The Byzantine Aristocracy and its Military Function (Variorum Collected Studies) [1 ed.] 9780754659020, 9781138375079, 075465902X

Citation preview

Also in the Variorum Collected Studies Series:

JAMES HOWARD-JOHNSTON

East Rome, Sasanian Persia and the End of Antiquity Historiographical and Historical Studies

NICOLAS OIKONOMIDES (Ed. Elizabeth Zachariadou) Society, Culture and Politics in Byzantium

DAVID JACOBY

Commercial Exchange Across the Mediterranean Byzantium, the Crusader Levant, Egypt and Italy

NICOLAS OIKONOMIDES (Ed. Elizabeth Zachariadou) Social and Economic Life in Byzantium

ATHANASIOS MARKOPOULOS

History and Literature of Byzantium in the 9th—10th Centuries

PAUL SPECK

Understanding Byzantium Studies in Byzantine Historical Sources

ANTHONY BRYER (with David Winfield, Selina Ballance, and Jane Isaac) The Post-Byzantine Monuments of the Pontos A Source Book

ALICE-MARY TALBOT

Women and Religious Life in Byzantium

ROBERT F. TAFT

Divine Liturgies - Human Problems in Byzantium, Armenia, Syria and Palestine

MILTON V. ANASTOS

Aspects of the Mind of Byzantium Political Theory, Theology, and Ecclesiastical Relations with the See of Rome

JEAN-MICHEL SPIESER

Urban and Religious Spaces in Late Antiquity and Early Byzantium

DAVID JACOBY

Byzantium, Latin Romania and the Mediterranean

VARIORUM COLLECTED STUDIES SERIES

The Byzantine Aristocracy and its Military Function

First published 2006 by Ashgate Publishing 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxfordshire OX14 4RN 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

First issued in paperback 2018 This edition © 2006 by Jean-Claude Cheynet Jean-Claude Cheynet has asserted his moral right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as the author of this work. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Cheynet, Jean-Claude The Byzantine aristocracy and its military function. — (Variorum collected studies series) 1. Aristocracy (Social class) — Byzantine Empire 2. Aristocracy (Political science) — Byzantine Empire 3. Byzantine Empire — Armed Forces — Officers 4. Byzantine Empire — History 5. Byzantine Empire — History, Military I.Title 949.5'02 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Cheynet, Jean-Claude. The Byzantine aristocracy and its military function / by Jean-Claude Cheynet. p. cm. - (Variorum collected studies series ; CS859) Includes index. 1. Byzantine Empire - History, Military - 527-1081. 2. Byzantine Empire History, Military — 1081—1453. 3. Aristocracy (Political science) — Byzantine Empire. I. Title. II. Series: Collected studies ; CS859. DF543.C47 2006 949.5'02-dc22 VARIORUM COLLECTED STUDIES SERIES CS859 ISBN 978-0-7546-5902-0 (hbk) ISBN 978-1-138-37507-9 (pbk)

2006006939

Jean-Claude Cheynet

The Byzantine Aristocracy and its Military Function

O Routledge

§^^ Taylor & Francis Group LONDON AND NEW YORK

CONTENTS Introduction Acknowledgements

vii—xii xiii

THE ARISTOCRACY IN BYZANTINE SOCIETY I

The Byzantine aristocracy (8th—13th centuries) English translation of (Uaristocratic by^antine (VJIIe-XIIIe siecle) \ Journal des Savants. Paris, July-December 2000, pp. 281-322

II

The Byzantine aristocracy in the 10th—12th centuries: a review of the book by A. Kazhdan and S. Ronchey English translation of (^LJaristocra^ia bi^antina nei secoli X—XII: aproposito dellibro diA. Ka^hdan e S. Ronchey', Rivista Storica Italiana CXIII,fasc. 2. Turin, 2001, pp. 413^40

1—43

1—28

III

Aristocratic anthroponimy in Byzantium English translation of 'L.'anthroponyme aristocratique a By^ance', ^Janthroponymie, document de rhistoire sociale des mondes mediterraneens medievaux\ ed. M. Bourin, J.-M. Martin andF. Menant. Rome: Ecole franc^aise de Rome, 1996,pp. 267-294

1—30

IV

Aristocracy and inheritance (llth-13th Centuries)

1-35

English translation of ^Aristocratic et heritage (Xle—XIIIe s.)', La transmission dupatrimoine, ed. G. Dagron and]. Beaucamp (—Travaux et Memoires. Monographies 11). Paris: De Boccard, 1998, pp. 53-80

V

Fortune et puissance de 1'aristocratie (Xe—Xlle siecle) Hommes et Richesses dans lEmpire by^antin II, ed. V. Kravari, J. Lefort andC. Morris son. Paris: Editions P. Lethielleux, 1991

VI

Devaluation des dignites et devaluation monetaire dans la seconde moitie du Xle siecle By^antion 53. Brussels, 1983

199—214

453—477

CONTENTS

vi

THE ARISTOCRACY AND THE BYZANTINE ARMY VII

VIII

IX

Official power and non-official power

Fifty Years of Prosopography: The Later }Loman Empire, Byzantium and Beyond (^Proceedings of the British Academy 118). ed. A. Cameron. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003

Basil II and Asia Minor

Byzantium in the Year 1000, ed. by P. Magdalino. Leiden, E.J. Brill, 2003, pp. 71-108

137—151

1-38

Philadelphia un quart de siecle de dissidence, 1182-1206

39-54

X

La politique militaire byzantine de Basile II a Alexis Comnene ZRVI29-30. Beograd, 1991

61—74

XI

Du stratege de theme au due: chronologic de 1'evolution au cours du Xle siecle

181-194

XII

Les effectifs de 1'armee byzantine aux Xe—Xlle s.

319—335

XIII

Mantzikert: un desastre militaire? By^antion 50. Brussels, 1980

410-438

XIV

La resistance aux Turcs en Asie Mineure entre Mantzikert et la Premiere Croisade

Phi ladelp hie et autres etudes. By^antina Sorbonensia IV. Paris, 1984

Travaux etMemoires 9. Paris, 1985

Cahiers de Civilisation Medievale, 38,fasc. 4. 1995

Eupsychia: Melanges Offerts a He/me ^Ahrweiler. Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne, 1998

Addenda and Corrigenda Index

131—147

1-4

1-18

This volume contains xiv + 364 pages

INTRODUCTION During the Middle Ages (seventh to fifteenth centuries) the aristocracy formed the social framework of the Byzantine Empire. Its history is closely associated with that of the State. Defining the concept is difficult however, and this is confirmed by the absence of precise vocabulary, except in its highest sphere where the emperor was almost systematically chosen from within its ranks. On the other hand the lowest ranks of aristocrats can barely be distinguished from the humbler echelons of the civil service in Constantinople or from wealthy merchants in the various cities. The Byzantine aristocracy can best be defined by services rendered to the State, yet in the Komnenian period the higher ranks were more than ever accessible by birth. For all these centuries, however, it would be unwise to formulate too strict an opposition between obtaining a position through capability or because of one's birth. Birth is a factor since the State needed officials who were thoroughly fitted for the task. The influence of parents, together with the availability of education in the capital, enabled their offspring to seek positions which opened the doors of the aristocracy for them, thus creating a de facto heredity. The aristocracy however was not a closed caste, and newcomers who showed military or intellectual talent ended up in positions which thereby made them members of the Senate. Since the primordial duty of the State was to defend the chosen people of God, the army was the main ladder for social ascent. Even if the officer corps, as well as other groups in the service of the basileus, was first and foremost drawn from the families of the generals (strategoi) in post, and hence were of 'good family', novi homines - new men - could to various degrees gain access to the officer class. Episodes of fierce conflict often helped fresh aristocratic families to emerge. This can clearly be seen in Asia Minor from the eighth to the ninth centuries and, at the turning point of the tenth and eleventh centuries, in the Balkans. The most significant advances in research have come from a more systematic exploitation of sigillographic evidence. More Byzantine seals, dated with greater accuracy, have been published, although their full impact will only be measured with the publication of the Byzantine prosopography for the years 867—1261. The chapters selected for this volume can conveniently be divided into two groups, one dealing with the general characteristics of the aristocracy, the other with its military role.

viii

INTRODUCTION

In order to secure a permanent place for one's family in the higher reaches of the aristocracy, it was necessary to glorify one's genos or descent, which between the eighth and the eleventh centuries often meant allowing it to be identified by a name which could be handed down from one generation to the next. Maintaining one's rank also presupposed the transmission of property and the cultivation of useful contacts. The wealth of the elites, in the provinces as well as in the capital, came from vast landed estates, part of which had been received as gifts from the emperor. These properties however were divided equally between children, without damaging the interests of daughters it seems. Byzantine inheritance law was not based on primogeniture. Thus in each generation it was necessary to compensate a weakening of personal estate and to trust in imperial generosity. The sovereign had thus at his disposition the means of controlling these powerful aristocrats (chapters IV and V). To obtain his favour the most effective method was to present a family member at court, and if possible have him accepted in the inner circle of the emperor's advisors. Even if such positions were seldom stable, they were the means of appropriating part of the State's resources, granted as rogai linked to offices or ranks conferred by the basileus. When, in the eleventh century, increasing monetary devaluation accelerated to the point where it was perceptible to all concerned, it brought about the corresponding devaluation of rogai. The recipients of these state benefits made up for their loss by claiming and progressively receiving higher state offices, thereby safeguarding their 'purchasing power' (chapter VI). Aristocratic power above all showed itself in the army, but in several different ways. Alongside the natural authority of officers over their men, we find the social pre-eminence of the the major landowners, as the officers usually were, in relation to their peasants, from among whom the rank and file soldiers were recruited (chapter VII). At times the emperor himself felt threatened by their overweaning power and Basil II, after repulsing two formidable rebellions led by Skleros and Phocas, did his utmost to recover control of Asia Minor, as much with a foreign policy aim of curbing the appetites of his eastern neighbours, who had profited from the internal dissensions of the Empire to extend their authority, as on the domestic front, when he confiscated the possessions of the Maleinos and the Phocas families (chapter VIII). At the end of the twelfth century, the provincial aristocracy, profiting from the general economic upsurge and the concentration of wealth in the cities, was tempted by local insurrections, particularly at Philadelphia, notwithstanding the presence there of the military headquarters of the dux of the Thrakesioi (chapter IX). The Empire's military policy derives from the great soldier emperors, the last of whom, Basil II, was an inhibiting reference for his successors (chapter X). By then the army in the tagmata had definitely won the day over that of the themes (chapter XI). Scholars still discuss the numerical strength of the Byzantine army, since consideration of the theoretical number of units, if they are estimated as

INTRODUCTION

ix

being in any way complete, leads to an inflated calculation of the military forces in the field. Attentive reading of the narrative sources and remarks drawn from the taktika invite a contrary assessment, which is doubtless the correct interpretation (chapter XII). The failure of this army when facing the Turks has led writers to stress its mediocre fighting skills, as a result supposedly of the lack of interest shown towards it by rulers between 1025 and 1078, who are abusively described as civilians. Analysis of the battle engaged by Romanos IV Diogenes at Manzikert suggests that this weakening of military qualities, even allowing for some indiscipline in the ranks and the poor equipment of some regiments, is not the real reason for the emperor's failure nor an explanation for the spectacular advance of the Turks, who benefited from the intense civil unrest after Romanos IV was freed by the Sultan (chapter XIII). Furthermore the rapidity of the Turkish hordes, in itself undeniable, has surely been overestimated, since traces of Byzantine presence can be found in western Asia Minor in the first decade of Alexos Komnenos' reign (chapter XIV). JEAN-CLAUDE CHEYNET Paris January 2006

INTRODUCTION L'aristocratie byzantine a constitue 1'armature sociale de 1'Empire byzantin durant le Moyen Age (Vlle-XVe s.). Son histoire se confond done avec celle de 1'Etat. Delimiter ses contours reste un exercice difficile, comme en temoigne 1'absence d'un vocabulaire precis, sauf au sommet ou elle cotoie 1'empereur qui est presque systematiquement issu de ses rangs. En revanche, les aristocrates les plus modestes se distinguent mal des fonctionnaires subalternes des bureaux de la capitale ou des riches marchands des villes. Elle se definit le mieux par le service qu'elle rend a 1'Etat, mais a 1'epoque des Comnenes la naissance 1'emporte desormais plus qu'auparavant pour definir la plus haute strate de la societe. Mais rappelons qu'a toute epoque, la naissance entre en ligne de compte puisque 1'Etat a besoin de gens eduques. L'opposition entre le merite et la naissance est done en fait peu marquee, puisque 1'influence des parents permet aux enfants de briguer des fonctions qui les integrent a leur tour a 1'aristocratie, creant une heredite de fait. Ce n'est toutefois pas une caste fermee, et les nouveaux venus qui ont quelque talent militaire ou intellectuel finis sent par obtenir les dignites qui ouvrent la porte du Senat. Comme la premiere fonction de 1'Etat est d'assurer la defense du peuple elu de Dieu, c'est 1'armee qui constitue le premier instrument de promotion sociale. Si le corps des officiers, comme tous les autres groupes servant le basileus, est d'abord forme des parents des strateges en place, et done d'heritiers de bonne famille, il reste ouvert aux hommes nouveaux a des degres divers selon les necessites du moment. Les episodes de guerres intenses favorisent sans aucun doute 1'emergence de nouvelles families aristocratiques, car c'est par 1'armee que se fondent les grandes lignees durables. L'Asie Mineure des VHIe-IXe siecles 1'atteste clairement comme les Balkans au tournant des Xe-XIe siecles. Les progres de la recherche les plus notables sont venus de 1'utilisation plus systematique de la sigillographie, car les plombs byzantins sont mieux dates, davantage publics, meme s'il faudra attendre la publication de la prosopographie systematique des annees 867-1261 pour en mesurer tout 1'impact. Les chapitres retenus dans ce volume se divisent en deux groupes et se rapportent a 1'etude des traits generaux de 1'aristocratie (chapitres I et II) et a son role dans 1'armee. Le maintien des families au sommet de 1'aristocratie impliquait une glorification dugenos, qui se marqua de plus en plus souvent par son identification par un nom

xi

INTRODUCTION

transmissible, qui se precisa entre les Vllle et Xle s. (chapitre III). Cette conservation du rang supposait egalement la transmission des biens et du reseau d'influence. L'heritage des grands domaines — dont une partie venait de donations imperiales, assurait une base fonciere aux elites provinciales aussi bien qu'aux constantinopolitaines, mais il leur etait necessaire de compenser le partage egalitaire impose par le droit byzantin, qui ne connaissait pas de droit d'ainesse, et qui, semble-t-il, ne defavorisait pas les filles. Le patrimoine affaibli a chaque generation ne pouvait etre reconstitue qu'avec 1'aide de 1'empereur, ce qui donnait au souverain un vrai levier pour le controle de ces magnats (chapitres IV et V). Pour obtenir des faveurs, rien ne valait mieux que d'introduire un parent a la cour, et, si possible, de le pousser jusqu'a lui faire integrer le cercle restreint des conseillers imperiaux. Meme si de telles positions etait instables, elles constituaient le moyen de s'approprier une partie des ressources de 1'Etat, recues sous forme des rogai attachees aux fonctions et dignites octroyees par le basileus. Lorsque, au cours du Xle siecle, la devaluation monetaire s'accentua et s'accelera au point d'etre perceptible a tous, elle entraina celle des rogai. Les beneficiaires de ces traitements d'Etat compenserent cette perte de revenus en reclamant et obtenant des dignites de plus en plus elevees afin de sauvegarder leur « pouvoir d'achat» (chapitre VI). Le pouvoir de 1'aristocratie se manifestait tout particulierement au sein de I'armee sous des formes diverses. A I'autorite naturelle des officiers sur leurs homines s'ajoutait la preeminence sociale des grands proprietaires, qu'ils etaient en regie generale, sur leurs paysans, parmi lesquels etaient recrutes les soldats (chapitre VII) A 1'occasion, 1'empereur etait menace par cette puissance et Basile II, apres avoir repousse les deux redoutables rebellions de Skleros et de Phocas, s'etait efforce de reprendre le controle de 1'Asie Mineure, tant du point de vue exterieur en refrenant les appetits des voisins orientaux, qui avaient profite des gueres civiles pour etendre leurs Etats, que sur le plan interne, en confisquant les biens des Maleinoi et des Phocas (chapitre VIII). A la fin du Xlle siecle, 1'aristocratie provinciale, qui beneficiait de 1'essor economique general et de 1'enrichissement des villes, fut tentee par des dissidences locales, notamment a Philadelphie, pourtant siege du due des Thracesiens (chapitre IX). La politique militaire de 1'Empire est heritee des grands empereurs soldats, dont le dernier fut Basile II qui constitua une reference paralysante pour ses successeurs (chapitre X). L'armee des tagmata avait alors definitivement prevalu sur celle des themata (chapitre XI). Les savants debattent des effectifs de I'armee byzantine, car un regard sur le nombre theorique d'unites, qu'on suppose completes, conduit a une estimation elevee de la masse des combattants alors qu'une lecture attentive des sources narratives et les observations tirees des Taktika invitent a 1'inverse, sans doute a plus juste titre (chapitre XII). L'echec de cette armee face aux Turcs a fait conclure a sa mediocre valeur au combat, en raison du desinteret suppose des empereurs regnant entre 1025 et 1078, qualifies abusivement de civils.

INTRODUCTION

xii

L'analyse de la bataille livree par Remain IV Diogene a Mantzikert suggere que cet affaiblissement des qualites militaires, meme si on peut conceder une certaine indiscipline des troupes et le sous-equipement de quelques-uns des regiments, ne constitue pas la vraie raison de 1'echec de 1'empereur, ni 1'explication de 1'avance spectaculaire des Turcs qui ont profite des guerres civiles acharnees entre pretendants au trone dont la premiere fut provoquee par la liberation de Remain IV par le sultan (chapitre XIII). Au reste, la rapidite — incontestable — de 1'avance des bandes turques a sans doute etc surestimee car on repere encore les traces de la presence byzantine a 1'ouest de 1'Asie Mineure dans la premiere decennie du regne d'Alexis Comnene (chapitre XIV). JEAN-CLAUDE CHEYNET Pans January 2006

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Grateful acknowledgement is made to the following institutions and publishers for their kind permission to reproduce the papers included in this volume: Academic des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, Paris (I); Rivista Storica Italiana, Turin (II); Ecole francaise de Rome (III); Ed. De Boccard et Centre d'histoire et de civilisation de Byzance, Paris (IV, X); Ed. P. Lethielleux, Paris (V); Reme By^antion, Brussels (VI, XIII); The British Academy and Oxford University Press, London (VII); Ed. Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden (VIII); Publications de la Sorbonne, Paris (IX, XIV); Institut d'etudes byzantines de 1'Academic serbe des Sciences et des Arts, Beograd (X); Centre d'etudes superieures de civilisation medievale, Poitiers (XII).

PUBLISHER'S NOTE The articles in this volume, as in all others in the Variorum Collected Studies Series, have not been given a new, continuous pagination. In order to avoid confusion, and to facilitate their use where these same studies have been referred to elsewhere, the original pagination has been maintained wherever possible. Each article has been given a Roman number in order of appearance, as listed in the Contents. This number is repeated on each page and is quoted in the index entries. Corrections noted in the Addenda and Corrigenda have been marked by an asterisk in the margin corresponding to the relevant text to be amended.

I The Byzantine Aristocracy (8th-13th Centuries)* The notion of aristocracy is not easily pinned down when applied to the Byzantine world, as M. Angold argued in the introduction to the collective work on the Byzantine aristocracy which he edited. That of elites, an even wider concept, is no more helpful in defining the nature of this aristocracy. This is why historians of the Byzantine Empire have portrayed this group in so many different ways. Our understanding of the economic development of Byzantium in the Middle Ages has moreover changed over the last fifty years. Previously a sort of rural golden age in the seventh and eighth centuries was imagined, and consequently an inevitable decline of the Empire during which the elites played the role of exploiters of the farming population, thereby conducting the State to powerlessness and decline.1 Thirty years ago, one of the most remarkable advocates of this pessimistic view, G. Ostrogorsky, proposed a synthesis of the characteristics of this aristocracy, the outcome of his previous researches, which has had a lasting influence on the historiography.2 At the time, however, certain scholars, such as P. Lemerle, A. Holweg and D. Jacoby, contested his viewpoints, and since then numerous works have modified the perspectives which he opened; the present writer therefore offers an update, centred mainly on the eighth to the thirteenth centuries, but without forgetting that the developments of this dominant group need to be seen in the perspective of a millennium of history. Three themes illustrate the field of this research: the hereditary or at least the transmissible character of social position by the privilege of birth; the establishment and the forms taken by the fortune of the elites; and lastly the question of the usurpation of State prerogatives.

* Many thanks to J. Lefort for kindly re-reading this text and for some remarks. For an analysis of this new perception of rural history, cf. J. Lefort, "Rural Economy and Social Relations in the Countryside", DOP 47 (1993) 101-113. 2 Ostrogorsky, Aristocracy, 1-32. It should be noted that much of this article is devoted to the final century of Byzantium, at a point in time when the situation had decisively changed in relation to previous centuries. 1

I 2

THE BYZANTINE

ARISTOCRACY

THE ROLE PLAYED BY BIRTH3 R. Guilland has provided several contributions to the study of the "Byzantine nobility",4 an expression which supposes the existence of a ruling class founding its rights upon birth and the transmission of privileges5. For Byzantinists, such a position is original, in so far as no specific group, even among the senators, was ever distinguished by right within Byzantine society. In the proto-Byzantine period, the Senate of Constantinople, formed on the Roman model, constituted a fairly numerous class, composed of around two thousand families, and depending to a large extent on the emperor's will.6 This means of recruitment explains the constant renewal of the proto-Byzantine aristocracy. Few families succeeded in maintaining themselves at the highest level for more than three generations. The Apions from Egypt are no exception, enjoying scarcely more than a century of pre-eminence. Membership of the Senate meant for its beneficiaries certain privileges of which by no means the least was dispensation from costly liturgies, but did not however definitively break their links with their city of origin. The Senate did not disappear in the turmoil of the seventh century. The emperors maintained their control over recruitment, founded on the high-ranking positions and responsibilities which they granted. In the 3 Debates on the nature of Byzantine aristocracy go back a long way and the literature on the subject is abundant. Amongst the more significant contributions, the collective work, Byzantine Aristocracy, in particular the introduction by the editor, M. Angold, and most recently Kazhdan - Ronchey, Aristocra^ia, 67-108, should be mentioned. 4 These articles have been collected in R. Guilland, Kecherches sur les institutions by^antines I (Amsterdam, 1967) 15-150. Relevant contributions are to be found by title: "La noblesse de race a Byzance; La collation et la perte ou la decheance des titres nobiliaires a Byzance; La transmission hereditaire des titres nobiliaires a Byzance". 5 The use of the term nobility is sometimes fairly lax. For example in a recent work K. F. Werner (Naissance de la noblesse [Paris, 1998]) refers to the aristocracy resulting from the intermarriage of Gallo-Roman senators and the close companions of Germanic kings as nobility. 6 For the Senate the reference work is A. Christophilopoulou, CH ovvK\r]W^ ei£ w Bv^avnvov Kpdw6p(os) J3ap) rcov ^(jjjji^afycov 'Pwfjifatywv 66 M€\ia((j)r]v6s. Whoever received a document from Melissenos, including his Turkish allies, might have believed in its authenticity, unless they were well informed of affairs in the capital. Narrative sources sometimes inform us that usurpers distributed among their accomplices the major offices of state. The problem, then, is to recognize the latter, since in principle the pretender to the throne respected the legal forms. Again, there is hardly any difficulty with the narrative sources. We know, for example, that Bardas Skleros had made Pegasios a count of Opsikion,11 and that Nikephoros Bryennios made his brother domestikos of the schools.12 But with the seals the situation is different, since we do not know the context in which they were struck. In several rare cases it is possible to suggest that a seal was not issued by an official authority. The great majority of preserved seals are well engraved, despite the difficulty of such work on so small an object and the necessity of engraving the letters of the inscription backwards so that they appear properly on the seal. The late Nicolas Oikonomides explained the reasons for this generally high quality.13 When an official was appointed to a province he no doubt departed with a boulloterion (die), on which had been engraved his title or titles as well as his new function. However, officials who were promoted to new titles or functions also possessed boulloteria of high quality. Oikonomides suggested that coin engravers accompanied the armies, thus eliminating the need to suppose that new boulloteria were sent out from the capital. While I see no need to reject this solution, since the imperial decrees of promotion were sent out from the capital, it would appear likely that engravers were also found outside Constantinople. Nevertheless, it has been noted that the engraving on a number of seals is of quite mediocre quality, obviously not the work of experts. But it is not necessary to conclude that this is a matter of the unauthorized fabrication of false seals. In the 10

Zacos-Veglery, no. 99. There is another well-preserved example in the museum in Istanbul. Skylitzes, p. 323. 12 Nicephori Bryennii historiarum libri quattuor, ed. and tr. P. Gautier (CFHB, series Bruxellensis, 9; Brussels, 1975), p. 269. 13 N. Oikonomides, 'On sigillographic epigraphy', SBS 6 (1999), 37-42. 11

VII OFFICIAL POWER AND NON-OFFICIAL POWER

143

same article Oikonomides gave possible reasons for poor quality in a boulloterion: the unexpected need for replacement due to loss or the presence of a strategos in an isolated garrison, for example. On the other hand, we find several seals of mediocre quality belonging to well-known military figures at the end of the eleventh century: Basil Apokapes, protoproedros and doux of Edessa (several examples); Philaretos Brachamios, kouropalates and domestikos of the schools; Thatoul, archon of the archontes. To these can be added the seal of the metropolitan of Edessa, Niketas the Prophet, who for the obverse reused a plate from an old boulloterion.14 But there are other examples from regions which indisputably belonged to the empire at the time, such as the seal of Theodore Hagiozacharites, protospatharios and strategos of the Bucellarioi, of which the obverse is well engraved but without doubt salvaged from another boulloterion, and also that of Demetrius, strategos of the Aegean, when he was promoted to protospatharios.,15 For the rest, we would have to make a list of all seals struck with improvised means which reflect particular situations and which can in certain cases be interpreted. For instance, we can be certain that Demetrius, promoted while he still held the function of strategos of the Aegean, modified his seal with the help of local means. The cases of Basil Apokapes and Philaretos Brachamios can also be explained. These two strategoi, who had long careers behind them, did not recognize the legitimacy of Michael VII and governed parts of the duchies of Antioch and Edessa in their own names. For the engraving of their seals, at least so long as they were rebels, they could not have depended on engravers in the capital or attached to the official army. On the other hand, the case of Theodore Hagiozacharites is very uncertain. It might be that he had lost his boulloterion, or that he had been promoted on the spot, like Demetrius. But it must be remembered that in 976 Theodore and his brother Niketas took part in the revolt of Bardas Skleros against Basil II, and then sided with the protovestiarios Leo, who commanded the imperial troops, before being captured by Skleros and blinded for lese-majeste, being condemned as 'rebels' against the man who considered himself the legitimate emperor.16 It is impossible to tell whether Theodore had been promoted strategos of the Bucellarioi by Basil II or by Bardas Skleros, since usurpers also established an administration in order to control the provinces.17 The same goes for seals above all suspicion. If a rebel rallied all the army to his side, as did Bardas Phokas in 987, he had professional engravers at his disposal, as we have seen above, and the seals of strategoi named by the usurper are no different from any others. 14 15 16 17

V. Laurent, Le corpus des sceaux de Vempire byzantin, V/2. L'Eglise (Paris, 1965), no. 1543. N. Oikonomides, 'The usual lead seal', DOP 37 (1983), 147-57 at 151. Skylitzes, p. 322. Bardas Skleros also named a certain Pegasios as strategos of Nicaea (Skylitzes, p. 323).

