The Byzantine Aristocracy: IX to XIII Centuries 9781407337722, 9780860542834

Citation preview

The Byzantine Aristocracy IX to XIII Centuries

edited by

Michael Angold

BAR International Series 221 1984

B.A.R.

5, Centremead, Osney Mead, Oxford OX2 0ES, England.

GENERAL EDITORS A.R Hands, B.Sc., M.A., D.Phil. D.R Walker, M.A.

� -S 221,1984 :'The Byzantine Aristocracy, IX to XIII Centuries' © The Indi victual Authors,

1984

The authors’ moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher. ISBN 9780860542834 paperback ISBN 9781407337722 e-book DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9780860542834 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library This book is available at www.barpublishing.com

C ONTENTS P age

A BBREVIATIONS A N OTE O N T RANSLITERATION M ichael Angold

1

I NTRODUCTION 1 .

S ir S teven R unciman WOMEN

2 .

I N B YZANTINE A RISTOCRATIC

S OCIETY

E velyne P atlagean L ES D EBUTS

D UNE A RISTOCRATIE

B YZANTINE

T EMOIGNAGE D E L 'HISTORIOGRAPHIE: N OMS E T L IENS D E 3 .

4 .

I MPERIAL

I DEAL

4 3

S NOBBERY

5 8

P ROSOPOGRAPHY O F T HE B ZYANTINE A RISTOCRACY

7 9

P aul Magdalino B YZANTINE A RISTOCRATIC O IKOS

9 2

R osemary M orris T HE B YZANTINE A RISTOCRACY A ND T HE M ONASTERIES

8 .

2 3

D onald N icol

T HE 7 .

L E D ES

P aul Magdalino

T HE 6 .

E T

S YSTEME

P ARENTE A UX I XeXe S IECLES

A lexander K azhdan T HE A RISTOCRACY A ND T HE

B YZANTINE 5 .

1 0

1 12

L ucy-Anne Hunt C OMNENIAN A RISTOCRATIC P ALACE D ECORATIONS: D ESCRIPTIONS

9 .

1 38

I SLAMIC C ONNECTIONS

R obin C ormack ARISTOCRATIC A ND

1 0.

A ND

P ATRONAGE O F T HE A RTS

I N

1 1th1 58

1 2th C ENTURY B YZANTIUM

M argaret M ullett ARISTOCRACY A ND P ATRONAGE

I N T HE L ITERARY C IRCLES 1 73

O F C OMNENIAN C ONTANTINOPLE 1 1.

E lizabeth J effreys WESTERN

I NFILTRATION O F T HE B YZANTINE A RISTOCRACY: 2 02

S OME S UGGESTIONS 1 2.

V era v on F alkenhausen A P ROVINCIAL A RISTOCRACY: I N S OUTHERN

I TALY

T HE

B YZANTINE

( 9th-llth C ENTURY)

P ROVINCES 2 11

P age

1 3.

M ichael A ngold ARCHONS C ITIES

A ND D YNASTS:

L OCAL A RISTOCRACIES

A ND T HE 2 36

O F T HE L ATER B YZANTINE E MPIRE

A PPENDIX M ichael A ngold I NVENTORY O F T HE

S O-CALLED P ALACE O F

B OTANEIATES

2 54

A BBREVIATIONS AASS

A cta S ancta B ollandiana

A B

A cta B ollandiana

M IR

A merican H istorical R eview B yzantion

B MGS

B yzantine a nd M odern G reek S tudies

B S

B yzantinoslavica

B Z

B yzant

n ische Z eitschrift

C IG

C orpus

I nscriptionum G raecarum

D OP

D umbarton O aks P apers

J OB

J ahrbuch d er ö sterreichischen B yzantinistik

JRS

J ournal o f R oman S tudies

MGH

M onumenta G ermaniae H istorica

M igne,

P G

J .P.

M igne,

P atrologiae c ursus c ompletus.

S eries g raeco-latina MM

F .

M iklosich a nd J .

g raeca medii a evi

( Paris, M uller,

O rientalia

R EB

R evue d es e tudes b yzantines

TM

T ravaux e t M emoires

V V

V izantijskij V remmenik I us

Z RVI

a nd P .

1 860-90)

C hristiana

Z epos,

I us g raecoromanum ( Athens,

1 931)

Z bornik R adova V izantoloshkog I nstituta

E ditions c ited b y e ditions b ut

J .

A cta e t d iplomata

s acra e t p rofana ( Vienna,

O C

Z epos,

1 857-66)

a re

o f H istories

a nd C hronicles

i ncluded

i n t he B onn C orpus

t he n ame o f t he a uthor, f ollowed b y B onn i n b rackets. o f H istories a nd C hronicles h ave t he t itle g iven i n t hen c ited b y

t he

n ame o f

t he a uthor.

a re

O ther f ull,

A N OTE O N T HE T RANSLITERATION O F G REEK N AMES,

T his

i s

a lways a h eadache.

w holly

s atisfactory,

f orms

a re

b elong

t o

T he

u sed,

t hey l eave

t he W orld

p erils o f

g lance

N either o f

w hen i t c omes

t he s ystems g enerally u sed

t o w orks o n B yzantium.

t he i mpression t hat

o f C lassical S cholarship,

B yzantine

w hich i s n ot

i s

I f L atin S tudies t he c ase.

e mploying G reek f orms c onsistently a re a pparent

a t A rnold T oynbee's

f rom a

C onstantine P orphyrogenitus a nd H is W orld.

I n a ll o ther r epsects a f ine w ork ! s truck b etween L atin a nd G reek f orms. t heir

T ITLES A ND T ERMS

L atin f orm h ave b ecome d omiciled

S omehow a b alance h as t o b e T here a re s ome n ames, w hich i n i n t he E nglish l anguage.

I t

w ould, f or i nstance, b e p erverse t o c hange A nna C omnena's s urname t o K omn n& ' . S o i n t his, a nd i n s imilar c ases, w here l ong u sage p rev ails,

I

h ave

p referred

t he L atin f orm.

B ut

t here a re m any

h ard

c ases, w hich w ere d ecided i n t he e nd b y e ditorial w him: C antacuzenus a nd n ot K antakouzenos, b ut A ndronikos a nd n ot A ndronicus. I h ave w here

p ossible u sed k h,

s eems v ides

t o m e t hat c h r epresents a b abble o f s ounds a nd t hat k h p roa m uch b etter g uide t o t he p ronunciation o f t he G reek l etter.

E ven h ave

a nd

n ot c h,

f or t he G reek l etter

X

.

h ere I h ave n ot b een c onsistent. I n t he f ace o f l ong u sage p referred, f or e xample, C honiates t o K honiates a nd a rchon

I t

I t o

a rkhon.

M ichael A ngold

I NTRODUCTION M ichael A ngold

T he

n otion

t orians:

i t

i s

o f s o

a ristocracy h as

a dmirably

o f t he b est, b ut i t l eaves t he a ssumption b eing t hat e xercise i t.

b ut,

f rom o ne g eneration

t herefore

b ecause p ower

t o

I t

t o

m odern

l iterally m eans

h is-

t he

r ule

i n d oubt w ho a re t he b est-fitted t o r ule; t hose w ho h ave p ower a re b est-fitted t o

A ristocracy h as

a r uling c lass,

b een a g odsend

i mprecise.

t he n ext,

c ome

t o m ean l ittle m ore

t han

s o o ften d escends w ithin a f amily

t he w ord

i s

u sually g iven h ereditary

o vertones. A ristocracy a nd n obility a re t herefore o ften t aken t o b e n o m ore t han d ifferent s ides o f t he s ame c oin. T he f ormer d eals i n t he e xercise o f t ions n eeded. c haracter o f

p ower, t he l atter i n t he q ualities a nd t he q ualificaA s hift i n t he m eaning o f n obility w ill a lter t he

a ristocracy,

T he B yzantines b roadly

a greed

q ualities q ualities a lone?

a nd v ice v ersa.

a gonized o ver

t hat

i ts

t he n ature

o f n obility.

e ssence w as a s eries

T hey w ere

o f m oral a nd

s piritual

t hat f itted a m an f or o ffice o r c ommand, b ut d id s pring f rom h igh b irth o r w ere t hey a cquired b y I t was

a d ebate t hat

r eflected

t hese m erit

t he c hanging c haracter o f

B yzantine a ristocracy. B yzantine a uthors make a ristocracy o r, f or t hat m atter, a ristocrat.

t he

l ittle u se o f t he t erm T here w as a n a rchaic

r ing t o t hem, w hich i ll-accorded w ith a m onarchy, s uch a s t hat B yzantium. M ichael A ttaleiates, t he e leventh-century h istorian,

o f i s

o ne o f t he f ew B yzantine w riters t o e mploy t he t erm a ristocrat. H e r ecalled h is h umble p rovincial o rigins i n a s hort a utobiographical s ketch.

T hanks

t o a g ood

e ducation - a nd c onsiderable a bility,

w hich

h e m odestly r efrains f rom m entioning - h e w as t o " become a m ember o f t he s enate a nd t o b e n umbered a mong t he b est o f c ouncillors o r a rist ocrats

a s

t hey w ere

a ristocrat, n ot i mperial s ervice. B y w ay o f

o ld".

t hat

m omentous

m uch

t alents. m uch m ore v ice

t o

t he

f orms

o f

i ts

He c learly e quated b eing

l ike

e mperor, o f

t o

t race,

t he h eart

a s

s tate

t he e mbodiment

p ensions

i n t he w ake o f

o f B yzantine g overnment.

h istory C onstantinople o ffered a

B irth c ounted f or s omething, b ut i n t he s truggle f or p referment.

t he

a nd

o f

r ank

c areer

e ducation a nd T he i deal w as t he s tate; a t

T he

t he t rue p atents o f n obility. g ift. F rom t he n inth c entury

c racy

a n

t he

h ad

f amily

t o

c ontend w ith

t ies.

g rowing u se o f

t ionships,

i n

i ncreasing

s urnames

c ontrast

t o

a nd a g reater a wareness

w as o f

c ame i n i nsignia

i mportance

r eflected f amily

t he s ituation p revailing b efore

1

t o

T hey w ere t his m erito-

e mphasis u pon t he

E velyne P atlagean s hows h ow t his

o pen

a bility f or l oyal s er-

r ewards

c ourt.

( brabeia) o f r ank w ere e ntirely i n t he e mperor's o f

a n

c hange w hich s aw a m eritocracy g ive

t o a h ereditary a ristocracy a t

F or

1

b irth, b ut w ith a p osition o f t rust i n c lose t o m odern n otions o f m eritocracy.

a n i ntroduction I s hould

A lexander K azhdan, w ay

c alled o f

w ith h igh I t c omes

i n

r ela -

t he n inth

c entury.

B y

d ifficult

t o

t he e nd o f

i nterest.

T he u pshot

s quare

t he c entury

t he m eritocratic w as

i t w as

b ecoming m ore

i deal w ith

a d ebate o ver

t he

t he n ature

a nd

g rowth o f

o f

m ore f amily

n obility,

w hich

i s c aught b y t he E mperor L eo V I ( 886-912) i n h is M ilitary H andbook. H e w as l oath t o a ccept t hat d istinguished b irth w as a n a bsolute q ualification f or h igh c ommand. H e p referred " to c onsider t he n obil ity

( I m en,

n ot

a ccording

t o

t heir

b irth,

b ut

a ccording

t o

t heir

d eeds". H e a dmitted t hat t hose o f d istinguished a ncestry m ight e xpect t o b e g iven h igh c ommand, b ut i t d epended u pon t heir a bility, n ot t o m ention t heir w illingness t o o bey o rders. T he e mperor p rov ided

a

c rucial

s uccinct m oment

d efinition o f3t rue n obility:

t o o bey o rders .

H e w as

t rying

" to

b e

r eady

t o u phold

o f m erit a nd s ervice a s t he e ssence o f n obility c onviction t hat i t d epended o n h igh b irth.

i n t he

a t

t he

a

i deal

f ace o f

t he

L eo V I w as t he f irst e mperor w ho t ried t o c ome t o t erms w ith t he g rowing p ower o f t he g reat A natolian f amilies, s uch a s t he D oukas, t he A rgyros, t he P hokas, t he S kieros, a nd t he M aleinos. T he f ortunes o f t hese f amilies c an b e t raced n o f urther b ack t han t he m iddle o f t he n inth c entury. i mportant c ommands A rgyros t old

T heir f ounders, a lmost w ithout e xception, i n t he a rmies o f t he A natolian t hemes.

f amily w ent

t hat

h e w as

b ack t o a t urmarch b y t he n ame o f L eo.

t he

f irst

t o

t ake

t he

s urname

A rgyros

" shining"), " whether b ecause o f t he c leanliness b ody o r b ecause o f t he b eauty a nd n obility o f h is o f

s ome o ther s ign o f

b e

f ound

s oldier

i n t he

t he S aracens

a nd r uinzd; t remble". I t o f

a nd h is H e a lso

o f K harsianon,

i s

b reeding a nd m anhood, t he E mperor M ichael

t o c ompare w ith h im.

e ncounter

t heme

h is

r eign o f

M any

t imes

o f T ephrike a nd

W e

f or

[ III

t here w as

( 842-867)] h is

n ot

r etainers

t hem d efeated,

u ndone,

t hem t o f ear E lizabeth i n

w hich

a nd

b ecame a f amily s hrine t he

r ole

t o

a nother

n ame w as r enowned a nd c aused f ounded t he m onastery o f S t.

a n e arly i nstance o f

a re

( literally

a nd p urity o f h is f eatures o r b ecause

d id h e a nd

l eave

h eld T he

a nd t he

b urial-place.

t hat m onasteries h ad a s a

f ocus

f amily s olidarity.

t hese

T he e xploits o f L eo A rgyros p rovide a c lue t o t he e mergence o f g reat f amilies a long t he e astern f rontier o f t he B yzantine

E mpire f rom t he m iddle o f t he n inth c entury. T he b alance o f p ower a long t he b order s hifted d ecisively i n f avour o f t he B yzantines. T he b eneficiaries w ere s uccessful w arband l eaders, s uch a s L eo A rgyros. T he r elative s ecurity t hat t heir m ilitary p rowess b rought a llowed t hem t o b uild u p e states a nd t o a cquire g reat f locks a nd h erds. T hey d ominated t he l ocal m ilitary o rganization, w hich w as p rovided b y t he t heme

s ystem.

T his

w as

s een a s

a d irect

c hallenge

t o

t he a uthority

o f t he s tate. F or a c entury t here w as t o b e a lmost c ontinuous f rict ion b etween t he g reat f amilies o f A natolia a nd t he c entral g overnm ent o f

i n C onstantinople.

t he

t hen,

F or a s hort w hile

i mperial o ffice,

w hen,

J ohn

( 969-976)

T zimiskes

f irst,

t hey e ven s ecured c ontrol

N icephorus P hokas

b ecame

e mperor.

( 963-969)

T hey

r uled,

t heory, a s g uardians o f t he l egitimate E mperor B asil I I, w ho s till a m inor. I t w as a n a rrangement w hich c ould n ot o utlast c oming o f

a nd, i n w as h is

a ge.

B asil I I's

a ccession t o

p ower

i n 9 76 w as

t he s ignal

f or a s eries

o f r ebellions b y t he m agnates o f A natolia. T he m ost s erious 9 87, w hen t he h eads o f t he t wo m ost p owerful f amilies, t he

c ame i n S kleros

a nd

o f

t he P hokas,

c ombined a gainst h im.

2

T hey h ad

t he

a rmies

t he

E ast

a t

t heir b ack.

A t h is w its

e nd t he e mperor t urned t o

t he r uler

o f K iev f or h elp. T hanks t o t he t imely d espatch o f a c orps o f V arangians f rom K iev B asil w as a ble t o d efeat t he a rmies o f t he E ast i n 9 89. b roken.

T he p ower o f

t he A natolian f amilies w as

f or t he t ime

b eing

B y a ny s tandards, t hese f amilies c onstituted a h ereditary a rist ocracy, b ut t heir p ower b ase w as i n t he p rovinces. O nly f itfully d id t hey d ominate t he w orkings o f c entral g overnment. O ur c oncern i n t his v olume i s n ot s o m uch w ith p rovincial a scendancies a s w ith t hat h ereditary a ristocracy w hich c ame t o c ontrol t he i mperial c ourt a nd g overnment f rom t he m id-eleventh c entury o nwards. I t i s a c hapter o f B yzantine h istory, w hich i ronically b egins w ith t he d efeat o f t he A natolian f amilies i n 9 89. A s P rofessor K azhdan h as s hown i n h is f undamental w ork o g t he B yzantine r uling c lasses i n t he e leventh a nd t welfth c enturies, t he r eign o f B asil I I w as a w atershed i n t he h istory o f t he B yzantine a ristocracy. c ooperating

T he w ith

g reat f amilies s ought t o r ecoup t heir l osses t he i mperial g overnment. M uch m ore t han i n

b y t he

p ast, t hey g ravitated t o C onstantinople. I n t his t hey s eem t o h ave b een a ctively e ncouraged b y B asil I I. I t w as e asier t o k eep a n e ye o n t hem . T hey w ould m aintain s pecial r esidences i n C onstantinople t he p alace o f B otaneiates i s j ust o ne e xample, o nly n otable b ecause a d etailed d escription - t ranslated a t t he e nd o f t his v olume -h as s urvived. T he B otaneiates w ere a n o ffshoot o f t he P hokas f amily. T hey p rovided B yzantium w ith o ne o f i ts l east d istinguished e mperors: N icephorus B otaneiates ( 1078-1081). H is f ather M ichael B asil I I's m ost t rusted c ommanders, d espite t he P hokas T he e mperor e ven s aw f it t o p romote h im t o t he o ffice o f C onstantInople - a p ost r arely g iven t o a s oldier. E mperor R omanos A rgyros ( 1028-1034) w as a nother m ember

w as o ne o f c onnection . p refect o f T he f uture o f a n o ld

A natolian f amily, w ho w as r aised b y B asil I I t o t his p osition. T hese a ppointments r eflected t he w ay t hat t hese f amilies w ere b eginning t o m ake C onstantinople t heir m ain c entre o f o perations, r etained t heir e states i n A sia M inor.

e ven

i f

t hey

T he d eath o f B asil I I i n 1 025 u shered i n a p eriod, w hen t he s uccession t o t he t hrone w as t o b e i n d oubt. T he h ouse o f M acedon, w hich h ad p rovided B yzantium w ith i ts e mperors f or a c entury o r m ore, w as f ailing. B asil I I n ever m arried; a nd t he t hrone w as t o g o w ith t he h and o f h is f rivolous n iece, Z oe. T he s truggle f or p ower w as v ery l argely a mong t hose o ld f amilies, w ho h ad b een a ble t o e stablish t hemselves i n t he c apital: f amilies, m achos, t he D oukas, a nd t he S kleros.

s uch a s t he A rgyros, t he M onoI n t he b ackground w ere v arious

c liques o f c ivil s ervants w ho w ere d etermined t hat t heir p lace i n g overnment w ould n ot b e u pset b y a ny c hange o f r egime. T hey c ont inued t o u phold t he m eritocratic i deal. M ichael P sellos w as t he m ember o f o ne s uch g roup, w hich l atched o n t o t he E mperor C onstantine M onomachos

( 1042-1055).

