Byzantine Aristocracy, depiction of donors in the Aghioi Anargyroi Church in Kastoria

Byzantine Aristocracy: Opulence, power, and struggles

While the Byzantine aristocracy transformed significantly in its makeup and dynamics from late antiquity to the capture of Constantinople in 1453, it maintained certain characteristics, a distinct lifestyle, and considerable power and influence throughout most of the period. Let’s dive into their opulent world, which came to a brutal end with the Empire’s collapse.


The base of the aristocratic power in Byzantium.

Throughout the whole period, the power of the Byzantine aristocracy is primarily based on several factors. The first is land ownership: the aristocracy owns vast estates that they exploit, from which they derive income. This land-based power allows them to integrate into the spheres of power, thereby placing them close to the emperor, the source of other factors that underpin aristocratic power: offices and dignities. Offices can be taken away, but the dignities and the benefits attached to them are lifelong. The income associated with both offices and dignities, paid by the imperial treasury, constitutes a significant source of wealth for the aristocracy.


The evolution of the Byzantine aristocracy.

The early Byzantine era: Turmoil and decline of the Late Roman elite.

The cities and urban civilization that formed the foundation of the Eastern Roman Empire gradually entered a crisis that culminated in the 7th century. At that time, the empire was in great difficulty. The invasions of the Slavs and Avars in the Balkans, and the Persians in Egypt, the Near East, and Anatolia left a large part of the empire’s cities devastated. The majority of local aristocratic families tied to the cities, as well as the senatorial aristocracy directly inherited from the Roman Empire, disappeared in this turmoil. But the question of the continuity of elites during the dark centuries (7th to 9th centuries) is not definitively settled. In Constantinople, some families seem to have survived: the ancestors of Patriarch Germanus (715-730) can thus be traced throughout the 7th century.


The aristocracy in the middle Byzantine era.

Miniature depicting Byzantine Emperor Nicephoros III Botaneites with his court, including two eunuchs on his right
Miniature depicting Emperor Nikephoros Botaneiates with his court. On the right, the eunuchs, and on the left, the ‘bearded men’ from the nobility.

However, it is certain that a powerful military aristocracy developed in the 9th century. It originated from the Anatolian plateau and held most of the military commands. The families holding these positions began to take pride in their lineage by using a hereditary name. When did such an aristocracy appear? Probably when imperial power stabilized under the Isaurian emperors, at the same time as the first hereditary names emerged. Alongside these newcomers, ancient Constantinopolitan families maintained strong positions, even though they adopted the use of hereditary names only later, in the 11th century. The most famous example is the lineage of Patriarch Photius. Over three centuries, it included numerous dignitaries, protospatharii, patricians, and no fewer than three patriarchs—Tarasios, Photius, and Sisinnios—and was related to the Amorian dynasty.

This aristocracy formed a caste where the importance of bloodline increased. No legal texts granted them hereditary advantages, but the connections between the heads of these families and the emperor or his close associates allowed their children to secure titles and positions. This specificity is reflected in the notion of eugénès, meaning “of good race”, coming closer to the idea of nobility. The term eugénia could undoubtedly be understood morally, as noble character, but in the texts, the quality of birth becomes a virtue and a condition for commanding men, with the emperor having to consider this factor in the eyes of public opinion.

The closure of the elites was never complete, as a great military career allowed one to join the group. This path enabled most foreigners—who were themselves counted among the aristocrats of their countries of origin—to reach the upper social level. In the 9th to 11th centuries, Armenians and then Georgians provided many officers. In the 11th and 12th centuries, it was the turn of the Bulgarians, and especially the Franks, followed by the Turks in the 12th century. During the Comnenian period, the trend was toward closure, and the rate of renewal decreased, but there were always some promotions of unknowns, and reclassifications between different layers of the aristocracy were permanent.


The shift to the lineage with the imperial family.

Indeed, within the aristocracy, the group of the emperor’s relatives gradually emerged. At any time, the sovereign, especially if his power was not firmly established, tended to trust close relatives for key positions that contributed to his security. From the Comnenian period onward, the role of relatives changed in nature and became almost institutional, as the court dignity system was based on blood proximity to the basileus, and thus, the highest positions were reserved for his brothers, nephews, and cousins. The families of the old military aristocracy that had not managed to integrate into the vast Comnenian clan were relegated to the background, in administrative offices or ecclesiastical positions. The ranks of the elite were closed to new men, except for foreigners, mainly Latins and Turks, who obtained the hands of imperial princesses. Belonging to the aristocracy now means to be tied through lineage, direct or indirect, with the imperial family.

Traditionally, particularly in the 11th and 12th centuries, a distinction is made between the military aristocracy and the civil aristocracy (politikon in Byzantine texts), or between the provincial aristocracy and that of the capital. This distinction is not without basis, as the expansion of the Empire and the development of the administration increased the population of the Constantinopolitan offices. These officials came from families wealthy enough to educate their children, whom they also destined for the highest ecclesiastical positions. Certain family names recur in the lists—albeit incomplete—of civil offices, especially for the very lucrative positions of imperial curators or fiscal officials. Civilians and military officers undoubtedly did not act with the same interests, but they should not be seen as two hostile factions. Marriages united them, and during the struggle for supreme power in the 11th century, the divide ran within each of the two aristocracies, as no provincial clan could hope to succeed without a strong party in the capital.


Fragmentation and difficulties in the late Byzantine period.