VII 144

In this rather unusual case we observe a official appointed according to the rules by a legitimate ruler, who then found himself thrust into opposition when the emperor who bestowed office on him was overthrown by a victorious usurper. In principle, the official in question should have become a private person, but it happened that, supported by loyal troops and protected by a favourable geographical situation, he then found himself in the position of a rebel. Such was the case of Philaretos Brachamios and his lieutenants, Basil Apokapes at Edessa and Gabriel at Melitene. The nature of their power, unofficial or not, depended completely on events in Constantinople: they were loyal servants of the emperor under Romanos IV Diogenes, rebels under Michael VII Doukas, and again subjects of the emperor under Nikephoros III Botaneiates and Alexios I Komnenos. It is more difficult to know the sentiments of their subordinates, but it would appear that, with the exception of certain troops with ties to the capital and a group of aristocrats at Antioch opposed to Philaretos, the majority of the population, who appreciated their government (especially that of Apokapes at Edessa), were little concerned by the nature of the relations between the strategoi and the capital. These relations continued under Alexios Komnenos, who offered the strategoi promotions, since the emperor was in no position to impose anything whatsoever in the region of Antioch encircled by the Turks; he contented himself with legitimizing the local authorities, all the more so because they had been appointed by the Byzantine administration. We shall return to these persons in connection with their relations with the Turkish invaders.

The diffusion of official

influence

The power of the masters passed in part to the servants, who could then exploit the weakest levels of society with no possibility of protest against their methods, save in the case of miraculous intervention, as in the Life of Nikon. There a woman who is a dependant of the monastery is the victim of the servant of the local doux, who takes a loaf of bread from her without paying for it, but Nikon intervenes to protect her.18 The fact of having held high office permitted one to retain the network of influence one had attained. It was thus in the early Byzantine period that prefects or consuls, once they left office, always mentioned their former function, to the point that this reference in itself became a title, diro VTTOLTWV or OLTTO vTrdpxwv, detached from any real exercise of the office of consul or prefect. In the medieval period we note several similar developments which give rise to the titles of stratelates, spatharios, magistros. But once he left office the official generally ceased to make mention of it. There are, however, exceptions: in the 18

See Life of Saint Nikon, 71.

VII OFFICIAL POWER AND NON-OFFICIAL POWER

145

collection of the Istanbul Archeological Museum there are two examples of the seal of a certain Theodoulos proedros and former (ytyov6Ti)pinkernes™ It even happened that an ancestor who had held a prestigious office might serve as a reference for the family. The type most often found is the form * soand-so, son of such-and-such a dignitary'. Many of these seals are concerned with foreigners, for whom the possession of a high Byzantine title undoubtedly represented political capital among their countrymen. At a later period, when family names had made their appearence, this phenomenon continued. The museum in Istanbul provides the good example of a seal of Constantine, protospatharios, epi tou Chrysotriklinou and (proto)notarios of the Bucellarioi, ho apo zugostates.20 There are also the seals of the sons of Euthymios: Michael, magistros, vestes and judge of the Thrakesioi, ho tou Euthymiou,21 and Nikephoros, proedros and genikos logothetes, ho toupatrikiou Euthymiou22 Euthymios is probably the patrikios and stratiotikos logothetes living in the middle of the eleventh century.23 All these formulations concern private persons who were keen to stress that they still possessed social power proportionate to the function they themselves or their relations had exercised. Another category is more difficult to classify: that of persons who mention an office on their seals which ought normally to contain further information, as in the case of military officers who call themselves strategoi or topoteretai. It is evident that one who was strategos of the Anatolikoi or doux of Antioch or topoteretes of the schools in fact held this office, but what was the role of strategoi ordoukes when no place or regiment is mentioned? These were not officers without subordinates, as we see in the example of Bardas Phokas, father of the future emperor: the sources call him a former strategos when he was recalled by Lekapenos to lead an army against the Rus'. Likewise, Constantine VII, when he wanted to make an enquiry as to the state of the themes of Asia Minor, had recourse to prestigious retired officers to accomplish this delicate task. In the taktika the term for these available officials is apratoi, to distinguish them from those in active service, the empratoi. The difference is that the apratoi were supposed to perform a new function when required by the emperor.

19

Unpublished seals from the Archeological Museum of Istanbul, no. 779/55 b and c. Ibid., Istanbul, no. 316. 21 Catalogue of the Byzantine Seals at Dumbarton Oaks and in the Fogg Museum of Art, III. West, Northwest and Central Asia Minor and the Orient, ed. J. Nesbitt and N. Oikonomides (Washington, 1996), no. 2.18. 22 5553(1993),196. 23 J.-C1. Cheynet, 'Sceaux byzantins des musees d'Antioche et de Tarse', TM 12 (1994), 391-478, no. 43. 20

VII 146

The Influence of non-officials Merchants Numerous Byzantine merchants and foreigners had always been present in the capital, but their activity intensified from the tenth century on. They were organized in bodies according to their craft, but the names of those in charge have not been preserved. On the other hand, the names of the crafts do appear, though rarely, on seals. In several cases these are family names, recognizable by the preceding article, e.g. ho keroularios (candlemaker); but the distinction is not always easy. Among the seals belonging to craftsmen, some have an official character, assured by the term basilikos, e.g. ho (imperial) raphtes (tailor). Other cases are uncertain. There were imperial workshops directed by the archon of the blattion (silk). We know that the production of silk was closely controlled, but we cannot be certain that the persons mentioned on seals had any official role. It is also plausible to assume that merchants who handled expensive goods would use this means to enhance their guarantees of quality and value. But if this is the case, we are surprised to find so few seals of silk-workers, when we know that most of the preserved seals come from the capital. The same goes for seals of pragmateutai, some of them perhaps those of foreign merchants. Were they accredited like the Russian merchants of the tenth century, a list of whom was provided by the prince of Kiev to the Byzantine authorities? A recent find is even more enigmatic: the seal of a chalkoprates, the first of its kind, dated to the eighth-ninth centuries, discovered at Sougdaia. Who was this person: a merchant in copper who had mines in the region, or a trade official who supervised exchanges on the Black Sea? I tend to think he was an official.

Women Apart from reigning empresses or regents and the exceptional case of Anna Dalassena, to whom her son conferred by chrysobull a sort of regency over the empire, women did not hold official office, and 'feminine weakness' was juridically sanctioned.24 Women normally held the titles of their husbands; for, with the exception of the 'girdled patrician', there was no title proper to the female sex. The girdled patricians were few and served the empress of the moment. Other women made reference to the function exercised by their husbands, such as Con24

J. Beaucamp, 'Incapacite feminine et role public a Byzance', in S. Lebecq, A. Dierkens, R. Le Jan, and J.-M. Sansterre, eds., Femmes etpouvoirs desfemmes a Byzance et en Occident (VIe-XIe siecle) (Lille, 1999), 23-36.

VII OFFICIAL POWER AND NON-OFFICIAL POWER

147

stantina Pekoulina, who styled herself protospatharissa and topoteretissa of the Cibyrrheote theme.25 The few seals we have of women would thus have been for private use. It remains to determine on what occasions women felt the need to seal their correspondence with a bull referring to their social rank. We can imagine wives managing their property, perhaps widows, writing to the curators of their domains. Women exercised real power. Leaving aside the famous Danielis, whose fortune and power remain obscure, one thinks of women of the imperial family who took part in court intrigues, especially under the Komneni and Angeli.

Monks In principle the humility proper to monks ought to have removed them from the power games which belong to this world. But such was not the case, for two reasons. On the one hand, monks exercised considerable spiritual power, affecting political life throughout the entire empire or, more often, throughout a province; and on the other, this was so because of the aristocratic origins of many founders of monasteries. Saints gave counsel to emperors, as did Michael Maleinos and Athanasios of the Lavra, or they were placed by the population as intermediaries between it and imperial officials, all the more so because many holy persons were the offspring of good families and kept up contact with the milieu of their origins. Exceptionally, holy men or ascetics could take measures which we should have expected from a public authority. To take one example, Nikon drove off, not without opposition, the important Jewish community of Sparta.26 In a dissertation on provincial elites, Leonora Neville provides examples taken from Lives of saints of Greece.27 In general, saints owed their influence more to their charisma as healers or prophets than to their ability to provoke divine wrath. It is true that in the period we are dealing with here, sanctity was at a low ebb, providing but few elect. There is no need to stress the influence exercised by the abbots of the great monasteries of the capital or the provinces, whose prayers were solicited for the success of imperial expeditions. This explains why we have seals not only of abbots but also of simple monks, many of whom still indicate in the legends on their seals their family names, and sometimes also their former 25

J.-Cl. Cheynet, C. Morrisson and W. Seibt, Les sceaux byzantins de la collection Henri Seyrig (Paris, 1991), no. 288. 26 Life of Saint Nikon, §88. 27 L. Neville, 'Local Provincial Elites in Eleventh-Century Hellas and Peloponnese (unpub. Ph.D. diss., Princeton, 1998).

VII 148

titles, which makes sense only if their family names were of use to them in their activities.

On the borders of the empire The place of foreigners More and more foreign nobles were being brought into the orbit of the empire. There were various stages of integration. Those who renounced their country of origin and entered into the service of the empire obtained titles and offices which rapidly became the same as those of old Roman families. The Armenian princely families established in Cappadocia are a case apart. Several of their members entered into the administration, but others received titles, often high ones, whose object was, aside from providing handsome rogai, to maintain the beneficiaries' prestige and to make them efficient spokesmen for Byzantine interests among their former subjects. Thus we see that Mary, the daughter of Kagik of Kars, who defended Tzamandos against the Turks, mentions her title of kouropalatissa, quite a high one at the time. Other ethnikoi received titles in return for recognition of imperial sovereignty. Such subjection most often remained theoretical, but in the twelfth century the Komnenian emperors, especially Manuel, wished to make this a method of ruling territories populated by ethnikoi but considered as belonging to the empire. It was thus that the Serbian zhupan, the Danishmenidid emir, and the Seljuk sultan proclaimed themselves douloi of the emperor. This formula was not intended simply to permit orators to sing the praises of the emperor to whom these peoples submitted, for the seals testify to the official character of the relation. In the empire itself, the doulos of the emperor, originally a personal servant of the latter, had become through this title, by delegation, the holder of power over all. One of the vaguest of the names we meet with is that ofarchon.2* In principle, this was the holder of an arche, thus of official power, but by the beginning of the thirteenth century one finds the first mention of an archon as a person of influence. The subjects of the emperor called archontes fall into several welldefined categories: • directors of a department, such as the blattion, the chrysoklabon (embroidery workshop), the zabareion (arsenal) or the thymele (responsible for public spectacles); 28

On the archons cf. most recently, with bibliography, J.-C1. Cheynet, 'Pozdnij arhont: primer iz Hersona', in Materialy po arheologii, istorii i etnografii Tavrii, VII (Simferopol, 2000), 310-17 (in Russian).

VII OFFICIAL POWER AND NON-OFFICIAL POWER

149

• archontes of the themes, infrequent except in the case of Crete; found in few provinces (Crete, Cyprus, the Cibyrrheote theme), they disappeared with the end of the provincial administration inherited from the early Byzantine world; • archontes of the cities, numerous in east and west: Abydos, Nicaea, Heraclea, Christoupolis, Strobilos, Thebes.29 Further, this title was held by leaders of populations which had not been integrated, principally the Slavs, whose archontes were often, though not always, members of the ethnos they commanded. The oldest example is that of Mauros, archon of the Sermisianoi and the of Bulgars.30 Let us note in more detail the seals of the Bichetoi of the Helladic theme.31 When the first archontes were appointed, their names suggest that they were Slavs. It must be understood that Byzantium in effect legitimized the power of the leaders of ethnikoi and, by integrating them into the court hierarchy, hoped to govern their people through their mediation. Later, the names become Byzantine in type, either because the Slavonic leaders were Byzantinized or, more probably, because the emperors risked appointing officials of their choice. Thus the function of an archon could correspond with two quite different situations. John Kegenes, archon of Patzinacia, whose seal has recently been discovered at Dristra, was such a one.32 These archontes exercised power recognized by the emperor over a population which was not yet under the direct administration of Byzantine officials. In the eleventh century it remains difficult to determine the real status of leaders of these mixobarbaroi subjects of the empire, in fact largely autonomous. And what are we to make of Leo the spatharocandidatus and without doubt archon of Croatia?33 The situation is even less clear for the archontes established beyond the control of the Byzantine army. The frontier zone sheltered strategoi who defended territories susceptible to loss through enemy conquest or disaffection of the population. 29

For examples see the index to the three volumes of Dumbarton Oaks Seals, s.v. archon. Zacos-Veglery, no. 934; the seal is dated to the 7th cent. 31 Catalogue of the Byzantine Seals at Dumbarton Oaks and in the Fogg Museum of Art, II. South of the Balkans, the Islands, South of Asia Minor, ed. J. Nesbitt and N. Oikonomides (Washington, 1991-7), no. 10.1. 32 John Kegenes, magistros and archon of Patzinacia, had a seal with the effigy of John the Forerunner (I. Jordanov, 'Sceau d'archonte de Patzinakia du xe siecle', Etudes balkaniques (1992: 2), 79-82). The reading of the second part of the name is confirmed by a similar seal (W. Seibt and M.-L. Zarnitz, Das byzantinische Bleisiegel als Kunstwerk (Vienna, 1997), no. 3.2.9). From Skylitzes we know that the Emperor Constantine Monomachos authorised this Pescheneg chieftain to settle with two tribes of his people in a territory which comprised three fortresses to the south of the Danube, in the theme of Paristrion (Skylitzes, pp. 455-7). This archon was both head of an administrative district and chieftain of ethnikoi at the same time. 33 Catalogue of Byzantine Seals at Dumbarton Oaks and in the Fogg Museum of Art, I. Italy, North of the Balkans, North of the Black Sea, ed. J. Nesbitt and N. Oikonomides (Washington, 1991), no. 16.1. 30

VII 150

These strategoi faced adversaries of diverse natures, either a great empire such as the Caliphate, or a series of small principalities which ought in the eyes of the emperors, especially in the tenth-eleventh centuries, to enter into the empire. Certain of them did not really enter the empire, such as Ibn Mousaraf, who at the beginning of the eleventh century obtained the title ofpatrikios and a document from the catepan of Antioch, authorizing him to build fortresses for his men and his family. It does not appear that he received any official command. On the other hand, when the Bagratides of Taron allied themselves with Byzantium, they conserved their principality, but in the capacity of strategoi of Taron.34 Likewise, the Slavonic leader Ljutovid was named probably by Michael IV protospatharios and strategos of Serbia and Zachlumia.35 We see in these * appointments' by Byzantium the de facto legitimization of a power within the context of the empire. The nature of the function of the doux of the east is no more explicit. The doux of the west commanded the tagmata in Europe, and one would expect that it was the same with the doux of the east and the contingents in Asia Minor. But we can hardly believe that Basil II would have bestowed such a responsibility upon a foreigner, when he named magistros and doux of the east Ibn Merwan, emir of Amida, who had performed an act of allegiance.36

Officials abandoned to their fate We have observed above the complicated destiny of certain strategoi and doukes of the eastern frontier during the coups d'etat preceding the accession of Alexios Komnenos. Moreover, at the time of the Turkish conquest at the end of the eleventh century, the chroniclers in their embarrassment do not know how to designate certain Byzantine strategoi now isolated in the midst of Turks; they use the term toparch, which was not official since we never find it on the seals. On the eastern frontier the matter was more grave, for the new emperor recognized the authorities in place, as is shown by the progression in the court hierarchy of Philaretos Brachamios, but he could not send them any help. In the face of the Seljuks, who reached their apogee under Malik Shah, Brachamios, Gabriel and others had to submit to the sultan, who left them their territory, though reducing it, as in the case of Brachamios. These men were doubly invested in their offices, and this phenomenon is reflected in the legends of the seals of several of them. Gabriel of Melitene has left us a seal on which he is called doux and emir, honoured with 34

Cf. recently B. Martin-Hisard, 'Constantinople et les archontes caucasiens dans le Livre des ceremonies, II, 48', TM 13 (2000), 376-9. 35 V. von Falkenhausen, 'Bine byzantinischeBeamtenurkundeaus Dubrovnik'^Z 63 (1970), 10-23. 36 Histoire de Yahya-ibn-Sa'id d'Antioche, continuateur de Sa'id-ibn-Bitriq, ed. and trans. I. Kratchovsky and A. Vasiliev, II (PO 23; 1932), p. 460.

VII OFFICIAL POWER AND NON-OFFICIAL POWER

151

the title ofprotokouropalates.31 This progression in rank suggests that the court in Constantinople, which had no control over local events, had accepted this double allegiance. An unpublished seal of Theodore Hetoum, emir and kouropalates, confirms that Byzantine officials—he was doux of Edessa without being named by Philaretos—had no scruples in submitting to a sultan who was found to be greatly tolerant with regard to his Christian subjects. Nor was belonging to two hierarchies the privilege of Byzantines in difficulty, for we have the seal, coarsely engraved, probably in the east, of a certain Aaron, ischan and vestarches.3* It is difficult to understand the situation. Perhaps he was a noble on the border (Armenian) who had remained independent and received a title in order to draw him to the side of the empire. In this case, he is to be compared to the group of Caucasian princes known in the tenth century from the Book of Ceremonies. Or was he an ethnikos who had settled in Asia Minor and had become more or less independent because of the disturbances? If not, it is hard to explain the title ischan. This double allegiance of certain Byzantines at the end of the eleventh century is not radically new. Let us remember that the chief Armenian archontes had been granted Byzantine titles by the emperors though they had received crowns from the Caliph. In conclusion, the nature of the power exercised by one or another individual cannot be easily defined with simply prosopographic elements, even though the latter generally suggest the most probable hypotheses. One must never forget that in the Byzantine empire, in spite of the Roman heritage, the division between public and private was never so clear as it is in modern states. 37 38

Zacos-Nesbitt, no. 464. Seal from the former collection Zacos, phototheque, no. 1478/79 i.

VIII

Basil II and Asia Minor With the Arab conquest of the empire's provinces further east, Asia Minor was to become the principal base of Byzantine power. It was the soldiers of the themes of Asia Minor who first held off the Muslims and then repulsed them with the aid of the tagmata in the pay of Constantinople. During the reigns of Nikephoros II Phokas and John I Tzimiskes, who had both made their way through the ranks of the eastern armies, the empire was the dominant force in the Near East, despite the regional pretensions of the Fatimids who had recently established themselves in Egypt and Syria. But the Empire had apparently reached its eastern limits, even if certain adjustments might still be made. That one part of the eastern army shared this view is clear from the conduct of John Tzimiskes, who abstained from any real attempt to reconquer Palestine.1 Military officers from Asia Minor had the ear of the government in Constantinople, particularly under Constantine VII and his son Romanos II. In 976 power came once again into the hands of Basil the parakoimomenos. He knew Asia Minor well, for in his youth he had led imperial armies with success against the Arabs. Wary of Tzimiskes's former supporters, Basil now dismissed their chief, Bardas Skleros, though not without the latter's resistance. The government of the parakoimomenos lasted from 976 until 986, but in the final years his regency became less and less acceptable to the young emperor, who turned to Nikephoros Ouranos for counsel.2 It is certain that Basil II himself considered that it was not he who exercised power during these years, for he called into question all decisions taken by the parakoimomenos before his fall. In 986, after the dismissal of the latter, the young Basil II, desiring to demonstrate his autonomy, launched an ill-fated offensive in Bulgaria, with the result 1 His famous letter to Ashot III, intended for the glorification of his campaign in Palestine, ought not to confuse the issue. In it he does not propose any programme of reconquest, but aims to consolidate his friendship amongst the Armenian elite, many of whom were employed in his service, such as Melias, whom he made domestikos of the scholai (Yahya, II, 353-354). 2 On Basil, especially the last years of his power, cf. W.G. Brokkaar, "Basil Lacapenus", Studia by^antina et neohellenica Neerlandica 3 (1972), 199—234.

VIII 2

BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

that the officers of Asia Minor, feeling themselves neglected, followed their natural leaders, the Phokades, in an attempt to proclaim Bardas Phokas emperor. Their failure in 989 left Basil II more power than any of his predecessors had ever had,3 the more so because of he chose to lead his armies in person - a novelty for the Macedonian dynasty, apart from a few inconclusive campaigns of his ancestor Basil I. Because of this decision Basil II was compared with his predecessors Nikephoros Phokas, whom the populace of Constantinople called 'the Victorious', and John Tzimiskes. Inasmuch as he had been their co-emperor, he must have already shared in their glory. In order to measure the impact of Basil II's policy in Asia Minor, the beginning of which should be dated to 989, we must first examine the economic situation of the eastern provinces and then the measures taken by the emperor in the economic and the military spheres, the diplomacy conducted by him with his neighbours and, finally, the men he chose to assist him in the government of the eastern themes and catepanate. The narrative sources are rather meagre. John Skylitzes devotes one of his longest chapters to Basil II, but in fact he treats only two principle points: the civil wars at the beginning of the reign and the Bulgarian campaigns, all the rest being dealt with in few paragraphs. Michael Psellos draws a portrait of the emperor rather than defining his policy. Fortunately, the Armenian, Arabic and Syriac sources are more informative on Basil's activities in the east. The economic situation in Asia Minor around theyear WOO

No Byzantine archives have been preserved which might permit us to judge the state of the economy of the eastern provinces at the end of the tenth century, and few of the excavations of Anatolian cities have reached the levels of this period. This lack of information explains the somewhat divergent opinions of modern historians. S. Vryonis, basing himself on the narrative sources, takes a rather optimistic view:4 for example, he describes 3 See the apt remarks by M. Whittow, Making of Byzantium (London, 1996), 374—5. The great factions of the Anatolian aristocracy had been subjugated, whereas the so-called Macedonian faction, centred in Andrinople, which intervened several times in the course of the eleventh century in the struggle for imperial power, was still in the early stages of development. 4 S. Vryonis, The Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor and the Process of Islami^ation from the Eleventh through the Fifteenth Century (Berkeley—Los Angeles—London, 1971), 14—24.