H e r ecalled

t hat M onomachos

" did n ot

a dvance

o ffice h olders a nd i mperial c ouncillors a ccording t o b irth ..., f or h e b elieved i t a bsurd t hat i t s hould b e a n e ssential l aw a nd a n u nchangeable r ule t o o bserve s uccession b y f amily a nd t hat o nly s omebody r evered f or h is l ineage s hould h ave a ccess t o t he p alace, e ven i f h is m ental f aculties w ere m arred a nd h e c ould d o n o m ore t han b reath , n ame" . °

n ot a ble t o b elch f orth a nything e xcept h is f amily's g reat T here w as m ore t han a n e lement o f w ishful t hinking i n t his; 3

a nd P sellos w as q uick t o r epent.

H e m arried a n a ristocratic

t aking g reat p leasure i n h er i llustrious d escent,

a nd w as

b ride,

s oon c laim-

i ng t hat h is o wn u ndistinguished f amily w ere s prung f rom c onsuls a nd p atricians. H e a lso t ook c are t o a ttach h imself t o t he r ising s tar o f t he D oukas f amily a nd w as D oukas t o t he t hrone i n 1 059. M ichael

i nstrumental

P sellos's c hange o f h eart,

i n

b ringing

h is w illingness

C onstantine

t o

a bandon

t he m eritocratic i deal, w hich h ad s erved m en o f h is s ort s o w ell, s ymptomatic o f t he t riumph o f a h ereditary a ristocracy. T he

w as n ew

E mperor C onstantine D oukas w as a t p ains t o p resent h imself a s a s cion o f t he g reat h ouse o f D oukas, w hich h ad b een s o p rominent a t t he t urn o f t he n inth c entury, e ven i t i t i s n ow i mpossible t o e stablish s uch a c onnection. H e b rought t o t he e xercise o f i mperial a uthority a s ense o f f amily s olidarity, n otably a bsent i n e arlier p eriods o f B yzantine h istory. H e a ssociated w ith h im i n g overnment h is b rother, t he C aesar J ohn D oukas, w ho h eld t he f amily t ogether a fter C onstant ine's d eath. T he C aesar, n ow a n o ld m an, c hose A lexius C omnenus, t he m ost p romising y oung a ristocrat a t t he i mperial c ourt, a s t he g uardian d aughter

o f h is E irene.

b rought A lexius

f amily's i nterests a nd m arried h im t o h is g randH is b acking e nsured t he s uccess o f t he c oup w hich

t o t he t hrone i n A pril 1 081.

T he a ccession o f A lexius C omnenus w as s een a t t he t ime t riumph f or a g roup o f a ristocratic f amilies u nited b y t ies o f a nd m arriage.

T hey a lmost a ll h ad t heir r oots i n A natolia,

a s a b lood b ut h ad

g ravitated o ver t he c ourse o f t he e leventh c entury t o C onstantinople - a p rocess w hich t he T urkish c onquest o f l arge t racts o f A natolia h ad o nly i ntensified. T he f amilies w ho c ame t o p ower w ith t he D oukas a nd t he C omneni w ere t o c onstitute t he a ristocracy p ar e xcellence. T heir s tatus w as e nshrined i n t he r eform o f c ourt t itles, w hich A lexius C omnenus u ndertook a s o ne o f h is f irst m easures a s e mperor. F or t he f irst t ime a d ynastic e lement w as i ntroduced i nto t he o rderi ng o f t he c ourt h ierarchy. A lexius c reated a s pecial o rder r eserved f or

h is

r elatives

b y b lood a nd m arriage - t he

o rder

o f

s ebastoi.

( Sebastos w as o riginally a n i mperial e pithet, e quivalent t o t he L atin A ugustus). T his n ew o rder h ad i ts o wn s pecial h ierarchy r anging f rom t he s ebastokrator, a t t he t op, w hich w as r eserved f or t he e mperor's e ldest b rother, d own t o s imple s ebastos. T he i mperial f amily i n i ts w idest s ense w as n ow i mposed, a t l east h onorifically, a s a n a ristoc racy a t t he t op o f B yzantine s ociety. T heir p osition w as s till f urther s trengthened b y t he g rant o f s tate r ights a nd r evenues, w hich w ere k nown a s p ronoiai. W ell m ight t he c hronicler Z onaras c omplain t hat i p _exius t ion.

r uled

t he E mpire a s

t he h ead o f a n a ristocratic

c onnec-

T he C omneni w ere a m ilitary a ristocracy. T hey m onopolized c omm and a nd p rovincial g overnorships. B elow t hem c ame t he b ureaucracy, w hich f ormed a n o rder w ithin t he s ystem o f r anks i ntroduced b y C omneni. H ereditary n otions b egan t o s eep i n, l argely b ecause f amilies,

n ot

i ncluded

i n t he c harmed D oukas-Comnenian c ircle,

a r efuge i n t he c ivil s ervice. c oming t o d ominate t he t owns,

I n t he p rovinces w hich, a t l east,

w ere i ncreasing i n i mportance.

T his

t he o ld f ound

l ocal f amilies w ere i n t he G reek l ands

t hree-fold d ivision o f t he u pper

r anks o f B yzantine s ociety i n t he e arly t welfth c entury i s a s hade s chematic, b ut b roadly a ccurate. I t p rovided t he B yzantine E mpire w ith

t he s tability

t o r ecover f rom t he d isasters o f

4

t he l ate e leventh

c entury. F rom u p

t he m iddle o f

w hich u ndermined

t he

t welfth c entury p ressures w ere

t he c ohesion o f

B yzantine

s ociety.

b uilding P rofessor

K azhdan h as

s hown t hat u ntil w ell

i nto

( 1143-1180)

t he C omneni

t o m onopolize h igh o ffice a nd r ank.

T hereafter

t hey b egan t o g ive w ay

t he m ost

p art

i ndependent

f rom t he

c ontinued f ringes

a ristocratic

t ical f orce. t he d eath o f

o f

t he r eign o f M anuel I C omnenus

t o o ther f amilies,

w hich c ame

t he C omnenian c ircle.

f amilies w ere b eginning

t o

f or

A s eries o f

e merge a s a p oli-

T hey c ontributed t o t he n ear a narchy, w hich f ollowed t he Emperor M anuel i n 1 180, a nd c ulminated i n t he f all

o f C onstantinople t o t he f ourth c rusade i n 1 204. T he p ower o f t hese f amilies w as a mply d emonstrated i n 1 195, w hen t he h eads o f t he P alaiologos, t he R aoul, t he P etraliphas, t he B ranas, a nd t he C antac uzenus f amilies c ombined t o o verthrow t he E mperor I saac I I A ngelos ( 1185-1195).

T hey

h oped,

b e m ore

m ight

r eplaced h im w ith h is a menable

t o

b rother A lexius,

t heir w ishes.

w ho,

i t w as

T he b ackgrounds

o f

t hese f amilies a re i nstructive. T he P alaiologoi w ere a n o ld f amily, a lready p rominent a t t he e nd o f t he e leventh c entury, w hen G eorge P alaiologos

h elped h is

b rother-in-law A lexius

C omnenus

t o s eize

t he

t hrone o f C onstantinople. T he f amily b elonged t o t he c harmed c ircle o f t he C omneni a nd p rovided h igh r anking o ffice h olders a nd d ignit aries

t hroughout

s ense

o f

t he

t race t heir o rigins t he T he

t welgth c entury,

f amily i dentity.

b ut

i t

a lso r etained a s trong

°T he R aoul a nd P etraliphas

b ack t o N orman a dventurers,

w ho

f amilies

c ould

t ook s ervice w ith

E mperor A lexius C omnenus, b ut t hey t hen f aded i nto o bscurity. P etraliphas b ecame s mall l andowners a round D idymoteichos i n

T hrace. a rmies

o f

e mperor.

T he p rowess d isplayed b y t wo m embers o f M anuel C omnenus b rought t hem t o t he T he

f amily's

t he f avour s hown b y b e s een w ith o rigin. n enus's

r ise t o p rominence c an b est

t he Emperor M anuel.

t he C antacuzenus

T he m ost

t he f amily i n a ttention o f

f amily,

M uch

t he t he

b e e xplained

b y

t he s ame p attern i s

t hough t hey w ere o f

t o

B yzantine

e arliest k nown C antacuzenus w as o ne o f A lexius C oms kilful c ommanders, b ut i t i s o nly w ith t he r eign o f

Manuel C omnenus

t hat

t he c ontinuöus h istory o f

t he f amily c an b e s aid

t o h ave b egun. T he B ranas f amily i s r ather d ifferent. M embers o f t he f amily w ere e stablished a t A drianople a t t he t urn o f t he t enth c entury, p ower

b ut

t hey s ought

r ested

t o a void e ntanglements

o n t heir c ontrol o f A drianople,

a t

c ourt.

w ithin e asy

T heir s triking

d istance o f C onstantinople. T hese f ive f amilies a long w ith a f ew o thers w ould p rovide t he n ucleus o f t he B yzantine a ristocracy u ntil a t l east t he m iddle o f t he f ourteenth c entury. B oth t he P alaiologoi a nd t he C antacuzeni w ould p rovide n ople

B yzantium w ith t o

t unes. a ble

t he L atins

I f t o

a nything,

b uild u p

t ook r efuge. b een o f

g reat o f

i mperial

T hey m ight a dding

C omnenus,

t o

A ngelos,

t o s ay

b ut

t his

w here

t hey

c ontinue

t o

L askaris, b ut

n o

l onger

e xclu-

b ut c onsisted o f a s eries s et

t heir o wn n ames

g reat

s tore b y

t hose o f

P alaiologos,

t he

t heir

i mperial

a nd e ven C anta-

t his o nly e mphasized t hat

o ne a r ptocratic o penly.

f or-

b ecause t hey w ere

p rovinces,

T he a ristocracy w as

b adges o f n obility,

d ynasty w as

i n t he

C onstantit heir

e xile c rystallized c hanges w hich h ad

i mperial f amily,

a ncestry, a s

d ared

1 204. t he

T he f all o f

t o h ave d amaged

t heir p osition,

l anded w ealth

b efore

f amilies.

c uzenus, f ew

t heir

i dentified w ith

i mperial h ouses

e xile e nhanced

T he e xperience o f

o ccurring

s ively

i mperial d ynasties.

i n 1 204 s eems h ardly

f amily a mong m any,

T hey w ere t he f amilies

o f

t he

e ven i f ' golden

l ineage'.

T hough B yzantium n ever h ad a nything a s

f ormal a s V enice's

L ibro d 'Oro, t he a ristocracy w as l imited t o a n e xclusive c ircle o f f amilies, r ather m ore t han a d ozen i n n umber. I t g ave r ise t o t he i dea p reserved i n t he G reek C h pnicle o f t he M orea o f t he t welve n oble h ouses o f C onstantinople. T here w as s ome m ovement i n a nd o ut o f t his g roup, w hich r emained a t ightly-knit b ody, b ound b y t ies o f m arriage. T hey r esented a ny a ttempts m ade b y d ifferent e mperors t o g ive a way t heir d aughters t o c ommoners, f or t his e ndangered t heir e xclusivity. M ore t o t he p oint, i t m ight m ean t hat t heir w ealth a nd l ands w ould p ass i nto

t he h ands o f o utsiders.

T he B yzantine a ristocracy m ay h ave b een a ble t o s urvive t he f all o f C onstantinople t o t he L atins w ith t heir f ortunes m ore o r l ess i ntact, b ut t hey w ere t he v ictims o f t hat e rosion o f p ower, w hich b egan i n e arnest a t t he t urn o f t he t hirteenth c entury. T he B yzant ine a ristocracy d isintegrated a long w ith t he E mpire. T here i s n o c oncerted t reatment i n t his v olume o f t his f inal p hase i n t he h istory o f t he B yzantine a riifocracy. I t i s, h owever, t he s ubject o f a s tudy b y A ngeliki L aiou. D isintegration t ook v arious f orms. a ftermath o f t he f all o f C onstantinople t o t he L atins

I n t he s uccessor

s tates a ppeared i n T rebizond, i n w estern A sia M inor, a nd i n t he G reek l ands. T hey w ere n ever p roperly r eintegrated i n t he r estored B yzant ine E mpire - n ot e ven i ronically t he l ands w hich h ad f ormed t he E mpire o f N icaea. I t w as t he s tart o f t he c reation o f i mperial c ourts i n t he p rovinces, e ach w ith i ts o wn a ristocracy. B y t he m idf ourteenth c entury v irtually a ll t he c ities o f B yzantium o f a ny s ize h ad

t heir o wn p etty i mperial c ourts,

a s

t he E mpire s plit u p i nto

a

s eries o f a panages f or t he p rinces o f t he r uling h ouses. B y t he e nd o f t he c entury n either a t C onstantinople n or i n t hese p rovincial c ourts w ere t he o ld f amilies m uch i n e vidence. T he p olitical c oll apse o f t he E mpire i n t he a ftermath o f t he c ivil w ars o f t he m idf ourteenth c entury d estroyed t he f oundations o f t heir p ower. T he f amilies t hat s ucceeded w ere t hose w ho c ould m aster t he f lux o f t hose y ears. T hey w ere o ften a dventurers, s uch a s t he t hree b rothers w ho s eized t he t own o f K avalla a nd t he i sland o f T hasos. g ave a v ivid a ccount o f t heir o rigins i n a l etter t o

O ne o f t hem t he d oge o f

V enice: " all o ur c lan i s f rom t he E ast a nd w e a re o f n oble b irth. W e t hree l eft h ome a nd c ame h ere [ i.e. t o K avalla]. W ith G od's g race a nd w ith o ur s words w e h a m t aken s ome c astles f rom t he p agan T urks a nd s ome f rom t he S erbs." T he E mperor J ohn V P alaiologos ( 13411 391) b owed b efore a f ait a ccompli, c onfirmed t hem i n t heir c onquests a nd r aised t hem t o p ositions o f r ank. T hey w ere t he l eaders o f a w arband. T he s urviving b rother A lexius p aid s pecial a ttention i n h is w ill t o t he w ell-being o f h is r etainers: h is p aidia, w ho, h e g ratef ully r emembered, h ad " often i n t imes o f d anger o ffered t heir s ouls o n h is b ehalf. . 13 T he h istory o f t he B yzantine a ristocracy h as c ome f ull c ircle. T he o ld f amilies s ought S erbia,

o thers

r efuge w here

t o C yprus a nd I taly.

S ome w ent

t o

I n 1 446 C iriaco o f A ncona,

t hey c ould.

t he

' father o f e pigraphers', f ound G eorge C antacuzenus i n h is c ountry h ouse a t K alavryta, i n t he m ountains b ehind P atras. H e w as t aking h is e ase i n h is m arvellous l ibrary, f or a ll t he w orld l ike s ome R oman s enator. B ut e ven h e j udged i t p rudent t o d epart f or S erbia w ith i ts g reater s afety a nd w ealth. W e h ave

t raced

t he h istory o f

t he B yzantine a ristocracy f rom i ts

6

o rigins

a long t he e astern f rontier i n t he n inth c entury t o i ts

i ntegration i n t he f ourteenth a nd f ifteenth c enturies.

d is-

W e h ave f ol-

l owed a s uccession o f t ransformations f rom b order w arriors t o c ourt a ristocracy, f rom i mperial c lan t o a ristocratic h ouses, f rom t he p rovinces t o C onstantinople a nd f rom C onstantinople b ack t o t he p rov inces. I t i s n ot t he a im o f t he s tudies c ollected i n t his v olume t o p rovide a c omprehensive t reatment _ f a ll a spects a nd e pisodes o f t his h istory. e leventh

T hey c oncentrate i nstead o n t he p eriod t hat r uns f rom t he t o t he e arly f ourteenth c entury: w hich m ight b e d escribed

a s t he h ey-day o f t he B yzantine a ristocracy. T he f ocus i s e ven n arrower t han t his m ight s uggest. T he e mphasis i s v ery m uch o n t he w ay t he B yzantine a ristocracy c hose t o p resent a nd e xpress s elves, w hether i n t heir p iety o r i n t heir p atronage o f t he

t hema rts,

l etters a nd m onasteries, o r e ven i n t he b ewildering a rray o f s urnames t hey c hose t o a dopt. T his w ill, I h ope, g ive a c ertain c oherence t o t he v olume, b ut i t m eans t hat m any a spects o f B yzantine a ristocracy h ave h ad t o b e n eglected.

t he h istory T he m ost

o f t he o bvious

o mission i s t hat t here i s n othing o n t he s ources o f a ristocratic p ower a nd w ealth. I t m ay b e t hat f or t he m oment t here i s n ot m uch t hat c an u sefully b e d one i n t his d irection. T here i s n othing o n t he p olitical c onnections o f t he B yzantine a ristocracy. T his i s l ikely t o o n

b e a m ore f ruitful 14f ield, a s G unther W eiss h as s hown i n h is b ook J ohn C antacuzenus. T o c ompensate f or t hese d eficiencies t here

i s

a

p ioneerilng s tudy b y P aul M agdalino o n t he

B yzantine

a risto-

c ratic o ikos o r h ousehold, w hich n ot o nly s heds n ew l ight c haracter o f t he a ristocratic f amily a t B yzantium , b ut a lso

o n t he r elates

i t t o t he B yzantine p alace a nd t he a ristocratic m onastery. T hese, a long w ith t he i mperial c ourt, w ere t he f ocus o f a ristocratic l ife i n B yzantium a nd t hey r eceive s pecial t reatment.

t he

B ut w hat o f t he c haracter o f t he B yzantine a ristocracy? W hat d o s tudies c ollected i n t his v olume a dd t o o ur u nderstanding o f t he

B yzantine a ristocracy? Q uite a l ot, s imply b ecause i t i s a p roblem t hat h as a ttracted l ittle a ttention a nd f ewer a nswers. C avafy h as g iven a s g ood a n a nswer a s a nybody i n h is p oem, ' A B yzantine a rchon, i n e xile, w riting v erses', w hich h as t he e xile, a v ictim o f A lexius C omnenus's E mpress E irene D oukaina, f inding s olace i n a ncient m yth a nd t he c omposition o f t he m ost c orrect i ambics ( iambous o rthotat ous). T his i s t he o ld i deal o f t he c ultivated g entleman w ith a g ood c lassical e ducation. I t h ad b een t he b adge o f t hose m eritocrats w ho d ominated c entral g overnment a t C onstantinople u ntil t he e leventh c entury. I t w as c ertainly t he i deal, a s P aul M agdalino s hows i n a b rilliant a rticle o n B yzantine s nobbery, t hat w as w ished u pon t he a ristocracy b y t he l iterati t hey p atronized. S o m uch t hat w as i rred ucibly a nd i neradicably B yzantine c ontinued t o i nform t he c haracter o f t he B yzantine a ristocracy: t he p iety, t he c onformism, t he n eed t o s how o ff. O ne h ardly n eeds

t o b e r eminded t oo o ften o f P rofessor L emerle's

a dage : " to r epresent B yzantium a s u nchanging o ver e leven c enturies w ould b e t o f all i nto t he t rap t hat i t h as i tself p repared". P rofess or K azhdan i s a ble t o e xpose t he c hanges t hat w ere o ccurring b eneath t he s urface. I t i s n ot t hat a n ew i mage o f t he a ristocracy i s c reated, b ut t hat t he i mperial i deal i s r eshaped i n t he i mage o f t he a ristocracy, w hich c ame t o p ower w ith A lexius C omnenus. B efore t he e leventh

c entury i t i s

t he t raditional p acific v irtues c ultivated b y

t he b ureaucracy w hich a re e mphasized i n p ortraits o f

7

t he e mperor,

b ut

t hese g ive w ay t o

t he m artial v irtues o f

a m ilitary a ristocracy.

