The Horses of St. Mark's

The Horses of St. Mark's:
A Story of Triumph in
Byzantium, Paris
and Venice

The British historian Charles Freeman is the author of several books about the ancient world, including AD 381: Heretics, Pagans, and the Christian State (2008, 2009).

His book about the horses of St Mark’s is based on ancient literary sources and archaeological objects – primarily, of course, the four horses of St Mark’s – as well as modern scholarship.

The text is divided into 19 chapters which cover different places and different topics. At the end of the book we find a brief bibliographical note and an index. Unfortunately, there are no notes with references.

The illustrations are numerous and well-chosen, but they are all in black-and-white, even if the original is in colour, and they are rather small: sometimes the original is a large painting which has been reduced so much that it is difficult or impossible to see the detail which Freeman wants the reader to see.

The porphyry statue of the four emperors – better known as the Tetrarchs – and the porphyry head of a Byzantine emperor (probably Justinian) are mentioned on pp. 88-89 and 93-94. Like the horses, these items were captured by the Venetians during the fourth crusade in Constantinople in 1204. Like the horses, they are still preserved in Venice, but there are no pictures of them in the book.

The horses are cast in copper, not bronze. They are slightly larger than real horses, and they are designed to be seen from below. When you read the book, you will find out why these facts are very important.

The purpose of the book is to follow the trail of the horses. They are ancient, so Freeman must go back to ancient

Greece

and ancient Rome in order to trace their origin, and the time frame must be extended all the way to the present day.

The horses have travelled several times, so Freeman must cover several locations (Constantinople, Venice and Paris) as well as several historical periods (the Byzantine Empire, the Venetian Republic and Napoleon’s Empire).

This book got some good reviews. The Spectator says it is “Entertaining and instructive,” while the Sunday Telegraph calls it “Lucid and engaging.”

I agree with this. It is interesting to see how the four horses came to be iconic figures which the leaders of several great powers wanted to capture in order to improve their own status.

Where are the horses from? And when were they cast? Freeman does not discuss these issues until we get to chapter 18 towards the end of the book. I am not going to reveal his answer here. You must read the book to find out. But I will say this: his conclusion and his line of argument are quite convincing.

[Sidebar: at this point I would like to play the devil’s advocate and ask a difficult question: where do the horses belong today? When Napoleon had the horses moved to Paris, the Venetians were outraged, and a few years later they got them back again. But what Napoleon did to Venice in 1798, was exactly what the Venetians had done to Constantinople in 1204. Should the Italian government hand over the horses to the government of

Turkey

? Freeman does not raise this question, so I do not know how he feels about it.]

This book is written by an experienced author who knows his topic very well. But even for an expert something can go wrong. I have to mention a few things which bother me:

Number 1

On page 17 Freeman claims the arch of Constantine was “built in his honour by the Roman Senate in AD 315.” On the next page there is a picture of the arch, and the caption reads: “The triumphal arch erected in Rome in 315 in celebration of Constantine’s conquest of the city in 312.”

The arch was dedicated in 315, but it was not built or erected in that year. It took a long time to build an arch. Maxentius probably began the construction of this arch while he was in control of Rome (306-312), but he was killed in the battle of the Milvian Bridge before the work was completed. When Constantine defeated Maxentius, he took over the arch and put his own name on it.

[For more information about this monument see Paul Stephenson, Constantine: Unconquered Emperor, Christian Victor (Quercus, 2009, 2011), pp. 151-158.]

Number 2

On page 22 Freeman describes the area where the Circus Maximus once was with the following words: “The site is completely deserted today, just an open space in the shape of an oval.”

The Roman circus – also known as a hippodrome – is not an oval; it is a rectangle where one short end has a slight curve, while the other short end is a semi-circle.

The site is not completely deserted. The seating is partially preserved in the south-east corner, where the semi-circle begins or ends (i.e. near the Aventine Hill).

Maxentius built a circus next to Via Appia, just south of Rome. It is smaller than the Circus Maximus, but better preserved.

Number 3

On page 129 Freeman refers to “the news in 1498 that Portuguese ships under Vasco da Gama had rounded the Cape of Good Hope.”

Vasco da Gama and his fleet left

Portugal

in July 1497, and they passed the Cape of Good Hope before the end of that year, but at the time nobody in Europe knew anything about it, since there was no instant communication then. The fleet arrived in

India

in May 1498 and began the journey back in August of that year. Vasco da Gama and his fleet did not arrive in

Portugal

until the second half of 1499. Only from that point in time could the news about his journey begin to spread across Europe.

These flaws are unfortunate, but they are minor, and they are the exception. In spite of them I have to say that The Horses of St Mark’s is a fascinating account about an intriguing combination of ancient and modern history.

* * *

Charles Freeman,
The Horses of St. Mark's:
A Story of Triumph in Byzantium, Paris and Venice,
(2004, 2005), 298 pages

* * *