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

3

Tzamandos as a city of considerable size because Skylitzes calls it polyanthropos? or cites Bar Hebraeus concerning the reconstruction of Tarsus, which supposedly recovered quickly and became very prosperous. A. Harvey is less optimistic, but also agrees that the region enjoyed growth.6 If one examines the chart of monastic foundations of the tenth century drawn up by J. Darrouzes, one sees that the foundations in Asia Minor were less than half those of the west, or of Constantinople taken alone.7 The conclusion that this half of the empire was losing momentum would probably be misleading, for there were particular factors in play, such as the foundation of Athonite houses and the corresponding decline of Olympus in Bithynia. Moreover, the changes which affected the aristocracy of Asia Minor under Basil II were not favourable to new foundations. However, N. Thierry notes that in Cappadocia the hermitages and smaller monasteries of the tenth century give way in the following century to organised monasteries with a capacity often exceeding eight or ten monks.8 This remark does not contradict the decline of the grand aristocracy of Asia Minor, since most of the known commanding officers belonged to lower grades. Lastly, the chart of Darrouzes, which takes into account only the creation of Chalcedonian monasteries, must be corrected by adding the many Jacobite foundations in the east.9 A part of the sums necessary for the construction of these Syriac monasteries came from immigrants and could be considered as a transfer of funds from Islamic to Byzantine lands. One would also need data concerning urban churches, but this is lacking, except in the case of the reconstruction (?) of the church of Kassianos, the cathedral of Antioch.10

5 Skylitzes, p. 319. A. Harvey, Economic Expansion in the Byzantine Empire 900—1200 (Cambridge, 1989), 208-11. 7 J. Darrouzes, "Le mouvement des fondations monastiques au Xle siecle", TM 6 (1976), 159-76. 8 N. Thierry, "Le provincialisme cappadocien", in S. Lampakis (ed.) Byzantine Asia Minor (Athens, 1998), 408. 9 G. Dagron, "Minorites ethniques et religieuses dans 1'Orient byzantin a la fin du Xe et au Xle siecle : 1'immigration syrienne", TM 6 (1976), 177—216. The Chronicle of Michael the Syrian and the Chronicon ecclesiasticon of Bar Hebraeus allow us to reconstruct the history of several monasteries: those of Sergisiyeh, Barid, Cursor and of Bar Gagai' (which was also a great intellectual centre). They all prospered in the half century following the reign of Nikephoros Phokas (ibid., 189-92). 10 Yahya II, 445; the translation uses the expression "remise en ordre" of this church after the model of St Sophia. Since Basil had restored this building which had been 6

VIII 4

BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

As we have said, the archaeology of Anatolia has not been well studied for the medieval period, though the few excavations and surveys that have been carried out, for example by C. Foss, suggest the same tendency: that of recovery after the shock of the invasions. It is difficult to isolate precisely the reign of Basil II in this context, probably because it marks no particular occurrence. There is every evidence that before the arrival of the Turks Asia Minor was in a prospering state, even if certain regions, such as Pamphylia,11 had not regained the same level of population and wealth they had enjoyed in Late Antiquity. But others, such as Bithynia, at least judging by variations of the level of the lake of Nicaea, had recovered more completely.12 The growth of Constantinople, the restoration of peace and the speedy return to monetary transactions and payment of taxes13 suffice to explain the quicker pace of this recovery. At Ankara in the tenth to eleventh centuries the city outgrew the walls of the citadel.14 The region of Strobilos appears to have been rich right up to the eve of the incursions of the Turks.15 Amorion recovered from the disaster of 838, and not only the upper part of the city but also the lower was reoccupied in the tenth and eleventh centuries. New constructions were in places put up against the old walls, proof of the sense of security which prevailed amongst the population of the time.16 After the reconquest Asia Minor was divided clearly into three parts, each with distinctive characteristics. Firstly, western Asia Minor, which had long enjoyed security, scarcely troubled by the odd pirate raid,17 damaged by an earthquake, one supposes a restoration, but this could also be understood as the re-organisation of the church's property after the model of St Sophia. 11 C. Foss, "The Cities of Pamphylia in the Byzantine Age", in Cities, fortresses and Villages of Byzantine Asia Minor (Aldershot, 1996), no. IV, 1-62. 12 B. Geyer, R. Dalongeville, J. Lefort, "Les niveaux du lac de Nicee au Moyen Age", Castrum 7 (forthcoming). The authors have studied the variations in the level of the lake. When this latter was high, it was because the drainage canal was no longer maintained, indicating little population. Conversely, a low level of water in the lake is an indication of more intensive agricultural activity. Such was the case during the reign of Basil II. 13 N. Oikonomides, "Ee Ttoio (3a0^io rjrav eKXpnV10^1^^1! H ^£(JC>[3u^avTivrj oiKOVOpa;", PoSovid. Tijuif crrov M.I. MOCVOVOOCKOC (Rethymno, 1994), 363-70. 14 C. Foss, "Late Antique and Byzantine Ankara", DOP 31 (1977), 84, repr. in his History and Archaeology of Byzantine Asia Minor (Aldershot, 1990), no. VI. 15 C. Foss, "Strobilos and Related Sites", Anatolian Sudies 38 (1988), 147-74, repr. in History and Archaeology', no. XII. 16 C.S. Lightfoot, "The Public and Domestic Architecture of a Thematic Capital: the Archeological Evidence from Amorion", Byzantine Asia Minor, 306—7. 17 Jews of Mastaura fell victim to such a raid sometime after 1022: T. Reinach, "Un contrat de mariage du temps de Basile Le Bulgaroctone", Melanges G. Schlumberger (Paris,

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

5

supplied abundant wealth, in particular provisions for the capital, and possessed many active ports (the Marmara coasts, Smyrna, Ephesus, Strobilos). It comprised the fertile soils of the theme of Thrakesion and of Bithynia, as well as the coastal plains of Trebizond and of Attaleia, geographically distant but with closely similar economic structures.18 Secondly, there was the central plateau and its Paphlagonian and Tauric borders, a rough land of stock-breeding, nearly devoid of large cities. Such cities as there were, Caesarea for example, where a few great families resided, or Ikonion, were little more than centres of garrisons or administrative headquarters which sustained markets only at a local level, while the land supplied men and officers for the army. Finally, the reconquered lands comprised fertile plains,19 including Cilicia, and the vibrant commercial cities of Theodosioupolis/Artze, Melitene, Tarsus, Antioch, and Laodicaea, to which were later added Edessa and Ani. The limited impact of the civil wars

Asia Minor was involved in two civil wars, that of 976-979, which opposed the imperial army that of Bardas Skleros, and that of 986-989, which saw the final defeat of Phokas. This latter episode could not have had any adverse effect on the Anatolian economy because the region rallied almost unanimously to the cause of the chief of the rebels, Bardas Phokas, and was therefore not the theatre of confrontation. The loss of life was probably quite limited. The earlier conflict had been more fiercely contested, involving a number of bloody battles in eastern and central Asia Minor, which presupposes the considerable movement of troops and all the concomitant damage. But again, it is clear that there were no long lasting consequences and all was set right in the course of a few years. The chroniclers mention no catastrophe such as famine or epidemic at this time. 1924), 118—32; D. Jacoby, "What do we learn about Byzantine Asia Minor form the documents of the Cairo Genizah?", Byzantine Asia Minor, ed. Lampakis, 84-7. 18 The two cities were very active ports, even if the details given by Ibn Hauqal concerning the amount of kommerkion, 300 pounds for Attaleia and 1000 for Trebizond, cannot be verified: M. Hendy, Studies in the Byzantine Monetary Economy c. 300—1450 (Cambridge, 1985), 174. 19 Some of the medieval mines that have been identified were in these provinces or near them: B. Pitarakis, "Mines anatoliennes exploitees par les Byzantins: recherches recentes", Revue numismatique, 153 (1998), 141—85.

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

6

The greater role of the central power

After 989 Basil II was free to pursue his policy of centralisation. He had at his disposition the formidable arm of the tax system which, by making the 'powerful' interdependent with the 'weak,' allowed him to reduce the estates of the former through legal' confiscation, undoubtedly less severe than that normally practised after rebellions but which nevertheless constituted a real threat to rich land owners.20 In fact, this probably had little effect on the prosperous parts of Asia Minor, for the crown, the tax authorities and Constantinopolitan institutions were already in a position of strength there through the services of numerous civil servants. Amongst these latter were the xenodochoi, all of them installed in this part of Asia Minor, the horreiarioi?1 the curators, especially those responsible for the management of estates in the fertile valley of the Meander, the Optimaton, Nicaea, Pegai, Dorylaion, Lampe, Mesanykta. In these latter cities it is possible that the episkeptitai worked together with the aplekta where the armies gathered before departing on campaign.22 On the other hand, the civil wars did bring about a marked change in the distribution of great estates on the plateau as a result of massive confiscations.23 This can be shown in the case of the Phokades, the

20

This does not mean that Basil frequently resorted to this measure, for his reign did not reverse the basic tendency of the prevalence of private or public domain over the rural commune. 21 Most of the horreiarioi are attested, generally on seals, in this part of Asia Minor: Paphos, Smyrna, Chios (?), Pegai, Panormos, Kios, Nicomedia, Amastris, Aminsos. Cf. J.Cl. Cheynet, "Un aspect du ravitaillement de Constantinople aux Xe/Xle siecles d'apres quelques sceaux &horreiarioF, SBS 6, 1-26. To this list, which remains provisional owing to the publication of new seals, we must add the seal of an horreiarios of Kinoles, a port of Paphlagonia situated between lonopolis and Sinope (seal of the Archeological Museum of Istanbul). The dates of these seals confirm that these granaries were operating during Basil's reign. 22 On the episkeptitai and curators, cf. J.-C1. Cheynet, "Episkeptitai et autres gestionnaires des biens publics (on the basis of seals of the Institut Francais d'Etudes Byzantines)", [to appear in SBS 7]. For example, it was at Mesanykta that the protovestiarios Leo installed himself and his army for the operation against Bardas Skleros, and where he negotiated the return of certain of the rebel's lieutenants (Skylitzes, 320). Such an evolution made useless any direct link of the soldier with the land. 23 On the changes which occurred under Basil II and his successors, cf. J. HowardJohnston, "Crown Lands and the Defence of Imperial Authority in the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries", By^antinische Forschungen 21 (1995), 75—100.

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

7

Malei'noi and the grandchildren of the magistros Romanes Moseles,24 though the role played by these latter in the civil wars is not known.25 It appears that the Skleroi were also affected by these measures, for Basil II installed the aged Bardas in the region of Didymoteichos; but the family had preserved, or regained, its position in the east, since the greatgrandson of Bardas, Romanos, possessed estates in the theme of the Anatolikoi under Monomachos.26 These measures were taken also against dependents of the great generals, thus making a great deal of land available. It is difficult to trace these changes in detail. A number of episkepseis which first make their appearance in the eleventh century may have been created on estates that had been thus confiscated: for example that of Podandos27 and above all Rodandos,28 the city where Nikephoros Phokas had revolted and raised troops against Basil II in 1022 and which was probably at the centre of the last estates left to the Phokades.29 One must not forget that Basil II probably also inherited a part of the immense property of John Tzimiskes, who had died childless, whereby he would

24 Scholia to a Novel of Basil II dated to 996 concern precisely these three families: N. Svoronos, Les no velies des empereurs macedoniens concernant la terre et les stratiotes. Introductionedition—-commentaires, posthumous edition by P. Gounaridis (Athens, 1994), 203, 207. 25 It should be remembered that the Moselai, of Armenian origin, had belonged to the highest ranks of the aristocracy since the end of the eighth century and were amongst the supporters of Romanos I Lekapenos — the magistros Romanos Moseles was his grandson (Skylitzes, 251) — and probably also amongst those of John Tzimiskes, an emperor close to the Armenians: A.P. Kazhdan, Armjane v sostave gospodstvujuscego klassa vi^antijskoj imperil i>XI—XIIi>i>. (Erivan, 1975), 10—11. Romanos, the grandson of Lekapenos and magistros under Romanos II (his first cousin), was thus one of the highest dignitaries in the state. We know nothing of his activities, except that Constantine VII, at the beginning of his personal reign, had sent him to inspect the theme of Opsikion (Theophanes Continuatus, 443). His grandsons were targeted probably because of the extent of their wealth, a good part of which must have come from public lands granted by Romanos I Lekapenos to his descendants. This confiscation suggests that Basil carried out a policy of systematic recuperation of estates granted by his predecessors. The parakoimomenos Basil had been the first victim. 26 It is impossible to determine whether Romanos had inherited these lands from his ancestors or had been the beneficiary of a recent grant — or restitution — on the part of Monomachos, his sister's lover: W. Seibt, Die Skleroi. Bine prosopographisch-sigillographische Studie, Byzantina Vindobonensia 9 (Vienna, 1976), 76—85. 27 G. Schlumberger, Sigillographie de I'Empire by^antin (Paris, 1884), 315: seal of Epiphanies Ka..., episkeptites of P. (llth c.). 28 Three seals of episkeptitai of Rodandos have come down to us: Catalogue of the Byzantine Seals at Dumbarton Oaks and in the Fogg Museum of Art^ IV, ed. E. McGeer, J. Nesbitt, N. Oikonomides (Washington, DC, 2001), nos 46.1-3. 2 9 Skylitzes, 366.

VIII 8

BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

have obtained lands in the theme of the Armeniakon, of which the Dalassenoi were to derive partial benefit.30 Basil II must also have reclaimed numerous estates in the provinces which had been recently reconquered, for the generals belonging to the great families mentioned above had surely taken advantage of their successes. Moreover, it was in this part of Asia Minor, particularly in Cilicia, that the parakoimomenos Basil had amassed the great wealth seized by Basil II after his mentor's downfall. This would explain the origin of the episkepsis of Longinas. Situated in a fertile plain near Tarsus, this city was in the possession of the parakoimomenos Basil, a fact which angered John Tzimiskes when he learned of it whilst passing through the region. The city remained an important point on the route from Syria in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. Thus the emperor had at his disposal also in this part of the empire considerable means of increasing the direct influence of the central power. This development can be traced through the mention of numerous civil servants who exercised authority in the region. There is no doubt that many of them came originally from Constantinople and that they derived profit from the exercise of these functions. Of course, the emperor left the posts of second rank to the indigenous population, as had always been imperial tradition, and this practice prevailed both in provinces peopled by foreigners and those inhabited by Greeks. On the other hand, the reign of Basil II appears to have seen the end of the nomination of indigenous peoples to the most important posts.31 Even posts of importance in the Church in the east, as for example at Antioch, occupied Basil II's attention. During a visit there in 995, he demanded the resignation of the Patriarch Agapios, formerly bishop of Aleppo, whom he had exiled for having supported Bardas Phokas,32 and replaced him, in 996, with a chartophylax of St Sophia who must have been young since he remained patriarch for nearly twenty-five years.33 His 30 Leo Diac., 99, affirms that Tzimiskes, the heir of Kourkouas, distributed his wealth to peasants and charitable establishments, but part of it must have also been paid into the state treasury. 31 Cf. most recently Catherine Holmes, "How the East was won in the reign of Basil II", in A. Eastmond (ed.), Eastern Approaches to Byzantium (Aldershot, 2001), 41—56. 32 The affair is obscure, for according to Yahya, II, 425, 428, himself, Agapios had been expelled from Antioch by Leo, the son of Bardas Phokas, who was then in revolt. Perhaps it was all a ruse to deceive the partisans of the emperor. 33 Yahya, II, 445. It was also Basil who, several months earlier, had personally chosen a former layman, the magistros Sisinnios, as patriarch of Constantinople after having left the post vacant for a number of years (Skylitzes, 340).

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

9

successor, Nicholas, appointed after a vacancy of several years, came also from Constantinople, where he had been abbot of Stoudios. The latter was certainly a faithful servant of the emperor, who had a strong attachment to the Stoudios monastery: he promoted the next abbot, Alexis, as patriarch of Constantinople several months after sending Nicholas to Antioch.34 Thus Basil further strengthened his popularity in the capital, which had already supported him in the perilous times of the great rebellions, whereas his predecessor, Nikephoros Phokas, had failed to rally the people of Constantinople. This is probably the explanation for the populace's attachment to the Macedonian dynasty when Basil's nieces held power. An efficient tax system based on economic prosperity

The reconquered regions were amongst the most densely populated of the empire in that they were highly urbanised. The military operations during the time of Nikephoros Phokas had probably caused considerable destruction, albeit in limited areas, as well as a demographic decline through the flight of one part of the population and enslavement of another; but the economic and demographic recovery was rapid, aided by the influx of Jacobite and Armenian immigrants.35 This process continued during the reign of Basil II.36 We do not know how many inhabitants Antioch had, but its population must certainly have been many tens of thousands strong. Melitene, formerly the capital of an emirate and an active commer34

Skylitzes, 368-9. It was also in this monastery that Basil had placed the young sons of Manuel Komnenos, Isaac and John, then orphans, for the completion of their education: Nikephoros Bryennios, Histoire, ed. and trans. P. Gautier, CFHB 9, (Brussels, 1075), 77. Finally, several days before his death, Basil showed his attachment to Stjohn Stoudios by summoning the abbot (Skylitzes, 369). 35 Dagron, "Minorites ethniques", 193—6. It appears that Jews of Egypt emigrated as well: Jacoby, "Genizah?", 87. 36 Mich.Syr., 145—6. "Parmi eux (people from Takrit in Djezire) etaient ces hommes celebres qui vinrent a Melitene, les Bene Abou 'Imran... Us depensaient toute leur fortune pour la construction des eglises et des monasteres". One year, the emperor imposed on them la charge de frapper les dariques de 1'empire pendant toute une annee, et vit que leur fortune n'avait pas diminue'. On another occasion, the emperor lacked money when he was in the land of Goubbos, returning from Armenia: Tempereur se leva la nuit et vint a leur porte leur demander un emprunt. Quand ils le reconnurent, ils se prosternerent, le venererent et lui donnerent cent kentenaria d'or, ce qu'il avait demande'. Though we need not accept all the details of these anecdotes, they give us a good idea of the newcomers.

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

10

cial centre, probably had a smaller population but one which nevertheless numbered in the tens of thousands. Merchants and craftsmen were quite active. In Antioch silks37 and luxury textiles were in abundance and of high quality. In 1078 Isaac Komnenos, then doux of Antioch, returned to the capital with Syrian textiles for the emperor Nikephoros III Botaneiates, who had formerly been doux of Antioch and was a great admirer of these cloths.38 Exchanges with the emirate of Aleppo had been regulated since the treaty of 961, and in December 981 Bardas Phokas managed to impose a tribute amounting to twenty thousand dinars or the near equivalent in nomismata?® In principle a Byzantine official supervised transactions at Aleppo and collected the tribute. But since no seal belonging to any commercial official of Aleppo/Berroia has yet been discovered, it is supposed that the commercial official of Antioch, who is well attested,40 was charged with this task. It would appear that the inhabitants of Antioch conducted their own trade with Syria and Egypt, as Basil II, annoyed by the installation of a Fatimid garrison in Aleppo, forbade any commercial travel between the empire and these countries. An exemption was made, on demand, for Mansur ibn Lu'lu, the former ruler of Aleppo, who had taken refuge on Byzantine territory in Antioch.41 The following year, the Fatimid governor of Aleppo, 'Aziz al-Daula, obtained permission from Basil to trade with the Empire and benefited thereby.42 We have proof of the importation of merchandise by Greeks from Fatimid Syria: the wreck of Serce Limani, discovered to the north of Rhodes and dated to the third decade of the eleventh century, contained Muslim glass and pottery, in particular from Tyre and sixteen glass coin weights based on Fatimid standards weight,43 37

On the production of silk in Northern Syria, cf. the references gathered by D. Jacoby, "Silk crosses the Mediterranean", Le vie del Mediterraneo. Idee, uomini, oggetti (secoliXl-XVI) (Genoa, April 1994), ed. G. Airaldi (Genoa, 1997), 63-4. 38 Bryennios, ed. Gautier, 299. 39 Yahya, II, 407. Several years earlier imperial troops and those of Bardas Skleros opposed one another in the hope of seizing the annual tribute of the city of Aleppo which the Saracens were transporting to Constantinople (Skylitzes, 321). 40 To date we know of three of them: Romanes Eugeneianos, protospatharios and kommerkiarios of A... (Schlumberger, Sigillographie^ 312); John Eugenianos, thesmographos, kommerkiarios of A... (ex-coll. Zarnitz 354 and Zacos BnF 654); N. hypatos and kommerkiarios of Antioch: K.M. Konstantopoulos, BvfyvnocKa ]uoAu|3&d|3ouAAa. CH cruAAoyj] 'AvocaTocaiov K.I7. IrajUOuArj (Athens, 1930), no. 74. 41 Yahya, III, 400. 42 Yahya, III, 404. 43 F.H. Doorninck Jr., "The Medieval Shipwerck at Serce Limani: An Early llthCentury Fatimid-Byzantine Commercial Voyage", Graecoarabica 4 (1991), 45—50.

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

11

Aleppo developed considerably in the tenth and eleventh centuries, so much so that it was necessary to construct new districts outside the walls. This urban development must be seen in connection with a rise in commerce for the ports of Northern Syria lay at the end of the principal trade route to the Mediterranean44. The affairs of the imperial treasury appear to have been entrusted to a basilikos, at least in the beginning, for we know the names of two of them, Koulai'b and K.n.t.tich.45 The extent of the emperor's property is unknown, but there is every indication that it was quite considerable. Basil II was able to grant Mansur ibn Lu'lu a building within the walls of Antioch as well as a village in the Gabal Laylun.46 After the reign of Basil we find no more mention of a basilikos at Antioch. We cannot assume that the function was abolished, for references to this office become rare in other themes as well. However, we note the office of kourator of Antioch attested on a number of seals. Amongst these latter, one of John spatharokandidatos could date from the reign of Basil II.47 In the course of the century, the kourator of Antioch added the qualification 'grand' to his title, which suggests that the office was more important than other provincial curatorships and resembled that of the Mangana.48 In the Early Byzantine period there were great imperial estates at Antioch, such as those of Hormisdas.49 No continuity of public estates of the same lands can be assumed over such a long period, but K. Todt has gathered references which prove that under Muslim sovereignty the region still comprised great public or Caliphal estates.50

44

Bianquis, Damas et la Syrie, 533—5. In 1041, the treasure of the Fatimid governor in the citadel of Aleppo amounted to 275 000 dinars (ibid., 555). 45 The name is transcribed in this form by Yahya, II, 373. The first part might represent a name beginning with Konto-. 46 Yahya, III, 402. 47 G. Zacos, Byzantine Lead Seals, compiled by J.W. Nesbitt (Bern, 1985), no. 527. The editors have not given a date, but the epigraphical characteristics and the modesty of the rank granted to John would suggest the turning of the tenth century. 48 Himerios (?) Solomon, protospatharios and grand curator of Antioch: J.-C. Cheynet, Sceaux de la collection Zacos (Paris, 2001), no. 8. 49 On these estates, see in particular D. Feissel, "Magnus, Megas et les curateurs des 'maisons divines'", TM9 (1985), 465-76. 50 K.-P. Todt, Region und griechish-orthodoxes Patriarch at von Antioch eia in mittelby^antinischer Zeit undim Zeitalte derKreu^uge (969-1204), typewritten thesis (Wiesbaden, 1998), 386-7.

VIII 12

BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

The army of Asia Minor Basil inherited an army perfected during the tenth century by the Phokades, by both Bardas and then, especially, by his son Nikephoros, whereas John Tzimiskes simply reaped the fruit of his predecessors' efforts. This army was an amalgam of indigenous troops and foreign contingents. The Byzantine army had probably increased its forces in the two previous centuries,51 to such an extent that it had lost its unity: the troops of the west had adopted military traditions divergent from those of the east, for the simple reason that they confronted adversaries of a different nature.52 Romanos II, no doubt on the advice of Nikephoros and Leo Phokas, had taken note of this increasing divergence and had divided the supreme command by creating two domestikoi of the scholai, one of the West and one of the East, a reform with the double advantage of taking into account the specificity of fronts as well as diminishing the power of the holders of these offices. Despite these precautions, the army of the east had imposed its candidate upon the empire in 963 and nearly managed to do the same in 986-989. Basil II had thus to resolve a delicate problem: to regain lasting control of the troops of the east without endangering the security of Asia Minor. Basil succeeded by means of several measures which we shall examine. First of all, the emperor was in a very good situation in the east because the Abbasid Caliphate, then controlled by emirs of the Buyid emirate, was weakened to the point that the emirs of Mesopotamian lands looked to Byzantium for alliances. The emirs of Aleppo had not recovered from the blows dealt them by Nikephoros Phokas and their aspirations for independence represented no great threat, especially as the city was the object of dispute amongst the successors of the Hamdanids, the Bedouins and the Fatimids. As for these latter, who had once seemed ready to reconquer lost Muslim positions, they had now lost all ambition. As we shall see, Basil II carefully selected his officers in order to eliminate both those who had too much influence in the army or had been too close to the Phokades, without however dispensing altogether with the 51 Without accepting the thesis of W. Treadgold (Byzantium and its Army, 284-1081', [Stanford CA, 1995], 85) that the army under Basil II had reached the fanciful number of 247,800 soldiers, it is nevertheless certain that the number of soldiers of the tagmata was increased appreciably, from the tenth century, by the recruitment of diverse nationalities besides the four traditional tagmata. 52 G. Dagron and H. Mihaescu, Le traite sur la guerilla de I'empereur Nicephore Phocas (Paris, 1986), 255.

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

13

services of the aristocracy in general.53 But what is more significant is that he reduced the importance of the thematic troops in favour of foreign contingents. This manoeuvre was not a novel one, for it appears that the troops of themes situated to the west of Asia Minor had been little used against the Hamdanids. However, the theme of the Thrakesion had participated, under its strategos Pastilas, in the reconquest of Crete in 961.54 In 949, the theme of the Thrakesion numbered only 1550 men, of whom 600 were Armenians charged with the defence of the coast. From this information N. Oikonomides deduced, quite rightly, that one third or even half of the soldiers had been transformed into paroikoi because the system of great estates was further developed in this very rich theme.55 In other words, in western Asia Minor the thematic system had already become moribund, though without any general slackening of the force of the contemporary Byzantine army. Troops of themes situated further to the east, the Anatolikon, Cappadocia, Seleukeia, Charsianon, were regularly levied, even if the quality of many of the soldiers thus obtained was mediocre.56 With Basil the tendency toward the "tagmatisation" of the themes was probably accelerated. In any case, this process was already complete when, under Michael IV, contingents of the themes of the east took part in long campaigns in southern Italy. It is thus that one can explain John Chaldos's tide in the sources as "doux of Thessalonica";57 from another document we learn his complete tide: doux of the Armeniakon, the Boukellarion and Thessalonica.58 As was remarked long ago, this title implies that John Chaldos carried out his mission with the aid of contingents of the themes of the Armeniakon and the Boukellarion for as long as the emperor judged necessary. These troops were far removed from their homes for several years, as were the tagmata. In the case of Chaldos, it was the Bulgarians who put an end to his mission by capturing him two years after his nomination and keeping him in prison twenty-two years. 53

Cheynet, Pouvoir, 335; C. Sifonas, "Basile II et 1'aristocratie byzantine", By^antion 64 (1994), 118-33. 54 Leo Diac., 8. These troops were not terribly well trained, for they allowed themselves to be caught in an ambush by the Muslims. 55 N. Oikonomides, "The Social Structure of The Byzantine Countryside in the Xth Century", ZvpjjieiKtcc 10 (Athens, 1996), 124-5. 56 Dagron, Guerilla, 280-87. 57 Skylitzes, 347. 58 Actes d'lviron I, Des origines an milieu du XIe siec/e, ed. J. Lefort, N. Oikonomides, Denise Papachryssanthou, Helene Metreveli, Archives de 1'Athos XIV (Paris, 1985), no. 8.

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

14

It seems certain that Basil II diminished the overall importance of the army of the east, which was apparently no longer able to carry on a campaign by itself.59 At Antioch, the army of the duchy, composed of tagmata, appears to have been increased in comparison with traditional thematic armies, and it was judged capable of repulsing Fatimid armies by itself. But we know of two cases of defeat of the doux of Antioch, of Michael Bourtzes and of Damian Dalassenos, resulting in several thousand dead and captured. When the emperor wanted to intervene with force in the east, he was obliged to wait for peace on the Bulgarian border, in order to raise the necessary elite troops. One tagma, that of the Immortals, appears to have been dissolved by Basil. The explanation for this may well be political rather than military. This contingent, created by John Tzimiskes from the best troops of his entourage - thus men from Asia Minor - was perhaps too tied up with the eastern aristocracy which had rebelled against Basil. Moreover, since the thematic armies of the east were mobilised to a lesser extent and probably already reduced only to their most useful part, the elite soldiers or epilektoi of the Treatise on Guerilla Warfare (De velitatione), the Byzantine army increased its contingents of foreigners, especially since the state coffers were now well filled through direct exploitation of numerous estates. It would even appear that Basil II purposely limited the numbers to a level he desired. Indeed, he left the treasury full,60 even though he had not reclaimed arrears in taxes, whereas his brother Constantine required that these be paid straightway at the beginning of his reign. One might consider this accumulation of wealth the result of excessive rigour or harsh confiscations, however I see no proof for these hypotheses.61 Whatever the reason, the constitution of this enormous reserve shows that the emperor could have raised more troops, and that the number of soldiers depended on his own choice. 59

One of the first to bring attention to this point was J.V.A. Fine, "Basil II and the Decline of the Theme System", Studia Slavico-by^antina et Medievalia Europensia I, in memoriam Dujcev (Sofia, 1988), 44—7. Cf. also more generally J.-C1. Cheynet, "La politique militaire byzantine de Basile II a Alexis Comnene", ZEJ/7 29-30 (1991), 61-74. 60 He supposedly accumulated 200,000 talents, that is, the same number of pounds in gold or 14.4 million nomismata (Psellos, Chronography, I, 19). This sum is hardly credible, considering the empire's resources; it would presuppose that the emperor had ammassed several years' taxes, which would have led to great deflation, unless we assume that the Byzantine economy was much more highly developed and that the circulation of money was much greater than has been thought. 61 The population of Constantinople never blamed Basil, whereas it had considered the fiscal exactions of Nikephoros Phokas a crushing burden.