T he

E mperor M anuel C omnenus e ven a ppropriated t he i mage o f D igenes A krites - t he a ristocratic i deal p ar e xcellence, a s J .B. B ury l ong a go o bserved. 15 I t d eprived t he B yzantine a ristocracy o f t he c hance i t h ad

t o e volve a n i mage s eparate f rom t he i mperial i deal.

T hey h ad

t o b e c ontent t o s ee t hemselves m irrored i n t he e mperor. T hey s hared i n h is v irtues, e ven i f t hey w ere t heir o wn. T hey g azed e nviously a t t he c hivalric i deal o f t he W est, w hich p laced t he k night a nd n ot t he r uler a t t he c entre o f s ociety. T he B yzantines f ailed t o d evelop a ny c lear c oncept o f k nighthood - o f t he w arrior a nd h is w ay o f l ife r eceiving t he b lessing o f t he c hurch, f or m uch t he s ame r eason t hat t hey n ever a ccepted t he i dea o f H oly W ar. W ithout a ny i ndependent i deal t he c haracter o f t he B yzantine a ristocracy w as c uriously c ontradictory. T hey w ere s laves o f t he e mperor, b ut r etained a s trong s ense o f f amily i ndependence. T hey w ere e ager t o c onform t o t he s tandards o f t he c ourt, b ut f launted t heir i ndividualism . T hey w ere p ublic f igures w ho v alued t heir p riv acy a bove a ll, s hutting t hemselves a way b ehind t he h igh w alls o f t heir p alaces. T hese w ere c ontradictions a t t he h eart o f B yzantine s ociety, c haracterized b y P rofessor K azhdan r ecently a s ' individua l ism a lso

w ithout f reedom . 16 B ut i n t he c ase o f t he a ristocracy i t w as t o d o w ith t heir d ouble c haracter : f used w ith t he i mperial

i deal a nd f amily, b ut b y v irtue o f t heir a ristocratic d escent i ncreas ingly i ndependent, o nce t he C omneni l ost t heir c ohesion. T his d istinction i s b rought o ut i n a l etter w ritten i n 1 156 b y a b ishop o f E phesus t o a m ember o f t he K ontostephanos f amily. H e b egged h im t o s top i nterfering i n t he a ffairs o f a s uffragan b ishopric, " for h e w as n ot a ble t o b ear t he t hought t hat h is i mperial b lood s hould t hus b e d efiled, n or t hat t he n ame o f t he K ontostephanoi r enowned f or j ustii9 a nd p iety s hould b e b esmirched t hrough t olerating s uch p ractices". T he l ife o f t he a ristocracy w as d ivided b etween t he i mperial c ourt, w here t hey j oined i n t he c eremonial t hat s olemnized i mperial a uthor ity, a nd t heir p alaces a nd m onasteries, w here t he f amily w as c eleb rated. T his p rivate d omain w as o ne t hat w as a s o ften a s n ot d omin ated b y t he w omenfolk . A nna D alassena w as t he r eal a rchitect o f t he f ortunes o f t he C omneni - j ust o ne o f a s eries o f f ormidable a ristoc ratic l adies, w ho a re t he s ubject o f t he o pening s tudy b y S ir S teven R unciman . I n m any w ays i t w as t he w omen, w ho h eld t ogether t he a ristocratic f amily i n B yzantium a nd g uided i ts d estinies. T his m ay e xplain w hy, i n c omparison t o o ther a ncient a nd m edieval s ocieties, B yzantium a ccorded s o p rominent

a r ole

t o

i ts w omen.

T his v olume h ad i ts o rigins i n t he S ixteenth S pring S ymposium o f B yzantine S tudies, w hich w as h eld i n E dinburgh 2 -4 A pril 1 982. I t d id n ot p rove p ossible t o c ollect t ogether a ll t he p apers t hat w ere g iven t here. I h ave t ried t o g ive g reater c oherence t o t he v olume b y a dding p apers

t hat w ere n ot g iven a t t he S ymposium .

M y t hanks

g o i n

p articular t o V era v on F alkenhausen f or a s plendid p aper o n t he a ristocracy o f B yzantine I taly; t o M argaret M ullett f or h er p ioneer i ng s tudy o f C omnenian l iterary p atronage,

w hich c omplements

s o w ell

R obin C ormack's p iece o n t he p atronage o f t he a rts; a nd, f inally, t o P aul M agdalino f or p roviding h is s tudy o n t he B yzantine a ristocratic o ikos.

8

N OTES 1 .

P . G autier, B yzantines,

' La d iataxis d e M ichel A ttaliate', R evue d es E tudes 3 9(1981), p .21.

2 .

J .P.

P atrologiae c ursus c ompletus:

M igne,

( Paris,

1 857-66),

1 07,

3 .

I bid.,

4 .

T heophanes C ontinuatus ( Bonn), S ynopsis H istoriarum , e d. J . p .189,11.28-36.

5 .

A .P.

c .700.

K azhdan,

V izantii 6 .

K .N. I V,

p .374,11.3-19; J ohn S cylitzes, T hurn ( Berlin/New Y ork, 1 973),

S otsialjnyj s ostav g ospodstvujushchego k lassa

( XI-XII v v)

S athas,

( Mowcow,

1 974),

p p.255-58.

M esaiönikg B ibliothgkg

( Venice/Paris,

1 872-94),

1 974),

p p.56-7;

I mperato-

e d. H .

G regoire i n B yzan-

p p.430-1.

7 .

Z onaras ( Bonn),

8 .

C f.

T imarion,

I II, e d.

R .

p .766. R omano

( Naples,

r is M ichaeli P alaeologi d e V ita s ua, t ion, 2 9-30 ( 1959-60), p p.449-51. 9 .

s eries g raeco-latina

c .688.

G eorge M ouzalon c riticized t he e xercise o f i mperial a long t hese l ines a nd p aid f or i t w ith t his l ife i n 1 258: ( Oxford,

s ee M .J. A ngold, 1 975), p p.80-93.

1 0.

T o K hronikon t ou M oreös, p .564.

e d.

1 1.

A .E. L aiou, T he B yzantine p eriod: a s tudy o f a rrested

a uthority S eptember

A B yzantine G overnment i n E xile

J .Schmitt

( London,

1 904), v .

8 710,

A ristocracy i n t he P alaeologan d evelopment', V iator, 4 (1973),

p p.131-51. 1 2.

G .M.

T homas,

D iplomatarium V eneto-Levantinum,

I I

( Venice,

1 899)

p p. 1 64-5. 1 3.

1 4.

A ctes d e P antocrator, e d. 1 0(1903), A pp. p p.12-13. G .

W eiss,

L .Petit

i n V izantijskij V remmenik,

J oannes K antakuzenos - A ristokrat,

S taatsmann,

K aiser

u nd M onch - i n d er G esellschaftesentwicklung v on B yzanz i m 1 4. J ahrhlundert ( Wiesbaden, 1 969), p p.23-53. 1 5.

J .B.

1 6.

A .

B ury, R omances o f C hivalry o n G reek S oil K azhdan

( Washington, 1 7.

( with G . D .C.,

C onstable),

1 982),

( Oxford,

1 911).

P eople a nd P ower i n B yzantium

p .34.

G eorges e t D emetrios T ornikes, L ettres e t D iscours, D arrouzes ( Paris, 1 970), p p.173-4.

9

e d.

J .

C HAPTER

1 - W OMEN I N B YZANTINE A RISTOCRATIC S OCIETY S ir S teven R unciman

I t o f

i s

t hree

a p latitude

e lements,

t o s ay t hat

t he G reek,

B yzantine c ivilization i s m ade u p

t he R oman a nd

t he J udaeo-Christian.

I f

t hat w ere t he w hole t ruth, i t w ould h ave p rovided a p oor p rospect f or B yzantine w omanhood. G reek c ivilization r eached i ts h eight, w e a re a lways

t old,

i n A thens

i n

t he 5 th c entury B .C..

Y et

n owhere e lse d id

w omen h ave s o d im a t ime, u nless t hey w ere o f i ll r epute. I t h as a lways s eemed t o m e m onstrous o f P ericles, h aving s ecured f or h imself t he p leasant l ives b ut

o f

c ompany o f A spasia,

c heerless

t he

i deal

h ard w ork.

t o h ave c ondemned

W e a re

w oman t here w as

a ll o ther w omen t o

t old t o a dmire R epublican R ome;

s omeone

l ike

t hat

g rim

c omplacent

m other o f t he G racchi, w ho a nnounced t hat h er j ewels w ere h er t wo t iresome s ons. Amongst t he J ews w omen w ere a llowed l ittle s ay, e xcept f or r are p rophetesses, s uch a s M iriam o r D eborah; a nd S t. P aul made i t c lear t hat h e d id n ot i ntend w omen t o d o m uch b etter u nder t he n ew D ispensation. much b etter

H ow w as

i t,

t hen,

t hat B yzantine w omen d id s o

t han t heir a ncestresses?

T he a nswer, I t hink, c omes l argely f rom t he E ast. I n e arly W estern E urope t here w ere a f ew f emmes f ormidables, s ome f ierce i nd omitable

l adies

i n t he o ld S agas,

a l egendary q ueen s uch a s M aeve o f

C onnaught, o r, m ore h istorically, Q ueen B oudicca. B ut i t E ast, N ear a nd F ar, t hat w e f irst f ind g reat w omen r ulers, mythical

S emiramis,

a llowed t o

s ay:

s ay:

t he

s un i s

o ne o f

t he g reatest

Q ueen o f

t he C hinese Empress W u,

t he Empress a s

C arthage,

i s

a s

b eautiful a s o f

t he E mpress";

t he P haroahs;

r uined b y

o f w hom y ou

b eautiful a s

t he s un'.

w ere

n ot

Y ou h ad

t o

Hatshepsut o f E gypt,

P hoenician l adies

f alling

i s i n t he t he s emi-

l ove w ith t hat

s uch a s D ido,

p rig A eneas,

o r

h er c ousin, Q ueen J ezebel, w ho m ade t he m istake o f m arrying i nto a p rophet-ridden c ountry. E ven i n P ersia, t he c ountry w hich p ioneered h arems D arius

g uarded b y e unuchs, Q ueen A tossa, a nd m other o f X erxes, w as t he

t hroughout h er l ife. a ction w as a v assal o f

d aughter o f C yrus, w ife o f d ominant p olitical f igure

I n C lassical G reece t he o nly e minent w oman o f t he P ersians, A rtemisia, Q ueen o f Halicarnas -

s us, t he o ne n aval c ommander o n t he P ersian s ide t o e merge w ith c redit f rom t he b attle o f S alamis. S he w ore a f alse b eard w hen g oing i nto b attle. T he

e mergence

o f

f ormidable

l adies - o r,

s hall w e c all i t

t he

m onstrous r egiment o f w omen'? - b egins i n t he C lassical w orld w ith t he Hellenistic a ge, w ith t he s uccession k ingdoms, a nd e specially i n P tolemaic E gypt: w ell

f itted f or

t hough Macedonia a nd E piros t he r ole.

I n R ome i t

b egins

s eem t o h ave b red w omen r ather s uddenly i n t he

f amily c ircle o f t he C aesars; a nd I s uspect t hat i t r eflects t he i nvasion o f m ore o riental i deas. L ivia a nd h er k inswomen p robably o wed

f ar

m ore

t o

t he i nfluence o f

C leopatra t han

1 0

t hey

w ould

h ave

l iked

t o a dmit. A fter

w omen,

t he

p erhaps

t hem,

t ill

t he

p eriod

o f T welve C aesars w e h ear

b ecause

t here w as n ot a nother T acitus

C hristian e ra,

o f t he h ouse o f Heliogabalus, R ome, Z enobia o f P almyra. I t i ty

t hat,

i n s pite o f

S t.

e xcept

f or

t he

l ittle

o f

g reat

t o t ell u s

o f

S yrian-born E mpresses

- a nd e xcept f or t hat e minent e nemy o f i s o nly a fter t he t riumph o f C hristian-

P aul,

w omen a ppear a gain t o

p lay a p art

i n

f act

i t

p olitics. C hristianity

o wed

a ppealed t o w omen, o nly a m inimal p art t rue,

s upposed

i ts

t riumph

l argely t o

t he

t hat

j us a s M ithraism f ailed b ecause i t a llowed i n i ts l ife. T he g ood C hristian w oman w as,

t o b e m odest

a nd

s elf-effacing,

w omen i t i s

r estricting h er p ublic

d uties t o w orks o f c harity. B ut C hristianity s tressed t he i mportance o f m onogamy a nd o pposed e asy d ivorce. I t b elieved i n f amily l ife, w ith

t he w ife a nd

t he m other p laying

l eading r oles.

I t

i s

t rue

t hat,

u nlike s ome o ther r eligions, i t d id n ot p ermit p riestesses. B ut t here w ere d eaconesses, t hough w ith t he d evelopment o f t he h ierarchy t heir p art

b egan t o

f ade.

W omen c ould e nter m onastic

l ife,

j ust

a s

m en c ould. T here h ad b een a nd w ere s till t o b e e minent w omen s aints; a nd a bove a ll t he g rowing c ult o f t he M other o f G od g ave a s pecial s tatus

t o w omanhood.

T he

l ot

o f w omen a mong

t he w hole w orld o ver.

t he p oor h as

a lways

T he p easant w oman,

b een m uch

t he

t ill r ecently,

a t

s ame l east,

w orked b eside h er h usband i n t he f ields - o r s ometimes d id a ll w ork, w hile h e h unted o r p oached o r w ent o ff w ith t he a rmy. s mall

s hop-keeper's w ife h as

h usband

g oes

o ut

c hildren a ccording t o

t o

t he

t hat

W hen

t he

t he h ouse a nd b rings u p

i n t he

t he

f amily r esources.

t he w ealthier c lasses,

s pare,

a lways h elped

t o w ork t he w oman r uns

c ivilizations

I t

s hop.

t he T he

i s

o nly w hen w e c ome

t o h ouses w ith s ervants

a nd w ith m oney t o

d iffer i n t he r ole o f w omen.

I n

M uslim

c ountries s uch w omen w ere r estricted t o t he h arem; a nd t hough t hey m ight e xercise c onsiderable p ower f rom b ehind t he v eil, o ver d utiful s ons o r b esotted h usbands,

t heir

l ives w ere i nevitably

l imited.

I n

t he e arlier C hristian w est, w omen w ere t ough a nd c rude, o ften a dminis tering t he f amily e states w hen t he m en w ere a way f ighting. I n T ibet, a ndry,

n ot

w here

w omen a re

r are,

a r ich

l ady u sed

a p ractice w hich g ave h er a w ide-spread

t o

i ndulge

i n

p oly-

i nfluence.

B yzantium h ad i ts o wn s tyle. T he w omen o f t he u pper c lasses d id g ive u p t he f reedom t hat t hey h ad e njoyed i n R oman I mperial t imes

- a f reedom d enounced b y R oman m oralists, w ho w ere q uite a s s tern a s S t. P aul. B ut t he R oman l adies f reedom w as w ithout a ny l egal s anc t ion. i mplied.

T hey

w ere

T hey

s ubject

w ere

t o

t he p atria p otestas a nd

e asily d ivorced a nd

t heir

r ights

a ll o ver

t hat

w ere i ll-defined. B yzantine l egislation w as t o t idy t hat u p. p erhaps t he m ain s anction f or w omen's p osition c ame t hrough p articipation i n t he c eremonies

o f

m ainly c opied P ersian C ourt.

f rom t he P ersians'; I n R ome, h owever,

o f

a

A ugustus,

A ugusta.

s eries

t he C ourt.

B ut t heir

T hese c eremonies w ere

b ut w omen d id n ot a ppear s ince t he d ays o f L ivia,

o f I mperial

W hen t he Emperor,

i t

d owries

l adies h ad b orne

t he I mperator A ugustus,

t he

h ad h is

a t t he t he w ife t itle

o f

p osition

a uthorized b y a c oronation, i t b egan t o b e f elt t hat h is f emale p artner s hould e njoy t he s ame a uthorization. T he f irst l ady t o b e c rowned A ugusta w as E udoxia, t he w ife o f A rcadius, i n 4 00 A .D., -

1 1

m any y ears

a fter h er m arriage - s he h ad a lready b orne

t hree d aughters

t o t he E mperor. B oth t he E mperor's a nd t he E mpress's c oronations w ere a t f irst s ecular a ffairs. B ut f rom 4 57 o nwards, t he E mperor w as c rowned b y t he P atriarch,

a cting a t

f irst a s

t he s enior o fficial

o f

s tate, b ut s oon, b y i nsisting o n t he p erfect o rthodoxy o f t he E mperor, t urning i t i nto a r eligious c eremony. T he E mpress, h owever, c ontinued t o b e c rowned b y t he E mperor, a s w as a ny j unior c o-Emperor t hat w as a ppointed. B ut t he P atriarch a ttended t he c eremony a nd g ave i t a r eligious s anction. T his s anction g ave t he E mpress a c onstitut ional p osition u nique i n t he h istory o f n ations. o rdinarily f ixed E mperor, u sually

b y h is

v acancy i n t he E mpire.

T he s uccession w as

t he c ustom o f t he E mperor c o-opting a j unior s on, s o t hat h is o wn d eath d id n ot c ause a B ut

i f h e d ied w ithout a j unior e mperor,

t hus

l eaving a v acancy, t he E mpress - t he s enior E mpress, i f t here w ere m ore t han o ne l iving - t hen b ecame t he r epository o f I mperial p ower; a nd i t w as f or h er t o n ominate t he n ext E mperor : w hom u sually s he t hen m arried, h eir, n ame

t he o nly;

w ere h e a vailable.

