1. Hutten, William Holden, The Story of Constantinople (London 1909) 324.Google Scholar

2. The history of the Serpent Column at Delphi is sufficiently treated elsewhere. See: Frick, Otto, ‘Das Plataeische Weihgeschenk zu Konstantinopel’, Jahrbücher für classische Philologie 3. Supplementband, Heft 4 (1857-60) 499–513 Google Scholar; Dethier, P. A. and Mordtmann, A. D., ‘Epigraphik von Byzantion und Constantinopolis von dem ältesten Zeiten bis zum Jahre Christi 1453’, Denkschriften der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil. Hist. Klasse 13 (1864) 20–8 Google Scholar; Wiesler, Fr., ‘Zur sogenannten Schlangensäule in Konstantinopel’, Jahrbücher fur classische Philologie 10 (1864) 242–59 Google Scholar; Fabricus, Ernst, ‘Das platäische Weihgeschenk in Delphi’, Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts 1 (1886) 176–91 Google Scholar; Gauer, Werner, ‘Weihgeschenke aus den Perserkriegen’, in Istanbuler Mitteilungen, Beiheft 2 (1968) 74–96 Google Scholar. A short but good synopsis with full references can also be found in, Mansel, Arif Mufid, ‘Istanbul’daki “Burmali sütun”’, Belleten. Turk tarih Kurumu 34 (1970) 189–97.Google Scholar

3. Eusebius, Vita Constantini, iii, 54; in Heikel, Ivar, ed., Die griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten drei Jahrhunderte (Leipzig 1902) VII, 101.Google Scholar

4. Sozomenus, Historia Ecclesiastica, ii, 5; MPG 67, cols. 945-8; Socrates, Historia Ecclesiastica, i, 16; MPG 67, col. 117; cf. also the western European historian, Landolfus Sagax, Historia romana, in MGH, Auctores antiquissimi, II, 327.

5. Some confusion is due to what is undoubtedly a later scribal error in Sozomenus’ work: ‘παν’ was replaced with ‘Παν.’ The result is that Sozomenus appears to describe the tripods of Delphi which include the most celebrated Pan, which the cities of Greece and Pausanias the Spartan dedicated after their victory. Pierre Gilles, in 1547, knew of the error, De Topographia Constantinopoleos (Venice 1561) 90. More recently it has been flagged by Frazer, J. G., Pausanias’s Description of Greece (London 1898) V, 301 Google Scholar; see also Migne’s gloss, MPG, 67, cols. 945-8, n. g; Frick, ‘Das Plataeische Weihgeschenk’, 514.

6. Interestingly, those who accept a fourth century placing of the column seldom acknowledge opposing views. Cf. Vasiliev, A. A., History of the Byzantine Empire (Madison 1952) I, 60 Google Scholar; Janin, Raymond, Constantinople byzantine: développement urbain et repertoire topographique (Paris 2 1964) 191 Google Scholar; Rice, David Talbot, Constantinople: From Byzantium to Istanbul (New York 1965) 21 Google Scholar; Maclagen, Michael, The City of Constantinople (London 1968) 26 Google Scholar; Dagron, Gilbert, Naissance d’une capitale: Constantinople et ses institutions de 300 à 451 (Paris 1974) 36–7, 306 Google Scholar; Krautheimer, Richard, Three Christian Capitals: Topography and Politics (Berkely et al. 1983) 49.Google Scholar

7. Casson, Stanley, Rice, David Talbot and Jones, A. H. M., Preliminary Report Upon the Excavations Carried Out in the Hippodrome of Constantinople in 1927 (London 1928) 13.Google Scholar

8. Vasiliev, A. A., ‘Harun ibn Yahya and His Description of Constantinople’, Seminarium Kondakovianum 5 (1932) 161.Google Scholar

9. Casson, Preliminary Report, 13; Marquart, J., Osteuropäische und ostasiatische Streifzüge (Leipzig 1903) 236 Google Scholar; cf.Majeska, George P., Russian Travelers to Constantinople in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries (Washington D.C. 1984) 255 Google Scholar, n. 97.

10. Dawkins, R. M., ‘Ancient Statues in Mediaeval Constantinople’, Folk-lore 35 (1924) 234 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, n. 51.

