THE DESTRUCTION
OF
THE GREEK EMPIRE
BY
EDWIN PEARS, LL.B.
Knight of the Greek Order of the Saviour and Commander of
the Bulgarian Order of Merit
Author of ‘The Fall of Constantinople: being the
Story of the Fourth Crusade’
WITH MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS
LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO.
39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON
NEW YORK AND BOMBAY
1903
All rights reserved
My object in writing this book is to give an account of thecapture of Constantinople and the destruction of the Greekempire. In order to make the story intelligible and toexplain its significance I have given a summary of thehistory of the empire between the Latin conquest in 1204and the capture of the city in 1453, and have traced theprogress during the same period of the race which succeededin destroying the empire and in replacing the Greeks asthe possessors of New Rome.
It may be objected that the task which I have set beforeme has already been accomplished by Gibbon, and that, ashis chapter on the last siege of the city is carefully compiledand written with a brilliancy of style which he has nowheresurpassed, there is no need for any further study of thesubject. My answer is twofold: first, that an importantmass of new material is now at the disposal of any one whowishes to retell the story, and second, that Gibbon told itwith a bias which makes it desirable that it should be retold.
The historian of the ‘Decline and Fall’ had less thanhalf the material before him which is now available, and thestory of the siege deserves telling with more accuracy andcompleteness than either the authorities available to him orthe scope of his monumental work permitted. It is truethat Professor J. B. Bury, the latest editor of Gibbon, has,by the aid of scholarly notes and of careful research, enabledthe reader to become possessed of many of the detailsviregarding the siege which have recently become known, buthe would be the first to admit that there is ample room fora fuller history of the siege than that given in the ‘Declineand Fall’ even with the aid of his valuable notes.1 Gibbonhimself regretted the poverty of his materials and especiallythat he had not been able to obtain any Turkish accountsof the siege.2 The only eye-witnesses whose narrativeswere before him were Phrantzes, Archbishop Leonard, andCardinal Isidore. If we add to their narratives the accountsgiven by Ducas and Chalcondylas together with what Gibbonhimself calls ‘short hints of Cantemir and Leunclavius,’ wehave substantially all the sources of information which wereavailable when the ‘Decline and Fall’ was written.
The new sources of information regarding the siegebrought to light since Gibbon’s day enable us to gain amuch more complete view of that event and of the characterof its principal actors than was possible at the time whenhe wrote. Several Continental writers have taken advantageof some at least of the new stores of information to rewriteits story,3 but I may be allowed to claim the good fortune ofbeing the first Englishman who has even attempted to writea nar