W hen T heodosius I I d ied w ithout a n

A ugusta P ulcheria n ominated a nd m arried M arcian , b ut i n s he h ad s worn a v ow o f v irginity. O n Z eno's d eath h is

w idow A riadne, w hen s he a ppeared b efore t he p eople i n t he H ippodrome, w as t old t hat i t w as h er d uty t o n ominate a n E mperor. I n t he n ext c entury w hen J ustin I I b ecame i ncurably m ad, t he E mpress S ophia n ominated T iberius A t w ould

t o b e r egent

a nd s ubsequently E mperor.

t hat t ime i t w as c onsidered i nconceivable t hat t he E mpress n ot a t o nce n ominate a n E mperor. B ut w hen a t t he e nd o f t he

e ighth c entury E irene, h aving e liminated h er s on, r etained t he I mperial p ower f or h erself, s he w as n ot r eally a cting u nconstitutiona lly :

t hough,

a s B ury s uggests,

i t m ight n ot h ave b een s o e asy f or

h er h ad t he B yzantines r etainel t he o ld L atin t itle f or E mperor, I mperator, ' commander-in-chief'. I t i s a lso w orth n oting t hat E irene's a ssumption o f t he r egency f or h er y oung s on w as f acilitated b y t he l egislation o f L eo t he I saurian, w hich m odified t he p atria p otestas b y g iving t he m other e qual r ights w ith t he f ather o ver t he c hildren. 3 A w idow w as t hus l egal g uardian o f h er y oung s on; a nd t he E mperor's g uardian c ould n ot w ell b e d eprived o f t he r egency. W hen t he P atriarch N icholas M ystikos t ried t o k eep Z oe K arbunopsina o ut o f t he r egency, p ublic o pinion w as o n h er s ide; a nd t hough h er g overnm ent s oon f ell a s t he r esult o f m ilitary d isasters, t he u surper, R omanos L ekapenos, m arried h is d aughter t o t he b oy-Emperor a nd c alled h imself B asileopetor, a s t hough t o e mphasize t hat h e h ad t aken o ver h is g uardianship. S ubsequent m others o f c hild-Emperors w ere a lways c onsidered t o b e e ntitled t o

w ife

t he r egency.

T he A ugusta w as n ot n ecessarily t he E mperor's w ife, t hough t he w as u sually s o c rowned, b ut n ot a lways a t t he t ime o f h er m ar-

r iage. w hether

P ulcheria w as t he E mperor's s ister, t hough i t i s u nclear s he w as o fficially a ppointed b y h er d ying f ather o r b y h er

c hild-brother. I n f act, i t w as t he P refect A nthemius w ho a rranged i t. T heophilos, w hen h e h ad n ot y et h ad a s on , a ppointed h is e ldest d aughter, T hekla, p robably i ntending h er f uture h usband t o s ucceed h im . L eo V I, b etween m arriages, a ppointed h is d aughter A nna, b ec ause,

w e a re t old,

t he g eremonies o f

t he C ourt

c ould n ot b e

m ain-

t ained w ithout a n E mpress. I ndeed, p erform

a nd

t he

E mpress

h ad

a v ast n umber o f o fficial

a h uge h ousehold t o s upervise.

1 2

O n t he d ays

d uties w hen

t o t he

E mperor e ntertained t he o fficials o f h is C ourt a nd g ave t hem g ifts a ccording t o t heir r ank, t he E mpress d id l ikewise w ith t heir w ives, c eremonies w hich a mbitious l adies, a nxious t o p romote t heir h usbands' c areers, w ere a ssiduous i n a ttending. T he B ook o f C eremonies l ists h er d uties i n t he t enth c entury: t hough i t i s n ot a lways c lear h ow m any f uncions s he a ttended a long w ith h er h usband. W hen C onstantine t alks o f t he Emperors', d oes h e m ean t he I mperial c ouple o r j ust t he E mperor a nd w hatever c o-Emperors t here w ere a t t he t ime? I d oubt i f t he E mpress a ttended m any o f t he s tate b anquets. O ne h as t he i mpress ion f rom L iutprand o f 'r emona t hat w omen w ere n ot p resent a t s uch f unctions i n h is t ime. B ut b y t he t ime o f t he C omneni a nd l ater, w omen w ere m ore i n e vidence. T he t erm ' gynaikeion t he g reat B yzantium

f or

t he w omen's q uarters

i n t he h ouses

h as s ometimes l ed t o a m isconception t hat t he l ed l ives o f s eclusion, s urrounded b y e unuchs.

o f

l adies o f I n f act

t here w as l ittle r esemblence b etween t he g ynaikeion a nd t he h aramlik o f a n O ttoman g reat h ouse. T he E mpress w as i n f ull c ontrol o f h er v ast e stablishment a nd d ecided w ho c ould b e a dmitted. H er h igh o ffic ials w ere n ot n ecessarily e unuchs, t hough t he p resence o f e unuchs i n t he m ore i ntimate p osts w as a s afeguard a gainst g ossip. S he h ad h er o wn T reasury. L arge r evenues w ere e armarked f or h er; a nd e nterpris ing E mpresses d id n ot d isdain c ommercial a ctivity. T heophilos w as h orrified w hen h e d iscovered t hat h is w ife 8 T heodora w as a s uccessful s hipowner. H e c onfiscated h er m erchandise. a l ess s nobbish a ttitude t owards t rade.

B ut o ther E mperors

t ook

T he p osition o f t he E mpress's q uarters i n t he G reat P alace m ust h ave v aried f rom t ime t o t ime. B uildings w ere e rected a nd d estroyed; a nd i ndividual E mpresses h ad t heir p ersonal t astes. T he P urple C hamb er, i n w hich s he w as r equired t o g ive b irth t o h er p resumably r em ained t he s ame, u ntil t he C ourt m oved f inally t o t he B lachernai P alace. 9 B ut t he f amily q uarters o f t he i mperial c ouple w ere p roba bly o utside o f t he g ynaikeion , o r o n i ts e dge. W hen w e l earn, f rom P sellos, t hat C onstantine I X's p rivate q uarters l ay b etween t hose o f t he E mpress Z oe, h is w ife, a nd t he S ebaste SW5e raina, h is m istress, t hey c annot h ave b een r ight i n t he g ynaikeion. N icephorus I I s pent t he l ast n ight o f h is l ife i n t he B oukoleon P alace, c hatting t o t he E mpress T heophano a bout t he t wo l ittle B ulgarian p rincesses w ho h ad j ust a rrived a t t he C ourt; a nd w hen s he l eft h im s he t old h im t o l eave t he d oor o pen, a s s he w ould b e r eturning. T he B oukoleon P alace w as c ertainly n ot p art o f t he g ynaikeion; b ut h er q uarters m ust h ave b een n earby; i ndeed, 1 1 w e a re t old t hat s he h ad h idden s ome o f t he c onspirators i n t hem. O n t he o ther h and i n t he d ays o f t he g reat T heodora, s he a nd J ustinian s eem t o h ave l ed s eparate l ives, d evoted t hough h e w as t o h er. H er q uarters w ere s o v ast t hat s he c ould h ide a f allen P atriarch i n t hem f or t welve y ears; a nd t he E mperor n ever P erhaps t he m ost r emarkable t hing d iscovered h im t ill h er d eath. 1 2 a bout t hat s tory i s t hat a s ecret c ould b e s o w ell k ept i n B yzant ium . I t i llustrates t he l oyalty t hat T heodora c ommanded. A nd c ertainly t he E mpress w as n ot c onfined t o h er q uarters. A n E mpressR egent m oved f reely a bout t he P alace, i nterviewing h er m inisters a nd i nspecting o ffices a nd r eceiving c lients i n t he i mperial r eception c hambers. T heodora s eems t o h ave p referred t o m ake c lients w ait u pon h er i n h er o wn c hambers; b ut t hat w as n ot d ue t o s elf-effacing m odesty.

1 3

T he

E mpress

t hus

e njoyed a p osition o f h igh c onstitutional

a nd

m aterial p ower; a nd m any E mpresses s howed t hemselves t o b e w orthy o f i t, w hether a s r egents o r a s e nterprising c onsorts, o f t he c alibre o f T heodora o r h er n iece S ophia. Im ust a pologize f or d ealing a t s ome l ength w ih E mpresses; b ut t hey, a fter a ll, w ere t he t op l ady a ristoc rats i n t he E mpire, a nd t hey s et t he t one f or t he l adies o f t he a ristocracy w ho c lustered a round t heir C ourt. A t t he h ead o f t he C ourt w as t he Z ostg P atrikia, t he M istress o f t he R obes, a h igh o fficial w ho w as i nvested b y t he E mperor i n p erson a nd w ho w as a llowed t o d ine w ith t he I mperial f amily. S he s eems u sually t o h ave b een a r elative o f t he E mpress. T heophilos, f or i nstance,

a ppointed

h is

m other-in-law

T heoktiste.

T here

1 4

w ere

d oubtless s pecially a ppointed l adies-in-waiting; b ut o n t he w hole t he l adies o f t he C ourt s eem t o h ave b een g raded a ccording t o t heir h usb ands

r ank. B ut

T heir

w hat

h ereditary

f amilies

f ormed t he a ristocracy o f

d o w e m ean b y t he a ristocracy?

t he E mpire.

T here w as

a ristocracy i n t he e arlier c enturies o f

r eally

B yzantium .

n o T he

a ristocracy w as t hen t he t op l ayer o f t he b ureaucracy o r o f t he a rmy, m ostly n ew m en w ho h ad m ade t heir w ay u p t he s ocial l adder. T heir w ives w ere e ither s imple f olk w ho h ad r isen w ith t hem, o r t he d aught ers o f p revious o fficials o r g enerals. M ost o f t he E mperors a nd E mpresses w ere e qually p arvenu o r t he c hildren o f p arvenus. T he o nly c laim t o h igh a ristocracy w as i f y ou c ould b oast a c onnection w ith t he p arvenu.

T heodosian h ouse - a nd T heodosius I h ad h imself T he o ne r eally a ristocratic l ady o f t he t ime w as

b een a J uliana

A nicia, d escended t hrough h er m other f rom b oth o f T heodosius's s ons, a l ady o f g reat w ealth, a p atroness o f t he a rts a nd a g reat b enefact ress, w ho t reated w ith c ontempt E mperors s uch a s t he w orthy c ivil s ervant e gastasius a nd, w ith e ven g reater c ontempt, t he p easant J ustin I . T here a re j ust a f ew o ther g reat l adies o f w hom w e h ear, s uch a s J ohn C hrysostom's g reat f riend, O lympias, a l ady w ho h ad r eceived a n e xcellent e ducation a nd s pent m ost o f h er l ife a s r ich w idow, f amed f or h er c harities a nd h er p ersonal a usterity, m uch d espised b y t he s mart c ircles t hat s urrounded t he E mpress E udoxia. H er d evotion t o C hrysostom l ed e ventually t o t he c onfiscation o f h er w ealt h l ife. Lu

B ut, o wing t o h er e xtreme v irtue, h ers w as a n u ntypical W e h ave p ractically n o e vidence a bout t he l ives o f h er

w orldlier c ontemporaries. T he o ne n on-royal g reat l ady o f t he s ixth c entury o f w hom w e k now s omething w as A ntonina, B elisarius's w ife a nd T heodora's f riend. B ut s he w e4 a v ulgarian, c annot a dmit h er a s a n a ristocrat. ' T he p eriod f rom t he f all o f

a n e x-actress.

W e

t he a mbitious E mpress M artina i n 6 42

a nd t he a ccession o f E irene t he A thenian t o t he r egency i n 7 80 i s a d im o ne i n t he h istory o f B yzantine w omanhood. E ven o f t he E mpresses w e k now i n m any c ases o nly n ames; a nd t hose a re o nly k nown f rom t he l ists o f I mperial t ombs. A part f rom C onstantine I II's w ife, w ho w as a d istant c ousin o f h is, a nd t he t wo K hazar p rincesses w h2 J ustinian I I a nd C onstantine V , t heir o rigins a re u nknown. 1 °

m arried P resum-

a bly t hey c ame f rom t he n oblesse d e r obe t hat s urrounded t he C ourt. I t s eems t hat t he H eraclian a nd I saurian E mperors k ept w omen i n t heir p lace. I ndeed, o ne o f t he f ew t hings t hat w e k now a bout a ny o f t heir E mpresses, w as t hat A nastasia, w idow o f C onstantine I V, w as w hipped l ike a S tephen.

n aughty s chool-girl b y t he I mperial T reasurer, t he e unuch T he m ethod o f c hoosing a n i mperial w ife b y m eans o f a

1 9

1 4

b ride-show ,

s eemingly

a n o riental c ustum i ntroduced b y

C onstantine

V 's K hazar w ife, s hows a r ather d isrespectful a ttitude t owards t he s ex, e ven t hough i t w as f ollowed b y t hat s talw mt f eminist, E irene t he A thenian , w hen c hoosing a b ride f or h er s on. U nder t he A morians

t hings

i mproved f or w omanhood.

T he c areer o f

t hat p ious b ut p ert p oetess, K as , p roves t he e xistence o f w ell e ducated w omen i n C onstantinople. " M oreover a l anded a ristocracy w as b eginning t o r e-emerge. T he b ride t hat E irene c hose f or h er s on, M aria o f A mnia, w as t he g rand-daughter o f a f armer w ho a massed a l arge f ortune t hen l ost i t o wing t o a n A rab i nvasion . S he s eems t o h ave b een a d ull g irl. 22 D anielis, t he r ich w idow a t P atras w ho b efriended t he f uture E mperor B asil I , s eems a lso t o h ave b een s elfm ade, o r i t m ay h ave b een h er l ate h usband w ho s tarted t he b usiness. S he s eems t o h ave h ad n o d esire t o f ound a g reat f amily; s he l eft h er w hole f ortune t o t he E mperor.

2 3

B ut h er c ontemporary,

T heodora,

w ife

o f T heophilos, c ame f rom a P aphlagonian f amily ( partly A rmenian) w here t he c hildren, e specially t he s ons, h ad b een g iven 24e g ood e ducat ion : w hich s uggests a c ertain a ristocratic t radition. C ertainly, b y t he n ext c entury t he g reat l anded f amilies o f A natolla b egin t o a ppear, t he D oukas a nd t he P hokas a nd o ther c lans, w hose a mbitions a nd q uarrels w ere s oon t o d ominate a nd l argely t o r uin B yzantium . T hese g reat f amilies m ade c onstant u se o f d ynastic m arriages; a nd s uch m arriages a re p ointless u nless t he b ride i s w ell e nough e ducated a nd w ell e nough i nformed t o b e c apable o f i nfluencing h er h usband. U nfortunately w e k now l ittle a bout t hese n oble l adies o f t he t enth c entury : w ho w as

u nless w e c an t ake a s f airly t ypical t he l ady T heophano, s ent b y h er u ncle, J ohn T zimiskes, t o m arry t he W estern

E mperor, O tto I I. S he w as o nly t o l ook a fter h erself,

c ertainly w ell e ducated a nd w ell a ble n ot b ut t o l ook a fter a v ast E mpire. M aybe

s he h ad b een s elected b y t he E mperor b ecause s he w as o bviously a n i ntelligent g irl; b ut s he c ertainly h ad n ot b een s pecially e ducated f or t he j ob. 25 I n t he n ext c entury t wo h ighborn a nd c ultivated B yzant ine l adies m arried D oges o f V enice. o f f orks i nto I taly. 2b A t t he e nd o f c entury

w e

h ave e vidence a bout

O ne o f t hem i ntroduced t he u se t he e leventh a nd i n t he t welfth

l adies o f

t he a ristocrary

f rom

t he

C omnenian w riters a nd p articularly f rom A nna C omnena. I t i s d ifficult t o s ay h ow f ar w e c an r egard t his e vidence r etrospectively. I s uspect t hat t hese n ew a ristocratic c lans a llowed t heir d aughters a f reedom o f l ife s uch a s h itherto o nly t he E mpress h ad e njoyed - a nd t he E mpress w as h ampered b y h aving t o m aintain I mperial d ignity. T he g ynaikeion, o r g ynaikonitis, h as n ow b ecome m erely a r oom, o r a s equence o f r ooms s ometimes o nly s eparated b y a I ndeed, i t s hould b e r egarc urtain f rom t he m ain r eception r ooms. 27 d ed, I t hink, r ather l ike a V ictorian l ady's b oudoir, t o w hich m en s hould n ot c ome w ithout i nvitation, b ut t o w hich m any d id c ome, e sp ecially i f t hey h ad s ome k inship w ith t he l ady. L adies r ide f reely o n

h orseback t hrough

t he c ity.

T hough o rdinarily v eiled w hen

t hey

w ent o ut, w e f requently h ear o f t hem r emoving t heir v eils: w hich a nyhow, I s uspect, w ere w orn m ore t o p rotect t he c omplexion t han f rom m odesty. O n t he o ther h and a g ood b urgeolse l ike P sellos's o nly r emoved h er v eil w hen Ae w as s o s tricken b y g rief t hat

m other s he d id

n ot k now w hat s he w as d oing. L adies w ere o ften p resent w hen t heir m enfolk d iscussed p olitics a nd i ndeed t ook p art i n t he d iscussions. I f t hey h ad t he t aste f or i t t hey w ere f ree t o e njoy t he c onversation

1 5

o f s cholars.

T hey w ere e ducated a t h ome b y m onks a nd s ome v ery w ell

e ducated - n ot m any, m aybe, a s w ell a s A nna h erself w as ( as s he f requently r eminds u s), b ut h er m other e njoyed gading b ooks o f t heol ogy t hat A nna h erself c ould n ot u nderstand. A nd a mongst t he p rincesses a nd g reat l adies o f t he f ollowing c entury t here w ere c ert ainly m any w ho w ere k nown f or t heir c ulture, 3 6 p oems t ell u s, f or t heir p atronage o f c ulture.

a s t he P rodromic T here i s a nother

i ndication o f c hange. W hen i n t he e arly n inth c entury t he E mperor M ichael R bangabe's w ife i nsisted o n a ccompanying h im o n a c ampaign, t he s oldiers w ere s hocked. B ut A lexius C omnenus's w ife, A nna's m other, w as a dmired f or s taying b y h is s ide d uring h is l ater c amp aigns, t o s ee t o h is h ealth; a nd s he a nd h er d aughters n ursed h im t hemselves d ing h is l ast i llness, a nd c ontinually q uarrelled w ith t he d octors. I t

m ust b e a ssumed

t hat

s ome o f

t hese l adies

l ed q uiet d omestic

l ives; b ut e ven a t h ome t heir l ives w ere n ot s ecluded. T hat w ise o ld m an K ekaumenos a dvises u s t hat i t i s v ery u nwise t o h ave g uests s tay. T his

T hey m erely c riticise y our f ood a nd t ry t o s educe y our w ife. i mplies t hat y ou h ad f ree a ccess t o y our h ostess - s he w as n ot

l iving

i n a ny s ort o f

i mpression i ntrigue.

p urdah.

T he h istories o f

t he t imes g ive

t he

t hat a lmost e very n oble l ady w as d eeply i nvolved i n A nd i n t hese i ntrigues w omen h ad o ne g reat a dvantage.

W ith r ather u nexpected g allantry t he B yzantines w ere s trongly a verse t o a dministering a ny p hysical p unishment o n w omen . T he e unuch w ho s panked t he o ld E mpress A nastasia w as a P ersian. I t i s t rue t hat t he I conoclast E mperors d id o rder a f ew I conodule l adle§ t o b e s courged: w hich p ractically g ave t hem t he r ank o f m artyr. ' I n t he f ifth c entury t he E mpress V erina, a d oughty o ld i ntriguer, w as a t ( I pe t ime s aid t o h ave b een t ortured: w hich w as c onsidered s hocking. T he o nly c ase o f m utilation o f w hich I k now w as w hen t he E mpress M artina h ad h er t ongue s lit. S he w as s o u npopular e t n o o ne m inded - i t w as p erhaps t he o nly w ay t o s top h er t alking. T here i s n o c ase o f a w oman b eing b linded. T he t wo E mperors w ho h ad w omen p ut t o d eath w ere t he t wo m ost b loodthirsty i n B yzantine h istory : P hokas, w ho o rdered t he e xecution o f t he Empress C onstantina a nd h er y oung d aughters, o n t he g round t hat t hey h ad b een p lotting a gainst h im f rom t he m onastery i n w hich t hey w ere c onfined. C onstantina m ay h ave b een g uilty, h er d aughters c ertainly n ot - : 3 6Andronikos C omnenus, w ho h ad t he E mpress M aria o f A ntioch p ut t o d eath, f orcing h er y oung s on t o s ign t he d eath-sentence. H e a lso h ad t he C aesarissa M aria m urdered i n p rison,

b ut

t hat w as

d one i nformally.