11. Casson, Preliminary Report, 12; cf.Van der Vin, J. P. A., Travellers to Greece and Constantinople: Ancient Monuments and Old Traditions in Medieval Travellers’ Tales (Leiden 1980) I, 269 Google Scholar. Based on travellers’ accounts, Van der Vin concludes that the Serpent Column was erected in the early Palaeologan period. This, however, contradicts his misreading of Nicetas Choniates who, he believes, places the Serpent Column in the hippodrome in 1204.

12. Vasiliev, ‘Harun-ibn-Yahya’, 155.

13. Minorsky, V., ‘Marvazi on the Byzantines’, Annuaire d’Institut de philologie et d’histoire orientales et slaves 10(1950) 461.Google Scholar

14. Sturlason, Snorre, Heimskringla: The Norse King Sagas, trans. Laing, Samuel (London — New York 1930) 286 Google Scholar. The description of the hippodrome appears to be an addition to the story, not in all manuscripts, and attributed to ‘people who have been in Constantinople’.

15. Jaubert, Pierre-Amédée, ed. and trans., La géographie d’Edrisi (Paris 1836-40, repr. Amsterdam 1975) II, 299.Google Scholar

16. Schefer, Charles, ‘Aboul Hassan Aly el Herewy: Indications sur les lieux de Pèlerinage’, in Archives de l’orient latin (Paris 1881) I, 589 Google Scholar, and n. 5.

17. Newton, C. T., Travels and Discoveries in the Levant (London 1865) II, 34.Google Scholar

18. Mango, Cyril, Byzantium: The Empire of New Rome (New York 1980) 75.Google Scholar

19. See Ostrogorsky, George, History of the Byzantine State, trans. Hussey, Joan (New Brunswick, NJ 1969) 46–7 Google Scholar, with accompanying references to the debate.

20. Chronicon Paschale (Bonn ed.) 528; Malaias (Bonn ed.) 320; Zonaras (Bonn ed.) Ill, 18. See Dragon, Naissance d’une capitale, 40-1.

21. Mango, Cyril, ‘L’Euripe de l’hippodrome de Constantinople. Essai d’identification’, REB 7 (1949-50) 185, 187–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

22. Casson, Preliminary Report, 25-6.

23. Newton, Travels and Discoveries, II, 27-8.

24. ‘… AΓ … ATωNΠATPIKIOVKEΠAPXOVPωM’, Frick, ‘Das Plataeische Weihgeschenk’, 550; Dethier and Mordtmann, ‘Epigraphik von Byzantion und Constantinopolis’, 5.

25. Frick, ‘Das Plataeische Weihgeschenk’, 551.

26. Dethier and Mordtmann, ‘Epigraphik von Byzantion und Constantinopolis’, 28. This reasoning assumes that the placing of the obelisk on the Theodosian base and its conversion into a fountain were contemporary events. This was probably not the case, but it could not have been undertaken too much later. Krauss, Friedrick, ‘Die Aufnahme und Darstellung des Obelisken und seines Unterbaues’, Istanbuler Forschungen 7 (1935) 85–6.Google Scholar

27. Casson, Preliminary Report, 13.

28. Majeska, Russian Travelers to Constantinople, 256. This is a very well informed and extremely handy work which replaces the Khitrowo translation.

29. ‘diebus iustratilibus’ or ‘diebus astiludialibus’. Gerola, Giuseppe, ‘Le Vedute di Costantinopoli di Cristoforo Buondelmonti’, Studi Bizantini e Neoellenici 3 (1931) 274–5.Google Scholar

30. Tafur, Pero, Travels and Adventures, 1435-1439, ed. and trans. Letts, Malcolm (New York — London 1926) 143.Google Scholar

31. The story had a long lifespan. Jean Carlier de Pinon heard it in 1579; cited from the MS by Bourquelot, Félix, ‘La Colonne serpentine à Constantinople’, Memoires de la Société impériale des antiquaires de France 28 (1865) 34 Google Scholar. In the late nineteenth century there still existed a popular story of a fountain crafted by Leo the Wise which continually decanted wine. When the Turks took the city, it was said, they destroyed the fountain but investigated its interior. There they found a bunch of grapes, one of which was only half squeezed. Had the conquerors not destroyed the talisman, the story continued, it would have provided wine until the end of the world. Carnoy, Henry and Nicolaidès, Jean, Folklore de Constantinople (Paris 1894) 12–3.Google Scholar

