of 1155–1156, 1169 and 1176.<ref name=Niketas1>N. Choniates, ''O City of Byzantium, Annals of Niketas Choniates'', 96–97<br/>* P. Magdalino, ''The Empire of Manuel I Komnenos'', 173</ref>

The problems this created were counterbalanced to some extent by his successes, particularly in the Balkans; Manuel extended the frontiers of his Empire in the Balkan region, ensuring security for the whole of Greece and [[Bulgaria]]. Had he been more successful in all his ventures, he would have controlled not only the most productive farmland around the Eastern Mediterranean and Adriatic seas, but also the entire trading facilities of the area. Even if he did not achieve his ambitious goals, his wars against Hungary ([[Byzantine–Hungarian War (1149–1155)|1149–1155]], [[Byzantine–Hungarian War (1162–1167)|1162–1167]]) brought him control of the Dalmatian coast, the rich agricultural region of Sirmium, and the Danube trade route from Hungary to the [[Black Sea]]. His Balkan expeditions are said to have taken great booty in slaves and livestock;<ref name="M174">P. Magdalino, ''The Empire of Manuel I Komnenos'', 174</ref> Kinnamos was impressed by the amount of arms taken from the Hungarian dead after the battle of 1167.<ref>J. Cinnamus, ''Deeds of John and Manuel Comnenus'', 274</ref> And even if Manuel's wars against the Turks probably realised a net loss, his commanders took livestock and captives on at least two occasions.<ref name="M174"/>

This allowed the Western provinces to flourish in an economic revival that had begun in the time of his grandfather Alexios I and continued till the close of the century. Indeed, it has been argued that Byzantium in the 12th century was richer and more prosperous than at any time since the [[Sasanian Empire|Persian]] invasion during the reign of [[Heraclius|Herakleios]], some five hundred years earlier. There is good evidence from this period of new construction and new churches, even in remote areas, strongly suggesting that wealth was widespread.<ref name=Angold>M. Angold, ''The Byzantine Empire, 1025–1204''</ref> Trade was also flourishing; it has been estimated that the population of Constantinople, the biggest commercial centre of the Empire, was between half a million and one million during Manuel's reign, making it by far the largest city in Europe. A major source of Manuel's wealth was the ''kommerkion'', a customs duty levied at Constantinople on all imports and exports.<ref name="kom">J. Harris, ''Byzantium and the Crusades'', 25</ref> The ''kommerkion'' was stated to have collected 20,000 ''hyperpyra'' each day.<ref name="kom2">J. Harris, ''Byzantium and the Crusades'', 26</ref>

Furthermore, Constantinople was undergoing expansion. The cosmopolitan character of the city was being reinforced by the arrival of Italian merchants and Crusaders en route to the Holy Land. The Venetians, the [[Genoa|Genoese]], and others opened up the ports of the Aegean to commerce, shipping goods from the Crusader kingdoms of Outremer and Fatimid Egypt to the west and trading with Byzantium via Constantinople.<ref name="Day">G. W. Day, ''Manuel and the Genoese'', 289–290</ref> These maritime traders stimulated demand in the towns and cities of [[Byzantine Greece|Greece]], [[Macedonia (region)|Macedonia]], and the Greek Islands, generating new sources of wealth in a predominantly [[agrarian economy]].<ref name="M143-144">P. Magdalino, ''The Empire of Manuel I Komnenos'', 143–144</ref> [[Thessaloniki|Thessalonica]], the second city of the Empire, hosted a famous summer fair that attracted traders from across the Balkans and even further afield to its bustling market stalls. In [[Byzantine Corinth|Corinth]], silk production fuelled a thriving economy. All this is a testament to the success of the Komnenian Emperors in securing a ''Pax Byzantina'' in these heartland territories.<ref name=Angold/>

===Legacy===
[[Image:The Byzantine Empire, c.1180.svg|thumb|350px|Map of the Byzantine Empire under Manuel, c. 1180{{sfn|Muir|1963|pp=16, 18}}{{sfn|Angold|1997|loc=map 3}}]]

