This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Nika riots" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (December 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Nika riots
Site of the Hippodrome of Constantinople in Istanbul
Date	January 532 CE
Location	Constantinople
Caused by	See causes
Goals	Free demes' leaders, overthrow Justinian
Methods	Widespread rioting, property damage, murder, arson
Resulted in	Military action by imperial government leading to the escalation and militarization of the riots
Parties
Byzantine Empire Blue and Green demes
Lead figures
Justinian I Theodora Belisarius Mundus Narses Hypatius  Pompeius  Some senators
Casualties
Death(s)	30,000 rioters killed[1]

The Nika riots (Greek: Στάσις τοῦ Νίκα, romanized: Stásis toû Níka), Nika revolt or Nika sedition took place against Byzantine emperor Justinian I in Constantinople over the course of a week in 532 CE. They are often regarded as the most violent riots in the city's history, with nearly half of Constantinople being burned or destroyed and tens of thousands of people killed.

The Roman Empire had well-developed associations, known as demes,^[2] which supported the different factions (or teams) to which competitors in certain sporting events belonged, especially in chariot racing. There were initially four major factions in chariot racing, differentiated by the colour of the uniform in which they competed; the colours were also worn by their supporters. These were the Blues (Veneti), the Greens (Prasini), the Reds (Russati), and the Whites (Albati),^[3] although by the 6th century the only teams with any influence were the Blues and Greens. Emperor Justinian I was a supporter of the Blues, although his support for the faction abated as he entered the early years of his reign, taking a more neutral stance as he looked to limit the power of the factions.^[4] It may be no coincidence that when the emperor treated the factions more equally, they became more inclined to unite.^[4] What's more, Justinian's previous ardent support of the Blues made him seem biased and contributed to his waning control of the capital leading up to 532.^[5]

The demes had become a focus for various social and political issues for which the general Byzantine population lacked other forms of outlet.^[6] They combined aspects of street gangs and taking positions on claimants to the throne. They frequently tried to affect imperial policy by shouting political demands between races. On the other side, the emperor could appeal to the demes and legitimize their political actions in order to gain their support, and it strengthened the bond between the emperor and the people.^[7]

In 531 AD some members of the Blues and Greens were arrested by the city prefect Eudaimon for murder in connection with deaths during rioting after a chariot race.^[8] Relatively limited riots were not unknown at chariot races, similar to the football hooliganism that occasionally erupts after association football matches in modern times but with devastations such as arson and murder. The murderers were to be executed, and most of them were.^[9] However, on January 10, 532, two of them, a Blue and a Green, survived execution, as the scaffold broke. Hearing this, monks from the monastery of St Conon took the two partisans across to the church of St. Laurence, where they were put under surveillance by the prefect's troops.^[10]

Justinian was nervous: he was in the midst of negotiating with the Persians over peace in the east at the end of the Iberian War, and now he faced a potential crisis in his city. Therefore, he declared that a chariot race would be held on January 13 and commuted the sentences to imprisonment. The Blues and the Greens responded by demanding that the two men be pardoned. When Justinian ignored their pleas, both factions united under the phrase "Nika" or "conquer" and took to rioting (see Riots for more detail).^[11]

A 6th-century head of an emperor at the Getty Villa, thought to represent Justinian^{[according to whom?]}

A 6th-century head of an empress at the Castello Sforzesco, thought to represent Theodora

Justinian, along with his prominent officials John the Cappadocian and Tribonian, faced significant public disapproval due to the implementation of high tax rates,^[12] allegations of corruption against the latter two officials,^[12] and John's reported harsh treatment of debtors.^[12][13] Justinian and John also reduced expenditure on the civil service and took steps to combat corruption within the civil service.^[13] John was particularly unfavourable among the senatorial elites, who were hit hard by John's new taxation policy which targeted the wealthiest in society, likely leading to senatorial influence within the riots.^[14][4] Justinian also took steps to diminish the influence of both teams. This was perceived by the Greens as an oppressive action akin to the reforms implemented in the civil service, while the Blues felt a sense of betrayal.^[13] The Roman legal code was widely perceived as a marker that distinguished the civilised Romans from "barbarians". (Latin: barbari).^[15] The law code was also religiously important as the Romans were believed to be "chosen by God", it being a symbol of justice.^[15] As a result, the successful implementation of significant legal reforms by an emperor was viewed as lending legitimacy to their reign, while a lack of progress in this area was interpreted as a sign of divine displeasure.^[15] What had taken nine years for the Theodosian code took Justinian just thirteen months.^[15]