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

15

The motley character of the troops placed in the field against the Arabs did not escape the latter's notice. Here again, Basil II did not innovate, but simply made greater use than before of Rus, whose country was now ruled by a Christian prince, and of Armenians. The former saved the throne for him in the struggle with Phokas, and contributed greatly to the success of the Bulgarian campaigns. Basil II took them with him when he took arms against the Muslims in 999, when the Varangians burnt St Constantine of Horns,62 and again when he fought against various Georgian princes, David the kouropalates, and then George of Abasgia.63 Under Basil the Varangians performed the function of the emperor's body-guard. The choice of loyal soldiers to make up a tagma devoted solely to the person of the emperor was an old tradition going back to Isaurian times. Basil II made greater use than his predecessors of Armenian combatants. Armenian troops had long been in service to the Empire, but their reputation was suspect, especially under Nikephoros Phokas.64 Armenians had zealously supported Bardas Skleros in his struggle against the parakoimomenos Basil.65 In 986, Basil II was apparently saved from a disastrous campaign against the Bulgarians by his Armenian infantry.66 Under Basil the Armenians constituted an important part of the garrison in the duchy of Antioch, where they had perhaps already been installed under John Tzimiskes.67 In 994 Armenian nobles fell in the battle which ended in the defeat of Michael Bourses.68 Several years earlier, in 991, the latter had come to the aid of the emir of Aleppo, Sa'ad ad-Daula, with 62

Yahya, II, 458. Aristakes of Lastivert, Recit des malheurs de la nation armenienne^ French translation with introduction and commentary by M. Canard and H. Berberian from the edition and Russian translation by K. Yuzbashian, Bibliotheque de By^antion 5 (Brussels, 1973) (hereafter Aristakes of Lastivert), 4: a quarrel broke out between the Rus in the Byzantine army and a group of Azat (nobles) of Tayk. Thirty of the latter perished. 64 On Nikephoros's decree concerning Armenian soldiers, cf. E. McGeer, "The Legal decree of Nikephoros II Phokas concerning Armenian Stratiotai", in T.S. Miller and J. Nesbitt (eds), Peace and War in Byzantium. Essays in Honor of George T. Dennis (Washington, DC, 1995), 123-37. 65 The strategos Isaac Brachamios pressed Bardas Skleros, who was still undecided, to provoke the first general confrontation in which imperial forces were defeated. The Armenians were still in the advance-guard of the rebels, under the command of Michael Bourtzes, at the time of another battle. Defeated, they were mercilessly massacred, whereas the 'Romans' were spared (Skylitzes, 318—319, 321). 66 Stephen Asolik of Taron, Histoire Universelle, annotated translation from the Armenian by F. Macler (Paris, 1917), 127. 67 Michael the Syrian affirms that Armenian emigration in Syria took place 'in the time of the emperor Basil': Mich.Syr., 187. 68 Asolik of Taron, trad. Macler, 199-200. 63

VIII 16

BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

Greeks and Armenians in his command.69 Basil established Armenian garrisons at Antarados and Shaizar.70 The Armenians were accompanied by their families, and the Armenian communities was so numerous in several cities of Cilicia and the duchy of Antioch that bishoprics were created for them, at Tarsus and Antioch. Once again, the emperor created a precedent, and the Armenians came to occupy a permanent and important place in the very important duchy of Antioch. Basil neglected no opportunity which came his way. In 1016, the emperor commanded the catepan of Antioch to receive with honour Mansur ibn Lu'lu who had been expelled from Aleppo by the Mirdassids. Mansur and his men, enrolled in the catepanate, received pay and constituted a tagma of seven hundred men.71 This is perhaps the beginning of the tagma of Saracens known from exemption lists between 1060 and 1088.72 Basil was accompanied by Bulgarian troops even before the country had been completely conquered by him, for in 995 Bulgarian elements of his army captured a number of Bedouin.73 At Basil's death, the army of the east was composed almost exclusively of professional soldiers, many of whom came from ethnikoi not subject to the empire: Russian Varangians, Armenians and Bulgarians. Latin cavalry and a number of Petcheneg contingents complete the picture of the Byzantine army in the eleventh century. Basil II hesitated, apparently, to give too much power to any one general, with the exception of Nikephoros Ouranos. For example, aside from the latter, it appears that no one else was promoted to domestikos of the scholai in the east - or in the west74 - during Basil's personal reign. 69 T. Bianquis, Damas et la Syne sous la domination fdtimide (359-468/'969--10776)', I (Damascus, 1986), 180-81. 70 Yahya, II, 443, 458. The list was certainly much longer, but we have information concerning these two cities only. 71 Yahya, III, 400; W. Felix, By%an% und die islamische Welt in frtiheren 11. ]ahrhundert^ Byzantina Vindobonensia 14 (Vienna, 1981), 66. 72 N. Oikonomides, Fiscalite et exemption fiscale a By^ance (IX*-XI* (IXe—XIes.)s.) (Athens, 1996), 270-271,301. 73 Yahya, II, 443. The seal of Christopher, interpreter of the Bulgarians, dates from this period: Laurent, Corpus II, no. 469 (we cannot be completely sure of the last part of the legend). 74 In 997, when Nikephoros Ouranos vanquished Samuel at the battle of the Sperchios he was, according to Skylitzes (p. 341), archon of All the West, that is, the commander of the tagmata of Macedonia and Thrace. In principle this command was not connected with that of the domestikos of the scholai of the west. But we have also found several seals of a Nikephoros, magistros and domestikos of the scholai. The absence of any geographical mention normally indicates an earlier period, before the division of the office of domestikos^ and one

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

17

The power of Nikephoros Ouranos was broadened when he was posted to Antioch, by far the most important and best guarded fortress of the east, as attested by his seal, where he is styled not doux of Antioch but 'Ruler of the East'.75 It is possible that his predecessor, Damian Dalassenos, had also obtained a command which extended beyond the duchy of Antioch, for Yahya of Antioch affirms that Basil entrusted him with the command of the east,76 which is to be understood, as in the case of Ouranos, as command over all or part of the tagmata stationed on the eastern borders, not over the themes of Asia Minor. After his succession to the throne, Basil's brother Constantine, who did not lead armies in the field during his reign, named the parakoimomenos Nicholas domestikos of the scholai.11 Another officer, Theodorokanos, must have had broader command in the capacity of archegetes of the east. The holder of this post, which had been recently created in as much as we find the first mention of it in the Escorial Taktikon, had charge, through the taxiarchs, of the professional infantry, which at this time was in part composed of Armenian garrisons of the duchy of Antioch. The emperor's men in Asia Minor Basil II reigned longer than any other emperor, more than half a century, or if we count only his personal reign, for some forty years. Paradoxically, however, we have only an imperfect knowledge of the personnel employed by him in the central administration and the government of the provinces. From this point of view it is significant that after Ouranos only would be tempted to attribute this seal to Nikephoros Phokas who, under Constantine VII, held this rank and exercised this office. However, one of these seals was found at Preslav, in the context of the reconquest of the city around the year 1000: I. Jordanov, "Molybdobulles de domestiques des scholes du dernier quart du Xe siecle trouves dans la strategic de Preslav", Studies in Byzantine Sigillography 2 (Washington, DC, 1990), 210—11). Moreover, the iconographic motif, (the Virgin) is out of keeping with the habits of the Phokades in the tenth century, who did not use icons on their seals. Finally, the case is clear in an original document in the archives Vatopedi, where allusion is made to Nikephoros, magistros and domestikos of the scholar. Actes de Vatopedi I, ed. J. Lefort, V. Kravari, Ch. Giros, Archives de 1'Athos 21 (Paris, 2001), no. 2, (998), p. 69. It seems certain that Basil II had re-established the unity of command in the case of Nikephoros. 75 See the commentary of E. McGeer, "Tradition and Reality in the Taktika of Nikephoros Ouranos", DOP45 (1991), 120. 76 Yahya, II, 444. 77 Skylitzes, 370. Constantine broke with the tradition whereby the office of domestikos of the scholai was not to be conferred on eunuchs.

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

18

two doukes of Antioch are attested during the last twenty years of Basil's reign: Michael the koitonitesva 1011 and Constantine Dalassenos in 1025.78 It should be noted that Basil transferred strategoi between Europe and Asia more than his predecessors had done: Nikephoros Ouranos, Basil Argyros, Nikephoros Xiphias were appointed commanders in the east after having proved themselves in the west. Exception must be made, as we have said, for Nikephoros Ouranos, Basil's protege and confidant from the time when the emperor was as it were subject to the parakoimomenos Basil. Judging from the chroniclers, Nikephoros appears to have been an isolated person, without any illustrious family connexions. All the same, however, he was descended from a family of high-ranking civil servants since at least the mid-tenth century. Basil Ouranos, probably an elder of the previous generation, was a correspondent of Theodore Daphnopates, who ascribed to him the rank of protospatharios and the office of asekretes.19 Nikephoros himself was keeper of the imperial ink-pot before his brilliant military career. The misfortunes of his brother Michael, to which Nikephoros refers in a letter, give us no clue as to his activities.80 This Michael is probably to be distinguished from a patrikios of the same name who was responsible for financial matters during the preparations for the ill-fated Cretan expedition in 949.81 Finally, in the first half of the eleventh century, perhaps under Basil II, this family was apparently united by marriage to another which was also enrolled in the high-ranking civil service, the Bringai. Otherwise, we should be at a loss to explain how the nephew of Michael VI Bringas, appointed doux of Antioch in 1056, could have borne the name Ouranos.82 The rehabilitation of the Bringai under Basil II is easily explained. Joseph had been a faithful servant of the dynasty, even if he had failed to prevent the victory of Nikephoros Phokas in 963. After 986, hatred of the Phokades had become very useful political capital. Amongst the other names which appear, the family of the Dalassenoi is the most in evidence, with Damian and his sons Romanos, Theo78

Yahya, III, 470. Theodore Daphnopates, Correspondance, ed. and trans, by J. Darrouzes and L.G. Westerink (Paris, 1976), 169, 171, 193. 80 J. Darrouzes, Epistoliers by^antms du Xe siecle (Paris,1960), 236—7. 81 Constantinus Porphyrogenitus, De cenmoniis aulae By^antinae libri duo, ed. J.-J. Reiske (Bonn, 1829-1830), 668. New edition by J. Haldon, "Theory and Practice in TenthCentury Military Administration: Chapters II, 44 and 45 of the Book of Ceremonies", TM 13 (2000), 223. 82 Skylitzes, 483. 79

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

19

phylaktos, and Constantine,83 even though two of them remained captives of the Fatimids for ten years. It is certain that the Dalassenoi replaced the Phokades as the dominant family in the army of Asia Minor, despite the emperor's authorisation of their acquisition of landed property equal to that of the latter. The effects of this imperial favour were felt long after Basil II's death, for Constantine Dalassenos was on several occasions solicited for marriage to a princess born in the purple or suspected of aspiring to the throne. Nor did the family fail completely in such expectations, for the son of a Dalassena came to power in 1081. The Komnenoi are observed more in the background. In 978 Manuel Komnenos zealously defended the cause of Basil II against Bardas Skleros, which would indicate that he was not close to the faction of the Phokades, who were less keen on supporting the young emperor. But then the Komnenoi disappear from sight until the end of the reign, when Nikephoros arrived in order to sort out the situation in Vaspurakan.84 We know however that Basil II saw personally to the military education of Manuel's children, Isaac and John, probably orphaned from an early age. The origins of the Komnenoi remain mysterious, but Manuel's mother was descended from the Erotikoi.85 There is no earlier attestation of these latter as military officials, but they had been in service to Constantine VII, who had given Nikephoros Erotikos, the son-in-law of the eparch Theophilos, the chair of geometry.86 The eastern family of Argyros were the most illustrious of Basil II's supporters, for they had been great military leaders since the end of the ninth century.87 They won the emperor's favour for two reasons. Firstly, the Argyroi were opposed, at the beginning of the tenth century, to the 83

See the notices concerning these persons in J.-C1. Cheynet and J.-F. Vannier, Etudes prosopographiques, Byzantina Sorbonensia 5 (Paris, 1986), 76-85. One must also add John, brother or son of Damian. 84 Skylitzes, 355; Aristakes of Lastivert, 26. 85 K. Barzos, fH yevecdoyia rcov KOJUV^VCOV, BU^OVTIVCC Kei^ieva vcai MeAerai 20 (Thessaloniki, 1984), I, 37—9. It is not impossible that the origins of the Komnenoi are to be sought in Thrace (ibid., 25). 86 A. Markopoulos, "Le temoignage du Vaticanus gr. 163 pour la periode entre 945 et 963", ZujUjueiKra 3 (1979), 92. Theophanes Continuatus (p. 446), who recounts the same facts, calls Nikephoros the gambros of the eparch Theophilos Erotikos. It is unlikely, though not impossible, that the two men, united by the relation of gambros (generally, son- or brother-in-law) had the same family name. We should probably correct one of the manuscripts, perhaps that of Theophanes Continuatus. 87 On the Argyroi, see J.-F. Vannier, Families by^antines: les Argyroi (IXe—XIIe siecles), Byzantina Sorbonensia 1 (Paris, 1975) and the review of this book by I. Djuric, ty^antinoslavica 39 (1978), 230-33.

*

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

20

first attempts of the Phokades to seize power. This position brought them into alliance with the victorious faction, the Lekapenoi: Romanos Argyros married the youngest daughter of the emperor Romanos I. Thereby, the Argyroi also became relations of the Macedonian dynasty. Romanos was the brother-in-law of Constantine VII, grandfather of Basil II. The memory of this relationship had not been forgotten in 1028 when Constantine VIII, on his death-bed, sought a successor and chose the grandson of Romanos and Agatha, also named Romanos.88 In 963, Marianos Argyros had also had the good sense to oppose Nikephoros Phokas. It is immediately clear why Basil should have placed such trust in the first cousins Basil and Leo Argyroi, even though they were hardly gifted as strategoi. The third brother, Romanos, chose a civil career, to which the emperor added lustre: he was a judge of the Hippodrome, with the rank of patrikios — quite high for a judge, who was usually only a spatharokandidatos or, at best, protospatharios; and he was also oikonomos of the Great Church.89 From seals we know that he was also megas chartoularios90 and judge of the Opsikion.91 Finally, one of the sisters, Pulcheria, married Basil Skleros, the grandson of the old rebel, at an unknown date though probably after 989, which would indicate that Basil II agreed to the marriage. One might suggest the date of 990/991, when the emperor received the visit of the old Bardas and his son Romanos near Didymoteichos.92 This meeting marks the reconciliation of the sovereign with the faction of the Skleroi. Romanos, a magistros, received a command in the east, which brought him into battle with the Fatimids near Antioch in 993.93 On this occasion, the marriage of the grandson of Bardas to the first cousin of Basil II could have been worked out in order to confirm the links between the two families. Thereby the Skleroi became relations by marriage of the Macedonian dynasty. The Argyroi were not the only generals from the eastern parts of the empire to serve under Basil II. The Doukai, Botaneiatai and Diogenai were also employed, but more in the west. We must remember, however, 88

Yahya, III, 484. Vannier, Argytoi, 36-7. 90 V.S. Sandrovskaja, Sfmgistika, in: Iskusstvo Vi^antii v sobmnijach SSS&—Catalog vystaki, I-III (Moscow, 1977), no. 745. 91 Unpublished seal of the Hermitage Museum 4454 (I thank V.S. Sandrovskaja for this reference), confirmed by G. Picker, Die Phundagiagiten (Leipzig, 1908), 97. 92 Yahya, II, 430. 93 There is some doubt concerning the nature of the command exercised by Romanos, cf. Seibt, Skleroi, 61—3. 89

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

21

that our lists of provincial officials are very patchy. The Doukai were not found, generally, in the same camp as the Phokades, which might explain the return to the foreground of the descendants of those who had escaped being massacred after the unsuccessful attempt by Constantine Doukas to usurp the throne in 913. The doux w\&patrikios Andronikos Doukas Lydos had, together with his sons Christopher and Bardas, supported the rebellion of Skleros.94 In 1016 Bardas was sent to crush a revolt in Khazaria.95 Andronikos Doukas, father of the future emperor Constantine, was made strategos of Preslav in the first third of the eleventh century, probably under Basil II.96 If the name Lydos, 'the Lydian', has any real sense, the Doukai must have then been established in Phrygia and no longer in Paphlagonia. Like the Doukai, the Botaneiatai were settled in Phrygia in the eleventh century, but Basil II also assigned them to important posts in the west, for Theophylact Botaneiates was doux of Thessalonica at the time when this city served as a rearguard base against the Bulgarians. Other Phrygian families, later related to the Botaneiatai, must have also found favour with Basil II, such as the Kabasilai and the Synadenoi. Nikephoros Kabasilas, doux of Thessalonica, massacred a band of Rus before the emperor's death.97 Constantine Kabasilas, doux of Vaspurakan in 1034,98 served at the side of Theodora in 1042 as an old retainer of her father Constantine VIII.99 The Synadenoi were not to become officers of high rank until after the death of Basil II, but it is to be noted that one of the correspondents and friends of Nikephoros Ouranos, when he was doux of Antioch, was named Philetos Synadenos and held the office of judge of Tarsus.100 The Melissenoi of Dorylaion are represented only by one Leo, who had supported Bardas Phokas until the battle of Abydos. Nevertheless, Basil II made use of his services, for Leo came to the aid of Michael Bourses, doux of Antioch, just before the crushing defeat of Gue at the hands of the Fatimids in 994.101 Thereafter the sources are silent concerning the role played by the Melissenoi, but the family occupied a pre-eminent position in the mid-eleventh century, amongst the others 94 Skylitzes, 328. 95 Skylitzes, 354. 96 I. Jordanov, Pecatite otstrategyata v'Preslav (Sofia, 1993), no. 303. 97 Skylitzes, 368. 98 Felix, By^an^ 146-7, with earlier bibliography. 99 Psellos, Chronography, I, 103. 100 See the note concerning this person in Darrouzes, Epistoliers, 48—9. 101 Yahya, II, 440-41.

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

22

favoured by Basil II. Finally, it is surprising that there is no mention of the Palaiologoi who were also established in Phrygia and held high rank in the aristocracy in the last third of the eleventh century. The Diogenai were alone in having once had close ties with the Phokades, for Adralestos Diogenes had supported the revolt of Bardas Phokas against John Tzimiskes.102 But a Diogenes had taken part in the conspiracy which, in December 944, put an end to the reign of Romanes Lekapenos and restored Constantine in all his rights.103 No source specifies that the Diogenai were established in the east, but their links with the eastern aristocracy make this very likely. Basil II appreciated the proven military qualities of Constantine Diogenes and entrusted him with highranking posts in the west. It was probably because of this imperial favour that the Diogenai were able to supplant the Phokades in influence in Cappadocia. John Chaldos was briefly doux of Thessalonica, but as we have seen, he commanded contingents from the east. He was descended from a family as ancient as the ruling dynasty itself. If the strategos of Calabria, Krinites Chaldos was a relation,104 the family had already been in service to Basil's grandfather Constantine VII. Nothing is known of the Xiphiai before the reign of Basil II, but they held the latter's favour, at least until the failed rebellion of Nikephoros Xiphias in 1022. Earlier, in 1006, the emperor had named Alexios Xiphias (a brother?) catepan of Italy. But this remains one of the rare examples of a promotion by Basil which did not permit the family to maintain its status of pre-eminence throughout the eleventh century. Of all the generals who had participated in one or another rebellion against the Macedonian dynasty, only one, Michael Bourses, found favour with the emperor, who even appointed him to the most important post in the East. The origins of the Bourtzai, perhaps Arab, remain obscure. Michael Bourses, aided by the Armenian Isaac Brachamios, had taken possession of Antioch for the emperor Nikephoros Phokas. But, discontented with his recompense, he rallied to the cause of John Tzimiskes, who named him doux of Antioch. He could not therefore be associated with the Phokas faction, all the more so because it was he who, in 969, 102

Skylitzes, 292. Theophanes Continuatus (ed. Bonn), 438 and A. Markopoulos, "Le temoignage du Vaticanus gr. 163 pour la periode entre 945-963", ZujUjueiKra 3 (1979), 83-119 at 91. 104 Skylitzes, 265. The name Chaldos might refer to the person's place of origin (Chaldea), but Skylitzes uses this name in earlier passages. It first appears at the end of the tenth century as a transmissible family name. 103

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

23

arrested and brought to Constantinople Leo, the son of Bardas Phokas who had still held Antioch for his father. This hostility for the Phokades and his thorough knowledge of the affairs of the duchy justified the renewed nomination of Bourtzes as doux, this time with the emperor's full accord.105 In sum, Basil chose his strategoi^ amongst Byzantines, from families which had served his ancestors faithfully. He also engaged as officers many foreigners, the great majority of them from the Caucasus. Armenia had long been a source of valued fighters, and Basil II continued this tradition, whereas many Armenians had taken part in the revolt of Bardas Skleros and were held in low esteem by both the inhabitants of the capital and the soldiers of the eastern themes, as demonstrated by the massacre of the Armenian soldiers of Skleros by the men of Bardas Phokas. The emperor preferred to employ Armenians who had been to a great extent Byzantinised, such as the Taronitai, though he was willing to entrust the theme of Cappadocia to Senacherim, former prince of Vaspurakan, if Skylitzes's information is exact.106 At this time the strategic importance of such a post had diminished, for the border had passed far to the east. Moreover, it is probable that Basil sought to humiliate the Cappadocian aristocracy, which was still under Phokas influence, by imposing on them an Armenian strategos^1 The Cappadocian revolt broke out in the very next year. Side by side with the Byzantines Basil II employed numerous Armenians and Georgians, even though the former had supported Bardas Skleros and the latter Bardas Phokas. In this case the support given to rebels appears to have had no adverse consequence. The emperor considered it more important to show the Caucasian elite, especially the Georgians,108 that they would have immediate recompense for their adherence to him. 105

On this person, cf. Cheynet-Vannier, Etudes, 18-24. Skylitzes, 355. Those close to Senacherim enjoyed great benefits (Yahya, III, 462). We also know that Senacherim's wife was made a %pste patrikia in 1021 or later, that his elder son David was given the title of magistros^ and that his younger son Abu Sahl was made kouropalates'. W. Seibt, "Armenische Personlichkeiten auf byzantinischen Siegeln", in N. Awde (ed.), Armenian Perspectives. 10th Anniversary Conference, International Association of Armenian Studies (Richmond, 1997), 269-72. 107 This hypothesis was formulated byj. Howard-Johnston, "Crown Lands", 97—8 and M. Whittow, Making of Orthodox Byzantium, 379. IDS Their Chalcedonian faith rendered them more acceptable to their subordinates. It is also possible that the emperor made a special effort with regard to the Georgians, in as much as these latter displayed recalcitrance toward Byzantine authority, despite the empire's capacity for absorbing new territories. 106

*

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

24

I shall not discuss the assimilation of these newcomers in detail, for they were employed more in the west, their traditional links with the faction of the Phokas faction. The Apokapai,109 the Pakourianoi110 and the family of Tornikios the Iberian111 are good examples. The first were employed against Samuel of Bulgaria.112 Details concerning individual Armenians, with the exception of Senacherim of Vaspurakan, are rarer, but it is certain that Basil II cut a good figure in Armenian milieux. As A. Kazhdan judiciously noted, most of the families who eventually made up the faction of the Komnenoi,113 beginning with these latter themselves, had been favoured by Basil II who, perhaps in this domain as well, had forged the aristocracy of the future by personally arranging matrimonial alliances of certain of his proteges. Isaac Komnenos was thus married to a Bulgarian princess. It appears, too, that Basil willingly employed former seconds-in-command of Bardas Phokas. He also recruited officers from amongst families who resided at the time in western Asia Minor, the Ouranoi, Doukai and Botaneiatai. Basil IPs objectives

It is always difficult to affirm that any emperor had a determined policy, so greatly does imperial action appear dominated by events. Basil's reign is partly an exception to this rule in that there were few unexpected incidents in the east, save for the defeats of the two doukes of Antioch. Basil clearly 109

On this family, see most recently M. Griinbart, "Die Familie Apokapes im Lichte neuer Quellen", SBS 5, 29-41. 110 On the Pakourianoi, P. Lemerle, Cinq etudes sur le XIe siecle by^antin (Paris, 1977), 158-61. 111 Tornikios ^7%£.&/sv2£z.t,protospatharios and strategos: V. Sandrovskaja, "Odno utocnenie teksta hroniki Skilitsy po materialam sfragistiki: Explanation of a Text of Skylitzes on the Basis of Sigillographical Evidence", Soobscenija Ermita^a 40 (1975), 46-8. The author attempts to identify him with a strategos Tornikios of Edessa known from another seal in the Hermitage. If the reading is correct, Tzotzikios is a new example of someone from the east being sent to serve in the west, for this can only have been the western Edessa: the eastern one was never the seat of a strategos. There was a strategos of Dristra named Tzotzikios (Skylitzes, 356). His sons (?) were also in service to the empire, for one Kemales Tzotzikios was strategos of Artach (cat. Spink no. 135, sale Zacos III, oct. 1999, ed. J.Cl. Cheynet, no. 262) and Pherses Tzotzikios strategos of Cappadocia (DOSeals 4.43.13). 112 Basil Apokapes and his sons, one of them named Gregoras, were captured by the Bulgarian Tsar (Skylitzes, 363). 113 A.P. Kazhdan, S. Ronchey, L'aristocm^ia bi^antina dal principle dell'XI alia fine delXII secolo (Palermo, 1997), 141-6.

