Cambridge Ancient Hi.. - Index of

228 8. administration and politics in the cities
that certain organized collectives – for instance, tanners, gardeners, goldworkers,
young men, Jews and also old Jews – sat together and on the side
of one of the factions or the other. The Jews regularly sat with the Blues.
Presumably these groups supported the faction with whom they sat. 153 The
question remains whether their faction allegiance was an accidental consequence
of the position of their seats in theatre, odeon or hippodrome, or
whether they had chosen to sit in a particular sector precisely because of
their preference for the faction that sat there. It is unlikely that the location
of seats is sufficient to account for the huge numbers that were ready to
support one or both factions when they got into trouble. It is much more
likely that what rallied people on behalf of one or even both factions was
awareness that they had publicized grievances in the past and would be
needed to do so again in the future. We do have information about a
number of political episodes in which the active participation by the factions
is either explicitly stated or at least probable. The years 579–80 saw a
large-scale anti-pagan witch hunt. The political background was certainly
complicated. It involved political and religious antagonisms, both in Syria
and at Constantinople. 154 Certainly the spectators in the hippodromes at
Antioch and at Constantinople were manipulated to put pressure on the
authorities, and were promised favours by lay and ecclesiastical authorities
trying to restore order. The colours are not mentioned in connection with
these demonstrations, but it is difficult to believe that they were not
involved. The reason could well be that in this episode they were on the
same side – as they were in a subsequent wave of demonstrations against
bishop Gregory of Antioch in 588–9. 155
In the violent local dispute between some of the cities of the Nile delta
known as the Aykela revolt, the factions were active participants, though
their allegiance was not consistent. This was in the 590s. 156 When the
Persians besieged Jerusalem in 614, the factions were united in pressing
for resistance when the patriarch advocated surrendering the city. 157
When the Roman generals Menas and Domentianus quarrelled in
Alexandria at the time of the Arab invasion (641), one was supported by
the Greens and the other by the Blues, and in this case Monophysitism
was an issue. 158
There is one feature of the urban troubles of the later sixth century
which is not found earlier: they were regional rather than confined to a
single town. This was certainly the case with the anti-pagan witch hunt of
579–80, the Aykela revolt of the late 590s, and the support for Heraclius’
153 Roueché, Performers and Partisans 83–128.
154 Evagr. HE v.18; John Eph. HE iii.29, 31–2. Rochow (1976).
155 Evagr. HE vi.7. 156 J. Niciu 97.1–30, tr. Charles 157–60.
157 Strategius Monachus, La Prise de Jerusalem v.10, ed J. Garitte, CSCO 202, Louvain 1960.
158 J. Niciu 119.5–17, tr. Charles 189–90.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008