However, prior to the Nika riots of January 532, the pace of legal reforms had significantly slowed.^[15] Concurrently, Justinian was engaged in an unsuccessful war against the Persian Empire. While initial Byzantine victories at Dara in the spring of 530 and Satala in the summer of 530 had temporarily enhanced his legitimacy, the defeat at Callinicum in 531 and the deteriorating strategic situation had a detrimental effect on the emperor's reputation.^[15] The legal reforms were met with resistance from the aristocracy from their inception, as they eliminated the ability to utilize obscure laws and jurisprudence to evade unfavorable judgments.^[15] As a result, Justinian's decision to ignore the factions' pleas to grant amnesty to the two individuals arrested in connection with the riots further exacerbated the anger and resentment towards the emperor, causing the factions to become more violent in their methods, setting fires and indiscriminately attacking imperial guards. Another cause that might have added to the intensity of the riots was the fact that the power of these factions had gone unchecked for a long time under Justin, with Justinian then strengthening their rivalries by supporting a specific faction. Furthermore, the fact that activity towards the factions had largely been unrestricted for three decades prior during Justin's reign, meant the likelihood of them working together in common cause was far greater.^[4] Their almost unrestrained force, combined with any resentment they held against the Emperor, is believed to have led to the Nika riots of 532 C.E.^[16] Similarly, it was rare for the two factions to begin working together in this manner and for them to militarise, both of which added to the severity of the uprising.^[17]

The timeline provided for these riots is not exact, and it is derived from different sources, including one by John Malalas, and one by Procopius.^[18]

Initially, the riots were unlikely to have had the end goal of deposing Justinian, with the early days of the riots being a more extreme show of typical factional vandalism and hooliganism that was exacerbated by the emotional response to the escaped Blue and Green criminals, with the aim to have the arrested rioters released. Usually, riots were more "conservative in nature" and were used to keep the emperor accountable and make him aware of the will of the people. However, in the case of the Nika riots, the populace was not mollified by Justinian's empty promises of change and were likely fueled by opportunistic senatorial intervention to shift focus to Justinian's deposition.^[5][14] These riots shared common characteristics with others during this period. However, it stands out due to the extent of militarisation. Common behaviour prior to this riot included the throwing of stones, which had been banned by Justinian in his anti-rioting decree of 527.^[19]

On January 13, 532, an angry crowd arrived at the Hippodrome for the races.^[10] The Hippodrome was next to the palace complex, so Justinian could preside over the races from the safety of his box in the palace. From the start, the crowd hurled insults at Justinian. By the end of the day, at race 22, the partisan chants had changed from "Blue" or "Green" to a unified Nίκα ("Nika", meaning "Win!", "Victory!" or "Conquer!"), and the crowds broke out and began to assault the palace. The riot lasted for a week. Fires started during the tumult destroyed much of the city, including the city's foremost church, the Hagia Sophia (which Justinian would later rebuild).

It is believed that on January 14, the second day of the riots, Justinian, rather than negotiating political concessions, offered to host more races and games in an attempt to appease the rioters.^[14] This did little to halt the violence however, with the crowd ignoring his pleas for a suspension of the hostilities.^[18] In the past, emperors had cancelled races on account of them exacerbating tensions and worsening factional violence.^[4]

The rioters demanded that Justinian dismiss the prefect John the Cappadocian and the quaestor Tribonian. To de-escalate the situation, Justinian apologized and accepted their demands. However, many in the crowd did not accept his apology.^[5] They then declared a new emperor, Hypatius, a nephew of former Emperor Anastasius I.^[20] Different sources say that Hypatius may have had an arrangement with Justinian to bring the crowd into the hippodrome. But according to some traditions, he was incorrectly told that Justinian had left the palace and enjoyed being proclaimed emperor.^[5] Procopius writes that the factions carried Hypatius away from his home and called him emperor against his and his wife's wishes.^[21]

