Revision:Urban Violence

TSR Wiki > Study Help > Subjects and Revision > Revision Notes > History > Urban Violence

Rioting common place some led by bishops against temples 0 famous revolt of Nika in AD 532 Emperor ready to flee and disturbances put down at great co to human life.

Not revolutions but short lived explosions of violence in highly unstable background. Religious and political issues thrown up as soon as violence began, sustained movement for religious and political reform not in question. Protests against this and that imperial policy common place, but urban violence did not turn into revolution.

Not necessarily a poor thing, 553 debasement ought poor out, authorities careful to distribute bread. Mainly due to Blues and Greens performers etc. Reached a peak in 7th century with reign of tyrant Phocas. Supposed Ble and Green had different ideological or religious standpoints, lack of evidence for this. Urban violence does seem to have increased toward the end of the period; a phenomenon which increased urban population must have played a part in.

Explanation lies at structural level ceremony and public theatre has roots far back in Principate. Emperor confronted people at Hippodrome and vice versa, provincial governors also acted in similar ways. Great churches meeting points at times of passion rioting caused symbols of authority to be broken down imperial or official statues, portraits patriarchs and bishops Physical settings esp. circus and theatre great place to express political discontent. Focus organised festivals where different professions had area etc

Charioteers heroes and many statues in Aphrodisias theatre remains in use in sixth century but early in seventh century stage collapsed and not repaired. part of building unused. Financial burdens stop chariot racing, indeed Procopius complains that Justinian closed down theatres, hippodromes and circuses.

Early Byzantine city place of continual public confrontation like earthquakes can’t find intensity never revolutionary. Performed structural function in balance between rulers who provided food and living and setting for expression of opinion, also came down with iron hand when necessary in face of independent or collaborating church

Food distribution important and expensive- - encouraged dependency and increased levels of population in city to very high levels. Made political rather than economic factors as dominant in stability added to public disturbance rendered capital highly vulnerable to a breakdown in supply. External circumstances which bought this breakdown, and a reduction in population at Rome and Constantinople. Continued past 476 in Rome by the church not on same scale, at Constantinople fatal change came with loss of Egypt to the Persians early 7th -contraction rapid. Artificially high level of public investment in certain aspects of urban life, through annona or building programme warn us that urban economic prosperity not a sign of general prosperity or otherwise of the empire.

Comments