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

25

had two main concerns: to assure the fidelity of the army in the east, especially near the borders, and to maintain positions that had been occupied whilst allowing for adjustments which might be made without great military effort. It has been argued that Samuel's aggression obliged Basil to wage constant war in the west, precluding the diversion of troops to the east. But this argument may no longer valid, for it is now accepted that Basil was not constantly on campaign against Samuel but responded periodically to the latter's movements.114 The 'toparchs', border chieftains or emirs, aligned themselves always with the side which seemed best to them, that is, which assured them the tides and resources necessary to keep control of their own subjects and to defend their countries from enemies they were unable to fight off alone. Kekaumenos illustrated his famous commentaries with examples of toparchs who were uncertain of which side they should choose. Samuel the Bulgarian very nearly succeeded in winning over a great part of the Byzantine aristocracy in the west, including Adrianople and Thessalonica115. The emperor could not, therefore, disregard these small border states. Either he established dominion over them, with the risk of having to absorb them in the empire, or else incurred the danger of a future adversary winning them over. Basil played both registers, persuasion and repression. Even his admirers, Aristakes of Lastivert and Matthew of Edessa, tell of the cruelty inflicted by the imperial armies on the Georgians, a policy of terror which led the emir of Her to "beg to be allowed to honour the emperor by paying tribute and recognising his power."116 The struggle against the Muslims

After the extraordinary expansion of Byzantine power during the century preceding the death of John Tzimiskes, the empire no longer had any enemy of equal stature in the east, with the exception of the Fatimids. These latter remained on the offensive throughout Basil's reign. At first it seemed they wanted to reconquer Antioch, but their attempts failed, despite several temporary successes. Then they concentrated their efforts on Aleppo, which they wanted to make a base for the conquest of 114

See most recently P. Stephenson, Byzantium's Balkan Frontier. A Political Study of the Northern Balkans, 900-1204 (Cambridge, 2000), 62-77. 115 Skylitzes, 343. 116 Aristakes of Lastivert, 13-14, 23-4.

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

26

Mesopotamia, and from thence the caliphate of Baghdad. Since Byzantium exercised a protectorate over this emirate from the time of Nikephoros Phokas, there were grounds for a major conflict. But the emperor did not appear to set great store by dominion over Aleppo. The reasons for this indifference are uncertain, for possession of this prosperous city was a source of revenue. However, there are several plausible explanations. The defence of Aleppo would have required the reinforcement of the troops, already numerous, of the duchy of Antioch; on the one hand, this would have involved the reduction of contingents in Europe and, on the other, would have given the doux of Antioch the power to entertain imperial ambitions, as had formerly been the case of the strategoi of the Anatolikoi. Secondly, Basil II probably reckoned that the Fatimids would exhaust a part of their dynamism in retaining Aleppo and its citadel if they managed to take it.117 In the event this forecast was proven correct. The Bedouin also posed a threat to the stability of Syria from the second half of the tenth century, for their numbers had increased to the detriment of sedentary peoples. Seeing that the Hamdanids, in selfdefence, had protected the eastern provinces of the empire from Bedouin raids,118 it is easy to understand how the maintenance of an emirate of Aleppo after the imperial triumph fitted in to a strategy of defence against the Bedouin. The treaty of 969/970 provided for the protection against marauders of caravans coming from Byzantine territory.119 In Mesopotamia, after the disappearance of the Hamdanids of Mosul, the Kurdish dynasty of the Marwanids established the most powerful emirate in the environs of Amida, especially at Mayyafarikin. Basil II could certainly not have forgotten that Bardas Skleros had managed to gather around himself Muslim contingents, amongst them Marwanids, for his revolt. The victorious emperor had treated Skleros with consideration and had not pursued the letter's former partisans with vengeance. This explains why, in 1000, when Basil travelled from Cilicia, where he had wintered, to the lands of the kouropalates David who had just died, the 117

On relations with the Fatimids see W. Faradj, "The Aleppo Question: A ByzantineFatimid Conflict of Interests in Northern Syria in the Later Tenth Century A.D.", BMGS 14 (1990), 44-60 and Bianquis, Damas et la Syne, 195-209, 311-23. 118 On the importance of the Bedouin, cf. AJ. Cappel, "The Byzantine Response to the 'Arab (lOth-llth Centuries)", By^antinische Forschungen, 20 (1994), 113-31. According to Mas'udi, by the 960's "the Orontes valley had become largely depopulated owing to a combination of official negligence and Bedouin encroachment." 119 Goods came not only from Northern Syria, for G. Schlumberger (Sceaux byzantins inedits, sixieme serie, Revue numismatique [1920], no. 310) bought at Aleppo the seal of a kommerkiarios of Chaldea datable — in so far as possible — to the eleventh century.

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

27

Marwanid Mumahhid ad-Dawla came to tender his submission and received in recompense the high rank of magistros and the office, somewhat obscure to us, of doux of the east.120 Thereafter peaceful relations were maintained, even though the Byzantines retained the inheritance of the kouropalates David, Achlat and Mantzikert, coveted by the Marwanids. In fact, their modest territory and an internal crisis in the year 1011 prevented them from undertaking any great projects.121 The advance toward the Caucasus

Basil's policy was more active with regard to the Caucasus. Armenians and Georgians had long been involved in the life of the empire, to the point of taking active part in the struggles for power of the various factions of the aristocracy of Asia Minor. The Georgian princes had close ties with the Phokades, with whom they were united by bonds of marriage, and the Armenian princes had to a great extent supported the rebellion of Bardas Skleros. The emperor had to sever these bonds forged on the battlefield if he was to secure peace on the eastern border. The direct or partial control of these border principalities was one of the most effective means of rallying local elites to the central power in Constantinople. It was to the Caucasus that Basil belatedly directed his efforts, more in response to the propositions of Senacherim Artzruni, prince of Vaspurakan, and to the provocation of George, prince of Abgasia, than out of any deliberate desire for expansion. It must have been fear of the Turks that decided Senacherim to abandon his kingdom. This is the most likely explanation, though for more than a century the empire had been absorbing Armenian and Georgian lands by promising their elites imperial titles and posts. Moreover, a philo-Byzantine current had developed in Armenian territories to the south, if we can believe the Story of the True Cross of Aparank written by Gregory of Narek, a monastery situated to the south-west of Lake Van.122 The novelty in the case of Senacherim was the 120 c£ Felix, By^an^ 134 and most recently T. Ripper, Die Marwdniden von Diydr Bakr. Erne kurdische Dynastie im islamischen Mittelatter (Wurzburg, 2000), 140—41. 121 Mumahhid ad-Daula was killed in combat against his vizir Sarwa. 122 i^ importance of this text has been stressed by J.-P. Mahe, "Basile II et Byzance vus par Grigor Narekac'i", TM 11 (1991), 555-73. In 983 the monastery of Aparank' was the beneficiary of an exceptional imperial gift, a relic of the Holy Cross. The government at Constantinople might therefore grant great favours to a Monophysite monastery. This measure cannot be attributed, at this date, to Basil II, for the parakoimomenos Basil was still

VIII 28

BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

extent of the transfer, for the whole of the population followed their ruler. It was perhaps the ascendancy of the Chalcedonians in the kingdom123 which, a priori, facilitated the integration of the elite and its economic wealth,124 which inclined Basil to accept Senacherim's proposition, despite the cost incurred by this annexation: the payment of the troops of the new catepanate and the revenue granted the former archon and his household. Again, the method chosen by Basil was to serve as a precedent, notably to Constantine Monomachos in the case of Gagik of Ani and to Constantine Doukas in the case of Gagik of Kars. One risks misunderstanding certain of the emperor's goals if one loses sight of the fact that internal and external policy were indistinguishable from one another in Byzantium. The chronology of the events of 1021— 1022 makes clear the close relation between Basil's concern for the containment of the aristocracy of Asia Minor and his foreign objectives. In 1021, taking advantage of the disappearance in February of al-Hakim125 which neutralised all danger on the Fatimid side, Basil conducted his first campaign against George, prince of the Georgians and Abasgians. Whilst taking up winter quarters in Trebizond, without demobilising the army, Basil prepared the transfer of a part of the Armenian elite of Vaspurakan which had been bequeathed to him by its prince, Senacherim Artzruni,126 and settled them in the cities of Sebasteia, Larissa and Avara; Senacherim was awarded the rank of patrikios and strategos of Cappadocia.127 It was most probably now that Basil took conciliatory measures with regard to the Armenian Monophysite community, for example by allowing the patriarch Peter, who had come to visit him, to celebrate Epiphany according to the Armenian rite. On this same occasion Basil received the famous conducting affairs, but it cannot be excluded that the young emperor had at least given his advice. Mahe even considers that it was on his initiative that the relics were transferred. 123 Commentary on the Divine Liturgy by Xosrov Anjewac'i^ transl. P. Cowe (New York, 1991), 8. 124 Several trade routes passed through the cities of Vaspurakan: Ibn Hauqal, 532-533; al-Istakri, 518; M. Canard, Histoire de la dynastie des H'amdanides de]a%im et de Syne, I (Algiers, 1951), 191. 125 Yahya, III, 444. 126 Cf. E. Honigmann, Die Ostgren^e des by^antinischen Reiches von 363-1071 nach griechischen, arabischen, syrischen und armenischen Quellen, Corpus Bruxellense Historiae Byzantine 3 (Brussels, 1935), 168—71; W. Seibt, "Die Eingliederung von Vaspurakan in das byzantinische Reich (etwa Anfang 1019 bsw. Anfang 1022", Handes A^msorya 92 (1978), 49-66. 127 Skylitzes, 354—5. To fill the void, partially; Basil transferred — at least temporarily — numerous Bulgarians after their final defeat (Aristakes of Lastivert, 7, who has little esteem for them).

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

29

testament of John-Symbatios, king of Armenia, which named him heir to the kingdom.128 In the spring of 1022, whilst negotiations between George and Basil continued, a part of the aristocracy of Asia Minor conspired with Nikephoros Phokas behind the emperor's back. Given that Basil and his troops were not far off, the reasons for discontentment must have been serious. Of this there can be no doubt. After a part of the Bulgarian royal family had been established in Asia Minor, numerous Armenians had in turn received land grants, originating probably out of confiscations from the local aristocracy. It was pure provocation that an Armenian was set at the head of the theme of Cappadocia. One need only remember how, several years earlier, the troops of Bardas Phokas, father of Nikephoros, had with fury massacred the Armenians in the service of Bardas Phokas. The rebels counted on success by restoring the traditional links of the Phokades with the Georgians. George was sure to support them, for, having seen his country devastated by the emperor, he had no chance of salvation unless the imperial army, and in particular the formidable Rus regiment, was forced to confront a new adversary. Basil was informed of the whole affair, and the rebellion ended under obscure circumstances on 15 August 1022, without having been openly declared. The conspirators were divided, and the role of Xiphias, former companion in arms of the emperor and then strategos of the Anatolikon, cannot easily be determined. It is certain that Nikephoros Phokas was assassinated by a member of his entourage. According to Aristakes, it was David Senacherim who, having taken part in the plot, regained his senses and realised the criminal nature of the undertaking.129 It is more likely that he was acting on behalf of the emperor and perhaps acted as an informer.130 The head of the chief conspirator, Nikephoros Phokas, was brought to Basil's camp and shown to the whole army in order to revive wavering loyalties.131 Basil visited his wrath on the Georgians. Pherses, one of the Georgian nobles in the entourage of the kouropalates David who, in 1000, had been taken to Constantinople as hostage, had later received estates in Basean. He had served as a liaison between the rebels and

128

Aristakes of Lastivert, 15-16. Aristakes of Lastivert, 19. 130 Matthew of Edessa, trans. Dostourian, 45, also alludes to this reconciliation between the Artzruni and Basil, alleging that the emperor had adopted Senacherim's son. 131 Aristakes of Lastivert, 19. 129

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

30

George of Abasgia.132 His punishment was a terrible one: he and his sonin-law lost their heads. Basil II had not ventured to take the field against George as long as his rear flank was exposed. Once free of this worry, he attacked and emerged victor of a bloody battle. We cannot be sure of the accuracy of Skylitzes's account. He describes two consecutive battles, one of which, dated 11 September of the sixth indiction (1022), saw the death of Liparites, one of George's principal generals.133 But in fact Liparites was killed during the first of Basil's Georgian campaigns.134 After the revolt had been put down and George had made his submission, Basil was willing to negotiate without requiring anything more than he had demanded earlier, that is, that he should receive the legacy of David the kouropalates in its entirety. The territorial situation

In northern Syria Basil II was content to consolidate the duchy of Antioch even without maintaining direct control over Aleppo, which had been achieved by his predecessors. He would probably have wanted to take possession of Tripoli, from which the Fatimids could launch attacks by land and by sea. But the most important indication of imperial passivity in Syria was the lack of any reaction to the destruction of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem by al-Hakim.135 In brief, as regards Syria, Basil opted for the defensive policy of earlier emperors who hardly ever left Constantinople, such as his grandfather Constantine VII.136 Further north the territorial gains were considerably greater because Basil finally recuperated the legacy of the kouropalates David and absorbed Vaspurakan, to say nothing of his preparations for the annexation of the kingdom of Ani. Furthermore, generals on the borders were left free to engage their direct adversaries: 132

Aristakes of Lastivert, 20-21. Basil had him arrested by 'cavalrymen belonging to pagan regiments.' Despite the fact that the text talks of cavalry, these were probably Varangians. The emperor would not have entrusted such a task to Greeks. 133 Skylitzes, 367. 134 Aristakes of Lastivert, 13. G. Schlumberger, L'epopee by^antine, II (Paris, 1890), 484, proposes that R'ad Liparites had been killed in 1021 and his son in the following year. 135 See the apt remark of M. Whittow, Making of Orthodox Byzantium, 381. 136 J. Shepard demonstrates that it was Constantine VII's intention all along to bar the routes of access to the Anatolian plateau to Muslims, and that he had at first attempted to repulse the incursion of Sayf ed-Dawla: J. Shephard, "Constantin VII, Caucasian Openings and the Road to Aleppo", in A. Eastmond (ed.), Eastern Approaches to Byzantium (Aldershot, 2001), 19-40.

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

31

thus the catepan of Vaspurakan, Nikephoros Komnenos, who was held to be very active and brave by Byzantines as well as Armenians, took possession of Arces.137 If one observes the borders of the empire in 986, one sees that the advance toward the east was not really inferior to that toward the west. The impression of vast conquests in the Balkans is made more spectacular by the fact that Samuel had at first met with great success and that it was necessary to regain territories lost after 986. One must not, therefore, be deceived by the view of the reign of Basil II presented the Greek sources, which are very partial and which suggest that the emperor concerned himself with nothing but the Balkans.138 From the outset the emperor maintained continuous diplomatic relations with the most important Muslim power of the time, the caliphate of Baghdad, until the end of the great rebellions, and then with the caliphate of Cairo. Between 980 and 1025 we count, solely on the basis of Arabic sources,139 a dozen exchanges of ambassadors amongst the three capitals. Although it is certain that Basil had no expansionist ambitions in Syria, he was nevertheless wary of being accused of not taking care of what Nikephoros Phokas, surnamed the Victorious, had added to the empire. Conclusion: Bast Ill's Legacy

Basil's legacy was the durable military and social organisation of Asia Minor. From a military point of view, he considered that the territory brought under Byzantine control by his predecessors sufficed for the interests of the empire, except for the need to improve border defences. For this reason he allowed adjustments by the incorporation of Armenian and Georgian territories if this involved no protracted effort. When any serious threat was posed to imperial provinces, for example, the duchy of Antioch or Chaldia, he intervened personally. Confronted with the Fatimids, he would have been willing to supplement the Byzantine system of defence by incorporating the emirate of Tripoli into the empire or by seizing Apamea or Horns. But he did not pursue this objective with conviction. Nevertheless his example inspired Romanos III to retain the 137

Aristakes of Lastivert, 27. 138 jn my study on revolts I wrongly stated that Basil had expansionist intentions only in the west (Cheynet, Pouvoir, 336). 139 Yahya, II—III; Maqrizi, Description topographique et historique de I'Egypte. [Deuxieme partie]^ French trans. U. Bouriant (Paris, 1900).

VIII 32

BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

city of Edessa captured by the bravery of George Maniakes. Basil II must have considered his victories over the Bulgarians as the counterpart of the triumphs of earlier emperors in the east, but it would appear that he thought his own campaigns in the east to be the key points of his reign. Imperial coinage bears witness to this. P. Grierson has distinguished several classes in the issues of nomismata. The fourth of these marks a rupture with the appearance of a crown above the head of the emperor, a symbol which had disappeared from monetary iconography since the fifth century. Grierson argues, convincingly, that the introduction of the crown of victory should be dated to the year 1001, which marked the victorious end of two years of campaigns in Asia Minor.140 Finally, Basil II has been accused of having weakened the strategic position of Byzantium by absorbing the buffer states which had for centuries stopped the advance of invaders. In fact, one would have to prove that the existence of such states was sufficient to ward off invasions. In the seventh century, when the Arab attack was intensified after the defeat of Yarmuk, the lack of firm control over Armenia allowed local elites to negotiate an accord of non-aggression which spared their country but which exposed the empire to direct strikes from its enemies. In addition, it appears that Basil was concerned to maintain peaceful relations with his principal potential adversary, the Fatimid caliphate, as shown by the repeated embassies between Constantinople and Cairo. In places where no great power was opposed to the Empire, the emperor wanted to establish a series of allied emirates, whose chiefs received titles and subsidies from Constantinople, such as the Mirdassids of Aleppo and the Marwanids of Diyarbakir. There was nothing imprudent in this, for the spirit of jihad had greatly diminished owing to the failure of the Hamdanids and the moderation of the Byzantines. These tiny emirates, peopled largely by Christians141, might well prefer imperial protection to Muslim domination. When the Seljukids became masters of Baghdad and advanced toward Jezireh and Syria, they came up against these emirs. Following the example of John Tzimiskes, who had begun to remedy the splintering of small Armenian border themes by organising a large 140 P. Grierson, Catalogue of the Byzantine Coins in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection and in the Whittemore Collection, II-III, 2 (Washington, DC, 1973), 606-7. 141 The Turkish successor states of these emirates took account of the Christian population by issuing coins with iconography inspired by Byzantine models, and certain dynasties (the Zengids and Danishmendids) even used overstruck Byzantine coins: G. Hennequin, Catalogue des monnaies musulmanes. A^sie premongole. Les Salguqs et leurs successeurs (Paris, 1985), 619-35.

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

33

district around Antioch, Basil created a series of large districts along the eastern border, a measure which he repeated in the west after the conquest of Bulgaria. He stationed there the best troops of the empire, many of them foreigners, especially Armenians, and probably after 1018 also Bulgarians, causing at least a partial demilitarisation of what contemporaries called the great 'Roman' themes. This structure served as a model to all Basil's successors in the eleventh century, with the exception of Romanos IV, who attempted a partial return to the old system of conscription. The only innovation of note after Basil's reign was the massive employment of Latin cavalry. In the social sphere, Basil II endeavoured to reconstitute an aristocracy in Asia Minor which would no longer pose a threat to the central power, and this objective affected his foreign policy. He took various measures concerning the structure of landed property. In general, one suspects that he was less generous in his grants of state lands to superior officers. Moreover, he introduced new elements, Armenians and Georgians and, at the end of his reign, Bulgarians. Finally, as is well known, Basil punished the faction of the Phokades, the Malei'noi and the Moselai by depriving them of the greater part of their property, thereby increasing the wealth of the state and at the same time allowing him to be generous toward the newcomers. It remains for us to assess the impact of Basil II's regime in Asia Minor on the course of Byzantine history in the eleventh century. Scholarly opinions still diverge considerably, depending on whether one considers Basil's reign as the culmination of the expansion of the medieval empire or detects here forebodings of future disaster. M. Whittow, who ends his history of the transformation of the Roman Empire into an Orthodox state centred on Constantinople with the reign of Basil II, judges the latter's policy in the east simply as conservative and in no way blames him for the ills which follow. On the other hand, M. Angold, who begins his excellent political history of the empire with the death of Basil, passes severe judgement on the overwhelming burden he bequeathed to his successors: an aggressive military policy demanding a rigorous system of taxation, a social policy which left little place for new forces generated by the economic revival, and finally the enlargement of the empire involving the absorption of foreign and heterodox populations, which gave offence to the Orthodox142 and endangered the provinces where these peoples of 142

According to Matthew of Edessa (transl. Dostourian, 43), Basil summoned to Constantinople the Armenian scholar (vardapet) Samuel who surpassed all the learned

VIII 34

BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

uncertain loyalty were settled. Here we are far from the favourable assessment of G. Schlumberger who, a century ago, considered Basil's reign as the high point of the 'epopee byzantine,' an opinion which is still reflected in the History of G. Ostrogorsky, who considered 1025 as the beginning of the empire's decline. We have already responded to the accusation of excessive fiscal rigour. There is no proof that Basil overtaxed the empire's resources. He gained better control of them, having the revenues from state lands, augmented by confiscated estates, sent directly to Constantinople. Military expenses, if they were proportionate to the size of the army, should not have increased by much, since the empire maintained only one large army in operation, whereas the troops of Asia Minor were partially disbanded. Did the absorption of new Armenian territories affect the demographic balance to the detriment of the 'Orthodox'? In the first place, the emperor who brought in the greatest number of heterodox foreigners was Nikephoros Phokas, though Basil in no way broke with the practice of his predecessor. The introduction of Georgians presented no difficulty from a religious point of view, for they were Chalcedonians, but the difference of language separated them from their Greek co-religionists. Basil transferred numerous Armenians to Asia Minor, but many of them were probably Chalcedonians, and amongst the elite were many who would serve the empire faithfully in the course of the following century. Basil certainly did begin preparations for the annexation of the kingdom of Ani, more homogenous from a religious point of view and attached to its national religion. However, judging from the manner in which this annexation was accomplished, the empire could count on a strong party at the country's core. Nevertheless, all the measures taken after Nikephoros Phokas's victories until the annexation of Ani in 1044 had the effect of reducing local Chalcedonians to a minority. Was the failure of this policy inevitable? Might Basil II have at least foreseen it? To be sure, the passing of time was necessary in order that the newly diversified aristocracy of Asia Minor, including Greeks, Bulgarians, Georgians and Armenians, to mix, whereas the Turkish onslaught left them hardly a quarter of a century's respite. In fact, the project nearly succeeded, for amongst those who defended the empire's south-eastern border against the Turks in the last quarter of the Greeks, whom the emperor consequently punished. Matthew also alleges (ibid., 53) that Basil, in his will, commanded his brother and successor to take care of the Armenians. In fact, the first signs of religious intolerance at Constantinople are later than the death of Constantine VIII.

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

35

eleventh century we note numerous Armenians and Georgians: Kachatur and Philaretos Brachamios, doukes of Antioch, Apellarip, the defender of Tarsus and Cilicia, and later Hethum at Edessa, Gabriel at Melitene, and Thathul at Marash.143 The great emperor's successors, however, did not have the same stature nor, above all, legitimacy, and they were forced to return to a policy favoured by the Church of Constantinople, to placate the clergy and probably also public opinion of the capital, on which imperial power now depended more than in Basil's time. In short, the Asia Minor invaded by the Turks was still organised according to the principles defined by Basil II, who served as a constant model to his successors - including those of the so-called 'civil aristocracy' - partly on account of his success, and partly because they inherited his ministers, such as John the Orphanotrophos, who perpetuated his policies. It was not until the reigns of Romanos IV Diogenes and Michael VII Doukas that the local recruitment of troops was again practised, though only in part. Basil II had reinforced the organisation of the borders on the basis of duchies and a catapanate employing the great majority of available forces, leaving the traditional themes nearly devoid of troops. In the event, this plan facilitated the Turkish advance, once the line of defence on the border had been breached.144 It would however be unjust to blame Basil, even indirectly, for the loss of Asia Minor at the end of the eleventh century. Rather, it was the long duration of his influence that hindered adaptation to the new situation created by the invasions of the Turks and, to a lesser degree in Europe, the Petchenegs. Basil II can with much greater certainty be reproached for not having assured the continuity of the dynasty, for reasons which escape us.145 In 143

Cf. several essays in L'Armenie et Bj^ance. Histoire et culture, Bj^antina Sorbonensia 12 (Paris, 1996): V. Arutjunova-Fidanjan, "L'image de 1'empire byzantin dans 1'histoire armenienne medievale (xe—Xles.)", 7—17; J.-C1. Cheynet, "Les Armeniens de 1'Empire en Orient de Constantin X a Alexis Comnene", 67—78; G. Dedeyan, "Les princes armeniens de 1'Euphratese et 1'Empire byzantin (fin Xle-milieu Xlle s.)", 79-88; Nina Garsoian, "The Problem of Armenian Integration into the Byzantine Empire", in H. Ahrweiler — A. Laiou (eds.), Studies on the Internal Diaspora of the Byzantine Empire (Washington, DC, 1998), 53—124. 144 J.-C1. Cheynet, "La conception militaire de la frontiere orientale (lXe-Xllle s.)", in A. Eastmond (ed.), Eastern Approaches to Byzantium (Aldershot, 2001), 57-69. 145 Hypotheses can always be attempted. One of the most interesting was that of M. Arbagi, "The Celibacy of Basil II", Byzantines Studies/Etudes by^antines 2 (1975), 41-5, who, basing himself on information provided by Ademar of Chabannes, argues that Basil lived a quasi-monastic life in consequence of a vow. This hypothesis is also accepted by L. Garland, "Basil II as Humorist", Bj^antion 79 (1999), 321. Basil's austerity during his personal reign is beyond doubt and stands in contrast to his youth, but this does not explain why the emperor did not take care for the marriage of his nieces. Perhaps he

VIII 36

BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

the end it was the struggle to establish a new dynasty, in the absence of any dominant group of the aristocracy after Basil's subjugation of the Phokades, which, together with the foreign invasions, rendered the situation uncontrollable.

wanted to avoid the often pervasive influence of relations by marriage. His grandfather Constantine VII had been subject to his father-in-law, Romanes Lekapenos, and Basil himself had with difficulty got free of the regency of his great-uncle \hepamkoimomenos.