32. Zosimus (Bonn ed.) 97; English translation: Ridley, Ronald R., ed. and trans., Zosimus (Canberra 1982) 38.Google Scholar

33. Codinus, De Signis (Bonn ed.) 55; Nicephoras Callistus, Ecclesiasticae Historiae MPG 146, col. 124.

34. The crusaders did spare other bronze statues on the spina. Pero Tafur saw one in 1437 which lacked a hand. It was believed to have formerly been a magical judge of fair prices. Letts, trans., 143.

35. Casson, Stanley and Rice, David Talbot, Second Report Upon the Excavations Carried Out in the Hippodrome of Constantinople in 1928 (London 1929) 3.Google Scholar

36. Malalas (Bonn ed.) 264-6; Cedrenus, George, Historiarum compendium (Bonn ed.)I, 431 Google Scholar; De Antiquitabus Constantinopolitanis, MPG 122, col. 1245; Patria Constantinoupoleos, in Th. Preger, ed., Scriptores originum Constantinopolitanarum (Leipzig 1907) II, sec. 200, 278. Mango, Cyril, ‘Antique Statuary and the Byzantine Beholder’, DOP 17 (1963) 61 Google Scholar. See also, Dulière, W. L., ‘Protection permanente contre des animaux nuisibles assurée par Apollônius de Tyanae dans Byzance et Antioche, Evolution de son mythe’, BZ 63 (1970) 247–77.Google Scholar

37. Choniates, Nicetas, Designis (Bonn ed.) 861–3 Google Scholar. Another bronze group, this one depicting storks, was similarly thought to repel serpents. Patria (ed. Preger) I, sec. 23-5, 10-1; cf.Dagron, Gilbert, Constantinople imaginaire, études sur le recueil des ‘Patria’ (Paris 1984) 108–9 Google Scholar. With some modifications, this story was amazingly resilient, surviving many centuries after the bronze storks were lost. It is mentioned by Evliya Effendi in the seventeenth century and was still current in the late nineteenth century as well. Effendi, Evliya, Narrative of Travels in Europe, Asia, and Africa in the Seventeenth Century, trans. Hammer, Joseph von (London 1834) 17 Google Scholar; Carnoy and Nicolaidès, Folklore de Constantinople, 23-5.

38. de Clari, Robert, La Conquête de Constantinople, ed. Lauer, Philippe (Paris 1924) 88 Google Scholar; English translation: McNeal, Edgar Holmes, The Conquest of Constantinople (New York 1936) 109–10.Google Scholar

39. Heimskringla, trans. Laing, 286.

40. On the column’s height: Dethier and Mordtmann, ‘Epigraphik von Byzantion und Constantinopolis’, 6 and n. 1.

41. The Anonymous Russian in ca. 1390 (ed. Majeska, 144) mentioned a working fountain in the hippodrome after describing the Serpent Column and Obelisk of Theodosius. From the description and his movement through the hippodrome, the fountain was probably somewhere near the current fountain of Wilhelm II, although more in the direction of Hagia Sophia.

42. Koukoules, Ph., (Athens 1949) III, 13.Google Scholar

43. Majeska, Russian Travelers, 144.

44. Ibid., 92.

45. Mango, ‘Antique Statuary’, 61.

46. Majeska, Russian Travelers, 164.

47. Estrada, F. López, ed., Embajada a Tamerlán (Madrid 1943) 43 Google Scholar; English translation: Strange, Guy le, trans., Embassy to Tamerlane, 1403-1406 (London 1928) 71.Google Scholar

48. Majeska, Russian Travelers, 184.

49. Cf.Holmes, William Gordon, The Age of Justinian and Theodora (London 1912) I, 64 Google Scholar, n. 3; Casson, Second Report, 1-4; Mango, ‘Antique Statuary’, 75, n. 119.

