Castration as a consequence of the strengthening of the dynastic principle

The paper discusses examples of corporal mutilation that accompanied intra-dynastic conflicts or clashes with real or potential pretenders to the imperial throne. Castration was a known but rarely applied measure in the political conflicts of the 7th and 8th century. Hence the two consecutive cases of castration of all sons of the deposed emperor Michael I Rhangabe (813) and the assassinated emperor Leo V the Armenian (820) deviated from the previous Byzantine practice. The paper establishes that in these cases the choice of castration as the most effective means of ensuring the future political disqualification of the princes and their families was a result of the strengthening dynastic principle, which was particularly noticeable in the cases of the descendents of Constantine V from his third marriage. It also highlights that castration was never used on the deposed emperor autokrator, but only on the bearers of imperial dignities (co-emperors) or simply princes with no imperial title. In examples where castration was used to ensure political disqualification, it was not a sanction for an individual wrongdoing (in other words, castration was not a penalty prescribed for a specific transgression); if these cases were a matter of punishment at all, the penalty was meant to sanction the entire bloodline () rather than the (innocent) individual. Castration was a milder form of punishment compared to other forms of physical mutilation (severing of the nose, tongue or ears; blinding). Due to the ambivalent attitude of the Byzantine society towards eunuchs, castration did not necessarily lead to social marginalization. Hence, it was applied more frequently during the reign of the Macedonian dynasty, but prominent castrates were incorporated into the official hierarchy as members of an order of eunuchs ( ??~? ).