VIII BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

37

Abbreviations Aristakes of Lastivert: Aristakes de Eastivert, Recit des malheurs de la nation armenienne. French translation with introduction and commentary by M. Canard and H. Berberian from the edition and Russian translation by K. Yuzbashian, Bibliotheque de Byzantion 5, (Brussels, 1973). Asolik of Taron: Stephen Asolik of Taron, Histoire Universelle, annotated translation from the Armenian by F. Macler (Paris, 1917). Bianquis, Damas et la Syrie: T. Bianquis, Damas et la Syne sous la domination fdtimide (359-468/969-1076) I, (Damascus, 1986). Bryennios: Nicephori Bryennii historiarum libri quattuor, Introduction, text, translation and notes by P. Gautier, CFHB, series Bruxellensis IX (Brussels, 1975). Byzantine Asia Minor. Byzantine Asia Minor (6th—12th cent.), ed. S. Lampakes, The Speros Basil Vryonis Center for the Study of Hellenism. Hellenism: Ancient, Medieval, Modern, vol. 27, (Athens, 1998). Cheynet—Vannier, Etudes: J.-C1. Cheynet—J. -F. Vannier, Etudes prosopographiques, Byzantina Sorbonensia 5, (Paris, 1986). Cheynet, Pouvoir. J.-C1. Cheynet, Pouvoir et contestations a By^ance (963—1210), [Paris, 1990]. Dagron, Guerilla: G. Dagron — H. Mihaescu, Le traite sur la guerilla de I'empereurNicephore Phocas (Paris, 1986). Dagron, Minorites ethniques: G. Dagron, Minorites ethniques et religieuses dans 1'Orient byzantin a la fin du Xe et au XIe siecle: L'immigration syrienne, TM 6, 1976, 177-216. Darrouzes, Epistoliers: J. Darrouzes, Epistoliers by^antins du Xe siecle (Paris, 1960). Felix, By%an%. W. Felix, By^an^ und die islamische Welt in friiheren //./^M//^^[ByzantinaVindobonensiaXIV] (Vienna, 1981). Howard-Johnston, Crown Eands: J. Howard-Johnston, Crown Lands and the Defense of Imperial Authority in the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries, By^antinischeForschungen^XI (1995), 75-100. Jacoby, Geni^ah: D. Jacoby, What do we Learn about Byzantine Asia Minor from the Documents of the Cairo Genizah, Byzantine Asia Minor (Athens, 1998), 83-95. Leo the Deacon: Eeonis Diaconi Caloensis historiae libri decem, ed. C. B. Hase, (Bonn, 1828). Markopoulos, Vaticanus gr. 163\ A. Markopoulos, Le temoignage du Vaticanus gr. 163 pour la periode entre 945-963, ZujUjuaKTO 3 (1979), 83-119.

VIII 38

BASIL HAND ASIA MINOR

Matthew of Edessa: Armenia and the Crusades, tenth to twelfth centuries: the Chronicle of Matthew of Edessa, trans, from the original Amenian with a comment, and an int. by A.E. Dostourian, (University Press of America, 1993). Michel le Syrien: Chronique de Michel le Syrien, Patriarchs Jacobite d'Antioche (1166-1199), ed. J.B. Chabot (Paris 1905-1910), reprint 1963. Psellos, Chronographj. Michel Psellos, Chronographie, ed. Renauld, (Paris, 19672)SBS: Studies in Byzantine Sigillography. Skylitzes: loannis Scylit^ae Synopsis Historiarum, ed. I. Thurn, [CFHB V, Series Berolinensis], (Berlin-New York, 1973). Yahya of Antioch II, III: }~Listoire de Yahyd-ibn-Sa'fd d'Antioche, Continuateur de Sa'id-ibn-Bitriq, ed. and trad, by I. Kratchovsky - A. Vasiliev, II, PO23 (1932), 347-520; III - ed. I. Kratchovsky; annotated French translation by Franchise Micheau and G. Troupeau, PO 47, fasc. 4 (1997). Whittow, Making of Byzantium: M. Whittow, The Making of Orthodox Byzantium 600-1025 (London, 1996). Zacos BnF: Seals of the Zacos collection in the Bibliotheque nationale of France (partly unpublished).

IX

PHILADELPHIA UN QUART DE SIECLE DE DISSIDENCE, 1182-1206 La ville de Philadelphie ne prit une grande importance strategique qu'avec 1'apparition du peril turc. Auparavant, elle etait une modeste bourgade : Psellos en parle comme d'un chorion1 ; elle est un simple eveche dependant de la metropole de Sardes2. A la fin du xie siecle, elle est occupee par les Turcs comme le reste de 1'Asie Mineure, et lorsque ces derniers, vers 10931094, en furent chasses par un general d'Alexis Comnene, Jean Doukas, la ville, confiee a Michel Kekaumenos3, devint le point d'appui le plus important de la defense byzantine en Asie Mineure. Son role etait de s'opposer a la pression des nomades turcs qui occupaient la lisiere du plateau anatolien, desormais zone frontiere entre Byzantins et Seldjoukides pour deux siecles environ. Elle apparait dans ce role durant tout le xne siecle. Sous Alexis I, Philokales repousse 1'attaque des sbldats de Arsan4, en 1109-1110. Un de ses successeurs, Constantin Gabras, partant de Philadelphie, battit les Turcs a Kelbianos en 111 I 5 . Sous Jean II, la ville servit de camp de depart pour I'empereur lorsqu'il alia reprendre Laodicee du Meandre et Sozopolis aux Perses en 11196. Sous Manuel I, Alexis Gifardos, due des Thracesiens, au debut de 11567 participa activement aux luttes contre les 1. Cf. PSELLOS, Mesaionike Bibliotheke, V, p. 459. Dans une lettre au krites de Philadelphie, Psellos appelle la ville un « chorion», qu'il a visite a plusieurs reprises, en particulier lorsqu'il avait pris la route directe vers la Mesopotamie quand il etait jeune. II est vrai qu'on peut voir aussi en cette expression 1'ironie d'un constantinopolitain, pour qui toute province est un lieu sauvage et bar bare. 2. Cf. V. LAURENT, Corpus des sceaux de rempire byzantin, V, 1, Paris, 1963 ; commentaire du sceau n° 369. 3. Cf. ANNE COMNENE, Alexiade, ed. Leib, Paris, 1945, III, p. 27. 4. ANNE COMNENE, III, p. 145. 5. ANNE COMNENE, III, p. 157. 6. Cf. KINNAMOS, ed. Bonn, p. 5. 7. Cf. Georges et Demetrios TORNIKES, Lettres et Discours, ed. Darrouzes, Paris, 1970, p. 150-151, note 1.

IX 40

Turcs8. La ville servit a nouveau de base cooperations pour 1'empereur lui-meme a plusieurs reprises, en 1160, puis en 1174, alors qu'il etait menace par une coalition de Tensemble des chefs turcs d'Asie Mineure9, et en 1176, Philadelphie lui permit de rallier les debris de son armee apres le desastre de Myriokephalon10. Philadelphie, place-forte de premiere importance11, toujours menacee par les Turcs, est, semble-t-il, la residence normale du due des Thracesiens12. Ce role de Philadelphie comme ultime place chretienne face a la menace turque est ressenti meme par les Croises allemands de Frederic Barberousse13. Sous Alexis II, celui qui occupe ce poste si important de due des Thracesiens est Jean Comnene Batatzes ; il cumule ce commandement avec celui de grand domestique. * * *

Qui est ce Jean Comnene Batatzes ? II est un des plus hauts personnages de I'empire, issu par sa mere Eudocie, soeur de I'empereur Manuel, de la famille des Comnenes, et par son pere Theodore Batatzes, d'une famille de 1'empire dont Timportance est anterieure meme a celle des Comnenes. Depuis deux siecles, on trouve des Batatzes parmi les plus illustres personnages. Cette famille originaire d'Andrinople est mentionnee des 1'epoque de Basile II, lorsqu'un Batatzes, par crainte d'une sanction, se refugia chez le roi bulgare Samuel14. Au xie siecle, on trouve un Jean Batatzes comme principal soutien de Leon Tornikes revoke contre Constantin IX15.

8. KINNAMOS, Bonn, p. 176. 9. KINNAMOS, p. 288. 10. NICETAS CHONIATES, Nicetae Choniatae Historia, ed. J.L. van Dieten, Berlin, New York, 1975, p. 191 et EPHRAEM, Bonn, vers 4636 et 4637. 11. Philadelphie est defendue par une muraille renforcee de nombreuses tours, doublee d'un avant-mur : cf. NICETAS CHONIATES, Orationes et epistulae, ed. J.L. van Dieten, Berlin, New York, 1972, p. 93 ; ouvrage cite desormais : N.C. Discours. 12. Georges et Demetrios TORNIKES, ibidem, p. 173. Georges Tornikes, qui sejourne a Ephese, est oblige, pour aller voir le due des Thracesiens, Alexis Kontostephanos, de traverser les montagnes qui separent Ephese de Philadelphie. 13. Lorsqu'eclaterent des incidents entre Grecs et Allemands devant Philadelphie, Tempereur Frederic refusa de tenter un assaut contre la ville, car il savait que « quia locus ille solus in illis partibus ab incursibus turcorum christianis erat refugium et tutamen», Historia Peregrinorum, MGH SS, Nouvelle Serie, V, p. 154, ed. Chroust ; et le meme fait est rapporte par ANSBERT, ibidem, p. 74. 14. Cf. SKYLITZES, ed. Thurn, p. 343, Berlin, 1973. 15. Cf. SKYLITZES, ibidem, p. 441-442, et MICHEL PSELLOS, Chronographie, ed. Renaud, Paris, 1967, tome II, p. 28-29.

IX PHILADELPHIA 1182-1206

41

Une branche de la famille est installee a Rhaidestos ou elle soutient la revoke de Nicephore Bryennios centre Michel VII16. Nicephore Batatzes exerca les plus grands commandements militaires dans la deuxieme moitie du xie siecle17. Au siecle suivant sont mentionnes un Batatzes a la tete d'un theme non identifie18, Leon Batatzes, qui participa sous Manuel I a une campagne victorieuse contre les Hongrois19. Enfin, consecration supreme, Theodore Batatzes, le pere de Jean Comnene Batatzes, a epouse la sceur meme de 1'empereur. II est peut-etre a identifier avec le Batatzes mentionne par Tzetzes. Ce Theodore Batatzes participa a plusieurs campagnes militaires, 1'une contre les Hongrois, Tautre en Glide20. En tant que beau-frere de 1'empereur, il est honore du titre de pansebaste sebaste21 ou de pansebastohypertatos22. II est mort avant 1166, etant qualifie de « makarios» dans la liste synodale du 6 mars 1166. II a eu au moins quatre fils, Andronic, Alexis, Jean et Isaac23, dont les deux premiers sont appeles, dans les listes synodales, Comnenes, du nom de leur mere. Andronic fut charge par son oncle Manuel I, lors de la campagne de 1176 contre les Turcs qui devait se terminer par le desastre de Myriokephalon, de les prendre a revers en attaquant par Neocesaree24. II echoua dans cette mission, fut tue et sa tete jetee dans le camp byzantin pendant la bataille de Myriokephalon25. Le troisieme fils de Theodore Batatzes ne nous est pas mentionne par les listes des synodes, mais nous est connu par plusieurs autres sources : 1'Histoire de Nicetas Choniates, la Vie de Saint Jean le

16. Cf. Michel ATTALEIATES, ed. Bonn, p. 244-245. 17. On connait de lui un certain nombre de sceaux mentionnes dans V. LAURENT, Deux nouveaux gouverneurs de la Bulgarie byzantine : le proedre Nicephore Batatzes et le protoproedre Gregoire, R.S.E.E., tome VII, 1969, p. 143-150, et dans Werner SEIBT, Die Byzantinischen Bleisiegel in Osterreich, t. 1 : Kaiserhof, Vienne, 1978, p. 243, n° 113 : Nicephore Batatzes fut successivement vestarque et stratege ; magistre, vestes et due de tout 1'Occident ; magistre, vestarque, due et preteur de la mer Egee ; puis proedre et due de Bulgarie, enfin curopalate. 18. Cf. TZETZES, ed. Leone, Leipzig, 1972, Lettre n° 47, p. 67. 19. Cf. KINNAMOS, p. 260. 20. Cf. KINNAMOS, p. 114 et p. 181. 21. D'apres la liste du synode de 1170, ed. Petit, V.V, XI, p. 479. 22. D'apres les listes synodales du 2 mars 1166 et du 6 mars 1166, dans P.O. tome 140, col. 236 et col. 253. 23. Ce dernier est connu seulement par une poesie conservee dans le Codex Markianos, 524, cf. N.E., tome VIII, p. 162. 24. Cf. KINNAMOS, p. 300, et G. ZACOS et A. VEGLERY, Byzantine lead Seals, Bale, 1972, vol. I, part III, sceau n° 2730. 25. Cf. NICETAS CHONIATES, p. 182.

IX 42

Misericordieux26, et quelques sceaux27. Jean Comnene Batatzes etait probablement le cadet d'Andronic et d'Alexis. Lorsque son oncle Manuel regnait, Jean exerga des commandements militaires, en particulier face aux Turcs. Apres Myriokephalon, en 1177 ou en 1178, les Turcs voulurent exploiter la terrible defaite de Manuel, et envoyerent une armee de vingt quatre mille hommes attaquer la vallee du Meandre, sous la direction d'un atabeg28. Manuel ayant appris cette attaque qui parvint jusqu'a la mer, confia des troupes a Jean Batatzes, a Michel Aspietes et a Constantin Doukas. Quoique cela ne soit pas mentionne, il est clair que Jean Batatzes avait la preeminence sur les autres chefs, puisqu'il congut le plan de bataille qui permit aux Byzantins de detruire presque completement cette bande turque29. II n'est plus fait mention de lui jusqu'au printemps de 1182, lorsqu'il manifesta son hostilite a Andronic Comnene. II etait alors grand domestique et due des Thracesiens, et residait a Philadelphie30. Depuis quand detenait-il ce poste ? Nous ne le savons pas, mais comme il semble que le protosebaste Alexis Comnene, qui avec Marie la veuve de Manuel exercait le pouvoir a la place d'Alexis, trop jeune, a Constantinople, n'avait pas modifie les grands commandements mis en place par Manuel avant sa mort, Jean Comnene Batatzes a done ete nomme grand domestique par Manuel, et 26. BioQ TOV dyiov 'Icodvvov paoiAscos TOV *EksriiJLovoQ ed. A. HEISENBERG, Kaiser Johannes Batatzes der Barmherzige. Eine mittelgriechische Legende, in B.Z., tome 14, 1905, p. 160 a 233 ; cite desormais ici : Vie de Saint Jean. C'est une source tardive du xive siecle qui donne une genealogie fantaisiste a Fempereur Jean III Batatzes en le rattachant a la lignee glorieuse des Batatzes. Le pere de Jean III, Basile Batatzes, fut un des chefs militaires les plus glorieux et les plus fideles de Isaac 1'Ange. Nous savons par Nicetas Choniates, p. 400, qu'il etait d'humble origine, ce qui exclut qu'il ait pu etre le fils de Jean Comnene Batatzes. Basile devait sa gloire a ses qualites militaires et a son mariage avec une proche parente de Tempereur Isaac Ange. Si cette source presente une prosopographie fantaisiste, en revanche, elle retrace assez fidelement les evenements concernant la revoke de Jean Comnene Batatzes, qu'elle appelle Constantin. Les renseignements qu'elle fournit peuvent etre en effet recoupes par ceux que donne Nicetas Choniates. 27. Cf. G. SCHLUMBERGER, Sigillogmphie-, Paris, 1884, p. 713, n° 4, et ZACOS et VEGLERY, op. cit., sceau n° 2730 bis : « S^payl? KO(JLVY]VOU TaOTa xaPtTWV1->[J!'ol) &S ^aTcxTgou TTpov^XOev SsajroTOU xXa8oe ananaj ycnexa CBOJHX HOJIHTHHICHX npoTHBHHKa. BHaaHTHJCKa AOMaha sojcKa je OAjiyiHo 3aMCH>eHa HajaMHHHKOM, a 6poJHOcx xpyna je nocxeneno cMaibKBana AO xe Mepe Aa je cnrypHocx U,apcxBa AOBeAena y naxaite.

X 74

y CTBapHocxH, npoijec KOJH je AOBCO AO necxaHKa xeMaxcKe BOJCKC noneo je y X seKy. BnsaHXHJcKH napesn OoKa, LjHMHCKHJe H BacHJinje II cy y csoje noxoAe yniaBHOM Kpexann y npaTH>H npoecHOHajiHHx BOJHHKa, jep je HajaMHHHKa sojcica 6njia MHOFO e(j>HKacHHJa OA xeMaxcKe, a ys TO 6njia H cxajiHO npimpaBHa sa noKpex. Bacmraje II je ya noMoh 6000 pycKHx najaMHHKa ycneo Aa yryniH no6yHy xpyna y BeheM AeJiy Majie Asnje. OHHancHpan>e ose HOBC BOJCKC nnje npeAcxaBJBajio npo6jieM, jep je aaMena BOJHC oGaseae nopeaoM o6e36el)HBajia AOBOJBHO Hosua, HOBOocBojene xepnxopHJe y HxajiHJH H na HcxoKy 6njie cy 6oraxe, a II^apcxBO je H na onnixeM njiany CKOHOMCKH ojanajio. BacHJiHJeBH HacjieAHHiiH cy nacxaBHJiH ^a AOCJie^HO BORQ osaKBy nojiHXHKy, iirapehH je na nnxasy xepnxopHJy IJapcxsa (HeKa^aniKbe GyrapcKe aeMJLe H H6epHJe). HajaMHHHKy Bojcxy cy HHHHJIH cxpamjH, ajiH H BnsaHXHHIIH 6yoyftH ^a je cxajian npnjiHB jbyzjcxsa 6no o6e36e^eH npejiacKOM BOJHHKa H3 GHBIIIHX xeMa y Majio6poJHHJe xarMe. TarMe HHcy GHJIC MaH>e e(j>HKacne OA npexxoAHHx xpyna. H>HxoBe Moryhe noGyne nncy npeAcxasjtajie xojiHKy onacHOcx 3a i^apa Kao no6yne xeMaxcKe BOJCKC. Ho, ano GHCMO MOFJIH ^a neinxo npnroBOpHMO BJia^ajyhHM xpyroBHMa y I^apnrpa^y, Gnjia 6n xo Bepa y HJiysHJy xpajnor MHpa. Hnje yMecHo cynpoxcxasjbaxH nojiHXHKy BOJHHX H II;HBHJIHHX u;apeBa. HcaK KOMHHH je npeyseo cse ,no6pe ynpasne Mepe npHMecbHsaHe y speMe H>eroBor npexxo^KHKa Mnxajjia VI. Pa,o;H concxBene sauixuxe, Mnxajjio VII je no3Bao Ajiane, 6ani Kao H BacHJinje II Pyce 986. ro#HHe. Tpe6a, AaKjie, HHCHCXHpaxH Ha KOHXHHyHxexy BH3aHXHJcKe BOJHe nojiHXHKe y XI Bexy, jep ce pacKHfl ca xeMaxcKHM ype^eaeM o^nrpao HaJKacHHJe y ^pyroj HOJIOBHHH X seKa. Hnnixa He H^e y npnjior XBPAH>H ^a je BH3aHxnjcKa BOJCKa 1078, na nan H 1081. roflHHe 6njia cjiaGnja o^ npexxo^He. LtapeBHMa H3 ^HHacxHJe eM TypaKa, HopMana H neneHera. Onnc cxaaa xpyna y BpeMe ^ojiacKa Ha BJiacx PoMana flnorena, y HyseHOM AxajinjaxosoM xeKcxy, ne MOSKC ce OAHOCHXH H Ha xarMaxcKy sojcKy, Koja je o^HOCHjia no6e^e y cyKoGy ca CBOJHM npoxHBHHUHMa. Ona^aH>e BHsanxHJcKe BOJHC Mohn npoyspoKoaajiH cy, BHnie Hero KBaJIHXCX caMHX xpyna, yHyxpaniH>H HCMHPH KOJH cy 3axBaxHJiH U,apcxBO y nepHO^y off, 1068. AO 1081. roAnne (na npHMep, nopas KOA ManuHKepxa H rpa^ancKH pax KOJH je osaj nopas npoyspoKOBao), 4>HHaHCHJCKa necnrypHOcx H Ha Kpajy nopasn KOA Apana H flncxpe, KOJH HAy na Aymy Jionier BOJCKOBo^e AjieKCHJa KoMHHna. HnaK, AOMaha BojcKa, naKO MajioGpojna, H AaJte je HMajia BeoMa 3HanaJHy yjiory 6am na Kpajy cxojieha. OncxaHKy H oGnoBH I^apcxBa, ynpKOC yHyxpaniEbHM npoGjieMHMa H cnojbnoj onacnocxH. AonpHnejia je Ao6pa aAMHHHcxpaxHBHa H Bojna op^aHH3a^Hja.

XI

DU STRATEGE DE THEME AU DUG : CHRONOLOGIE DE L'EY7OLUTION AU COURS DU Xie SIECLE Au cours du xe siecle, la signification des termes stratege1 et due s'etablit assez clairement : le stratege est le chef militaire du theme, tandis que le due est le chef d'un tagma ou d'une partie de tagma2 stationne dans un lieu donne, ville ou theme3. Au temps de Jean Tzimiskes furent creees de grandes unites territoriales sur les frontieres, soit par un simple regroupement de themes existants, comme en Italie, ou le catepanat est forme des themes de Calabre et de Longobardie4, soit a la suite d'une expansion de 1'empire, comme le duche d'Antioche5. Ce duche, organise quelques mois apres la conquete de la ville, absorba nombre de petits themes frontaliers recemment crees autour d'une ville, Tarse, Mopsueste, Mauron Oros, etc. La structure de ces duches a pu evoluer ensuite, comme 1'atteste la creation d'un theme de Lucanie, dans les limites du catepanat 6 d'ltalie. L'essentiel demeure que le due ou le catepan7 dans ces 1. Nous ne prenons pas en compte ici le stratege de ville, le monostratege, le stratege autocrat6r, mais seulement le stratege de theme. 2. Le meilleur exemple de ce type de due est fourni par Nikoulitzes 1'Ancien ; etant domestique du contingent des Excubites stationne en Hellade, il est appele due de 1'Hellade : G. G. LITAVRIN, Sovety i rasskazy Kekavmena (Cecaumeni consilia et narrationes), Moscou 1972, p. 280; cite desormais Conseils et recits. 3. Helene AHRWEILER, Recherches sur 1'administration de 1'empire byzantin aux ix e -x e siecles, Variorum Reprints 1971 = BCH 84, 1960, p. 36-52 pour le stratege, et p. 52-67 pour le due ou catepan ; cite desormais L'administration. Cf. aussi N. OIKONOMIDES, Les listes de preseance byzantines des IX* el Xe siecles, Paris 1972, p. 344-345 ; cite desormais Listes de preseance. 4. Sur 1'Italie sous la domination byzantine, avec la liste des catepans ou dues d'ltalie : Vera von FALKENHAUSEN, Untersuchungen uber die byzantinische Herrschaft in Siiditalien vom 9. bis ins 11. Jahrhundert, Wiesbaden 1967. 5. La liste des dues ou catepans d'Antioche a ete donnee par V. LAURENT, La chronologic des gouverneurs d'Antioche sous la seconde domination byzantine, Melanges de V Universite Saint-Joseph 38, 1962, p. 221-254. 6. A. GUILLOU, La Lucanie byzantine, etude de geographic historique, Byz. 25, 1965, p. 119-149. La date de creation de ce theme est anterieure a 1042, date a laquelle est atteste le stratege de Lucanie Eustathe Skepides. 7. Sur 1'equivalence des deux termes, Helene AHRWEILER, L'administration, p. 64-65. Contre cette equivalence, T. WASILEWSKI, Les titres de due, catepan et pronoetes dans 1'empire byzantin du c ix jusqu'au xn e siecle, Actes du XIIe Congres d'fitudes Byzantines, Belgrade 1961, t. II, p. 233-239. Nous admettrons quant a nous 1'equivalence des deux termes, dans la mesure ou ils s'opposent de la mSme fagon a celui de stratege.

XI 182

nouveaux ressorts administratifs8 ne remplace pas un stratege ; on ne connait de fait ni stratege d'ltalie, ni stratege d'Antioehe8bis. Ce fait difference les dues d'Antioche ou les catepans d'ltalie des autres dues cites dans le Taktikon de 1'Escurial, comme ceux de Mesopotamie ou de Thessalonique qui coexistent avec des strateges dans ces memes themes. De tels dues, chefs d'un ou plusieurs tagmata, exergant ou non dans la province d'origine de ces tagmata, continuent d'exister au cours du xie siecle, mais ce n'est pas 1'objet de notre etude9. A la veille de 1'avenement des Gomnenes, on constate que de grand themes existant depuis longtemps ne sont plus diriges militairement par un stratege, mais par un due10. La situation est toute differente de celle du siecle precedent, puisque le due ne cotoie plus le stratege, mais 1'a evince. A partir d'un materiel sigillographique qui permet de renouveler en partie la documentation11, nous voudrions essayer de suivre cette evolution et de delimiter plus strictement la chronologie de ce changement, comment il s'est effectue, s'il s'agit d'une reforme generale et progressive et si elle a touche tout 1'empire. L'arrivee au pouvoir des Comnenes, les grandes invasions en Occident et en Orient constituent la limite chronologique inferieure de notre recherche, dans la mesure ou ces evenements ont entralne un bouleversement des structures administratives regulieres12. Pour ne pas risquer d'erreur sur la titulature des gouverneurs militaires de themes, nous retiendrons leur nom seulement lorsque la precision « catepan », « due » ou «stratege » est explicitement donnee. Nous ne tiendrons pas compte des auteurs non byzantins (Armeniens, Latins...), sauf s'ils utilisent un decalque des termes due et catepan. Nous serons egalement mefiants envers les chroni-

8. La notion de doukaton, comparable £ celle de « strategis » pour le theme, est attestee de fagon sure une fois seulement, precis6ment a propos du duche d'Antioche — dans un texte a vrai dire tardif, mais qui reproduit une situation ancienne — lors de la remise de ce duch6 a Bohemond par Alexis Comnene en 1108 : ANNE COMNENE, Alexiade, XIII, XII, 23 : LEIB, III, p. 135. La notion de «katepanaton » n'est pas attestee chez les auteurs byzantins, mais seulement chez un auteur arabe : cf. infra note 17. 8 bis. Un reliquaire conserve a Aix-la-Chapelle comporte une inscription nous informant qu'Eustathe (Maleinos) fut stratege d'Antioche et du Lykandos entre octobre et decembre 969. Durant cette periode la conqu§te de la region d'Antioche n'etait pas achevee et 1'organisation administrative de la province restait provisoire, comme 1'atteste la double fonction d'Eustathe. Sur cette inscription, voir W. B. R. SAUNERS, The Aachen reliquary of Eustathius Maleinus (969-970), JDOP, 36, 1982, p. 211-219. 9. Helene AHRWEILER, V'administration, p. 35, 60. Pour le xi e siecle, le dernier exemple semble constitue par Argyros, fils de Meles qui, en 1054, est magistre, vestes, due d'ltalie, de Calabre, de Sicile, de Paphlagonie. Argyros ne pouvait pas avoir de competence territoriale a la fois sur la Paphlagonie et sur 1'Italic ; on ne saurait deduire de cette titulature 1'existence d'un duche correspondant a chacun de ces themes. De me'me, nous ne parlons pas du due considere comme 1'equivalent du domestique des Scholes : due d'Occident, due d'Orient. 10. Helene AHRWEILER, L'administration, p. 59-60. 11. Parmi tous les sceaux inedits — deja lus par V. LAURENT — nous avons choisi ceux dont la datation pouvait §tre precisee par Femploi des dignites accompagnant la fonction du proprietaire du sceau. 12. Le due, surtout en Orient, suit 1'evolution des grands themes qui se desagregent sous 1'impact des attaques turques et se morcellent; on observe ainsi 1'existence de nombreux dues dont 1'autorite s'etend seulement sur une ville et sa region immediate : Helene AHRWEILER, Vadministration, p. 63.