3 7

S o, u nless t he E mperor w as a m onster, a g reat l ady c ould i ntrigue h appily, k nowing t hat i f t hings w ent w rong t he w orst t hat c ould h appen t o h er w ould b e c onfinement i n a m onastery a nd p erhaps t he

c onfiscation o f h er w ealth.

L ife

i n a m onastery w as n ot n eces-

s arily u ncomfortable, u nless, l ike t he u nfortunate E mpress T heophano, o ne w as i gnt t o r epent o f o ne's s ins i n a n e stablishment i n b leakest A rmenia. t ill

s he

A

l ady s uch a s A nna D alassena,

w ho l ived f or

s uceeded i n p lacing h er s on o n t he t hrone,

w hich,

i ntrigue t o

h er

f ury, h er b rother-in-law h ad a bdicated, w as n ow a nd t hen f orcibly r etired t o a m onastery, o r e lse w ent t here f or s elf-protection. S he s eems t ors

o n t hose o ccasions t o h ave b een a ccompa l ged b y h er o wn s ervia nd t o h ave p rovided f or h er o wn k eep. ' E xcept f or g rave

p olitical o ffenses t here w as n o q uestion o f t he l ady h aving t o t ake f ull m onastic v ows. A d owager, o n t he o ther h and, w ould u sually

1 6

r etire

i nto

a c onvent,

t o e nd h er d ays w ell c ared f or

i n

a

h oly

a tmosphere, c laiming n o b etter t reatment t han t he o ther e lderly f olk w ho w ere t o b e f ound i n 2ese a ltruistic e stablishments. T he e lderly b ourgeoise d id l ikewise. T he e mergence o f

t hese g reat

f amilies m eant

t hat

f amily s urnames

c ame i nto u se i n p olite c ircles; a nd i t i s s ignificant t hat i f y our m other's s urname w as s marter t han y our f ather's, - o r i n y our g randm other's

s urname w as

s marter s till,

- y ou t ook i t.

A nna D alassena's

f ather's s urname w as C haron; b ut t he D alassenoi w ere a g rander f amily. N one o f A nna C omnena's c hildren s ank s o l ow a s t o t ake t heir f ather's s urname: t hough B ryennios w as a g ood n ame; b ut C omnenus o r D oukas w as b etter. B y t he f ourteenth c entury t he n otables u sually b ore a s tr eg o f s urnames, m entioning a ll t heir s mart a ncestors o n b oth s ides. T he

a ristocracy

w as

c ontinually a dmitting

n ew

f amilies.

s pite o f t he p ride o f b irth s hown b y s omeone l ike A nna C omnena, n ence i n t he a rmy o r t he c ivil s ervice ( or j ust g reat w ealth)

I n e mic ould

b ring o ne i nto t he c harmed c ircle, e specially i f o ne m arried i nto i t a nd s till m ore i f o ne d isplayed t he r ight s tandards o f c ulture. T he B yzantines r emained t o t he l ast i ntellectual s nobs. g reat f amilies h ad l argely b een o f A rmenian suck.

I n t he p ast t he L ater m any o f

t hem w ere d escended f rom s ome L atin i mmigrant. B ut t he l ives t he l adies s eem t o h ave b een m uch t he s ame i n t he f ourteenth a s

o f i n

t he e leventh a nd t welfth c enturies, l ittle a ffected b y t he p eriod o f t he F rankokratia a nd t he E mpire i n E xile. T he o ne d ifference s eems t o h ave b een t hat t hey s pent m ore t ime i n t heir c ountry h ouses t han b efore. I n t he o lder d ays a l ady n ever l eft t he c apital a nd t he c ourt v oluntarily . N ow w e f ind t hem q uite o ften i n t heir c ountry s eats. P artly t his m ust h ave b een d ue t o t he e ffect o f t he t emporary l oss o f C onstantinople, p artly t o e conomic c onsiderations, a nd p artly t o t he r educed s ize o f t he I mperial C ourt; a nd a nyhow, w ith t he r educed s ize o f t he E mpire i tself, m ost o f t he c ountry s eats w ere n ot s o f ar a way. I t w as a lmost a s e asy a nd r ather l ess r isky t o c onduct i ntri ees

f rom

y our l ands i n T hrace t han f rom y our t own

e stablish-

m ent. A part

f rom

s uch c hanges,

g reat l ady, T heodora, r esembles t he l ife o f

t he l ife o f

t he

f ourteenth-century

t he m other o f J ohn C antacuzenus, v ery t he e leventh-century A nna D alassena.

m uch B oth

b elonged t o t he h igh n obility, t hough T heodora's a ctual p arentage i s u nknown - h er s urnames o f P alaiologina-Angelina m erely s how t hat s he w as v ery w ell c onnected, b ut n either w as p robably h er f ather's n ame. E ach w as a w ealthy w idow w ho w orked h ard f or h er s on's a dvancement. T heodora, t hough, i n t he m ore r estricted c ircles o f h er t ime, m ight h ave s eemed t he m ore p rominent a nd i ndeed w as f or a t ime e ntrusted w ith t he g overnment o f D idymoteichos, b ut s he d ied b efore h er s on's t riumph - d ied u nder h ouse a rrest,

d eprived o f h er s ervitors.

4 4

A mong t he b ourgeoisie l adies f ashions h ad n ot m uch c hanged. I n t he f ifteenth c entury t he I talian s cholar F ilelfo n oted t hat B yzant ine w omen a lways w ore v eils w hen o ut w alking a nd w ere n ever u nescorted - a nd i ncidentally s poke m uch p urer G reek t han t heir m enfolk b ecause t hey n ever s aw f oreigners n or m en o f t he w orking c lasses. f oreigners

B ut

a s

c annot

h e

h ad m arried

b e a ccurate.

a

G reek,

H owever,

1 7

h is

s tatement

h er m other w as

a bout

I talian :

w hich m ay h ave m ade a d ifference - a nd p erhaps h e w ished

t o h int

t hat

s he w as a d ull g irl i n o rder t o j ustify h is n otorious l iaison w ith h is m other-in-law. 45 I n t he u pper c lasses v eils s eem t o h ave b een d iscarded, p erhaps d ue t o t he i nfluence o f W estern-born E mpresses. W hen J ohn V III's w ife M aria o f T rebizond r ode t o c hurch, h er f ace w as w holly v isible. B ertrandon d e l a B rocquiere s aw h er a nd a dmired h er e xtraordinary b e uty, t hough h e t hought t hat s he n eed n ot h ave w orn s o m uch m ake-up.

a nd

T o t he l ast t he g reat l ady p layed a l eading r ole i n B yzantium e ven f or a g eneration b eyond. S hortly b efore t he f all o f t he

c ity t he G rand D uke L oukas N otaras, h imself p erhaps a r ich p arvenu, b ut m arried t o a l ady w ith P alaeologan a nd C antacuzene b lood, s ent h is u nmarried d aughter A nna w ith t he h oliest o f h is r elics t o V enice, w here h e s eems

t o h ave k ept a p rosperous b ank a ccount.

t o h ave b een a ffianced s he w ould h ardly h ave c ould h ave s hown i t u p d evoted c hronicler o f

S he

c laimed

t o t he l ast E mperor, C onstantine, a c laim t hat m ade a t a t ime w hen t here w ere m any a live w ho h ad i t b een e ntirely f alse. S phrantzes, t he t he P alaeologan f amily n ever m entions i t; b ut

a s h e h ated h er f ather a nd h ad f ailed t o f ind a b ride f or t he E mperor i n G eorgia o r T rebizond, h is s ilence i s u nderstandable. I n V enice s he w as r egarded a s t he u ndoubted h ead o f t he e xiled G reek c ommunity, b y t he V enetian g overnment a s w ell a s b y t he G reeks; a nd s he u sed h er p osition w ith c harity a nd e nterprise

f or a ll h er l ong l ife.

S he mee

a s plendid f igure f or c losing a s tudy o f g reat w omen i n B yzantium. F eminists n o d oubt w ould f ind m uch t o c riticize i n t he p osition o f w omen i n B yzantium. B ut i n f act t here h ave b een f ew c ivilizations i n w hich w omen o f t he r uling c lasses h ave e xercized s o m uch p ower, a nd h ave h ad t he r ight t o d o s o. I s m anaged t o l ast f or e leven c enturies?

t hat,

1 8

I w onder,

w hy B yzantium

N OTES 1 .

F or

t he p osition o f

t he E mpress

s ee J .B.

B ury,

.' The C onstitu-

t ion o f t he L ater R oman E mpire', i n S elected E ssays, e d. T emperley, p p. 1 10-2, a nd i n J . B rehier, L e M onde B yzantin , p p. 1 8-19, 2 7-33. S ee a lso S . R unciman, S ome n otes o n t he r ole o f t he E mpress', i n E astern C hurches R eview , i v, 2 ( 1972), p p. 1 19-124. 2 .

S uggested b y B ury

3 .

S ee t he p rovisions o n m arriage a nd t he g uardianship o f m inors i n t he E cloga, A M anual o f R oman L aw : T he E cloga, t rans. E .H. F reshfield,

4 .

S ee

S .

1 963),

p p.

i n c onversation w ith t he a uthor i n 1 924.

7 2-79.

R unciman, p p.

8 7-88,

a nd I ntroduction ,

p p.

T he E mperor R omanus L ecapenus

1 8-19. ( Cambridge,

4 7-52.

5 .

S .

R unciman,

a rt.

c it.,

p p.

1 23-4.

6 .

L eo G rammaticus ( Bonn), p . 2 74. S ee a lso J .B. t he E astern R oman E mpire, p . 1 54, f or t he

B ury, H istory o f c ase o f T hekla.

M ichael I I h ad j ustified h is m arriage t o t he e x-nun b y t he e xpressed w ish o f t he s enators t hat t heir w ives s hould h ave a n E mpress t o p reside o ver t heir t inuatus ( Bonn), p . 7 8. 7 .

I t i s

c lear

t hat

c eremonies.

T heophanes

t he v isit o f O lga o f R ussia t o

c aused c eremonial p roblems.

C on-

C onstantinople

C ould a f emale p otentate a ppear a t

S tate b anquets? T he E mperor C onstantine P orphyrogenitus h ad t o w ork o ut a s pecial p rotocol. S ee A . R ambaud, L 'Empire G rec a u X e.

S iècle:

C onstantin P orphyroggnete

8 .

G enesius,

9 .

A ccording t o A nna C omnena,

A lexiad,

D awes,

t he P urple C hamber,

o f

( Bonn)

p p.

o ld

p .

1 50-1,

s et

a side

7 5:

( Paris,

T heophanes C ontinuatus

1 69-70), f or

V I,

1 870). ( Bonn),

8 a nd V II,

t he c onfinement o f

p .

8 8.

2 ( trans.

" which h ad b een

E mpressess",

w as

a

s quare r oom w ith a p yramidical r oof, t he f loor a nd w alls b eing c overed w ith p urple m arble. I t l ooked o ver t he s ea n ear t o t he B ucoleon h arbour. T here i s n o r ecord o f a P urple C hamber i n t he B lachernai P alace, t hough t he t itle o f ' Porphyrogenitus' c ontinued t o b e u sed f or c hildren b orn o f 1 0.

P sellus,

1 1.

L eo D iaconus

1 2.

M ichel

l e S yrien,

I I,

1 95.

1 3.

p .

P rocopius

C hronographia, V I. ( Bonn),

p p.

6 2,

8 7-8:

C hronique.

e d.

R enaud,

C edrenus

e d.

r eigning E mperors.

J .B.

I ,

( Bonn),

C habot

i n t he S ecret H istory g ives

1 4.

p p.

1 47.

I I,

( Paris,

p p.

3 75-6.

1 899-1910)

a v ivid p icture o f

t iers w aiting i n T heodora's s tuffy a nte-room , t oe i n o rder t o b e n oticed b y h er e unuchs. e dition ,

p .

c our-

s tanding o n t ip( Anecdota, L oeb

1 78-180.)

F or t he Z ostg P atrikia s ee L .

B rghier,

1 9

L e M onde B yzantin

I I,

L es I nstitutions,

p p.

1 24-5.

T he c eremony o f h er i nstallation

i s g iven i n C onstantine P orphyrogenitus, D e C eremoniis, p p. 2 57-261. A p assage i n t he K leterologion o f P hilotheos, i n B ury, I mperial A dministrative S ystem, s ays t hat s he w as e nti tled t o d ine w ith t he E mperor, t he P atriarch, t he C aesars a nd t he K ouropalatai - t he E mpress i s n ot m entioned, b ut t his m ust b e a n e rror. I t i s m ost u nlikely t hat s he w ould b e p ermitted t o d ine a lone w ith m en ; h er m istress m ust a lso h ave b een p res ent. T he Z ostg P atrikia w as c learly s uperior t o t he z ostai, o f w hom t here w ere m ore t han o ne. I n t he a ccount i n t he D e C eremoniis, ( p. 5 96), o f P rincess O lga s r eception, f ive r anks o f c ourt l adies j oined i n t he w elcoming p rocession, t he z ostai, t he m agistrissai, t he p atrikiai, t he o ffikiallai p rotospat hareai, a nd t he m ere p rotospathareai. W e k now o f t hree l adies w ho w ere m ade z ostai, t he d aughter o f T sar S amuel o f B ulgaria a nd t he w idow o f T sar J ohn V ladislav , a fter B asil I I's c onquest o f B ulgaria, ( Cedrenus ( Bonn), I I, p p. 4 51, 4 74) a nd i n t he t welfth c entury a l ady o f t he M elissenos f amily, w hose s eal h as s urvived. ( G. B yzantin , p . 6 07). n ame w e k now . 1 5.

H er

S chlumberger, S igillographie d e l 'Empire T heoktiste i s t he o nly z ostg p atrikia w hose

f amily c onnections m ade J uliana A nicia a f igure o f

t ial

i mportance

a nd

i mmensely

r ich.

S ee

E .

p oten-

S tein,

H is-

t oire d u B as-Empire, ( Paris-Brussels-Amsterdam , 1 949), I I, p . 6 7. n .l. B ut s he s eems t o h ave t ried t o k eep c lear o f p olitics. B ook I o f t he G reek A nthology c ontains a l ong e pigram o n t he C hurch o f S t. P olyeuktos w hich s he f ounded ( no. 1 0), a nd s ix s hort

e pigrams o f h er f oundation o f

S t,

E uphemia

( nos.

1 2-17).

S he w as a lso r esponsible f or t he f ine i lluminated m anuscript o f t he M ateria M edica o f D iocurides, n ow i n t he N ational L ibrary i n V ienna.

I t c ontains h er p ortrait.

1 6.

F or t he l ife o f O lympias s ee J ean C hrysostome, L ettres ä O lymp ias, e d. A -M . M alingrey ( Paris, 1 947), p p. 6 -66.

1 7.

S ee B ury,

H istory o f t he L ater R oman E mpire,

I I,

( 1923),

p p.

5 6-8. 1 8.

T he o rigins o f C onstans 1 I's w ife,

F austa,

a nd o f C onstantine

I V's w ife, A nastasia, a re u nknown. T he w ives o f L eontios, T iberius I II, P hilippikos, A nastasius I I a nd T heodosius I II a re n ever m entioned. W e a re e qually i gnorant o f t he o rigins o f L eo I II's w ife, M aria, a nd o f C onstantine V 's s econd a nd t hird w ives, 1 9.

M aria a nd E udocia.

T heophanes, p ing w as

2 0.

I ,

p .

3 67:

N icephorus,

p .

3 7,

s ays

t hat

t he w hip-

i n s emblance'.

T he p rocedure

f or

s electing c andidates

f or

t he b rideshow,

w hich

i nvolved i nspectors t ouring t he p rovinces t o f ind g irls f rom r espectable h omes w ho l iterally m easured u p t o t he s tandards o f b eauty r equired b y t he t aste o f t he C ourt, a re g iven i n t he V ita P hilareti, e d. F ormy a nd L eroy i n B 9 ( 1934), p .142, d escribing t he s election o f t he S aint's g rand-daughter, M aria o f A mnia, a s a p ossible b ride f or C onstantine V I. T he t ext i mp lies

t hat

t he p ractice w as n ot n ew .

2 0

P ossibly C onstantine

V

h ad e mployed i f f or t he c hoice o f h is s econd a nd t hird w ives a nd a lmost c ertainly f or h is s on, L eo I V, w hose b ride w as t he A thenian E irene. S taurakios, s on o f N icephorus I , T heophilos, M ichael I II a nd L eo V I o btained b rides b y t his m ethod. T he a ccounts o f T heophilos's c hoice r elate t hat t he i ntended b rideg room , a fter i nspecting t he g irls, g ave t he s uccessful c andid ate a g olden a pple. S ee B ury, E astern R oman E mpire, p p. 8 1-3. 2 1.

K asia's i n

l ife a nd w orks a re d iscussed i n K .

K rumbacher,

K asia,

S itzungsberichte d er p hilosophisch-philologischen u nd d er

h istorischen K lasse d e b ayerischen A kademie d er W issenschaften , 3 , ( 1897), p p. 3 05-370. 2 2.

A fter v ery f ew y ears o f m arriage C onstantine V I d ivorced o f A mnia a nd s ent h er i nto a m onastery.

T heophanes,

I ,

M aria p .

4 69.

2 3.

S ee S . R unciman, T he W idow m gmoire d 'A. A ndreades ( Athens,

D anielis', E tudes d ediges ä l a 1 940), p p. 4 25-431.

2 4.

T heodora's b rother, t he C aesar B ardas, w as, a s e ven h is e nemies a dmitted, a m an o f g reat c ulture a nd i ntellectual i nterests. S ee B ury, E astern R oman E mpire, p . 4 39.

2 5.

F or T heophano, w ife o f O tto I I, s ee J . M ortmann, T heophano d ie G emahlin O ttos I I, ( Gottingen, 1 878), a nd F . D olger, ' Wer w ar T heophano?', B Z 4 3 ( 1950), p p. 3 38 f f.

2 6.

M aria A rgyra, c ousin o f B asil I I, m arried G iovanni O rseolo i n 1 006, a nd T heodora D oukaina , s ister o f M ichael V II, m arried D omenico S ilvio i n a bout 1 072.

2 7.

A nna C omnena, A lexiad, X V, 8 ( trans. d ivided s at'.

t he w omen's a partments

2 8.

P sellus, E pitaphioi L ogoi, B ibliothäkä, V . p . 3 0.

2 9.

A nna C omnena,

3 0.

I n

A lexiad, V .

p articular

J ohn I I's

S ebastokrator A ndronicus. n äne e t Manuel I C omnäne,

D awes,

i n

9 ( trans.

K .N.