50. Reinhard, Jean, ed., Essai sur J.-M. Angiolello (Angers 1913) edition p. 49.Google Scholar

51. Giese, Friedrich, ed. and trans., Die altosmanischen anonymen Chroniken (Leipzig 1925) I, 90; II, 120.Google Scholar

52. Mansel, ‘Istanbul’ daki “Burmali sütun,”’ 202-3; res. 20; the complete engraving can be found in, Weigand, Th., ‘Der Hippodrom von Konstantinopel zur Zeit Suleimans d. Gr.’, Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts 23 (1908) 1–11 Google Scholar; tafel 1.

53. Carel van Mander, Schilderboeck (1604), English trans: van de Wall, Constant, Dutch and Flemish Painters (New York 1936) 73–5.Google Scholar

54. Gabriel, Albert, ‘Les Etapes d’une campagne dans les Deux Irak d’après un manuscrit turc du XVIe siècle’, Syria 9 (1928) 328–49 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Denney, Walter B., ‘A Sixteenth-Century Architectural Plan of Istanbul’, Ars Orientalis 8 (1970) 49–63 Google Scholar; Johnston, Norman J., ‘The Urban World of the Matraki Manuscript’, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 30 (1971) 159–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

55. Viaggi fatti da Vinetia, alla Tana, in Persia, in India, et in Costantinopoli (Venice 1545) 119v.

56. Dorez, Leon, ed., Itinéraire de Jérôme Maurand d’Antibes à Constantinople (Paris 1901) 228 Google Scholar. See also the very inaccurate sketch of the Serpent Column, pl. XVII.

57. Chesneau, Jean, Le Voyage de M. d’Aramon, ambassadeur pour le Roy en Levant, ed. Schefer, Charles (Paris 1887; repr. Geneva 1970) 30.Google Scholar

58. Gilles, De Topographie Constantinopoleos, 90-1.

59. Thevet, André, Cosmographie de Levant (Lyon 1554; repr. Geneva 1985) [ed. Lestringant, Frank] 64.Google Scholar

60. Dernschwam, Hans, Tagebuch einerReise nach Konstantinopel und Kleinasien (1553/55), ed. Babinger, Franz (Munich — Leipzig 1923)Google Scholar (Studien zur Fuggergeschichte, 7) 100.

61. du Fresne-Canaye, Philippe, Le Voyage du Levant, ed. Hauser, M. H. (Paris 1897) 102, 255.Google Scholar

62. See pp. 00-00 infra.

63. Schweigger, Salomon, Ein newe Reyssbeschreibung auss Teutschland nach Constantinopel und Jerusalem (Nuremberg 1608; repr. Graz 1964) 124 Google Scholar; Schweigger also provides an interesting drawing of the column showing damage to one jaw, 123; cf. also the map, 102, fig. A.

64. Casson, Second Report, 1-4.

65. Ménage, V. L., ‘The Serpent Column in Ottoman Sources’, Anatolian Studies 14 (1964) 170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

66. Casson, Second Report 1.

67. Ménage, ‘Serpent Column’, 170.

68. On this author, see Ménage, V. L., s.v. ‘Kemal Pasha-zade’, in Encyclopaedia of Islam, new edition, IV.Google Scholar

69. The original text with this translation from Ménage, ‘Serpent Column’, 171.

70. Ibid., 171, n. 17.

71. Ménage identifies only the last sentence as Kemal-Pashazade’s comment, based on the fact that it is the only sentence which adds something new to the story from the Anonymous Chronicles. The reasoning is circular. The author’s own comments, one would think, would follow the phrase ‘The narrator says:’.

72. The snake problem in this period is illustrated by the exploits of Ogier Ghiselin de Busbecq, who was in Constantinople in 1555 and 1556. Discussing his lodgings near the Column of Constantine (not far from the hippodrome) Busbecq noted, ‘it swarms with different kinds of vermin, such as weasels, snakes, lizards, and scorpions. Sometimes when a man goes to fetch his hat in the morning, he has the unpleasant surprise of finding a snake coiled round it.’ Unfortunate snakes, in fact, provided the neglected German ambassador with considerable entertainment. He was fond of staging fights between snakes and weasels, and was especially intrigued by the mechanics of the snakes’ ingestion of mice and frogs. Forster, Charles T. and Danieli, F. H. B., The Life and Letters of Ogier de Busbecq (London 1881) I, 203–4.Google Scholar

73. Leunclavius, Joannis, Annales Sultanorum Othmanidarum (repr. in MPG 159; repr. Frankfurt 1596)Google Scholar; also translated back into German in Neuwe Chronica Turckischer Nation (Frankfurt 1595).