XI DU STRAT^GE DE THEME AU DUG (xie SIECLE)

183

queurs byzantins qui peuvent etre imprecis ; nous leur prefererons, en cas de contradiction, les sources officielles, sceaux et documents de la pratique. En consequence, nous ne chercherons pas a donner des listes completes des gouverneurs de themes. Nous eliminerons aussi les themes de modeste dimension centres autour d'une forteresse isolee, bien representes dans le Taktikon de 1'Escurial, en particulier sur la frontiere orientale. Nous ne considererons que les themes dotes d'une structure administrative complete avec notamment, a cote du due ou du stratege, un juge du theme. Au cours du xie siecle, des strateges de villes sont encore nommes, au moins jusqu'a Tepoque de Romain IV Diogene13. De telles strategies apparaissent pour la derniere fois dans le chrysobulle d'Alexis Comnene accorde a Bohemond14; nous avons souligne par ailleurs le caractere archai'que et theorique du document, bien mis en valeur par la mention du theme de Kasiotis dont la capitale etait Alep, ville qui n'etait plus sous Finfluence byzantine depuis pres d'un siecle. Constatons tout d'abord que Fexpansion byzantine se poursuit au xie siecle, en particulier au temps de Basile II ; de nouveaux themes sont crees en Occident: ceux de Bulgarie, Paradounavon (Paristrion), Sirmium (ou Serbie ?)15, en Orient: les themes armeniens de Taron, Vaspourakan, Iberie et Grande Armenie, auxquels il faut ajouter celui d'fidesse. La liste des dues ou catepans s'etablit ainsi : Dues de Bulgarie ou dues de Skopje16 : David Areianites, d'abord stratege autocrator, puis premier catepan de Bulgarie17; Constantin Diogenes, due de Bulgarie ; Jean, stratege de Bulgarie18;

13. Helene AHRWEILER, Vadministration, p. 48. 14. ANNE COMNENE, Alexiade, XIII, XII, 17-25 : LEIB, III, p. 133-136. 15. La question de 1'existence de ce theme, de son identification avec celui de Sirmium a ete discutee ; toute la bibliographic est donnee dans N. OIKONOMIDES, Listes de preseance, p. 260, n. 14. 16. N. BANESCU, Les duches byzantins de Paristrion (Paradounavon) et de Bulgarie, Bucarest 1946, p. 134-169. D'une maniere generate, nous ne produisons pas les references citees par les articles ou ouvrages auxquels nous renvoyons. Nous ne les donnons que pour les complements apportes a ces listes. 17. SKYLITZES = IOANNIS SCYLITZAE, Synopsis historiarum, ed. I. THURN, Berlin, New York 1973, p. 358. Areianites fut stratege autocratdr a Skopje, forteresse dont la reddition venait d'etre obtenue. II ne s'agit done pas d'une fonction de stratege de theme, mais de chef des armees qui occupent la Bulgarie, dont 1'organisation administrative n'est etablie qu'en 1018. Cette date est conflrm6e aussi par Yahya d'Antioche, qui parle de la creation d'un « katebanyyat» de Bulgarie : ed. CHEIKHO, Annales Yahia ibn Said Antiochensis, Beryti-Parisiis 1909, dans Corpus Scriptorum Orientalium, Scriptores arabici, Series III, tome VII, p. 363. 18. I. MITITELU, I. BARNEA, Sigilii de plumb bizantine, Studii §i Cercetari di Istorie Veche 17, 1966, p. 48. Les auteurs proposent de lire 'lodcvvfl aTOX0ocpt

Ov^\> (prints, (74) M. ATT., p. 148. (75) M. ATT., p. 87, a lui-meme raconte de facon detaillee, Tinstallation des Ouzes, - c'est la seule fois de son Histoire ou il emploie le terme precis -, dans le territoire de Tempire, sous Constantin X. Us furent etablis en Macedoine, et demeurerent des auwmxoL, allies pour les Remains, jusqu'a maintenant, comme les Petchenegues voisins installes dans les memes conditions. (76) ZONARAS, p. 699, qui parle aussi de v innfov £nava, 5, 17, 18; III 29 Eulampes, Theoktistos: XIV 136 Eumathios: see Philokales Eumeneia: I 37 eunuch: III 25; IV 5 Euphemianos: III 5

INDEX Euphemios: VII 141 Euphrates: X 64 Euphrosyne: see Bobaina, Kamaterissa Euripiotes, George: IV 10, 22 Euripiotissa, Helena: IV 10, 22 Europe: VII 150; IX 49; XIV 134 Eustathios: see Argyros, Boilas, Chomatianos, Kamytzes, Maleinos, Romaios Eustratios: see Choirosphaktes, Garidas Euthymios: II 8; III 12 Euthymios' son, Michael: XIV 139 Euthymios' son, Nikephoros: VII 145 Euthymios, kouropalates: XIV 136 exaktor. Ill 25 exarchos: III 17 exisotes: VI 461 Exkoubiton, theme: XII 322, 324; see komes, domestikos Exkoubitorum, comes: I 10 exkomseia: I 27,29; II 7 exoproika: IV 12 Fatimids: VIII10,12,14, 21, 25, 28, 30, 32 fortresses: see kastra Franks: I 36; X 68; XII 323, 326, 330, 334; XIII 421, 437; XIV 145 Frederick Barbarossa: IX 40; XII 334 GabalLaylun:VIIIll Gabrades, family: II 22 Gabras, Constantine: IX 39; XII 322 Gabras, Theodore: XIV 133, 141, 144, 147 Gabriel, at Melitene: VII 144, 150; VIII 35 Gagik of Ani: I 36; II 20; VII 148; VIII 28 Gagik of Kars: VII 148; VIII 28; XIV 132 Galatia:XIV133 Galaton:III 13 Gangra: XII 328 Garidas, Eustratios, patriarch: XIV 143 Genesioi, family: I 11; II 14, 16 genikon: see logothetes genikos logothetes: VII 145 genos: I 6; II 9; III 9, 28 Geoffrey of Villehardouin: XII 333 Georgia, Georgians: I 25, 32; III 27; IV 18; VIII 23, 25, 27, 28, 29, 33, 34; XII 324 George, name: III 5—7, 21 George of Abasgia: VIII 15, 27, 28, 30 George, o ton Thessalonikes: III 25 George: see Euripiotes, Kamoulianos, Maggaphas, Maniakes, Nikaeus, Kentrokoukouros, Palaiologos, Pediadites, Promoundenos Gerardos: II 20

7

Gerasimos, name: III 24 Germans: IX 47; XII 319; XIII 423 Germia: III 21 gerotrophos: VI 461 Gidos, Alexis: IX 49 Gifardos, Alexios: IX 39 Gnuni: I 12 Gorgonites, Basil: VI 469; XIV 136 Goudeles: III 9 Greece: I 22; III 14 Gregory, name: III 6 Gregory, homes of the Opsikion: 113 Gregory of Narek: VIII 27 Gregory: see Solomon, Pakourianos Guiscard, Robert: 72; VI 469, 470; VII 140, 141; XII 323, 325, 331; XIII 421 Guzes, John: III 3 Guzes, Thomas: III 3 Gymnos, Peter: XIV 138 Hagia Sophia: II 6; VIII 8, 20 Hagioantoniotes: III 17 Hagiochristophorites: III 16 Hagioeuphemites: III 16 Hagiotheodorites: III 16 Hagiozacharites, Theodore: VII 143 Halys:XIV133 Hamdanids: II 21, 25; VIII 12, 13, 26, 32; X62 Harald: I 32; XII 324 Hasan the Deaf: X 68 Hebdomon: V 206 hegoumenos: II 19; IV 27; XIV 145 Helen: see Artabasdina, Diaxene, Euripiotissa Hellas: VI 462; VII 149; IX 48; X 66; XI 192 Henry of Flanders: IX 48, 52 Her, emirate: VIII 25 Heraclea Pontica: VII 149; XIV 145 Herakleios, emperor: I 14, 41 hetaireia: II 7 Hethum, Theodore: VII 151; VIII 35 Hexamilitai, family: XIV 137 Hexamilites, Basil: XII 329 Hexamilites, Epiphanios: VI 469; XIV 136 Hexamilites, Leon: VI 469 Hexamilites, Serge: VI 467; XIV 139 Hierissos: III 25 Hieron: XIV 146 Hikanatoi, tagma: I 11; XII 322, 324 Hikanatoi, family: II 22 Himerios: see Solomon homo novus: I 5, 7, 18, 42 Horns: VIII 15, 31 Hormisdas:VIIIll horreianos: VIII 6

8 Humbert: III 27 Humbertopoulos: III 27 Hungarians: IX 41; XII 331; XIII 421 hypatos: I 33; II 13; IV 14; VI 460, 470; XIV 135 hyperperon: IV 10, 25, 27 hypobolon: IV 6, 18 hypogrammateuon: IV 34 lasites, Constantine: VI 467 lasites, Leo: XIV 140 latropouloi, family: III 17 Ibankos: V 203 Iberia: VI 460; VIII 24; X 66, 67; XI 183, 185,186,187,194; XII 322; XIV 141 IbnMerwan:VII150 IbnMousaraf:VII150 lezith: see Yazid Ikonion: VIII 5; IX 47; XII 323, 333; XIV 133,143 illoustnos: VI 472, 474 Immortals: see Athanatoi immunity: I 38 Ingerina, Eudokia: I 16; III 9, 22 loannokampites, Theodore: I 33 Ionia: IX 44 Irene, see Bertha of Sulzbach Irene, see Piroshka of Hungary Irene: see Doukaina, Komnene Isaac, name: III 19,29 Isaac I Komnenos: IV 33; V 209; VIII, 19, 25; X 65, 69; XII 326 Isaac II Angelos: I 37; V 211; IX 45, 46, 47, 49, 51, 52; XII 331, 332 Isaac: see Brachamios, Doukas, Komnenos Isaurian: I 3, 7; see Constantine V, Leo III ischatr. VII 151 Italikos, Michael: II 4 Italy: III 13; VIII 22; XI 181, 182, 187; XIII 412 Iviron: IV 20; V 207 Jacobite: VIII 3, 9 Jeanne of Savoy: see Anna Palaiologina Jerusalem: III 24; IV 9; VIII 30 Jezireh: VIII 32 John, name: III 3, 5, 6, 11 John, epi tou kanikkiou: VI 467, 468 John, logothetes tou dromou : VI 467, 468 John, judge of Armeniakoi: XIV 137 John, judge of Charsianon: XIV 138 John, judge of Paphlagonia: XIV 139 John, judge of Thrakesion, vestesi XIV 139 John, judge of Thrakesioi, vestarches: XIV 139

INDEX John, kourator. VIII 11 John, Orphanotrophos: VIII 35; X 66 John Vladislav, of Bulgaria: IV 29; X 63 John I Tzimiskes: I 18; V 206; VIII 1, 2, 7, 8, 12,14,15, 22, 25, 32; X 62, 63, XI 181; XII 330 John II Komnenos: II 5, 9, 13, 15; IX 39; XII 328 John IV Laskaris: IV 30 John: see Aboudimos, Alythinos, Chaldos, Gutzes, Kamateros, Kamoulianos, Kegenes, Komnenos, KomnenoDoukas, KontoStephanos, Maios, Maggaphas, Melidones, Opos, Plytos, Skylitzes-Thrakesios, Solomon, Symbatios, Taronites, Thylakas, Zonaras Joseph: see Tarchaniotes judge: of the Velum, of the Hippodrome: passim judges of: II 12 (Kibyrraiotai, Anatolikoi); 16 (Aegean Sea); 17 (Melitene, Cyprus); III 12; IV 24; VI 459-61, 468-9; VII 145 (Thrakesioi); VIII 20 (Opsikion); VIII 21 (Antioch); XIII 437 (Katotika, Armeniakoi); XIV 135 (Boleron, Strymon, Thessalonica; Thracia, Makedonia; Aegean Sea); XIV 136 (Cyclades); XIV137 (Anatolikoi, Armeniakoi) Justinian: II 6 Kabasilas, Constantine: VI 465; VIII 21 Kabasilas, Nikephoros: VIII 21 Kaichosroes: IX 47 Kakikios/Kagik: see Gagik Kale: see Basilakios, Diabatene, Pakouriane Kallergai: I 40 Kalomaria: mother of Stephen: III 22 Kalokyros: see Delphinas Kalonas: III 14 Kamaterissa, Euphrosyne: III 10 Kamaterissa, Theodora, sister of the Augusta: III 23 Kamateroi, family: II 19 Kamateros, Basil: VI 469; XIV 136 Kamateros, Demetrios: IV 31; V 208, 211 Kamateros, Epiphanios: VI 466 Kamateros, John: VI 468 Kamoulianoi, family: III 8 Kamoulianos: David, George, Theodore: I 7 Kamytzes, Eustathios: XII 328 Kamytzes, Manuel: IV 31; V 203, 204, 207, 209 Kantakouzenoi, family: II 13

INDEX Kapandritai, family: IV 35; Kapandrites, Alexios: I 35; IV 24 Kaputru: X 68 Karamallos, Leo: VI 469; XIV 136 Karantenos, Michael: XII 328; XIV 146 Karbonopsina: see Zoe Karmalikai, family: III 13 Kars: VII 148; VIII 28 Kasiotes:XI183 Kassianos: VIII 3 Kassiteras, j-^Melissenos Theodore Kastamonitai, family: III 16 Kastoria:XI 186 kastron: I 36, 37; III 1; IV 21; V 202 kata: III 25-6 Katakalon/Katakoilas/Katakylas, family: 113,17 Katakalon, Leo: II 6, 7 Katakalon: see Kekaumenos Kataphloroi, family: II 18 katepano: II 17; VII 138, 150; VIII 16, 22; IX 45; X 66; ^\ passim; XIII 423; XIV 139 Katotika: XIII 437 Katotikos, family, John, Paul, Stephen: II 10 Kedrea:XIV144 Kegenes, John: VII 149 Kavala:XIV143 Kekaumenos, author of Strategikon: I 39; IV 1, 30; V 206, 212; VIII 25; X 71 Kekaumenos, Katakalon, strategos: X 68; XI 186; XII 324, 326 Kekaumenos, Michael: IX 39 Kelbianos: IX 39, 52 Kenchres, Elpidios: IV 11, 24 kentenariom IV 8; V 200, 202, 203, 204, 209, 213; XII 331 Kentrokoukouros, George: III 9 Kephalai, family: III 16 Kephalas, Leo: IV 33; V 206; VI 462, 463; XIV 139 Kephalas, Nikephoros: V 206 keroularios: VII 146 Keroularioi, family: II 18, 21, 25 Keroularios, Michael, patriarch: II 3; IV 27 Khadab: XIII 430, 437 Khazaria: VIII 21 Kibyrrhaiotai: II 12; IV 26; VI 461; VII 147, 149; XI 190, 193; XII 321, 328, 329; XIV 138, 140 Kilidj Arslan: IX 47-48; XII 335,138; XIV 146 Kios: XIV 144 Klaudioupolis: V 204; XIV 145 Klazomenai: XIV 145

9

Kn.t.tich:VIIIll koiaistor.l 10; II 12 koitonites: VIII 18 Kokkobasileioi: XII 325 kommerkiarios: VIII 10 homes: I 13, 22; III 26; VII 142 IX 45 Komnene, Anna, daughter of Alexios I: II 10; III 19, 27; XIII 432, 435 Komnene, Anna, daughter of a caesar. III 22-3 Komnene, Anonym, sister of Manuel I: IV 32

Komnene, Eudokia (a), wife of Nikephoros Melissenos : III 22 Komnene, Eudokia (b), mother of John Komnenos-Batatzes : III 12; IX 40 Komnene, Irene-Yolande of Montferrat: III 23 Komnene, Maria Tzousmene, sister of Manuel I: IV 10 Komnene, Theodora, wife of Baldwin II: IV 10

Komnenoi, family : I 5, 14, 30, 38, 42; II 13, 18, 22, 26; III 12,16, 20, 23, 28-9; IV 2, 4, 32; V 204, 205, 206; VI 456; VII138; VIII 19; XI182 Komnenoi, see Komneno-Doukas: III 29 Komnenos, Adrian, brother of Alexios I: III 11; IV 32; VI 466 Komnenos, Alexios, protosebastos: IX 42 Komnenos, Andronikos: III 19 Komnenos-Batatzes: see Batatzes Komnenos, David: IX 50 Komnenos, Isaakios, brother of Alexios I: II 5; IV 23, 32; V 207; VI 455; VIII 10; X 71; XIV 141 Komnenos, John (a), brother of Isaakios I: IV 8, 28; VI 455; VIII 19 Komnenos, John (b), son of Isaakios (a): VI 466 Komnenos, John (c), sebastos: II 5 Komnenos, John (d), the Great Komnenos: IV 11 Komnenos-Erotikos, Manuel (father of Isaakios I and John [a]): I 6; IV 28; VIII19 Komnenos, Manuel (b), son of Isaakios I: IV 28

Komnenos, Manuel (c), son of John (a): IV 8 Komnenos, Nikephoros, katepano: VIII 31 Komnenos, Theodore, son of Michael VIII: III 12 Komnenos, Theodore, doux of Paphlagonia: XIV 140 Kontomytes: III 22

10

INDEX

Kontostephanoi, family: I 6; II 12, 13 Kontostephanos, John: VII 139; XII 331 KontoStephanos, Michael: II 12-13 Kontostephanos, Stephen: I 7; III 9 Korikos:XIV144 koubikoularios: I 34

Koulaib:VIIIll

kourator/kouratoreia: I 35; II 10; VII 138; VIII 11 Kourkouades, family: I 38 Kourkouas, Anonym: V 206 Kourkouas, John: XII 329 kouropalates: I 25, 31, 34; II 11; VI 455, 456, 469, 473; VII138,143,151; VIII15, 26; XIV 136,139,140,141 kouropalatissa. VII 148; XIV 132 Krateroi, family: II 14; III 9, 16 Krateros, Leon: 117 Krikorikios:V210 Krinites: see Chaldos Krispinos: XIII 421, 429, 437 Kritopoulos: III 17 Kurd: VIII 26 Kymineianos: III 26 Lachanodrakon, Michael: I 16, 22 Lagoi, family: III 13 Lampe: VIII 6 Laodicaea of Meander: IX 39, 47, 51; XIV 142 Laodicaea the Great: VIII 5; XII 328 Lappardas, Andronikos: IX 43 Larissa: VIII 28; XII 323 Latins: II 27; VIII 16, 33; IX 50, 52, 53; X 68; XI182 Latros: IX 47; XIV 145 Lavra: I 31; IV 23; V 206; VII 139 Lebounion: X 72; XII 325 Leichoudes, Constantine: I 23; V 206, 209 Lekapene, Agatha, daughter of Romanos I: VIII 20 Lekapenoi, family: VIII 20 Lekapenos, Basil: I 6, 34; III 25; IV 31, 33; V 203, 209, 210; VIII 1, 8, 15, 18 Leo: III 6, 11,14 Leo III: I 7, 13 Leo VI12,13,15 Leo VI: I 12, 13, 17; 26; II 6; IV 5, 12; VI 469; X 67; XII 320 Leo,*rofo»:VII149 Leo, protovestiarios: VII 143 Leo, epi ton deeseon: XIII 437 Leo: see Areianites, Diabatenos, Diogenes, Hexamilites, lasites, Karamallos, Katakalon, Kephalas, Krateros,

Maggaphas, Phokas, Phylakas, Promoundenos, Sarbandenos, Serblias, Skandyles, Skleros, Tornikios, Tzikandyles, Tzimiskes Leobachos: III 13 Leonidas: III 21 Libellisios, Peter: VI 464 Ljutovid: VII 150 Limas, Manuel: III 24 Liparites: VIII 30; X 68 logades: seeproteuontes logothetes tou genikou: I 21 logothetes tou dromou: I 18; II 17; VI 459; VII138 logothetes tou stratiotikou: VII 145; X 68 logothetes ton sekreton: III 11 logothetes ton hydaton: XIII 437 Longinas: VIII 8 Longobardia:XI181,193 Lucania:XI 181, 193 Lydia: IX 44, 51 Lydos: see Doukas Lydos Lykandos: XI 190; XIV 138, 140 Macedonia/Makedonians: I 5; IV 10; V 208; X 67, 72; XI 191; XII 321, 324; see also Thrace Machetarios, Michael: VI 467 Maggaphas: Athanasia, Basil, George, John (1), John (2), Leo, Nike-: IX 45 Maggaphas, Theodore: I 37; V 213; IX 45-53 magistrissa: III 22 magistros: I 14, 24, 25; II 11, 13; III, 19, 22; IV 28; V 204, 209; VI 460-74 passim; VII 144, 145, 150; VIII 7, 20, 27; XI 186, 187, 188, 191; XII 323, 324; XIII 430, 436, 438; XIV 136-7, passim Magnus: III 7 Maios, John: IV 30, V 206 Makrembolitai, family: II 19 Makrembolites, Theodore: XIV 138 Makrembolitissa, Eudokia: V 206; XIII 413, 436 Makres:XIV143 Maleinoi, family: I 26; III 29; IV 15; V 204, 211-12; VIII 7, 33 Maleinos, Constantine: IV 16, 17, 25 Maleinos, Eudokimos: III 19; IV 3, 15, 16 Maleinos, Eustathios: I 18; IV 31; V 204 Maleinos, Manuel: IV 15 Maleinos, Michael, Saint: VII 147 Maleinos, Stephen: IV 33 Maleses, Basil: XIII 430, 437

INDEX Malesios: III 9 Malik Shah: VII 150; XIV 142 Mamikonians: I 12 Manbidj:XIV132 Mangana: I 23; V 206, 209; VIII 11 Maniakai, family: III 13 Maniakes, George: I 35; VII 141; VIII 32; XII 327, 330 Manichaeans: XII 325 Mansur ibn Lulu: VIII 11, 16; XII 324 Mantzikert: VIII 27; X 68, 71; XII 332; XIII 412, 431 passim Manuel I Komnenos: I 5, 28; II 6, 15, 21; III 20, 26; IV 9, 32; VIII 19; VL passim; XII 319, 331; XIV 146 Manuel, domestikos ton Scholon: 113 Manuel, 'judge of Anatolikoi': XIV 138 Manuel, metropolitan of Crete: III 244 Manuel: see Erotikos, Kamytzes, Komnenos, Limas, Maleinos, Philokales Marash: VIII 35 Mardaites: XII 325 Maria, of Alania: X 71 Maria, of Antioch: IX 42 Maria, daugther of Gagik of Kars: VII 148; XIV 132 Maria: see Komnene, Skleraina, Tzousmene Marianos: see Branas Marines: III 3; see Mastromailes, Neapolites Marmara: VIII 5 marriage: I 5; II 23, 26; TJ passim, VIII 18, 20 Martinakioi: 116; III 9 Marwanid: VIII 26-7, 32 Maryandenoi: XIV 145 Mastromailes: Marines, Michael: III 11 Matthew, name: III 24 Maurix, Michael: VI 460-61; XIV 141 Mauroi: I 35 Maurokatakalon: V 207, 210 Mauron Oros: XI 181 Mauropous, John: X 64 Mauros: VII 149 Maurozomes: IX 50, 52 Mayyafarikin: VIII 26 Meander: VIII 6; IX 42, 50, 52; XII 333; XIV 141 Media: VI 460 Medikion: I 21 megas chartoularios: VI 469; VIII 20 megas domestikos: III 11; IX 40 megas domestikos of the West: IV 20 megas doux. II 20; III 23; XIV 140 megas droungarios: III 26 Melanoudion, see Mylasa Melias: I 32

11

Melidones, John: XIV 136 Meligalas: III 5 Melissenoi, family: II 14,15; III 8, 23; VIII 21 Melissenos Kassiteras, Theodore, patriarch: II15 Melissenos, Leo: VIII 21 Melissenos, Nikephoros, brother-in-law of Alexios I: I 30-31; III 22; IV 15, 32, 35; VI 464; VII142; XIV 133,147 Melissenos, Theognostos: III 19 Melitene: I 32, 37; II 17; VIII 5, 9, 35; XI 185,190; XII 331; XIV 132 Menas, name: III 3, 5 Menelaos: III 21 mercenary: XIII 416, 422 merchant: II 20; VIII 10 Mesanykta: VIII 6 mesa^on: I 23; V 206; X 64 Mesolimnia: IV 33 Mesopotamia: VI 460; VIII 12, 26; X 72; XI 182; XI 189; XII 327; XIII 423; XIV 132 Mesopotamitai, family: III 16 Mesopotamites, Basil: XII 325 Messina: X 67; XII 324 metochiomN 202; VII 141 metropole/metropolitan: I 7 (Chalcedon); III 24 (Crete); VII 143 (Edessa); XIV 133 (Neocaesarea); XIV 134 (Nikomedia, Nicaea, Cyzicus, Myrai, Smyrna, Ephessus, Anazarbe, Mopsuestia) Michael, name: I 11; III 6, 14, 20, 21, 23 Michael II: I 11, 15, 17 Michael III: I 13 Michael IV: VI 455; VII 150; X 66 Michael V: V 203, 212; VI 455 Michael VI Bringas: II 17; III 8; VIpassim; VIII 18; X 68-70; XII 326, 328; XIII 435 Michael VII Doukas: VI 458,passim, VII 144; VIII 35; X 41; X 70, 71, 73; XI 188; XII 323, 326, 331; XIII 433, 435; XIV 132,133,139,147 Michael, akolouthos: X 68 Michael, doux of Anatolia: XIV 140 Michael, doux of Dyrrachion: VI 465 Michael, judge of the Velum: VI 468 Michael, judge of Charsianon: XIV 138 Michael, katepano: X 66; XII 330 Michael, koitonites: VIII 18 Michael, metropolitan of Neocaesarea: XIV 133 Michael, patrikios: VIII 18 Michael, o tou Thessalonikes: IV 25