S athas,

D awes

p .

s ister-in-law , S ee p p. 1 4,

T heophanes, I , p . 4 95-6: A nna C omnena, ( trans. D awes, p p. 3 04-7; 4 20-5).

3 2.

K ekaumenos S trategikon,

3 3.

I n

' A c urtain

M esaiönikä

1 35).

E irene,

F . C halandon, 2 13.

3 1.

e d.

p . 4 13):

f rom t he r oom w here t he E mperors

w ife o f

A lexiad X II,3;

W assiliewsky a nd J ernstedt,

a bout 7 62 a l ady c alled A nna w as

t he

J ean I I C om-

X V,

I I

p p.42-3

s courged i n a n a ttempt

t o

m ake h er c onfess t o c arnal i ntercourse w ith t he i conodule m artyr, S t. S tephen , ( Vita S tephani, i n M igne, P G 1 00, c ol. 1 129B). T heodore t he S tudite r efers t o t wo i nstances o f c onv ents w hose i nmates w ere f logged, a nd i mplies t hat a n oble l ady, E irene s uffered t he s ame p unishment, ( Theodorus S tudita, E pistolae, e d. M ai, N ova P atrum B ibliotheca, V III, 2 , e d. C ozza-Luzi,

n os.

5 9,

6 8,

9 1).

2 1

3 4.

S ee E .W.

B rooks,

T he E mperor Z enon a nd t he I saurians',

l ish H istorial R eview, 3 5.

T heophanes,

3 6.

C hronicon P aschale

( Bonn),

N iketas C honiates,

e d.

3 7.

p p.

2 59-60,

I ,

p .

8 ( 1893),

p p.

E ng-

2 18-9.

3 31. p p.

I .A.

3 96-7.

V an D ieten ( Berlin/New Y ork,

1 975),

2 69.

3 8.

C edrenus

( Bonn),

I I,

p p.

3 9.

A nna C omnena, A lexiad,

4 0.

S ee D .J.

3 80-1.

I I

C onstantelos,

5 ( trans.

D awes p .

5 5).

B yzantine P hilanthropy a nd S ocial W el-

f are ( New B runswick, 1 968), p p. 8 8 f f., a nd p p. 2 22-240, d eali ng w ith g erokomeia, o ld p eople's h omes, w hich w ere p robably r eserved f or t he a ged p oor. 4 1.

B y

t he

f ourteenth c entury a s tring o f f our s urnames

w as

n ot

u ncommon , ( e.g. C onstantine C omnenus M aliasenos D oukas B ryennios - P olemis, T he D oukai, n o. 1 21, p . 1 42). W ives u sually a dded t heir h usbands s urnames t o t heir o wn, ( e.g. A nna C antacuzena C omnena P alaiologina B ryennia P hilanthropena, N icol, 1 50).

T he F amily o f K antakouzenos, n os. 3 9, 4 0, p p. 1 49I t i s o ften d ifficult t o d iscover w hich i s t he a ctual

p atronymic. 4 2.

A s,

f or

i nstance,

f amilies

o f

t he g reat

f amily o f R aoul.

t he P eloponnese

P hrangopoulos, G iles'. T he

w ere o f

M any o f

F rankish

t he g reat

o rigin ,

' son o f t he F rank', o r G ilopoulos, e minent f amily o f A sen w as o f r oyal

e .g.,

' son o f B ulgarian

o rigin. 4 3.

I n

t he

t enth c entury t he g reat

f amilies s eem m ostly

r esided o n t heir c ountry e states.

t o

h ave

I n t he e leventh c entury m ost

o f t hem c ame t o C onstantinople t o b e n ear t o t he s eat o f p ower, a nd, l ater i n t he c entury, b ecause m any o f t he A natolian f amil ies h ad l ost

t heir e states

4 4.

S ee N icol, o p.

4 5.

F or F ilelfo,

c it., s ee K .

p p.

t o

t he T urks.

3 0-33.

S etton,

' Byzantium a nd

t he I talian R enais-

s ance', P roceedings o f t he A merican P hilosophical S ociety, v ol. 1 00, n o. 1 , p p. 7 2-3 [ reprinted i n K .M . S etton, E urope a nd t he L evant i n t he M iddle A ges a nd-the R enaissance ( London, 1 974), I ]. D .J. G eanolkoplos, G reek S cholars i n V enice ( Cambridge, M ass., 4 6.

p p.

3 2-3.

B ertrandon d e l a B rocqui k-e , ( Paris,

4 7.

1 962,

1 892),

p .

S ee G eanakoplos,

V oyage d 'Outremer,

e d.

1 56. o p.

c it.,

p p.

6 2,

2 2

w ith r eferences.

C .

S chefer

L es d ebuts d 'une a ristocratie b yzantine e t l e t gmoignage d e l 'historiographie : s ysteme d es n oms e t l iens d e p arente a ux I X' - Xe s ieeles E velyne P atlagean

" L'oncle q u'on a ttendait s 'appelait P alamede , d 'un p renom q u 'il a vait h eritg d es p rinces d e S icile , s es a ncetres. E t p lus t ard q uand j e r etrouvai d ans m es l ectures h istoriques , a ppartenant ä t el p odestat o u t el p rince d e l 'Eglise, c e p renom m eme, b elle m gdaille d e l a R enaissance - d 'aucuns d isaient u n v eritable a ntique t oujours r estg d ans l a f ami ne, a yant g lissg d e d escendant e n d escendant d epuis l e c abinet d u V atican j usqu 'ä l 'oncle d e m on a mi, j 'eprouvai l e p laisir r gservg ä c eux q ui, n e p ouvant f aute d 'argent c onstituer u n m edaillier , •

•

u ne p inacotheque,

r echerchent l es v ieux n oms

•

M arcel P roust , A l 'ombre d es j eunes f illes e n f leur , g d. d e l a P lgiade , p . 7 49.

L es a ristocraties d e l 'Occident m edieval s ont A l 'ordre d u j our' . L e t erme d gsigne u n g roupe r estreint a u s ommet d e l a s ocigtg , m ais d emeure p lus o uvert e t p lus m aniable q ue c elui d e n oblesse , vi s ignifie p our s a p art l 'exclusivite h greditaire

d 'un s tatut

p rivilggig 2 ) .

D u c ötg d e B yzance ,

O strogorsky e t B eck 3Q nt d gjä p retg l 'oreille , c hacun e n s on t emps, ä d es ) s irenes c omparatives . M ais q uiconque o uvre a ujourd'hui l e d ossier d e l 'aristocratie b yzantine l e f ait e n t out g tat d e c ause ä l a l umiere d e l a p roblgmatique m ise e n o euvre p our l 'Occi c lent , e t n otamment p our l a p griode f ormatrice d es V II e

X Ie s iecles, d ecisive a ussi A B yzance , d e C onstantin V

äB asile I I, d e 7 41 ä 1 025. L a q uestion o ffre d es a spects p olitiques, c ulturels, e conomiques , i nstitutionnels: e ile c ommence c ependant p ar l a p arentg a ristocratique , s a s tructure , s on f onctionnement 4 ) . L 'etude e n e st l iee p our l 'Occident a u d e-b at o uvert ä l a s uite d e M arc B loch s ur l a c ontinuitg d es l ignages ä p artir d e l 'epoque c arolingienne, e t m et d onc e n j eu d 'une p art l 'illustration d u l ignage, d 'autre p art l es u sages r elatifs a ux n oms p ropres e t l 'emergence d es n oms l ignagers. L es t ravaux K azhdan o nt f rayg l a v oie e n c e s ens. B ans u ne p remiere e squisse 5 ) , i i m ontrait q ue l 'illustration p ar l a n aissance s e d essine ä B yzance a u t ournant d es I XeXe s iecles , e t f ait a lors c oncurrence d ans l es s ources ä l 'eloge d u m erite p ersonnel. I l o bservait a ussi q ue , d ans l a C hronique d e T heophane , 1 /5 e nviron d es i ndividus n ommes p orte u n n om d e f amille , s elon l ui 2 2 c ontre 9 7, a vec u n s eul e xemple d e n om c ommun ä d eux f reres; q ue c es n oms s ont p our l a p lupart v ulgaires; e t q ue l a p roportion s 'inverse d ans l 'oeuvre d e N iketas C boniates. K azhdan p ubliait e nsuite u n l ivre f ondamental 6) -, q ui s e d onnait p our o bjet l a d efinition d e l a " classe d ominante" ä B yzance a u c ours d es X I eXII e s iecles. I l y s uivait u ne m ethode s ociologique , d ans l e c adre d e l aquelle l e r eleve s ystgmatique d es n oms d e f amille p ermettait ä l a f ois u ne d iscussion d es o rigines d es a ristocrates ,

e t

u ne a ppreciation

d es

2 3

s olidaritgs

d e

p arentele ,

d ont

l e

t riompbe d es C omnenes m arque n ouvelle p griode e ncore. L e

p resent p ropos

K azhdan.

l e

p oint

c ulminant,

s e d istingue

o u

p our

s ur p lusieurs

p oints

L a p griode d 'abord s era c elle d es d ebuts,

g eneration d u V III e s iècle

j usqu'ä

m ieux d ire u ne

d e

c elui

d e

d epuis l a d erniere

l a p remiere d u X I e.

E nsuite ,

o n s 'est

d eliberement l imitg ä u ne s eule c ategorie d e s ources, l 'historiographie. I i c onvient e n e ffet d e r econnaitre l es c ontours e t l a s tructure d u g roupe a ristocratique, d 'inventorier, v oire d e c lasser l es r elations q ui l e c onstituent,

e t q ue m arquent l es t ermes d e p arente e t l es n oms.

M ais c ela

n e v a p as i ci s ans c onsiderer c c g roupe d ans s a d ynamique s ociale, d onc d ans l a s trategie q ui l e p orte v ers l e c oeur d u p ouvoir , c 'est-ä-dire l 'empereur r egnant. O r , l 'historiographie c ontemporaine, d e p ar s a f onction, s ocial d e r edaction , l a s ituation s ociale d e s es a uteurs, p recisgment

t outes

c es d onnees d ans

l eur m ouvement

e t

l eur

s on l ieu t ournit

g enese 7 ) . N ous

n 'avons p as c onserve l es o euvres i nspirges a lors p ar c ertaines p ersonnalitis a ristocratiques,

s i c e n 'est e n f iligrane,

q ui n ous r este.

C elle-ci d emeure l e r ecit d u p ouvoir i mperial , d e s es h auts

p arfois ,

d ans

l 'historiographie

f aits, d es a ssauts q u'il s ubit, d es r ivalitgs q u'il s uscite. E t c eci c onfere , p eut-on p enser , u ne v aleur c ertaine s inon i mmgdiatement c laire a ux m entions d e p ersonnes e t d e p arentes q ue d e t els

r ecits r etiennent.

O n y

v oit c omment, d 'un p ersonnage e t d 'une g eneration al 'autre, d es n oms l ignagers s 'ajoutent p rogressivement, i rregulierement, a ux n oms p ropres, q ui f ont

e ux-mgmes

o ffice

d e

m arqueurs

p ar

l eur

s ignification

e t

l eur

t ransmission; e t c omment l 'examen p hilologique d e c es n oms l ignagers, p ropose p ar K azhdan , e n f ait e ffectivement u n m atgriau d e l 'histoire s ociale.

E nfin,

p arente ,

m ais

o n n e t rouve p as s eulement l a u ne t erminologie d e l a

a ussi

l es

a ssociations l es p lus f requemment m ises e n o euvre

d ans l es s trategies d es a ristocrates. O n p eut e sperer a percevoir a insi u ne h istoire q ue l es r econstitutions d e l ignages n 'eclairent p as a ssez, p arce q u'elles s uivent l a p lupart d u t emps l a d emarche a nalytique d e l a p rosopographie s ans l a d epasser8 ) . M ais u ne a utre d ifficultg s e r encontre a lors. E n r aison m gme d e l 'importance q u'on v ient d e r appeler , l es o euvres h istoriographiques d es I Xe Xe s iecles o nt d onne l ieu ä u n t ravail i ntense d e m anipulation e ntre c ontemporains, D ans

l a

p erspective

c oherence d ans

q ui n ous

l a r edaction .

d ont

l 'etude n 'est p as e ncore a chevge 9 ) .

i nteressait ,

n ous

a vons

N otre p remier a uteur

c hoisi

l a m eilleure

s era d one T hgophane

l e

C onfesseur, f ils d 'un f avori d e C onstantin V , e t m oine, q ui t errine s a c hronique u niverselle s ous l e r egne d e M ichel I I. I l s era n otre t emoin ä p artir

d u

d ebut

d u

V II e

s iecle 1 0)

.

Ensuite,

n ous

a vons

r etenu

l es

C ontinuateurs d e T heophane, c et a telier h istoriographique r guni a utour d e C onstantin V II, ä l 'apogee p olitique d e l a d ynastie f ondee p ar B asile Ie . S ans e xclure q uelques r eferences p onctuelles ä " Georges l e M oine", ä d 'autres a uteurs d u Xe s iècle , ä S kylitzes, n ous l aissons a insi d e c ötg l a n ebuleuse

d e q uestions

S ymgon L ogothete

s oulevee p ar

o u M agistros.

l a

P our

c hoisi l 'Histoire S ecrete d e P rocope, p ar

s a

c onception

p alatiale.

e pigraphique r epresentatiZ,

N ous

C hronique

l es

d onnees

d u

Xe s iècle,

a ntgrieures ,

a utour d e n ous

a vons

l a p lus p roche d e n os h istoriographes d isposions

e galement

ä u n n iveau s ocial m oyen,

d 'un d e

e chantillon l 'Antiquite

c hrgtienne e n A sie M ineure 1 1) . D e l 'autre c ötg , l a P eira d u j uge E ustathios a tteste , u n p eu a u-delä d u Xe s iecle ,

e t p our l e m gme m ilieu a ristocratique,

u n u sage i ndependant d e t oute c omposition l itteraire 1 2) . E nfin , q uelques d ocuments d 'archives p ermettent l a c omparaison a vec d es n oms p aysans d epuis l e d ernier q uart d u I Xe s iècle. H .

M oritz a vait d éjà e tudie l a f ormation e t l e reertoire d es " noms d e

f amille" a ttestes d ans l 'historiographie

2 4

b yzantine

1 3)

.

M ais,

d epuis

c c

t ravail t oujours u tile , l a r echerche s 'est e nrichie e t p rfcisfe.

L 'histoire

a ncienne a e xamine l e s ystame o nomastique g rec s ous l 'Empire , l a d iffusion p uis l e d fclin d es t ria n omina , m arque d e l a c onquete r oma Ae d ans l es n oms d es s ujets, l es d ebuts d e l 'anthroponymie c hrgtienne l". L 'histoire m fdigvale a p retf d e s on c ötf a ttention ä l a f in d u s ystame a ntique,

ä l a

p art d e g ermanisation d e Vanthroponymie o ccidentale , ä lig mergence d u n om d e f amille , q uelle q ue s oft l 'extension d onnge ä c e d ernier g roupement , e t s a s ignification s ociale 1 5) . L 'anthropologie a r fcemment f clairf l es h istoriens p ar d es e tudes s ur l es f onctions a ctuellement e xercfes d ans l es p aysanneries e uropfennes p ar l es b lfments d e l 'appellation d es p ersonnes , n om d e b apteme, n om d e f amille , s obriquet 1 6) . E nfin , u n c hapitre a dmirable d e S . D . G oitein , d ans s on v olume s ur l es f amilies d ans l es d ocuments d e l a G eniza , o ffre d es s uggestions t ras r iches s ur l e s ystame d es n oms , ä p artir d 'un m ateriel j uif m fditerrangen , e t p eu f loigng d ans l e t emps d e n otre p griode 1 7) . L 'histoire

s ociale

d u

s ystgme

o nomastique

b yzantin

p rend

d onc

c o me

p oint d e d epart l 'Antiquit6 t ardive e n s on d omaine d 'expression g recque.

L a

t radition s gculaire y g tait c elle d u n om p ersonnel u nique , a ccompagn6 d e c elui d u p are, e t p orteur d 'une s ignification p lus o u m om s c lairement p erceptible e ncore ( ex. K allinikos). C es n oms s e t ransmettent l e p lus s ouvent d e g rand-pgre ä p etit-fils , e t d 'oncle ä n eveu , p arfois a vec d es v ariantes , e t d e m e i ne p our l es f emmes. L es t ria n omina i ntroduits p ar l a r omanisation p erdent l eur p ertinence , a pras u ne b tape i nterm Uiaire o i l l e n omen A urelios s e g gngralise , a u c ours d es I II eIV e s igcles D as l ors, l 'usage g rec e st ä n ouveau f ondf s ur l e n om u nique, a uquel l 'Occident a rrivait d e s on c ötf ä l a m e i ne é poque , m ais p ar d es v oles d ifffrentes, o i l i ntervenait l '616ment g ermanique. L e n om u nique t riomphe d ans n os d eux e nsembles t bmoins:

l 'Histoire S ecrete d e P rocope , o i l n ous c omptons a u t otal

7 8 n oms d 'homme , 1 3 n oms d e f emme; l ifchantillon e pigraphique q ui o ffre s auf e rreur 2 50 n oms d 'homme, 1 49 n oms d e f emme. M ais o n y d iscerne a ussi l es q uestions q ue l e s ystame a vait r fsoudre. L e n om u nique l ui-meme , t out d 'abord, q ue n ous d fsignerons d fsormais c omme n om p ropre, e st p orteur, d isions-nous , d 'un s ens, e t l 'on m et c elui-ci e n r apport , n ous l e v errons, a vec l a d estinge d e l a p ersonne 1 9 ) .

I i f aut a lors c oncilier c ette e xigence

e t c elle d e l a t ransmission f amiliale d u n om p ropre. d ernier n e s uffit p as ä s ituer e t ä d gfinir l es i ndividus , d 'un g roupe t opographiquement o u s ocialement l imitg .

A u s urplus, c e s urtout a u s ein

L 'histographie e t l es

i nscriptions o nt a lors r ecours a ux m gmes m oy 9s : Vindication d u p are, e t a ussi , c hez P rocope , d e l 'oncle o u d u c ousin " ); l 'adjectif d 'origine , l a f onction , l e m étier ; e nfin , l e " nom a joutf" ( epiklgn , e piklesis). C hacune d e c es p r&cisions n 'est p as e xclusive d es a utres , e t e lles s ont d 'autant p lus n fcgssaires q ue l e r epertoire d es n oms e st p lus r fduit. O n l e v oit b ien d ans l e c as d es d ix J oannis d e l 'Histoire S ecrete : d eux d 'entre e ux s ont i dentifies p ar l eur p are ( V 3 1; X II 6 ), u n t roisiame c o me n eveu ( V 7 ), t andis q ue l e f ils d e T heodora e st d e p are a nonyme ( XVII 1 7); l e f ameux p rffet d u p rgtoire e st d fsignb c o me " le C appadocien" ( I 1 4); d eux a utres s ont l 'un p rfposf a u T rfsor ( XXII 3 3), l 'autre a rcheveque d e C onstantinople

( VI

2 6);

e nfin ,

o n r elave d es s urnoms ' 21 q u i a ppartiennent ä

l a l angue c ommune d ans l eur f ond c o me d ans l eur f orme

) ,

K yrtos

" le B ossu"), P hagas ( IV 4 , " le B ouffeur"), L axarion ( XXIX 1 ). d es s urnoms s imilaires s ur l es p ierres t ombales d e K orykos,

( VI 5 ,

O n d bcouvre c 'est-ä-dire

d ans u ne c ollectivitb r elativement c lose 2 2) L e r epertoire o nomastique l ui-meue d emeure p ourtant, ä l a m eme é poque, a ssez

l arge.