Justinian considered fleeing, but his wife Theodora is said to have dissuaded him, saying, "Those who have worn the crown should never survive its loss. Never will I see the day when I am not saluted as empress."^[22] She is also credited, by Procopius, with adding, "[W]ho is born into the light of day must sooner or later die; and how could an Emperor ever allow himself to be a fugitive."^[9] Although an escape route across the sea lay open for the emperor, Theodora insisted that she would stay in the city, quoting an ancient saying, "Royalty is a fine burial shroud," or perhaps, "[the royal colour] Purple makes a fine winding sheet.".^[23] However, Theodora's speech as quoted by Procopius can be viewed as representative of the discussions which took place in the palace rather than literal.^[24]

Justinian created a plan that involved the eunuch Narses and the generals Belisarius and Mundus. Carrying a bag of gold given to him by Justinian, the slightly built eunuch entered the Hippodrome alone and unarmed. Narses went directly to the Blues' section, where he approached the important Blues and reminded them that Justinian supported them over the Greens. He distributed the gold and the Blue leaders spoke quietly with each other and then addressed their followers. In the middle of Hypatius' coronation, the pro-Justinianic Blues separated off, leading the Greens to hurl stones against them. Then, the troops led by Belisarius, Mundus and Constantiolus stormed into the Hippodrome, with Belisarius capturing Hypatius and Pompeius while Mundus killed any remaining people indiscriminately, whether they were Blues or Greens.^[10][9]

According to the account of Procopius, around 30,000 people were killed, although many likely died as result of trampling in the chaos of the riot rather than at the hands of the soldiers.^[1][14] According to Procopius, Hypatius and Pompeius maintained their innocence and argued that their detainment was an injustice.^[25] Despite this Justinian had Hypatius and Pompeius executed and exiled the senators who had supported the riot.^[26] He also confiscated the properties of senators that stood against him.^[27] Although, he later granted titles and land to Hypatius' and Pompeius' children,^[28] and some of the officials Justinian dismissed in response to the demands of the rioters, like John the Cappadocian were reinstated to their prior positions.^[16]

He then rebuilt Constantinople and the Hagia Sophia. However, the crushing of the Nika riots did not end the factions' violence. Indeed, in 565, in the last year of Justinian's reign, fighting became so bad again that the city prefect Julian had to purge the factions to restore peace.^[29]

The causes and the accounts of the riots are debated. The most common view is that Justinian's miscommunication, indecisiveness and inconsistency with the circus factions caused and escalated the riots.^[5][30] But it has been posited that had his predecessors shown the same lack of consistency, they too could have been subjected to a "Nika" riot.^[5] It is the view of Mischa Meier that Justinian may have intentionally provoked the riots so that his political rivals within the senate, like Hypatius may reveal themselves to him.^[19] However, Rene Pfeilschifter rejects this argument as radical.^[19] Clemens Koehn argues that Justinian not only considered fleeing, but may have left Constantinople for a period of time, since some sources, such as the Chronicon Paschale, state Hypatius was told by a doctor within the palace that Justinian had left.^[19] The reason for his alleged departure is contested; Theophanes believes it was due to panic, whereas Westbrook suggests Justinian hoped to get fresh troops garrisoned in Thrace.^[19]

Most scholars believe that the timeline provided is derived from two diverging traditions, including one by John Malalas and one by Procopius.^[18] Procopius provides an insider perspective from the palace while Malalas recounts the Nika riots as an outsider of the events in the city.^[31] Procopius, as a legal advisor to Belisarius, may have enhanced Belisarius' role.^[32]

Some believe that a number of the senators saw this as an opportunity to overthrow Justinian, as they were opposed to his new taxes and his lack of support for the nobility.^{[citation needed]}

• Diehl, Charles (1972). Theodora, Empress of Byzantium. Frederick Ungar Publishing, Inc. ISBN 0-8044-1230-8. Popular account based on the author's extensive scholarly research.
• Weir, William (2004). 50 Battles That Changed the World: The Conflicts That Most Influenced the Course of History. Savage, Md: Barnes and Noble Books. ISBN 0-7607-6609-6.

• Meier, William N. (2003). "Die Inszenierung einer Katastrophe: Justinian und der Nika-Aufstand". Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik (in German). 142 (142): 273–300. JSTOR 20191600.

• Procopius, "Justinian Suppresses the Nika Revolt, 532", from the Internet Medieval Sourcebook.
• J. B. Bury, "The Nika Revolt", chapter XV part 5 from History of the Later Roman Empire (1923).
• James Grout: "The Nika Riot", part of the Encyclopædia Romana
• Samuel Vancea: "Justinian and the Nike Riots" Archived 2012-06-19 at the Wayback Machine, published in Clio History Journal