Though some historians may try to discount the Great Man theory of history, I believe that there are a couple of men who are able to steer the life of their respective states towards glory or ruin. Though they are reliant on the machinery of their respective states, great men are the personalities that make things happen.
Basil II was one of those types of individuals. He came onto the throne of the Byzantine Empire at a young age and was seen as a great prospect for imperial rule. He managed to maintain his grip of the throne for almost fifty years. In that time, he brought great wealth to the empire and transform the Byzantine Empire into a powerhouse that could not be challenged by its rivals around the Mediterranean. The problem that lies in non-representative governments such as the Byzantine Empire is that the wealth and glory of the state is reliant on one particular ruler. All the glory of the previous age was now being wasted and thrown away by incompetent and uncaring rulers.
Basil II’s brother, Constantine VIII became emperor in 1025. He was a man living in the shadow of a giant. He had been content to let his brother run the government almost exclusively. He did not care much for the business of running a government but involved himself in his hobbies such as horseback riding and cooking. When he came to the throne, the Byzantine Empire could not ask for a less suitable successor than Constantine VIII.
The Byzantine Empire did not have a proper succession system and as Basil II did not have any heirs, the throne was in the hands of a leader was not interested in running the empire. Being as paranoid as he was, he agitated the nobility by participating in a repression campaign against them, his rule being well known for torture and terror. The empire could not ask for less prepared ruler. The nobility, when he was not torturing their members, were given many concessions that saw the centralized power of the empire being fragmented into more autonomous holdings. Basil II had spent many years fighting against rebellious nobles and managed to make the state stronger than it had been previously. All this was being undone by Constantine VIII and his lack of leadership.
Constantine VIII is an example of the weakness of the Byzantine Empire’s system. The Empire did not have a proper succession. Even at this late stage, the Byzantine Empire was still conceived in the ancient ways of the Republic. The Empire was not supposed to be a monarchy though it functioned in that way. Basil II’s disposition towards the soldier’s life made him unable to have a heir at a moment when the empire needed strong leadership to consolidate the gains that he had made. Basil II came at the end of a string of soldier emperors who brought the Byzantine Empire to its apogee in the Middle Ages; this success was fragile, considering the political geography of the Byzantine state. It was surrounded by hostile states that wanted to invade it and occupy the territory. Constantine VIII was simply the wrong ruler at the wrong time for the empire to survive. Such a reign would have not been as disastrous had it taken place when the empire had more stable borders; however, history would not let the Byzantine Empire to have a breather.
Constantine VIII was not interested in running the empire and to be honest, I have to admire him a little bit. He wanted to run his own life and not be beholden to politicians and sycophant bureaucrats. In a system like that of the Byzantine Empire, I expect that this job would be very mentally straining for anyone. Constantine VIII had lived a life of leisure and seclusion from the affairs of state. He had essentially lived a life of retirement before such a thing even existed. To be taken out of that and thrust into the mantle of leadership is quite a trying situation for someone who has existed on the fringes of the aristocracy.
Much like the Emperor Commodus, Constantine VIII decided to live a life of luxury mixed with tyrannical rule. The successors who would come after him were a motley crew of invalids and downright incompetent rulers. Constantine VII’s reign is the start of the decline of the Byzantine state. The inability to maintain the gains that had been made under Basil II was unstainable for the empire. Even with somewhat competent rulers such as Constantine IX, they were stuck with trends that really began with Basil II’s brother.
What this shows is that the Byzantine Empire became too dependent on one ruler to keep it together. Basil II’s inability to set up a succession is a blemish but one that took time to manifest in the empire. In my opinion, it is rulers like Constantine VIII who prove the great theory of history. There are some people who are destined to rule and flourish. Those who succeed those great rulers often bask in the sunlight of vibrant days and squander it.
Byzantine-Empire.com 