L e n ombre d es J oannis

q u'une e xception p rbmonitoire.

n 'est e ncore d ans l 'Histoire S ecrete

C ependant ,

2 5

s i Von q uitte

l es a cteurs

d u

r ecit h istoriographique p our l es g pitaphes p rovinciales ,

l e t ableau c hange :

l es h omonymes s e m ultiplient , e t l a p roportion d e n oms c hrgtiens a ugmente , l e s econd f ait e xpliquant l e p remier , a u m om s e n p artie. S auf e rreur , o n t rouve d u c ötg m asculine h uit e xemples d e P aulos, a utant d 'Alexandros, q uatre p our A niketos, t rois p our J oannis e t a utant p our K yriakos; d u c ötg f eminin , n euf e xemples d e K yrilla - a uxquels o n p eut a jouter K yria ( 1) e t K yriakg ( 2) - s ept p our M atrong , c inq p our P aula e t P aulina , q uatre p our T hekla , a utant ( plus u n c as d outeux) p our M aria. A utrement d it, c inq n oms s e p artagent n res d ' u n d ixieme d es h ommes e t u n c inquieme d es f emmes. A joutons q ue c inquante n oms m asculins s ont e ncore p rgcgdgs d e A ur(elios), e t t rente n euf f gminins, s oft r espectivement u n c inquieme e t u n q uart d es t otaux , s ans q ue n ous p uissions f aire u ne v entilation c bronologique. C ertes , c es e xemples n e s ont q ue d es e xemples: n os i nscriptions a ttestent p eut-etre d es p rgfgrences p rovinciales ,

t andis q u'il e et s uffi d 'ajouter l e

d gpouillement d es G uerres d u m e i ne P rocope p our a ccroitre l e n ombre d e n oms g trangers. O n n e l eur r efusera p as c ependant u ne c ertaine q ualitg d e s uggestion, T hgophane.

q ue

S auf e rreur ,

m et

e n r elief

l a c onfrontation a vec l a C hronique

d e

T hgophane a tteste 1 08 n oms p ropres m asculins ä c ompter d e

6 10 j usqu 'ä l a f in d e s a C hronique , e t q uatorze d 'entre e ux s e p artagent l a m oitig d u t otal : K onstantinos e t N ikgtas ( sept f ois c hacun), J oannis e t T heodoros

( cinq f ois c hacun),

S tephanos, T heophylaktos, M ichael, L eön

( quatre f ois c hacun), N ikephoros ( trois f ois), T heopbanes , T heophilos, G regorios ( deux f ois c hacun). L es n oms c ommen ant p ar N ike - e t p ar T heo p euvent

d 'ailleurs

g tre

r egroupgs.

C e

l ot

d iffere d u p recedent p ar d es

n oms d 'origine g trangere , e t s ingulierement a rmgnienne , A rsaber , V artan s ous d iffgrentes f ormes d 'hellgnisation ( Bardas , B ardanes , B ardanion), e t s urtout p ar l a r ichesse e t l a f requence d e l 'onomastique c hrgtienne, o u p our m ieux d ire d éjà b yzantine. L e t gmoignage d e T heophane e st e n r evanche c omparable ä c et g gard a c elui d es C ontinuateurs. O n n e t rouve p as t race , d 'autre p art, d e l 'exclusivite l ign ere , e t d onc s ociale , c onferee ä c ertains n oms d ans

l 'Occident c arolingien

L 3)

.

L a p redilection d es D oukai p our l e n om

d 'Andronikos, c hargé d e v aleur g uerriere , e st u n c as d 'espece : m ais l e n om , s ans e tre a ussi c ourant q ue d 'autres, n e l eur d evient p as p ropre , e t i l e st a ttestg d u r este d es n otre g chantillon a ntique. L es n oms i mpgriaux d e C onstantin e t d e L eon , c eux d es a pötres A ndre e t J ean , d es s aints N icolas e t G eorges, c eux d es I rene e t d es T heodora s emblent a lors d iffuses l argement. O n o bjectera q ue l a C hronique d e T heophane s e d groule p recisement d ans l e c ercle

d u p ouvoir .

I l e st

v rai ,

e t d es

c omptages

s ystgmatiques

d ans

l e

m ateriel d isponible p our l a m eme p griode, h agiographie, s ceaux , i nscriptions, p ermettraient d e d iscerner , p ar d es t ableaux d e f rgquences 2 4) ,l 'histoire c ulturelle e t s ociale d es n oms p ropres ä c e t ournant o ü B yzance a

v raiment

l aissg

l 'Antiquitg

d erriere

e h e.

P renons s eulement i ci d eux g utres e xemples. U n d ocument d e L avra , e n d ate p robablement d e 9 74 2 5) , c omporte u ne l iste d e t rente d eux p aysans, d ans l aquelle h uit n oms s e p artagent l es d eux t iers d u t otal : D emetrios ( quatre f ois), K onstantinos e t B asileios ( trois f ois c hacun), s oft u n r epertoire s errg e t c hristianise, e mpereurs

e volution p lus p oussge e ncore: m atrimoniale , s eulement c hacun),

o i l f igurent l es n oms p ortes p ar l es

d es V III e Xe s iecles. o n r eleve

o ff r ent L eon ,

u n

L a P eira m anifeste d e s on c ötg u ne

a bstraction f aite d 'une l ongue q uestion

s oixante h uit m entions m asculines ,

n om p ropre ,

n otament

M ichael

R omanos e t S ergios ( deux f ois c hacun);

e t

d ont v ingt s ix

P etros

( trois

f ois

l a p lupart d es a utres

p ortent s eulement u n n om d e f amille , d irectement o u s ous l a f orme d 'une i ndication d e f iliation , e t q uelques-uns n e s ont d gsignes q ue p ar l eur f onction . U ne s eule f emme s ur h uit, " la p atrikia M aria K astorissa" , f igure

2 6

a vec n om p ropre e t n om d e f amille. L es a utres s ont d gsignges c omme " gpouse d e" o u " fille d e", s ans m ention d e n om p ropre, c e q ui r appelle n on s eulement u ne t endance d e l 'historiographie , l orsqu'il n e s 'agit p as d e f emmes i mperiales , m ais a ussi l 'usage d e l a G eniza g tudig p ar G oitein . L e s tock d es n oms p ropres b yzantins a pparait d onc e ntrainé p ar u ne m odification s gculaire , d e s ens p robablement c ulturel p lus q ue s ocial. C es n oms n 'gchappent p as p our a utant ä l a c ontradiction d ans l aquelle n ous a vons v u e nferme l e n om g rec a ntique , m arquant p ar s a t ransmission l a p osition d e l 'individu d ans l a f amille , m ais p ar s on s ens l a d estinge d e c elui q ui l e p orte. V oici d 'abord l e c as d e T hbophane l ui-meme , m ort e n 8 17. F ils d 'Isaakios e t d e T heodote , i l a r eu a u b apteme s on n om , q ui r appelle c elui d e s a m are. P uis, e n r aison d e l 'affection p ortge ä I saakios p ar C onstantin V , c e d ernier " ajoute" p lus t ard ä T hgophane l e " nom p aternel". E n r evanche , i l c onservera c e n om d e b apteme c omme n om " d'habit" m onastique. I i g pouse u ne f ille d e s on m ilieu , n ommge ä s on b apteme M egalö , n om d e m eme f ormation c ommune q ue c eux d es p etites d anseuses d e m auvaise v ie l e l 'Histoire S ecrete, K omitö ( IX ,3), e t C hrysomallö ( XVII , 3 3 e t 3 4) 2 6) L orsqu 'elle q uitte l e m onde a vec l ui , a pras l 'avanement d 'Irane , T hgophane c hange s on n om e n c elui d 'Eirene , " d'une fnon c hrgtienne , m ais a ussi a vec ä p ropos": i l j oue a insi s ur l e s ens d u n om , e t s ur l a r gfgrence ä l 'impgratrice. C onsidgrons m ai A l knant E uthymios l e j eune , m ort e n 8 98 , e t f ils d 'une " maison m ilitaire" L '). I l a p our p are E piphaneios, " ainsi a ppel6 s cion l a d ivine E piphanie" , e t c e n om p asse ä l 'une d e s es s oeurs , E piphaneia. L ui-meme a r evu a u b apteme l e n om d e N iketas, p ar u n c hoix q ue l 'hagiographe n 'explique p as. I i y d iscerne e n r evanche u ne i ntention d ivine , p uisque l e f utur s aint " devait e n v ertu d e s on n om r emporter l a v ictoire s ur l es e nnemis v isibles e t i nvisibles" . O n l e v oit n ganmoins f eter l e m artyr d u m eme n om . S a m are l ui c hoisit p our b pouse u ne j eune f ille d u m gme m ilieu, " qui m ontrait d es g races p ar s on n om s eul": E uphrosyne. L 'gpousant , i l l e c hange p our c elui d 'Anastasö . " en v ertu d e l 'espoir q ue l e l ignage t ombg a llait r essusciter". P uis , l e s aint e ntre d ans u n m onastare , e t l e s upgrieur l ui c onfare l e n om d 'Euthymios, s ans d oute p our s ignifier, g crit l 'hagiographe, q ue lio n g tait p assé d u W couragment" a u " bon c ourage", a pras q ue l es i mages e ussent f tg r estaurees. U ne c ontemporaine d 'Euthymios, l a m oniale T heodora d e T hessalonique ( 812-892) 2 8) , a r e u a u b aptgme l e n om d 'Agapg, " afin d 'annoncer ä l 'avance p ar l e n om d onng l a v ie d e l a f illette". " Il n e f aut p as, p oursuit l 'hagiographe , a ssigner l e n om s cion l a s eule v olontb d es p arents. I l d olt e tre a ussi u n g age d 'amour e nvers l e S eigneur, c omme l a s uite l 'a m ontr U. C es e xemples a ttestent l a d ouble e ntorse q ui p eut e tre f alte a lors a u p rincipe d e l a t ransmission f amiliale d u n om p ropre. L a s ignification d e c elui-ci e st df terminante , p arce q ue p rf t lonitoire. E t l 'on e n c hange e n e ffet l orsqu 'on c hange d e c ondition , p ar l e m an age e t p ar l a p rise d 'habit. S i l ' 4oux c hange l e n om d e 1" dpousge , o n v ient d e l e v oir ,

l a t onsure ,

c om m e l e b apteme,

r equiert u n p are s pirituel ,

q ui i mpose

l e n om m onastique. A insi , l e p atriarche N icolas Ie " tonsura ( Zoe m are d e C onstantin V II), c hangea s on n om p our c elui d 'Anna , e t i l l 'appelait s a f ille s pirituelle" 2 9) . L 'auteur d e l a V ie d e M akarios d e P elekete e l erve q ue l 'on c hange d e m eme l e n om d es e sclaves q ue l 'on v ient d 'acheter 3") . L a f ami ne i mpgriale c onstitue a lors d ans

l e s ystame.

u n c as

p articulier ,

L orsque L eon V a rrive a u t röne ,

m ais

i nscrit

e t c hange e n C onstantin

a u c ouronnement l e n om d e s on f ils S ymbatios ( armgnien S mbat), 1 1 r econstitue i mplicitement l e c ouple L eon I II/Constantin V ( Theophanes C ont. p . 4 1): l e m otif e st e ncore p lus f ort q ue c elui d 'Heraklios a ppelant " nouveau C onstantin" s on f ils e t h omonyme ( Theophanes, p . 3 00). L a

2 7

p remiere d es d eux I rene d u V III e s iècle , f ille d u k hagan d es K hazars, r ev )it c e n om a u b apteme l orsqu'elle e pouse C onstantin V i bid ., p . 4 09 , 3 0-410 , 3 ), p eut-etre e n r aison d e s on s ens. M ais l a s econde , e pouse d e L eon I V f ils d es p recedents, e st n ée c hretienne, e t p orte j usqu'ä s on m an age l e n om d 'Athenais ( ibid., p . 4 44 , 1 6). I i y a urait l ä u ne e bauche d e l ien e ntre l e n om e t l a f onction , m ais u ne e bauche s eulement , p uisque l e n om d 'Irene n e d evient p as e xclusif . A u Xe s iècle , l a f amille i mperiale d onne l 'exemple d es r egles d e t ransmission d es n oms p ropres. C onstantin V II p orte l e n om d u f ils d 'un p remier l it d e B asile ( Theophanes C ont. p . 2 64), R omain I I c elui d e s on g rand-pere R omain Ie , C onstantin V III c elui d e s on g rand-pere C onstantin V II. B asile I I r appelle e videment s on a ieul B asile Ie , m ais s on n om e st a ussi c elui d e s on o ncle m aternel, l e p arakoimomenos B asile l e B ätard , d ont o n s ait l e r ole i mportant. D es f illes d e C onstantin V II , l es d eux p remieres p ortent l es n oms d e l eurs g rand-meres p aternelle e t m aternelle r espectivement , z og e t T heodora ; A gathe s emble n ommee d 'aprZs u ne s oeur d e s a m ere , A nna d 'apres l 'epouse d 'un f rere d e s a m ere , S tephanos ( ibid., p . 4 22); m ais Z oe f ille d e Z aoutzes a vait a ussi m is a u m onde u ne f ille a insi a ppelee ( ibid., p . 3 64), q ui e tait d onc l a d emi-soeur d e C onstantin V II. E nfin , s a f ille T heophanö r apelle p eut-etre l a p remiere e t s ainte e pouse d e L eon V I,

o bjet d 'un c ulte p ublic 31) .

C e n om e st a ussi

c elui d e l 'epouse d e C onstantin , l e p lus j eune f ils d e R omain Ie ( ibid. 4 23), e t e nfin i l e st c onfere l ors d e s on m ariage ä l 'epouse d e R omain p ar C onstantin V II l ui-meme ( ibid. p . 4 58), " en t ant q ue m anifestee c hoisie d ivinement" , n ote l 'historiographe o fficiel. P eut-etre y a -til

p . I I e t e u

l ä, c o me d ans l e c as d 'Irene , l 'ebauche d 'un u sage i mperial d e c c n om . L es r emarques q ui p recedent v oulaient m ontrer q ue l e n om p ropre c onserve s a d ouble f onction d e m arqueur f amilial f ixe, e t d 'expression v ivante , e t d onc c hangeante , d e l a d estinee i ndividuelle. E n t out e tat d e c ause , i l n e s uffit p as ä s pecifier a ssez l es p ersonnes a u s ein d 'un m ilieu c o me c elui q u'embrasse l e r ecit h istoriographique , m eme s i l 'on f ait a ppel a ux d iminutifs p our d istinguer e ntre d es h omonymes,

c omme c c p arent d e

B ardas e t d e M ichel I II, q ue l es C ontinuateurs a ppellent n on s eulement T heophilos e t " le p etit T heophilos" , m ais T heophilidion , T heophilitzes, e t q ui p ortait d e s urcroit l e c urieux n om d e P aideuomenos, " Eduque" ( ibid ., p p . 2 24-225, 2 26, 2 29). L es s pecifications a nnexes o beissent d onc ä l a n ecessite h istoriographique, e t a uparavant s ociale, d e d istinguer l es i ndividus,

t out e n l es s ituant d ans l a s ociete p olitique,

e t d ans l eur

p ropre p arentele. L e p robleme a lors d ifferent p our l es h o mes e t l es f emmes. L a C hronique d e T heophane p recise p resque t oujours l a f onction e t l e t itre d es p ersonnages m asculins. M ais l a f onction e st s ujette ä c hanger , e t l a f requence d u t itre d e p atrice l e r end p eu s pecifiant. C c n e s ont e ncore q ue l es c riteres q ui t racent l e c ontour d u g rcupe s ocial , s ans m eme p ermettre d 'apprecier s on o uverture. D 'autres m oyens d e s pecifier l es i ndividus s e p resentent a lors: n om d e p ere , i ndications d e p arente , m ention d e l 'origine , e nfin s urnom . O n l es t rouve r arement t outes r eunies p our l a m eme p ersonne , c c q ui c onfirme l eur c aractere f onctionnel , s ans q ue l e c hoix o pere p ar l e n arrateur s e l aisse e xpliquer ä p remiere v ue. D ans l a p artie q ue n ous a vons d epouillee , T heophane p resente s eulement c inq ( ou s ix) m entions d 'origine , a uxquelles o n p eut a jouter l e n om d e B oilas ( Theophanes, p p.

4 46-447),

q ui e st e n f ait t i n t itre b ulgare 32) , e t l e s urnom d e T ourkos ,

q ui q ualifie B ardanes , s tratege d es A natoliques r evo ke c ontre N icephore Ie ( ibid., p . 4 79). L es m entions d e p arente n e s emblent p as d avantage p rimordiales: d eux d 'un f rere , d eux d 'une p arente i mperiale , u ne q uinzaine d u p ere. C es d ernieres s ont c onformes ä l a t radition a ntique. L e n om d u p ere y a pparait p arfois ä l a unite d u p atronyme: a insi , T heophylaktos " fils d e R angabe"

( ibid.,

p .

4 54),

d rongarios d u D odecanese ,

2 8

a p our f ils

M ichel R angabg - l e f utur e mpereur. R este a lors l e s urnom , q ue j 'ecrirais v olontiers s ur-nom , t ant i l e st c lairement p erv i c omme u ne a ddition s pecifiante a u n om p ropre. D ans l a m ajorite d es e xemples a nciens , s oit l a f in d u V III e s iècle , i l e st i ntroduit, c omme l e n otait K azhdan JJ) p ar l a f ormule " surnomme, a ppelg e ncore " (ho/to e piklgn). O n t rouve a ussi s implement h o o u h o r gtheis " appelg". L e s urnom p eut n aftre d 'une c irconstance: l e p atriarche C onstantin e st a ppelg " Face d e t enahres" ( Skotiopsis) e n 7 68 , l ors d e s a c hute

( ibid.,

p .

4 41).

M ais l e p lupart d u t emps i l f ait

o ffice

d e

m arqueur s table. U n d erive d e n om p ropre c o me M artinakios e st d éjà, l ui , a ussi , ä l a l imite d u p atronyme ( ibid ., p . 4 38) 3 4) . L a p lupart d es a utres s urnoms s e r epartissent c lairement e n d eux f amilles. L 'une e st i nspire p ar l es p articularitgs i ndividuelles: " Rousseau" ( Rousios, i bid., p . 3 68), " Joue d 'äne" ( Onomagoulos, i bid., p . 3 98), " Quarante c oudees" ( Sarantapgkhys, i bid ., 4 74), " Costaud" ( Karteroukas, i bid., p . 3 77), " Pied d e c rabe ( Podopagouros, i bid., p . 4 38), " Doigt c oupe" ( Koutzodaktylos, i bid ., p . 4 45). L 'autre s e r gfare a u q uotidien f amilier , v oire r ustique. I di l es n oms m gmes d eviennent s urnames : " le m oineau" ( Strouthos, i bid., p . 3 80), " la c henille" ( Lakhanodrakön, i bid., p . 4 40), " la c hicorge" ( Pikridion , i bid., p . 4 65), " le c hiot" ( Kouloukgs, i bid ., p . 4 45). L ä l es s urnoms s ont d es f ormations d erivges: X uylinitgs ( xuyling) " bois" , i bid., p .