74. Leunclavius, Annales, MPG, 159, col. 612.

75. Ménage, ‘Serpent Column’, 170, n. 11, who seems to attribute the Turkish translation to Lówenklau. It was the work of John Gaudier.

76. Leunclavius, Pandectes historiae Turcicae, MPG 159, col. 820; the Pandectes are included in all editions of the Annales. See also, Dieter Metzler, s.v. ‘Löwenklau’, Neue Deutsche Biographie, v. 15.

77. In 1578: Schweigger, Reyssbeschreibung, 124; in 1585: Leunclavius, Pandectes, MPG 159, col. 820; in 1655, de Thévenot, M., Relations d’un voyage fait au Levant (Paris 1665) IV, 41–2 Google Scholar, cited from Bourquelot, ‘Colonne serpentine’, 42; in 1672: d’Arvieux, Laurent, Mémoires du chevalier d’Arvieux, envoyé extraordinaire du Roy, à la Porte, Consul d’Alep, d’Alger, de Tripoli, & autres Echelles du Levant (Paris 1734) IV, 467–8 Google Scholar. Johann Wild, in 1604, and Evliya Effendi, in 1634, blamed Selim II for the broken jaw: Wild, Johann, Reysbeschreibung eines Gefangen Christen Anno 1604, ed. Narciss, Georg A. (Stuttgart 1964) 332 Google Scholar; Evliya Effendi, ed. von Hammer, 19.

78. In 1675: Spon, Jacob and Wheler, George, Voyage d’Italie, de Dalmatie, de Greece, et du Levant, Fait aux années 1675 & 1676. (Amsterdam 1679) I, 178 Google Scholar; in 1678: de Bruyn, Cornelius, Voyage du Levant (Delft 1700) 52 Google Scholar; in 1690: Du Mont, Jean, Nouveau voyage du Levant (The Hague 1694) 173.Google Scholar

79. Ménage, ‘Serpent Column’, 171, n. 20.

80. Evliya Effendi, Narrative of Travels, trans, von Hammer, 19.

81. Cf. Gilles, De Topographie Constantinopoleos, 89; Wratislaw, Wenceslas, Adventures of Baron Wenceslas Wratislaw of Mitrowitz, trans. Wratislaw, A. H. (London 1862) 70–1.Google Scholar

82. Parry, V. J., s.v. ‘Djerid’, Encyclopaedia of Islam, new edition, II.Google Scholar

83. The game is now played only in exhibitions. For excellent photos of the fast-paced sport see Halici, Feyzi and Yesilay, Zeynel, ‘Jereed: A Game of Skill of Men and Horses’, Image of Turkey 9 (1987) 14–7.Google Scholar

84. Freshfield, Edwin H., ‘Notes on a Vellum Album, containing some original sketches of public buildings and monuments, drawn by a German artist who visited Constantinople in 1574’, Archeologia 72 (1921-2) 87–104, pls. XV–XXIII.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

85. Freshfield, Edwin H., ‘Some Sketches Made in Constantinople in 1574’, BZ 30 (1929-30) 519–22 Google Scholar, Tafel II, incorrectly captioned ‘The Hippodrome at Constantinople looking North East’. It should read southeast.

86. Mango, Cyril, ‘Constantinopolitana’, Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts 80 (1965) 305–15 Google Scholar, figs. 1, 4, 5.

87. Reproduction by permission of the Master and Fellows of Trinity College, Cambridge, (ms. O. 17.2, f.6).

88. The head is pictured in, Devambez, Pierre, Grand bronzes du Musée de Stamboul (Paris 1937) 9–12 Google Scholar, and Pl. II; good top and bottom views can also be found in Gauer, ‘Weihgeschenke aus den Perserkriegen’, Tafel 4.