12 Michael, tagmatophylax: XIV 146 Michael: see Aspietes, Attaleiates, Autoreianos, Barys, Bringas, Daphnopates, Doukas, Euthymios, Italikos, Karantenos, Keroularios, Kekaumenos, Machetarios, Maleinos, Mastromailes, Maurix, Philokales, Psellos, Rhodios, Saronites, Skleros, Styppeiotes, Choirosphaktes. Micheas: III 14 Mikkinas: III 3 Miletos: I 35; XIII 432 Mirdassid: VIII 32 Mitylene: XIV 146 Mitylinaios: II 11 mixobarbaroi: VII 149 modios: I 25 monastery: I 21, 36; II 6, 9; III 14; V 207; VIII 3, 27 Monomachatos: VI 465 Monomachoi, family: II 18 Monophysite: VIII 28 Morocharzanioi, family: I 11; II 13 Moroleon: III 13-14; IV 17 Mopsuestia: XI 181; XIV 134, 142 Mosele, family: II 14; VIII 33 Mosele, Romanes: VIII 7 Mosul: VIII 26 Mosynopolis: I 37 Mouzalones, family: II 13 Mumahhid ad-Dawla: VIII 27 Mylasa and Melanoudion, theme: IX 44, 47,52 Myranthia: III 21 Myrelaion: 117 Myra: XIV 134 Myriokephalon: IX 40-43 passim mystographos: IV 13 Nampites: XII 334 Narek, monastery: see Gregory Narses, see Peter Nemanja: XII 330 Nea Kome: IV 27 Nea Mone, Chio: I 38, 39 Neapolites, Marinos: III 11 Nemitzoi: XIII 422 Neokaisareia: III 12; IX 41; XIV 133 Neokastra: IX 44, 52 Nestongoi, family: III 27 Nicaea: I 16; II 3, 13; IV 28; VII 149; VIII 4, 6; IX 43; X 69; XII 328, 331; XIV 133-4,143-4 Nicholas, domestikos ton scholon: VIII 17

INDEX Nicholas, epi ton deeseon: VI 466 Nicholas Mystikos: I 9 Nicholas of Stoudios: VIII 9 Nicholas of Myra, Saint, relics: XIV 143 Nicholas: see Beriotes, Cheilas, Diogenes, Galaton, Mystikos, Serblias, Skleros, Tzantzes, Xylinites, Zonaras Nikaeus, George: XIV 136 Nikephoritzes: II 17; V 206, 209, 210; VI 464; X 71; XII 323 Nikephoros, name: III 20 Nikephoros II Phokas: I 18, 24, 25; III 20; V 207; VI 457; VIII1, 2, 7, 9,15, 18,19, 22, 29, 31, 34; XI186; XII 323 Nikephoros III Botaneiates: I 26, 32; III 10; IV 34; V 206, 208, 212; VI 458, 462, 464, 473, passim; VII142, 144; VIII10; X 69; XII 326, 331; XIII 419, 435; XIV 133,139,145, 147 Nikephoros, judge of the Anatolikoi: XIV 137 Nikephoros, judge of the Opsikion: XIV 139 Nikephoros: see Antiochos, Basilakios, Bourtzes, Bryennios, Euthymios, Kabasilas, Kephalas, Komnenos, Melissenos, Monomachos, Ouranos, Palaiologos, Petraliphas, Phokas, Synadenos, Xiphias Nikerites, Leo: II 27 Niketas:I14;III6 Niketas, judge of Boleron, Strymon, Thessalonica: XIV 135 Niketas: katepano: VII 138 Niketas, komes: 113 Niketas the Prophet, metropolitan of Edessa: VII 143 Niketas: see Anzas, Bardales, Sergios, Xiphilinos Nikephoritzes: II 17; V 206, 209, 210; VI 464; X 71; XII 323 Nikomedia: XII 323; XIV 134, 144 Nikon, Saint: VII 147 Nikopolis, Epeiros: XI 192 Nikoulitzas the Younger: I 33, 40 nobelissimos: I 13, 14; V 203; VI 455, 463, 473; XIV 139 Noe: VII 140 Nomikopoulos: III 17 nomisma: I 25; IV 8; V 200, 201, 207; VI 476; VIII10, 32 Norman: II 27; X 68, 72; XI 184; XII 328, 331, 333; XIII 412, 431; XIV 144, 147

INDEX notarios ton eidikou logothetou: VI 468 notarios tes sakelles: VI 469 notarios ton sekretom V 203 officer: I 3, 10 Ohrid:XI186 oikeioi, oikogeneis: I 32; III 25; V 203; VII 139; see also anthropoi, douloi oikonomos: of the Great Church: VIII 20 oikos: I 21, 37; IV 27, 31, 34, 35; V 209, 210 Opos, Constantine: XII 328; XIV 145 Opos: see Alythinos, John Opsikion: I, 14, 17, 22; VIII 20; X 67; XI188; XII 321; XIV 138-9, 144-5, 147 Optimatoi: VIII 6; XI188,193; XIV 140, 147 Orient: see East Otto: IV 33 o tow. Ill 24-7 Ouranos, Basil, Michael: VIII 18 Ouranos, Nikephoros: II 17; IV 26; VI 457; VIII 1,16-18, 21; XII 327 Ouze: XI193; XIII 412, 415, 425, passim Paipert:XIV133 Pakouriane, Kale: I 33: IV 3, 11, 20, 21-3 Pakourianoi, family: III 24, 27; IV 3, 35 Pakourianos, Apasios: IV 3, 20-21; V 205 Pakourianos, Gregory: I 24, 32, 36; IV 2, 20-21, 28, 33; V 200, 202-6, 208, 210; XII 324; XIV 132 Pakourianos, Sergios: IV 18; V 201 Pakourianos, Symbatios: I 3, 33, 34; IV 3, 18, 19-20, 33; V 200, 203, 211 Palaiologina, Anna, Jeanne of Savoy: III 23 Palaiologoi, family: II 13, 14; III 12; VIII 22 Palaiologos, George: VI 465; XIV 139 Palaiologos, Nikephoros: X 72; XIII 431 Palaiologos, Theodore: III 12 Pamphylia: VIII 4; XIV 143 Pantherios: see Skleros Pan-, Basil: XIV 138 pansebastohypertatos: IX 41 pansebastos: IV 24; VI 472; IX 41 Pantokrator: II 9 Paphlagonia: III 21; VI 462; VIII 5, 21; XI188,193; XII 321; XIV 139, 140, 147 Paradounavon/Paristrion: VI 462; X 64; XI183-4 parakoimomenos: II 20; VIII 17; see also Basile Lekapenos paroikos: I 30; VII 141; VIII 13 Partitio Romanie: IX 48 Pastilas: VIII 13

13

Patmos: I 28, 36 Patzinacia: VII 149 patriarch: II 15; III 24, 29; VIII 8, 9, 28; XIV 142-3 patrikia poster. VII 146 patrikios: I 7, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15; II 8, 12; III 26; IV 12,15, 24; VI 460, 461, 462, 468, 470, 474; VII145,150; VIII18, 20, 21, 28; XIV 135 patrimony: II 7; IV'passim Paul, name: III 5 Paulicians: I 32 Paulopouloi, family: III 17 Pediadites, Basil: XI 185 Pediadites, George: IV 22 Peganes: I 22 Pegasios: VII 142 Pege: VIII 6; IX 45 Pekoulina, Constantina: VII 147 Peloponnesos: I 21; VI 462; XI 192; XII 321 Pergamon: IX 44; XIV 134 Peritheorion: I 37 Persians: IX 39, 50 Petchenegs: V 204, 207; VI 458; VIII 16, 35; X 68; XI 193; XII 325, 326, 330, 334; XIII 412, 415, 424, 428; XIV 144,146,147 Peter: III 5, 6,21,25,26 Peter: see Gymnos, Libellisios, Narses, Romaios, Serblias Petraliphas, Nikephoros: IV 10; XII 331 Petronas: 113 Petropouloi, family: III 17 Phalakros, Demetrios: III 13; IV 3 Pherses: VIII 29 Philadelphia: I 37; TKpassim Philaretos: I 20; II 21 Philetos: see Synadenos Philippikos, emperor: 115 Philippoupolis: I 36; XII 325 Philokales:I26;V210 Philokales, Eumathios: IX 39; XIV 143 Philokales, Manuel: VI 468 Philokales, Michael: VI 467 Phocaea: XIV 142, 145 Phokas: Phokas, family: I 26, 37, 38; III 7, 15, 19, 20, 29; V 204, 205, 206, 210, 211, 212; VIII 6,12, 15, 19, 22, 27, 33, 32, 36; X 62, 70; XIV 133 Bardas the Elder (son of Nikephoros the Elder) (1): IV 15; XII 329 Bardas the Younger (b): V 211; VIII 5, 10, 21, 22, 23, 24, 29; X 63; XII 334 Leo the Elder: I 7; V 211

INDEX

14

Leo son of Bardas (b): VIII 23 Leo (brother of Nikephoros II): I, 18, 25; II 17; V 206, 211; VII 139; VIII 12; X 62 Nikephoros the Elder: IV 15 Nikephoros Vry-neck': V 211; VIII 29 Photeinos: I 10 Photios, patriarch: I 11; II 8, 14; III 29 Phoukas/Phokas: XIV 146: see vestarches Phrangopouloi, family: III 17 Phrygia: VIII 21, 22; X 70; XIV 133, 144, 147 phj/ax-.Vll 140 pinkernes: VII 145 Piroshka of Hungary: III 23 Pisidia: see Antioch Plytos,John:IV22 Podandos: VIII 7 polyanthropos: VIII 3 Polybotos: XIV 144 Polyeuktos: XIV 139 Polygyros: III 14 Pontos: XIV 147 Porphyrogennete: see Zoe, Eudokia Pothos:XIV139 pound: IVpassim pragmateutes: II 21; VII 146 prattor.UlO, 12; XIV 137, 139 praktor. I 28 Preslav:VIII21;X68 Priene: XIV 134 primikerios: III 11 proasteiom IV 14, 25; V 201, 202 proedros: II 11, 15, 20; III 25 ; IV 14; V 200; VI,passim-, VII 145; XIII 438;

XIV 135,137

Promoundenoi, family: II 12; XIV 137 Promoundenos: Basil: II 12 Promoundenos, Constantine: II 12; XIV 137-9 Promoundenos, George: II 12; VI 469 Promoudenos: Leo, Michael, Peter, Stephen, Theodore, Theophanes: II 12 pronoetes: II 10; IV 14; VII 138 pronoia: I 28-30, 33, 40; II 25; IV 33 property: see estates Propontis: XIV 144-5, 147 prostasia: IV 8; V 212 proteuon: I 24; VII 141 protoanthypatos: VI 473, 474; XIV 136 protoasekretes: XIII 430 protokouropalates: II 20; VII 151 protonobelissimos: VI 456, 463, 465, 471, 472, 473; XIV 139 protonotarios: VII 145; XIV 143 protonotarios tou dromou: XIII 436

protoproedros: II 10, 12, 20; VI 461-72^.^; VII143; XIV 135,136,140 protoi: seeprotueontes protosebastos: III 11; VI 472 protospatharios: I 3, 7, 23, 25, 33; II 12; III 15; IV 11, 14, 25, 29; V 200, 203, 213; VI 460, 466, 468, 469, 470, 474, 476; VII143,145,150; VIII18, 20; IX 45; XIV 135,146 protospatharissa: VII 147 protostrator. I 14, 34; V 203, 209 protovestarcher. II 12; VI 473-4; XIV 135, 136 protovestes: VI 473; XIV 137 protovestiarios: V 210; VII 143; XIII 437 Psamathia: II 6 Pselloi, family: II 12 Psellos, Michael: IV 7, 9,11, 24, 26, 33, 34; V 208, 210; XIII 415 Pseudo-Alexis: IX 48; XII 332 Psilloi, family: II 5 psychika: IV 19, 21, 27 Pteleotes, Demetrios: IV 23 Pyrgion:XIV134 Quadratus, name: III 7 Radenos: III 16 Radolibos:IV19;V201 Ra's Ain: XII Raymond of Saint-Gilles: XII 325 Rallai, family: III 27 Rambaud: XII 323, 334 Raoul: III 27; see also Rallai r^j: II 21; VII 146 Rasopoles, Stephen: III 15; IV 25; V 213 Rhaidestos: IV 23; V 205; IX 41 Rhangabe: III 8 Rhentakioi: I 7; III 8 Rhentakios, Constantine: III 13; IV 3 Rhodes: VIII 10 Rhodios, Michael: XIV 136 roga: I 24, 25, 42; IV 11; V 204, 205, 213; VI 454, 473, 474passim; VII140, 148; X 68-9 Rodandos: VIII 7 Romaioi, family: II 16 Romaics, Eustathios: II 16; IV 2, 27, 28 Romaics, Peter: II 16 Romaics, Theophylaktos: II 16 Romanes I, Lekapenos: I 7, 17, 19, 39; III 20, 22, 25; IV 22; VIII 20; IV 24 Romanes II: I 17, 20; VIII 12 Romanes III, Argyros: I 24; II 16; X 64, 71; IV 29; VIII 20, 31; XII 328; XIII 436

INDEX Romanes IV, Diogenes: I 37-8; VI 458; VIII 33, 35; X 70, 71; VII144; XI183,188; XII 332, 333; XIII 412, 413 passim, 436; XIV 132 Romanes: see Agallianos, Mosele, Skleros Rosaion: IV 14 Roum: XIV 144 Roussel de Bailleul/Ourselios: VII 141; XII 323, 326, 332-3; XIII 423, 437; XIV132, 133 Rupenids: II 22 Rus: VIII 21, 29; X 62-3, 71; XII 324, 326, 330; XIII 423 Sa'adad-Daula:VIII15 Sabas: see Asidenos sake lie: see sekreton

sakellarios: I 10, 21; XIV 133 Samouch: XII 328 Samos: I 28; XI 190, 191, 193; XII 321 Sampson: IX 52 Samuel of Bulgaria: VIII 24, 25, 31; IX 40; X 64, 69; XII 325 Sangarios: XIV 145 Santabarenos: I 26 Saracens: VIII 16 Sarakontapechys, family: I 13; III 8 Sarantapechys: III 16 Sarbandenos, Leo, o tes Bourt^aines: III 26 Sardis: IX 39, 44, 46, 52; XIV 134,146 Saronites, Michel: VI 465 Sassoun: XII 328, 334 Sayf al-Dawla: X 62; XII 329 Scholar. XII 322; XIII 428; see also domestikos Scythians: XIII 422, 424 seal: II 14, 16; III 12, 24; VII 138, 139, 141, 147; see bouttoterion Sebasteia: VIII 28; XI 189; XIII 424; XIV 133,141-3,147 sebastokrator. II 5; IV 10; VI 455, 456, 473; VII139 sebastophoros: VI 464 sebastos: I 5; II 22; III 11; VI 456, 464-6, 472-3; VII139; IX 45; XIV 139 sekreta: II 15; V 203, 206; see also chartoularios, logothetes, notarios Seljuks: VII 148; VIII 32; IX 39; XII 326, 331, 335; XIII 417; XIV 144,147 Seleukeia: VIII 13; XI 189; XII 321 Seleukeia of Kalykadnos: XIV 144 Sembat:XIV132 Senacherim: VIII 23, 27, 28; see also Artsruni Serbia: VII 148, 150; XI 184; XII 330 Serblias, family: XIV 137 Serblias,Leo:X66;XI189

15

Serblias, Nicholaos: XIV 135 Serblias, Peter: XIV 138 Serbs: X 66, 72; XII 330 Serdica:XIII415,436 Sergios, name: III 6, 21 Sergios, kata Niketan: III 26 Sergios: see Hexamilites, Pakourianos Sergopoulos: III 17 Sermisianoi: VII 149 Servia:XI186 Sgouroi, family: II 22; V 213; Sgouros, Leo: IX 48 Shaizar: VIII 16 Sicily: VII 141; XI 185; XII 324; XIV 132 Sidera: XIV 145 Sinope:I37;XIV141-2 Sirmium:XI 183, 184 Sisinnios: I 10 Skeniadoi, family: II 12 Skandyles, Leo, son of S.: XIV 140; see also Tzikandyles Skepides: III 15 Skleraina, Maria: IV 5 Skleroi, family: II 19; III 8, 10, 16, 19; IV 2; V 204, 211; XIV 137 Skleros, Andronikos: VI 468 Skleros, Bardas: I 31; II 11; V 207, 211; VII 142, 143; VIII passim; X 63; XII 326, 330 Skleros, Leo, brother-in-law of Michael II: 112 Skleros, Leo: judge of the Anatolikoi: XIV 137; judge of Opsikion, 139 Skleros, Michael: XIV 135 Skleros, Nicholas: VI 462, 466; XIV 135 Skleros, Pantherios: III 19 Skleros, Romanos: I 35; V 211; VI 464, 465; VII 141; VIII 7; X 70 Skopje: XI 183 Skribopouloi, family: II 22 Skripou: I 22 Skylitzes, John, Skylitzes-Thrakesios: VI 467 Slavs: II 26, 27; XIII 428 S'mbat: see Symbatios Smyrna: VIII 5; IX 45, 52; XIV 134, 143, 146 Smyrnaios, Theodore: XIV 136 Soliman: XII 331; XIV 144, 147 Solomon, Himerios: IV 28; 29 Solomon, Gregory: IV 29 Solomon, John: VI 467 Sophon, Lake: XIV 145 Soudaga: IV 19 Sougdaia: VII 146 Soundaq: XIII 423 Sozopolis: I 37; IX 39

16

INDEX

Sparta: II 10, 22; VII 147 spathanos: I 14; VI 472; VII 144 spatharokandidatos: II 20; VI 470, 474; VII 149; VIII 20; IX 45 Spondylai, family: II 13 Stenimachon: I 36 Stephen, judge of the Anatolikoi: XIV 138 Stephen: see Bardales, Kalomaria, Kontostephanos, Rasopoles Stephen the Younger, Saint: I 21 Stoudios: VIII 9; see also Alexis, Nicholas, Theodore Strategics: III 17 strategos: I 4, 12-13, 18, 31; II 17, 21; V 204; VII140,145,150; VIII 18, 20, 23; X 70; ¥1 passim; XII passim strategos autokrator. I 6 strategos of: Aegean: I 10; VII 143 Anatolikoi: I 10, 13, 17, 24; VII 145; VIII 26 Antioch: 118 Armeniakoi: I 7 Boukellarioi: VII 143 Calabria: VIII 22 Cappadocia:IV15;VIII28 Mesopotamia: XIV 132 Opsikion: 117 Peloponnese: I 12 Preslav: VIII 21 Serbia and Zachlumia: VII 150 Sicily: VII 141 Thrakesioi:I13;VIII13 strateia: X 66 Stratelatai (tagma): XIII 428 stratelates: VII 144 stratopedarches: III 25 Strobilos: VII 149; VIII 5; XIV 145 Strymon: VI 462; XIV 135 Stylos: XIV 145 Styppeiotes, Michael: III 27 Svjatoslav: X 62; XII 330 Symbatios/S'mbat, name: III 27 Symbatios-John, king of Armenia: VIII 29 Symeon Metaphrastes: II 6 Symeon the New Theologian: IV 5 Symeon: see Bardales symmachoi: XIII 424 Synadenoi, family: VIII 21 Synadenos, anonym: IX 50 Synadenos, Nikephoros: XIII 431 Synadenos, Philetos: VIII 21 syngambria: I 12 Syrgaris: I 40

Syria: III 3; VIII 10, 11, 30, 31, 32; X 64; XIII 424; XIV 132,141 Syropoulos: III 17 tagma(ta)\ I 11, 36; II 23; VII 150; VIII 1,13, 14,16,17; X 62, 65, 66, 67, 68, 70, 71, 72; XI 181, 182, 194; XII passim; XIII 425, 528; XIV 146 tagmatophylax: XIV 146 taktikon: II 11; III 1; XII 332 Tangripermes: XIV 146 Tarasios, patriarch: 110; III 29 Tarchaniotai/Trachaniotai, family: II 19 Tarchaniotes, Joseph: XII 332; XIII 417, 423, 438 Tarchaniotes, Katakalon: XIII 438 Tarchaniotissa, Helen: XIII 438 Taron: V 210; VII 150; XI 183, 185; XII 328; XIV 132 Taronitai, family: III 16; VIII 23 Taronites, John: VI 467 Tarsus/Tarsiots: VIII 3, 5, 8, 35; XI 181; XII 327, 330; XIV 142 Tatikios:IIIll;XIV144 tax/taxation: I 30, 31, 40; II 6, 7; IV 31; VIII14; X 66 taxiarches: II 20; VIII 17; XII 327, 328 Tchordvaneli: XIV 132 Teras, Calabria: VII 140 Tessarakontapechai, family: II 14; see also Sarakontapechai tetarterom IV 20 Thatoul:VII143;VIII35 Thebes: III 13; IV 3; VII 140, 149 teicheiotes: IV 29 thema(ta): 116; VIII 13, 33; ¥1 passim; XII passim Theodora, Saint, from Aegina: I 22 Theodora, empress: I 39; V 209; VIII 21; X68 Theodora: see Kamaterissa Theodore, name: III 5-7, 21 Theodore, cousin of the emperor Herakleios: 114 Theodore, son of Michael VIII: III 12 Theodore of Stoudios: I 10 Theodore I Laskaris: II 3; IX 49; XII 333 Theodore II Laskaris: IV 30 Theodore, judge of Armeniakon: XIV 137 Theodore, Lydian, under Isaac II: IX 51 Theodore: see Alopos, Alyates, Attaleiates, Bardales, Batatzes, Daphnopates, Dokeianos, Hagiozacharites, Hetoum, loannokampites, Kamoulia-

INDEX nos, Komnenos, Makrembolites, Maggaphas, Palaiologos, Promoundenos, Smyrnaios Theodorekanos: VIII 17 Theodosios, name: III 5, 20 Theodosioupolis/Artze: VI 462; VIII 5; XIII 422, 423, 424, 435; XIV 133 Theodoulos, proedros: VII 145 Theognostos: see Bourtzes, Melissenos Theoktistos: see Eulampes Theophanes, metropolitan of Thessalonica: V203 Theophanes: see Promoundenos Theophano, wife of Romanes II: I 17 Theophilos, emperor: 113 Theophilos, a relative of Michael III: I 34 Theophobos, strategos: 113 Theophylaktos: see Botaneiates, Romaics Theophylaktos, archbishop of Bulgaria: V 210; XIV 143 Theophylaktos, judge/Kibyrrhaioton: XIV 138 Theophylaktos, judge/Paphlagonia: XIV 139 theoretron: IV 7, 18 thesmographeus: IV 25 Thessalonica: I 22, 30; III 14, 25; IV 14, 25; V 203; VI 462; VII139; VIII 13, 21, 22, 25; XI182,191; XII 325; XIV 134, 135 Thomas the Slav: I 15, 17 Thomas, eunuch: III 26 Thomas: see Guzes, Chalkoutzes Thoros, of Sassoun: XII 328 Thrace: II 25; IV 31; V 208; X 72; XI 191; XII 321, 322, 324; see also Macedonia Thrakesion, theme: I 13, 16, 22-3; V 204; VII 145; VIII 5, 13; l^passim; X 67; XI 188, 193; XII 321; XIVpassim Thrakesios: see Skylitzes, John Thylakas, John: XIV 138 Thylakas,Leo:XIV135 Toghrul Bey: X 68 toparches: VIII 25 topoteretes: VII 145; XIV 133 topoteretissa: VII 147 Tornikioi, family: V 211 Tornikios, Leo : II 13; IX 40; X 64, 65, 67; XI185 Tornikios the Iberian: V 207; VIII 24; X 63 ; XII 326 Tornikios of Sassoun: X 72; XII 334; XIV 132 Tourkopouloi: XII 325 Tourkos: see Bardanios tourmarches: I 32; II 20; III 14; XII 321 Tourmarchopouloi, family: II 22; III 17

17

Toutach:XIV132 trachea: IV 20; VI 477 Trachaniotes: see Tarchaniotes Trebizond: VIII 5, 28; XII 322; XIII 430; XIV 133, 147 Triblattai, family: II 12 Tribounas: III 26 Trichades, family: II 12 Triphyllioi, family: II 14; III 8 Tripoli: VIII 30, 31 Troas: IX 53 Turks/Turcomans: I 20, 36, 37; II 27; III 11, 15; IV 15; VII 142, 144, 148, 150; VIII 4, 27, 34, 35; VL passim; X 68, 72; XI 193; XII 323, 326, 328, 331, 333, 335; XIII 412, 419, 422, 424, 427, 432; XIV passim; see also Seldjuks typikon: II 19; IV 20, 31 Tyrach: X 68 Tyre: VIII 10 Tzachas: XII 331; XIV 133,145 Tzamandos: VII 148; VIII 2; XIV 132 Tzantzes, Nicholaos: XIV 136 Tzikandyles, Leo: XIV 140; see also Skandyles Tzintziloukes: II 19 Tzirithon, Basile: VI 460-61, 467, 468; XIV 138 Tzykandilai, family: II 13 Tzourbaneles, Constantine (?): XI 184 Tzousmene: see Komnene Maria: IV 10 Valachs: IX 47 Varangians: I 32; VIII 16; X 68; XI 187; XR, passim-, XIII 421, 431 Varangopouloi, family: III 17 Vardariotai: III 11 Vasak: XIV 141 Vaspurakan: VIII 19, 21, 23, 24, 27-8, 30-31; XI 183,185 Velum: see judge Venice, Venetians: IV 32; IX 47, 49; XIV 142 Verria: see Berroia vestarches: II 12, 15, 20; VI 458, 467, 471, 474; VII151; XIV 146 vestes*. II15; VI 460, 461, 465, 471, 474; VII 145; XIV 135-7passim Vigla: see droungarios Vlachs: I 33, 40; IX 47; X 66; XII 325; XIII 424 Vladimir: X 63 wealth: I passim; II 14, 26; IV 1, 6, 15; V 200, 207 West: III 9; VI 459, 461, 463, 465; IX 49; X 64; XII 330, 331, 333; j-^/ro domestikos

18 xenodochos: VIII 6 Xeroi: II 14 Xeros, anonym: IV 30 Xeros, Basil: XIV 138 Xiphias, family: VIII 22 Xiphias, Alexios: VIII 22 Xiphias, Nikephoros: VIII 18, 22, 29 Xiphilinos, John, patriarch: XIII 412 Xiphilinos, Niketas, judge: XIV 136 Xiphilinos, protoproedre and pronoetes of Lakedaimon: II 10 Xylinitai, family: I 7; II 14; III 8 Xylinites, Constantine: III 9

INDEX Xylinites, Nicholaos: VI 468 Yazid/Iezith: III 27 Yolande of Montferrat: III 23 Zacharias: XIII 432 Zachlumia: VII 150 Zoe, empress: III 22, 23; V 212 Zoe Karbonopsina, wife of Leo VI: 110 Zonaras, John: V 209 Zonaras, Nicholaos: XIV 136 sygostates: 110 Yolande of Montferrat: see Komnene, Irene