This characteristic persists during the late Byzantine period, but territorial fragmentation leads to the rise of local aristocracies tied to competing provincial powers. These aristocrats still hold substantial land, with their wealth directly linked to the exploitation of peasant labor. However, the dynatoi increasingly engage in urban trade and finance. Close to the courts of both imperial and provincial authorities, they secure prominent roles in the military or civil administration, granting them significant political influence.

Despite their enduring power, the aristocracy of the late Byzantine period faces numerous challenges. The relative decline of the rural economy, frequent epidemics, continuous warfare, and the drastic contraction of the empire result in many aristocratic families losing their land holdings or falling into ruin. Simultaneously, the weakening of imperial finances impacts the payment of dignities and administrative offices. Some aristocratic families, particularly in Constantinople, form alliances with Italian merchants to profit from the burgeoning trade. The aristocracy also faces attempts by the Palaiologan emperors to consolidate imperial authority, curbing the influence of the dynatoi.

Culturally, the aristocracy continues to lead a refined lifestyle, serving as patrons of the arts, literature, and the church. However, with the rise of the military aristocracy and the increasing threat posed by the Ottoman Empire, the traditional aristocratic class becomes more militarized, gradually shifting focus away from cultural patronage.


The aristocratic lifestyle.

Belonging to the Byzantine aristocracy also means having a certain lifestyle that reflects one’s social status.

Aristocratic mansions and residences.

Aristocrats in Byzantium lived in luxurious urban houses or rural estates, often equipped with various comforts. The wealthiest likely had sanitary facilities in their palaces, including baths, especially as public baths gradually disappeared. Nonetheless, most of these palaces or urban houses have completely disappeared.

Cappadocia is probably one of the only regions to have retained some remains of aristocratic mansions carved into rocks from the Middle Byzantine era, while in Mystras, once the main Byzantine city in the Peloponnese, the ruins of many important mansions from the local aristocracy are still visible today. Few of the furnishings used by the Byzantine nobility have survived; nonetheless, the sophistication of surviving ivory caskets or portable icons gives us a glimpse into the lavish furnishings they used.


Outdoor activities and leisure of the Byzantine elite.

Aristocrats, especially men, have leisure outdoor activities such as playing ball on horseback (similar to polo) or hunting. Hunting is especially fashionable during the Comnenian era, perhaps influenced by Western aristocracy. However, hunting is practiced in all periods and is often seen as a substitute for military training. Emperors set the example: three of them, Theodosius II in 450, Basil I in 886, and John II Comnenus in 1143, died in hunting accidents. Aristocrats hunt large game like bears, boars, and deer with spears, sometimes on horseback, with the help of dogs and even trained leopards. For game birds, falcons are increasingly used. Young birds trained by falconers are often imported from Georgia. Falcon hunting becomes more prominent in literature from the 11th century onwards. Manuel I Comnenus has a true passion for this sport, and treatises on raising and caring for these birds multiply during his reign.

Aristocrats host feasts on numerous occasions, in major cities and smaller towns alike. For instance, in the 9th century, according to his grandson Nicetas, Philaretos the Merciful has an ivory table inlaid with gemstones for 36 settings in Amnia, Paphlagonia. Aristocratic meals showcase magnificence, typically provided by the household’s properties. The dishes are numerous and often include game, as well as fish from lakes, the most renowned being from Nicaea. In a world where sugar is rare and only comes from honey, cakes and rare, delicate fruits, particularly grapes, are served. The meals are accompanied by strong, sweet wines that can be preserved without turning into vinegar, such as those from Nicaea, the Aegean Islands, and Monemvasia in southeastern Peloponnese. These feasts often include entertainment in the form of interludes featuring skits, mimes, music, or dances. They are also a prime venue for the recitation of epic poetry and romances. It is worth noting that women are not always admitted to these festivities.

In smaller circles, aristocrats play table games like knucklebones, dice, checkers, or backgammon. Before the end of the 11th century, chess appears and spreads. In Byzantium, it is reputed to come from the “Assyrians” (i.e., Mesopotamia, which was Arab at the time). Anna Comnena reports that her father, Emperor Alexius I, enjoyed this game, playing it to relax with his family. A 14th-century text indicates that bishops, high officials, dignitaries, and merchants engage in chess with gold or silver pieces on a horn chessboard. The pieces could also be made of carved wood or bone. Success in the game is seen as a good omen for the battlefield or business affairs.

Byzantine chess pieces from Constantinople, aristocratic leisure game
Byzantine chess pieces discovered in various locations in Constantinople are probably from the Middle Byzantine era.

Some aristocrats also often maintain circles of scholars in their homes. This is the case with Photius in the 9th century before he became Patriarch of Constantinople, and John Mauropous in the 11th century. In these early literary salons, participants display their erudition and eloquence and practice the art of the epigram, short satirical poems filled with often cryptic allusions to current events. It is in these circles that epic poetry and romance develop, particularly from the 12th century onwards.


The aristocratic patronage.

Byzantine aristocrats, both men and women, are also serving as patrons of the arts, literature, and the Church. Byzantine aristocrats often had themselves depicted as donors on church walls, icons, or manuscripts for religious, social, and political reasons. Piety and religious devotion were important motivations, as aristocrats sought to express their commitment to the Christian faith and contribute to the salvation of their souls. By financing religious works, they hoped to obtain divine blessings and secure their place in heaven. Simultaneously, these representations served to enhance their social prestige and political legitimacy. Being seen as a benefactor of the Church or a patron of sciences and arts allowed aristocrats to display their wealth and influence. Finally, these portraits contributed to the memory and posterity of the donors and the prestige of their families, ensuring that their names and images would remain associated with remarkable works. Relatively few of these depictions have survived, but some are known, particularly from the late Byzantine era.