Byzantine Constantinople, the walls of the city and adjoining historical sites
John Stuart Mill · en
The statement of Phrantzes (p. 252), among others, that in the siege
of 1453 the charge of the palace and all about it was entrusted to
Minotto, the Baillus of the Venetian colony, might be employed in
favour of the view that the “turres Avenides” which Leonard of Scio
associates with the Xylo Porta, and assigns to Jerome and Leonardus
de Langasco, could not be the towers S and N, but the towers of the
Heraclian Wall. For the towers S and N, being attached to the Palace
of Blachernæ, would fall under the care of Minotto. There is force
in the argument. But it is weakened by statements of Pusculus (iv.
173) and Zorzo Dolfin (s. 55), which imply that the palace defended
by Minotto was the Palace of the Porphyrogenitus. For both of these
writers place the Gate of the Palace (see above, p. 47) between the
Gate of Charisius (Edirnè Kapoussi) and the Gate of the Kaligaria
(Egri Kapou), and Pusculus describes the palace concerned as “Regia
celsa,” an apt description of a building seated, like Tekfour Serai,
upon the walls.
The references made to the Tower of Anemas, though not under its
name, by the Spanish ambassador Clavijo, who visited the Byzantine
Court in 1403, should not be overlooked (see _Constantinople, ses
Sanctuaires et ses Reliques_, translated into French by Ph. Bruun,
Odessa). Speaking of the Church of Blachernæ (p. 15), he describes
it as “située dans la ville près d’un châteaufort, servant de
demeure aux empereurs; ce fort a été démoli par un empereur, parce
qu’il y avait été enfermé par son fils.” The fact that Clavijo
identifies the Church of Blachernæ by its vicinity to the Tower of
Anemas may be pressed into the service of the opinion that the tower
in question stood in the Wall of Heraclius. For there is no more
appropriate way of indicating the situation of that church than by
saying that it stands a little to the rear of the Heraclian Wall. So
appropriate is that mode of identification, that the Patriarch
Constantius has recourse to it when, conversely, he indicates the
situation of the Tower of Anemas (which he considered to be the
southernmost Heraclian tower): “The Tower of Anemas still exists,”
he says. “On its side facing the Holy Well of Blachernæ it has a
large window, with a smaller one above” (see above, p. 150). But,
unfortunately, to describe one building as “near” another is often
the most tantalizing aid to its discovery that can be offered. The
towers S and N cannot be said to be far from the Church of
Blachernæ. Perhaps some injury to one of the Heraclian towers might
explain the statement of Clavijo, that the Tower of Anemas had been
destroyed; but could he have mistaken the citadel formed by the
Walls of Heraclius and Leo for an Imperial residence? Such language
suggests rather the towers S and N.