To the [[rhetor]]s of his court, Manuel was the "divine emperor". A generation after his death, Choniates referred to him as "the most blessed among emperors", and a century later John Stavrakios described him as "great in fine deeds". [[John Phokas]], a soldier who fought in Manuel's army, characterised him some years later as the "world saving" and glorious emperor.<ref name="DH">J. Harris, ''Byzantium and the Crusades''<br/>* P. Magdalino, ''The Empire of Manuel I Komnenos'', 3</ref> Manuel would be remembered in France, Italy, and the Crusader states as the most powerful sovereign in the world.<ref name="Stone"/> A Genoese analyst noted that with the passing of "Lord Manuel of divine memory, the most blessed emperor of Constantinople ... all Christendom incurred great ruin and detriment."<ref name="DM">G. W. Day, ''Manuel and the Genoese'', 289–290<br/>* P. Magdalino, ''The Empire of Manuel I Komnenos'', 3</ref> William of Tyre called Manuel "a wise and discreet prince of great magnificence, worthy of praise in every respect", "a great-souled man of incomparable energy", whose "memory will ever be held in benediction." Manuel was further extolled by [[Robert of Clari]] as "a right worthy man, [...] and richest of all the Christians who ever were, and the most bountiful."<ref name=RoC>Robert of Clari, "Account of the Fourth Crusade", [http://www.deremilitari.org/resources/sources/clari1.htm 18] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050213114657/http://www.deremilitari.org/resources/sources/clari1.htm |date=13 February 2005 }}</ref>

A telling reminder of the influence that Manuel held in the Crusader states in particular can still be seen in the [[Church of the Nativity|church of the Holy Nativity]] in [[Bethlehem]]. In the 1160s the nave was redecorated with mosaics showing the councils of the church.<ref>B. Zeitler, [https://www.jstor.org/stable/3046063 Cross-cultural interpretations]</ref> Manuel was one of the patrons of the work. On the south wall, an inscription in Greek reads: "the present work was finished by Ephraim the monk, painter and mosaicist, in the reign of the great emperor Manuel Porphyrogennetos Komnenos and in the time of the great [[king of Jerusalem]], [[Amalric of Jerusalem|Amalric]]." That Manuel's name was placed first was a symbolic, public recognition of Manuel's overlordship as leader of the Christian world. Manuel's role as protector of the Orthodox Christians and Christian holy places in general is also evident in his successful attempts to secure rights over the Holy Land. Manuel participated in the building and decorating of many of the basilicas and Greek monasteries in the Holy Land, including the church of the [[Holy Sepulchre]] in Jerusalem, where thanks to his efforts the Byzantine clergy were allowed to perform the Greek liturgy each day. All this reinforced his position as overlord of the Crusader states, with his hegemony over Antioch and Jerusalem secured by agreement with [[Raynald of Châtillon|Raynald]], [[Prince of Antioch]], and Amalric, King of Jerusalem respectively. Manuel was also the last Byzantine emperor who, thanks to his military and diplomatic success in the [[Balkans]], could call himself "ruler of [[Dalmatia]], [[Bosnia]], [[Croatia]], [[Serbia]], [[Bulgaria]] and [[Hungary]]".<ref name="S372-373">J. W. Sedlar, ''East Central Europe in the Middle Ages'', 372–373</ref>
[[File:Manuel I Komnenos (Vat.gr.1851 folio 2v).jpg|thumb|Manuel I Komnenos sitting next to his son Alexios II.]]
Manuel died on 24 September 1180,<ref name=":1">Schreiner, Peter (1975). [[iarchive:kleinchroniken1/page/n74/mode/1up|''Die byzantinischen Kleinchroniken'' '''1'''.]] [[Corpus Fontium Historiae Byzantinae]] '''XII'''(1). p. 146. ''Chronik'' 14, 80, 4: "[[Greek numerals|κδ']] [24] τού σεπτεμβρίου μηνός, τής [[Greek numerals|ιδ']] [14] [[Indiction|ίνδικτίώvoς]], [[Byzantine calendar|ςχπθ']] [6689] έτους".</ref> having just celebrated the betrothal of his son Alexios II to the daughter of the king of France.<ref name="M194">P. Magdalino, ''The Medieval Empire'', 194</ref> He was laid to rest alongside his father in the [[Pantokrator Monastery]] in Constantinople.<ref>Melvani, N., (2018) 'The tombs of the Palaiologan emperors', ''Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies'', 42 (2) pp.237-260</ref> Thanks to the diplomacy and campaigning of Alexios, John and Manuel, the empire was a great power, economically prosperous, and secure on its frontiers; but there were serious problems as well. Internally, the Byzantine court required a strong leader to hold it together, and after Manuel's death stability was seriously endangered from within. Some of the foreign enemies of the Empire were lurking on the flanks, waiting for a chance to attack, in particular the Turks in Anatolia, whom Manuel had ultimately failed to defeat, and the Normans in Sicily, who had already tried but failed to invade the Empire on several occasions. Even the Venetians, the single most important western ally of Byzantium, were on bad terms with the empire at Manuel's death in 1180. Given this situation, it would have taken a strong emperor to secure the Empire against the foreign threats it now faced, and to rebuild the depleted imperial treasury. But Manuel's son was a minor, and his unpopular [[regency]] government was overthrown in a violent ''[[coup d'état]]''. This troubled succession weakened the dynastic continuity and solidarity on which the strength of the Byzantine state had come to rely.<ref name="M194" />