Divinity Atlas

Sacred Correspondences
Rituals

Byzantine Imperial Coronation

Initiatory Rituals

Citation Formats

General Reference

APA Style

BibTeX

The making of a Byzantine emperor began as a military and civil act: acclamation by the army, the senate and the people, with the new ruler raised on a shield. From the seventh century the patriarch's crowning of the emperor, normally in Hagia Sophia, became the settled form, and the ceremony was read as expressing the concord of empire and priesthood rather than the subordination of one to the other. Anointing appears in the Byzantine sources only in the later empire, and when and why unction entered the rite is disputed among historians.

Facts
Disputed
Origin Period
from 600 2
Its own text says the patriarch's crowning of the emperor became the settled form from the seventh century, but it began earlier as military and civil acclamation, and it states directly that when and why anointing entered the rite is disputed among historians. 600 marks the century in which the crowning form settles, not a single agreed founding act.
Standing as a Comparative Category
Used, but its validity as a comparative category is disputed 1
The Byzantine imperial coronation, in which the patriarch of Constantinople placed the crown on the emperor, is read two different ways by historians of Byzantine political theology. Gilbert Dagron's Emperor and Priest: The Imperial Office in Byzantium (2003), built from close study of Byzantine imperial and canonical texts, records one reading that treats the patriarch's crowning as constitutive, the act that actually confers imperial legitimacy, against another that treats it as a liturgical recognition of an office the emperor already held by army and Senate acclamation, the older Roman mechanism of accession. A separate argument concerns when anointing with oil, unction, was added to the ceremony, complicated by the possibility that Western coronation practice, familiar to Byzantines especially after the Fourth Crusade's sack of Constantinople in 1204, influenced the Byzantine adoption of unction. The method is philological and historical, reading the surviving Byzantine coronation ordines and chronicle descriptions across centuries for when specific elements first appear. Because the texts describe the ceremony without stating its own theological rationale, both questions remain open to interpretation.
Attributions
Purpose
Understood to confer legitimacy on a new emperor by presenting his rule as sanctioned by God, the anointing and crowning performed by the Patriarch of Constantinople marking the transfer of authority as a sacred rather than a purely political act. 1
Practice
Who Performs It
Clergy or ordained officiants 1Tradition: Byzantine Christianity
Practitioner Detail
From roughly the seventh century, performed by the Patriarch of Constantinople, normally in Hagia Sophia 1Tradition: Byzantine Christianity
Frequency
Once, or at a turning point in a life 1
Liturgical and Scriptural Role
Combined Christian anointing with the acclamation of the people and the army, casting the emperor's authority as both divinely sanctioned and publicly affirmed rather than purely hereditary. 2
Form
Implements and Materials
Centers on the imperial crown and regalia, placed on the emperor by the patriarch or, in earlier centuries, sometimes by the emperor's own hand before the assembled clergy and people. 1
Meaning
Literal Meaning
Emperor and Priest: The Imperial Office in Byzantium places the coronation at the very outset of a reign, the anointing and crowning performed by the Patriarch of Constantinople that publicly confirmed a new emperor's legitimacy before his subjects. 1
Origins
Place of Origin
Constantinople 2
Historical Origin
Developed out of the acclamation ceremonies of the late Roman army and Senate, gradually absorbing ecclesiastical elements such as anointing and coronation by the Patriarch of Constantinople as the office of emperor took on an increasingly sacral character. 2
Text
Source Text
This history of the Byzantine liturgical tradition situates the emperor's coronation within the rite's wider development, describing how imperial anointing and acclamation by the people came to sit alongside the church's own liturgical ceremonial. 2
Status
Current Status
Ceased with the fall of Constantinople to the Ottomans in 1453, which brought the Byzantine Empire the ceremony had served to an end. 2
Learn More
From the Shield to the Crown

Making a Byzantine emperor began, in the empire's earlier centuries, as an unambiguously military and civil act rather than a religious one: the new ruler was acclaimed by the assembled army, senate and people, and in the oldest form of the ritual was physically raised aloft on a shield, a Roman military custom the Byzantines inherited and continued long after the empire had become thoroughly Christian in every other respect. Religious coronation entered gradually rather than displacing the older acclamation outright, and by the middle Byzantine period the two had fused into a single ceremony, with the shield raising, where it survived, understood as an archaic preliminary to the properly sacred act that followed.

From roughly the seventh century the patriarch of Constantinople's placing of the crown became the ceremony's defining religious moment, normally performed in the Hagia Sophia, the empire's great cathedral, and the developing rite drew Byzantine political theology, which held the emperor to be God's appointed representative on earth, isapostolos in some formulations, equal to the apostles, into direct ceremonial expression in a way that shaped Christian ideas of sacred kingship across the medieval world far beyond Byzantium's own borders.

Patriarch, Emperor and a Contested Balance

The patriarch's central role in crowning the emperor gave the church real, if carefully bounded, leverage within a political system that otherwise subordinated ecclesiastical to imperial authority in a relationship modern historians generally describe as caesaropapist, the emperor holding real authority over church governance even as the church alone could perform the rite that made him emperor in the fullest ceremonial and theological sense. Byzantine practice developed the technique of co-coronation, crowning an heir alongside the reigning emperor during the senior ruler's own lifetime, as a mechanism for securing dynastic succession in a system that otherwise had no fixed rule of hereditary succession and where a change of ruler could as easily come through usurpation, army revolt or palace conspiracy as through orderly inheritance, making the ceremony as much a political safeguard as a religious rite.

Empresses, where they reigned in their own right rather than only as consort, could also be crowned with variations on the same essential ceremony, a recognition Byzantine practice extended more readily in certain periods than most contemporary Western monarchies. The ceremony's theological claims and its ceremonial vocabulary, the raised platform, the acclamations, the specific regalia, influenced coronation practice across the Orthodox world and, at a greater remove, fed into medieval Western ideas of sacred kingship even where Rome and Constantinople increasingly diverged on the underlying theology of church and state after their eleventh century schism.

Cross-Tradition Connections

Belongs to Tradition

The patriarch's crowning of the emperor, normally in Hagia Sophia, became the settled Eastern Orthodox form.

Conducted By

The Byzantine emperor was crowned in Hagia Sophia by the patriarch of Constantinople.

Source The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 3rd revised editionF. L. Cross and E. A. Livingstone (eds.)
Source The Orthodox ChurchTimothy Ware (Kallistos Ware)

Contrasts With

Two Christian coronation traditions with different centres of gravity, one on unction, the other on acclamation and the patriarch's crowning.

Sources
1. Emperor and Priest: The Imperial Office in Byzantium
Gilbert Dagron, Cambridge University Press, 2003
2. The Byzantine Rite: A Short History
Robert F. Taft, The Liturgical Press, Collegeville, 1992View the Source
The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 3rd revised edition
F. L. Cross and E. A. Livingstone (eds.), Oxford University Press, 2005View the Source
The Orthodox Church
Timothy Ware (Kallistos Ware), Penguin Books, 1993View the Source
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share a thought.
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.

View At A Past Year

The atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.