89. Sur-name miniatures (1582), Öz, Tahsin, Turkish Textiles and Velvets (Ankara 1950) pis. 13, 15Google Scholar; Huner-name (ca. 1588), Casson, Preliminary Report, figs. 5, 6; Mansel, ‘Istanbul’daki “Burmuli sütun”’, 201, res. 14-9, 22.

90. The first record of the shift in popular belief is found in Schweigger, Reyssbeschreibung, 124, who was there in 1578. But the story was not then widespread. In 1600: Ali, in Ménage, ‘Serpent Column’, 171, n. 20; in 1604: Wild, Reyssbeschreibung, 332; in 1634: Evliya Effendi, ed. von Hammer, 19; in 1672: d’Arvieux, Mémoires, IV, 467-8; in 1675/6: Spon and Wheler, Voyage, I, 178, and Wheler, George, A Journey into Greece in Company of Dr. Spon of Lyons (London 1682) 185 Google Scholar. The latter, based on the inscription on the obelisk structilis describing it as a ‘brazen wonder,’ believed the serpent column was once perched on its neighbour’s apex. Aubrey de la Motraye later repeated this theory, but treated it with well-deserved scepticism; Travels through Europe, Asia, and into Part of Africa (London 1723) 1, 196.

91. Du Mont, Nouveau Voyage, 173; my translation.

92. For a good bibliography on this folklore see, Vryonis, Speros Jr., The Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor and the Process of Islamizationfrom the Eleventh through the Fifteenth Century (Berkeley — Los Angeles 1971) 437–8 Google Scholar, n. 108. Related folklore continued to help shape Greek history in later centuries and, to some extent, still does. See Herzfeld, Michael, Ours Once More: Folklore, Ideology, and the Making of Modern Greece (Austin 1982).Google Scholar

93. Du Mont, Nouveau Voyage, 173.

94. Theatrum Europaeum (Frankfort-am-Main 1635-1738), XV, col. 867.

95. de la Motraye, Travels, I, 205.

96. de la Motraye calls it the “Palace with Cupolas” in the Atmeidan. Ménage, ‘Serpent Column’, 172, n. 28 correctly identifies this as the famous vizier’s old palace. The Theatrum Europaeum records that the ambassador was lodged near the obelisk, not far from Hagia Sophia; XV, cols. 867-8.

97. On the general mood of the Ottomans in their relations with the West during those years, see Abou-el-Haj, Rifaat A., ‘The Formal Closure of the Ottoman Frontier in Europe: 1699-1703’, Journal of the American Oriental Society 89 (1968) 467–75, esp. 469–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

98. de la Motraye, Travels, I, 205-6.

99. de la Motraye, Travels, I, 207, states that Lesinski left around October 1, but the Theatrum Europaeum gives August 1 as the date; XV, col. 868.

100. Original text in and this translation by Ménage, ‘Serpent Column’, 173.

101. Ibid.

102. de la Motraye, Travels, I, 206.

103. Mansel stresses that the Turks were, indeed, the last to want harm to come to the column. He leaves the door open for Polish complicity, but also suggests lightning or rapid temperature change as possible culprits. ‘Istanbul’daki “Burmali sütun”’, 206-9.

104. Chishull, Edmund, Travels in Turkey and back again to England (London 1747) 40–1.Google Scholar

105. Tournefort, J. P., Relations d’un voyage du Levant (Paris 1717) I, 512.Google Scholar

106. For example, Slade, Adolphus, Records of Travel in Turkey and Greece, 1829–1831 (London 1854) 390 Google Scholar, who claimed that Mehmed II truncated the column ‘to show his contempt for the emblem of collective wisdom’.

107. Bourquelot, ‘La Colonne serpentine’, 47.

108. Lybyer, Albert Howe, The Government of the Ottoman Empire in the Time of Suleiman the Magnificent (Cambridge, Mass 1913) 240 n.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

109. Pococke, Richard, A Description of the East and some other Countries (London 1745) II, part 2, 131 Google Scholar. It is not clear what Pococke was referring to.

110. Casson, Preliminary Report, 14.