It would seem that, in accordance with old Roman custom, victorious generals, below Imperial rank, were not allowed to enter the city in triumph through this gate. Belisarius,[[254]] Maurice,[[255]] Nicephorus Phocas, before he became emperor,[[256]] and Leo his brother,[[257]] celebrated their respective triumphs over the Vandals, Persians and Saracens, in the Hippodrome and the great street of the city.[[258]]
The Golden Gate (Outer).
An Imperial triumphal procession[[259]] was marshalled on the plain in front of the Golden Gate,[[260]] and awaited there the arrival of the emperor, either from the Hebdomon or from the Palace of Blachernæ. The principal captives, divided into several companies, and guarded by bands of soldiers, led the march. Next followed the standards and weapons and other spoils of war. Then, seated on a magnificent white charger, came the emperor himself, arrayed in robes embroidered with gold and pearls, his crown on his head, his sceptre in his right hand, his victorious sword by his side. Close to him rode his son, or the Cæsar of the day, another resplendent figure of light, also on a white horse. Upon reaching the gate the victor might, like Theophilus, dismount for a few moments, and falling thrice upon his face, humbly acknowledge the Divine aid to which he owed the triumph of his arms. At length the Imperial cortège passed through the great archway. The civic authorities came forward and did homage, offering the conqueror a crown of gold and a laurel wreath, and accepting from him a rich largess in return; the Factions rent the air with shouts—“Glory to God, who restores our sovereigns to us, crowned with victory! Glory to God, who has magnified you, Emperors of the Romans! Glory to Thee, All-Holy Trinity, for we behold our Emperors victorious! Welcome, Victors, most valiant sovereigns!”[[261]] And then the glittering procession wended its way to the Great Palace, through the dense crowds that packed the Mesè and the principal Fora of the city, all gay with banners, flowers, and evergreens.
Sometimes the emperor, as in the case of Heraclius,[[262]] rode in a chariot instead of on horseback; or the occupant of the triumphal car might be, as on the occasion of the triumph of Zimisces, the Icon of the Virgin.[[263]] Michael Palæologus entered the city on foot, walking as far as the Church of St. John Studius before he mounted his horse.[[264]] On the occasion of the second triumph of Theophilus, the beautiful custom was introduced of making children take part in the ceremonial with wreaths of flowers.[[265]]
But besides serving as a State entrance into the city, the Porta Aurea was one of the strongest positions in the fortifications.[[266]] The four towers at its gateways, the deep moat in front, and the transverse walls across the peribolos on either hand, guarding approach from that direction, constituted a veritable citadel. Cantacuzene repaired it, and speaks of it as an almost impregnable acropolis, capable of being provisioned for three years, and strong enough to defy the whole city in time of civil strife.[[267]] Hence the great difficulty he found in persuading the Latin garrison which held it on his behalf, in 1354, to surrender the place to his rival John VI. Palæologus.
The Golden Gate, therefore, figures also in the military annals of Constantinople. In the reign of Anastasius I. it was the object of special attack by Vitalianus at the head of his Huns and Bulgarians.[[268]] Repeated attempts were made upon it by the Saracens in the siege of 673-675.[[269]] Crum stood before it in the reign of Leo the Armenian, and there he invoked the aid of his gods against the city, by offering human sacrifices and by the lustration of his army with sea-water in which he had bathed his feet.[[270]] His demand to plant his spear in the gate put an end to the negotiations for peace. In 913 the Bulgarians, under their king Simeon, were again arrayed before the entrance.[[271]] Here, also, in 1347, John Cantacuzene was admitted by his partisans.[[272]]
John Palæologus, upon receiving the surrender of the gate foolishly dismantled the towers, lest they should be turned against him, in the fickle political fortunes of the day.[[273]] He did not, however, carry the work of destruction so far as to be unable to use the position as an “acropolis” when besieged, in 1376, by his rebellious son, Andronicus.[[274]] Later, when Sultan Bajazet threatened the city, an attempt was made to restore the towers, and even to increase the strength of this point in the fortifications.[[275]] With materials taken from the churches of All Saints, the Forty Martyrs, and St. Mokius, the towers were rebuilt, and a fortress extending to the sea was erected within the city walls, similar to the Castle of the Seven Towers constructed afterwards by Mehemet the Conqueror, in 1457. Upon hearing of this action, Bajazet sent peremptory orders to John Palæologus to pull down the new fortifications, and compelled obedience by threatening to put out the eyes of Manuel, the heir to the throne, at that time a hostage at Brousa. The humiliation affected the emperor, then seriously ill, so keenly as to hasten his death. Subsequently, however, probably after the defeat of Bajazet by Tamerlane at Angora, the defences at the Golden Gate were restored; for the Russian pilgrim who was in Constantinople between 1435 and 1453 speaks of visiting the Castle of the Emperor Kalo Jean.[[276]]
In 1390, Manuel II., with a small body of troops, entered the city by this gate and drove away his nephew John, who had usurped the throne.[[277]] During the siege of 1453 the gate was defended by Manuel of Liguria with 200 men, and before it the Sultan planted a cannon and other engines of assault.[[278]]
Between the second and third towers to the north of the Golden Gate is an entrance known at present, like the Porta Aurea, also by the name Yedi Koulè Kapoussi. Dr. Paspates thinks it is of Turkish origin.[[279]] It has certainly undergone repair in Turkish times, as an inscription upon it in honour of Sultan Achmet III. testifies; but traces of Byzantine workmanship about the gate prove that it belongs to the period of the Empire;[[280]] and this conclusion is supported by the consideration that, since the Porta Aurea was a State entrance, another gate was required in its immediate neighbourhood for the use of the public in this quarter of the capital. Hence the proximity of the two gateways.