4 00),

M yakios

( myax " huitre",

i bid.,

p .

3 83),

T riphyllios

( Triphyllion

" trafle" , i bid ., p . 4 76). L es f ormes s ont e lles-mgmes v ernaculaires. L es s uffixes q u 'on v ient d e v oir , o u l 'exemple d e S arantapgkhys , l e d gmontrent a mplement. C e t ype d e s urnom a ussi e st p arfois ä l a l imite d u n om t ransmissible d es l e V II e s iècle : " le f ils d e G rggorios O nomagoulos" e st l ui-mgme d esigne p lus l oin c omme " ho O nomagoulos" ( ibid., p . 3 98), t andis q ue l es f rares T riphyllioi s ont n ommes a u p luriel ( ibid., p . 4 76). R ien n e s ignale e n r evanche d 'autres n oms, q ue n ous s avons e n f ait a voir g te t ransmis d as c ette é poque : M elissenos , B oilas , S arantapekhys. P lus t ard, B ardas,

f ils d 'une s oeur d e T heodora,

g pouse d e T hgophile,

K ontomytes c omme l 'homme d ont i l e st l e g ambros, C ont. p . 1 75).

s 'appellera

i di l e g endre ( Theophanes

A vec l es C ontinuateurs d e T hgophane e t l eur r ecit d es I XeXe s iacles, b ien d es e lements d emeurent. p ropres ,

I i n 'y a p as l ieu d e r evenir s ur l es n oms

s ur l a s pecification d es p e

s ouvent a ussi p ar l 'origine : d omicile d ans l a c apitale.

wnnages e r l e t it e e t l a f onction ,

n ation c ite ) , t heme , v oire m eme l e V oici p ar e xemple l e g endre c hoisi p ar

l 'empereur T heophile , ( ibid., p . 1 07): " nommg A lexios , s ur-nomme M ouselg , v enu d u p ays d es A rmeniens, i ssu d u l ignage d es K rgnitai"; e t l e C ontinuateur a joute ä t outes c es p recisions q u'il d emeurait " dans l e q uartier d e l 'acropole , a ux m aisons d ites d e l a K renitissa H 38) . L e p assage s e f ait i nsensiblement , e t c as p ar c as, d e t elles i ndications d 'origine a u p atronyme p roprement d it q ue s ont d evenus K amoulianos ( Theophanes , p . 4 65, T heophanes C ont. p . 3 97) o u I bgritzgs ( Skylitzes , p . 1 87, 1 . 6 9). M ais l e v eritable c hangement e st d etermine p ar l 'importance n ouvelle q ue r evgtent d ans l a v ie p olitique l a p arentale e t s on i llustration . L e C ontinuateur g pingle " les a scendants o bscurs" d e T homas d it l e S lave, s oulavement p rovincial d e 8 21 ( Theophanes C ont. p . 5 1). s ont

d onnges

s ur

t rois

g enerations.

A insi e n u sent

T heodora , l 'epouse d e T heophile ( ibid ., p p. lo r s q u co mp o s e ve r s

l 'instigateur d u L es g enealogies

l e C ontinuateur p our

1 74-175); e t l e m oine N ikgtas, 8 2 1- 2 2 la c el a b re

V ie d e P hilarate l e M isericordieux39) -, s on g rand-pare e t p arrain ,

d ont u ne

p etite - f ille , M arie , a vait e te l a p remiere e pouse d e C onstantin V I. L e s ystame o nomastique s emble g voluer e n c onsequence. E piklgn d ecline a u

2 9

p rofit d e o nomazomenos " nommg", t o e pönymion " de s ur-nom", e t s urtout e pilegomenos " dit e n o utre" . L e n om l ignager t ransmis s e d istingue d es l ors d u s urnom p ersonnel. L e p atrice H imerios, g crit p ar e xemple l e C ontinuateur ( ibid ., p . 1 72), " gtait a ppelg l e P orc ( Khoiros) e n r aison d e l a s auvagerie d e s a p hysionomie". L a V ie d e B asile ( ibid., p . 2 53) p rgsente u ne v ersion m ieux s gante:

l e s urnom a e tg a ttribug p ar l 'empereur " en

r aison d e l a s auvagerie d e l a f igure",

" mais i i m gritait l 'appellation p our

s a v ie d e p orc , s a v ie s ale p our m ieux d ire , e tc." L e m gcanisme d u s urnom i ndividuel d emeure l ä v ivant e t c lairement p e m i. M ais l es a llusions a u l ignage ( genos, g enea, s eira) s e m ultiplient. E t s urtout u n n ombre c roissant d e p ersonnages s ont p rgsentgs a vec u n s econd n om , p arfois m gme a vec c e d ernier s eul . P renons

l 'exemple

d e

S klgros ,

" le d ur" ,

d 'un l ignage d 'origine a rmgnienne.

d evenu

l e n om t ransmissible

A u d ebut d u I Xe s iècle l e n om e st d éjà

l ignager : l a C hronique d ite d e M onemvasie m entionne ä l 'annge 8 05 u n s tratege d u P gloponnese " appartenant a u c lan ( phatria) d e c eux q u 'on s urn omme

( eponomazomenön)

S klgroi";

l e

S criptor i ncertus

d gsigne

u n

c ontemporain d e M ichel I , l ui a ussi s tratege d u P eloponnese , c o me " Leon s ur-nomme ( fils d e) S klgros 1 , 40) . D e t elles fnons d e n ommer p ersistent , p uisque N ikgtas " dit e n o utre ( epilegomenos) S klgros" ( Theophanes C ont., p . 3 58) e st u n c ontemporain d e L eon V I. M ais l e r ecit d e l a g uerre p aulicienne ( ibid., p . 1 66) m entionne " le S klgros" s implement. P our l es P hokas , l 'gmergence d u n om l ignager s 'est f aite ä p artir d u n om p ropre d e l 'aieul , ä t ravers s on u sage c omme i ndication d e f iliation . o bserve f rgquemment l a s olution t ransitoire o ü l e p atronyme

D e f ait, o n e st p resente

a insi , p ar e xemple " le ( fils) d 'Argyros" ( ibid., p . 1 65). D ans l e c as d es L ekapenoi , i l y ae u f lottement : T heophylaktos , l e p ere d u f utur e mpereur , p orte l e f ier s urnom d 'Abastaktos, " l'insoutenable" ; m ais Ie e t s es f ils e n p orteront u n a utre , t ire p eut-etre d 'un l ieu d 'origin J 1 ) .

D ans u n

m ilieu o i l l es n oms a joutgs a ux n oms p ropres s ont e n v oie d e d evenir t ransmissibles, s ans l 'e stre e ncore r ggulierement, l eur m ention p ar l 'historiographe r envoie e videmment ä l a s olidaritg d e l a p arentele e t ä l 'illustration d e l 'ascendance , v oire a ux d eux e nsemble. T outefois , l es p ersonnages d esigngs p ar l eur s eul n om p ropre, a vec l eur t itre l e c as g chgant ,

s e r encontrent t oujours.

I i p eut s 'agir d 'un h omme a ssez n otoire

p our s e s uffire ä l ui-mg 'me d ans l e r gcit , t el l e p atrice N ikgtas, " co-beaup ere" ( sympentheros) d e R omain Ie ( ibid., p . 4 13), o u a u c ontraire d 'un h omme n ouveau . A insi , i a ucun m oment l e f utur B asil Ie n 'est p ourvu d 'un n om a joutg ä s on n om p ropre , s i l 'on e xcepte l e s urnom p ersonnel d e K ephalas " la C aboche", q u'il a urait r«u d ans s a j eunese o bscure 42 . C ertes, l e s econd n om p eut m anquer s i l e p ersonnage v ient d 'gtre i ntroduit d ans l e r ecit. M ais l a n ecgssitg d e d istinguer l es h omonymes d emeurent , e t m ere n e f ait q ue c roitre , c o me e n t emoigne l e r gcit q ue f ait L gon D iacre d es l uttes m enees a utour d u p ouvoir i mperial p ar l es P hokades e t l es S kleoi 4 3) . L e

r epertoire

r elevg p recedent,

d es r ows

a joutgs

o ü q uelques-uns

o bgit

a ux t endances o bservges d ans l e

d 'entre e ux ,

o n l 'a d it,

s e

t rouvaient

d éjà. O n r etrouve l es n oms t ires d e t oponymes , e t p roches d e l 'adjectif d 'origine. Q uelques n oms l ignagers s ont t ires d e n oms p ropres. L 'exemple c lassique e t d éjà c ite d e P hokas n 'est p as l e s eul ,

e t C onstantin ,

d ernier

f ils d e R omain Ie , g pouse T heophanö " issue d u l ignage d e M amas" ( ibid., p . 4 23). G abriglopoulos ( ibid., p . 3 80) e t T heodotakgs ( ibid., p . 3 61) a ttestent d es f ormations p romises ä u n b el a venir . L es v ariantes s ur l e n om p ropre , c o me M öroleön ( "le s ot L eon" , i bid., p . 4 04), B arymichagl ( "Gros-Michel" , i bid ., p . 3 95) s ont e lles a ussi a u s euil d u p atronyme. L es d eux g roupes m ajeurs d gfinis p lus h aut s e m aintiennent. L 'un r envoie ä l a

3 0

p ersonne p hysique e t m orale : " Pied p lat" ( Platypodes , i bid., p . 4 01), " Camus" ( Kontomytgs , i bid., p . 1 75), " Beau g ars" ( Kallönas , i bid., p . 3 69), m ais a ussi " le f ort" ( Krateros, i bid., p . 4 58). L 'autre s e r efere ä l a v ie m aterielle. O n y r eleve b eaucoup d e p lantes: K rambönitgs, t ransmissible, v ient d u " chou" ( krambg, T heophanes C ont., p . 3 9), G ongylios, t ransmissible , d u " chou-rave" ( gongyli, i bid ., p . 3 86), M aroulis d e l a " laitue" ( marouli , i bid., p . 3 89). O n r encontre a ussi " l'argent" d ans l e n om d éjà c ite d 'Argyros,

" l'ivoire" d ans c elui d 'Elephantinos

( ibid ., p . 4 21). U n a utre c ontingent e st c elui d es n oms d e m etier , d ont K hoirosphaktgs " l'egorgeur d e p orcs ( ibid., p . 3 59) r este l 'exemple c lassique.

M ais l a q uestion e st e n f ait c ompliquee p ar l 'importance

c roissante d es n oms e n as,

b ien a ttestes d es

l a l angue a ntique ,

d emeures

c aracteristiques d u g rec v ivant 4 4) , e t n ettement p lus n ombreux q ue d ans l a s erie p recedente. L e s uffixe a f ait d es n oms t ransmissibles d 'une f onction ( Doux/Doukas), d 'un n om p ropre ( Grggoras), i l a h ellenise l 'armenien G urgen ( Kourkouas). O n l e t rouvait d ans l es a ttributs p hysiques d éjà c ites ( Kephalas, K allönas), e t d ans d es f ormations q ui p euvent r envoyer ä u n m étier, G aridas " vendeur d e c revettes" ( ibid., p . 3 92), K assiteras " etameur" ( ibid., p . 2 2), Z önaras e t T oxara ( ibid., p p. 4 42 e t 3 88), " fabricant d e c eintures" e t " d'arcs". L e d iminutif tzgs, q ue n ous a vons v u u tilise d ans l a s pecification d 'un n om p ropre a pparait i ci a ussi, e xemple d ans B oiditzgs " le p etit b oeuf" ( ibid ., p . 1 30). T out

c eci n 'autorise p as

d e c onsiderations

g enerales

p ar

s ur l a f ormation

d es n oms a joutes g recs a ux I Xe Xe s iecles. N ous a vons e n e ffet e nvisage i ci, r appelons-le, l e s eul u sage h istoriographique, e t e ncore s ur d eux e xemples e ssentiellement. N ous f erons c ependant q uelques r emarques e t s uggestions. E n p remier l ieu , n os r eleves n 'eclairent p as v raiment l es o rigines e thniques d es a cteurs d e l a g rande h istoire , e n p articulier l e r öle p ourtant c onnu d es A rmeniens. L es n oms p ropres c omme B ardas, l e p lus c ourant, e n c onservent e t e n t ransmettent l a t race, a insi q ue d es n oms l ignagers c o me M ousele o u K ourkouas d éjà c ites. M ais l 'hellenisation d 'un p atronyme a rmenien n 'est p as l a r egle, mo r ime o n s 'en c onvaincra e n c onsiderant l 'inventaire d resse p ar K azhdan g 5) . P eut-etre l es n oms d éjà i llustres e t t ransmissibles f ranchissaient-ils s euls l a f rontiere. Q uoi q u 'il e n s oit , n ous a vons e n s ubstance s ous l es y eux u n s ysteme g rec , l equel s 'avere e n r evanche t out a f ait h omogene d ans s a v erdeur p arlee. A ucune d istance s ociale n e s epare l a f ormation d e K heilas " la L ippe" ( ibid., p . 1 72), s obriquet d 'un o bscur c ompagnon d e M ichel I II , n om p orte a u d ebut d u I Xe s iècle p ar C onstantin ,

e t c elle d e K ephalas, u rotopapas d u p alais

( Georgius M onachus, p . 8 06), p uis s ous A lexis le C pmnene p ar L eon , d ignitaire ( vestarkhos), e t b eneficiaire d 'une d onation 4 6) • f audrait e n f ait d echiffrer l e s ens m e i ne d es c hoix . L es d enominations v alorisantes , K rateros,

S klgros , A bastaktos,

s e c on wivent a isement.

L es a llusions p lus

o u m om s n arquoises a ux p articularites p hysiques m eriteraient d éjà u n e xamen p lus a ttentif , d ans l a m esure o u e lles r envoient ä u n c ode q ue l 'on p ourrait r econstituer. E t s urtout, p ourquoi l a l aitue, p ourquoi l e c hou-rave? A necdote , i mage , o u s ymbole? a ussi r eduit q ue l e n ötre. A joutons

c ependant q ue

L e p robleme n e p eut g tre a borde d ans u n c adre

l es n oms

d e p aysans

c onnus ä p artir d e l a M gMe

é poque r elavent d es m gmes p rincipes. L a l iste d es d ependants d ressee v ers 9 74 4 7) s pecifie l es i ndividus e poux d e d 'Abydos ,

t rente-deux p aysans c o me f ils o u c omme

f ille/soeur ( gambros), a vec d e e xceptions s ignificatives : L eon u n i mmigre ; t rois h ommes d esignes p ar l eur s eul m étier , " ma on"

( oikodomos),

" forgeron" ( khalkeus),

b oukellarios,

d esignes c o me " le m oissonneur" ( then i ..),

3 1

t andis q ue

l es

p ares

" le b oucher" ( makella ..),

o u

e ncore

" le P aphlagonien" a ttestent

d es m entions ä m i-chemin d u p atronyme ,

s ans q ue n ous e n p uissions v raiment j uger; e nfin,

d es s obriquets c omme

" Lavre-Coupge" ( Khopsokheilos, " bec-de-liavre"?) s uffisent ä s pecifier d 'autres i ndividus. L e d ocument n e p eut r ien n ous d ire s ur l a t ransmissibilitg d e t ous c es s ur-noms, m ais i i p rouve l eur n ecessite, p uisque, s ur u n t otal d e t rente d eux n oms p ropres, o n l 'a v u, r gpatent a u m om s d eux f ois. P oussee j usqu'au X Ie s iècle e t a u d el r ", u ne c onfrontation e ntre l 'anthroponymie d es p aysans e t c elle d es a ristocrates m ontrerait ä l a f ois d es s ur-noms c ommuns a ux d eux g roupes , m ais a ussi , p eut-on p enser , u ne f ixitg p lus g rande d es s ur-noms d evenus a ristocratiques, e t d onc u ne d ivergence c roissante: d u m om s e st-ce l 'hypothase q ue l 'on p eut d essiner i d. Q uoi q u'il e n s oit, d ans l a p eriode i nitiale q ue n ous c onsidgrons l 'anthroponymie b yzantine e st u ne. E n s orte q ue c es s ur-noms q ui r essuscitent p our n ous l e g rec v ernaculaire d e l 'gpoque , m e p araissent a ttester n on p as , c o me o n l e p enserait t rop v ite , u n a mple m ouvement d e m ontge d es p rofondeurs

s ociales

v ers

l es

s ommets

d u

p ouvoir , m ais p lutöt , s ans p rejudice d e l 'origine d es i ndividus , l e d egre d 'unite c ulturelle d 'une s ocigte q ui r ecommence ä s e d ifferencier s ur d e n ouvelles b ases a u l endemain d es b ouleversements d es V II eVIII e s iacles. L e g roupe d ominant d ont t itres e t f onctions t racent l e c ontour s e c onstitue l entement , e t s urtout p rogressivement , a u c ours d es I Xe-Xe s iacles : l e s igne d e l a r gussite s erait a lors, c as p ar c as, l a t ransformation d u s ur-nom i ndividuel e n n om l ignager , c ar c elle-ci a tteste l 'integration d gsormais s table e t d efinitive a . l a c ouche s ociale e n q uestion , c omme a illeurs ä l a c ellule v illageoise . L e n om l ignager n e s e m et p as c ouramment a u f gminin d ans l 'historiographie q ue n ous a vons e xaminee , p as p lus q ue d ans l a P eira , o n l 'a v u . L e f ait d evient a u c ontraire r ggulier ä p artir d es C omnanes. L e d gcalage e st s ans d oute s ignificatif, e t c onstituerait u n i ndice d e f ermeture d u m ilieu a ristocratique , d gsormais s oucieux d e m anifester d es d eux c ötg u ne a scendance d e q ualite. I i v a d e s oi q ue l e j eu d es n oms l ignagers n 'est l ä q ue l a m arque d 'une e volution a ccomplie. C onsiderons e n e ffet m aintenant l es p arentales d ans l eur t ravail c ollectif

d e

p romotion p olitique.

L e

t erme d e f amille a u s ens m oderne ,

l arge o u r estreint , d emeure e vide ment i nconnu. O utre l es d ifferentes d esignations d u " lignage" d éjà c itges, l 'historiographie c onnait " la p arentale" ( syngeneia), e t " les p arents" ( syngeneis). L es " parents" d e Z og f ille d e9 )Z a outzgs s ont c onvaincus d e c onjuration ä s a m ort, e t c hassgs d u p alais 4 O n " fait d escendre d u p alais l es p arents" d e J ean G aridas, l orsque c elui-ci r gclame e n f aveur d u f rare d e s a f emme, T heodoros Z ouphinezer g galement,

( Theophanes C ont. p . 3 92). L a m aison ( oikos) s e m anifeste e nsemble ä n os y eux c omplexe, d ans l equel u ne p arentale s e

r enforce d e s es " amis",(philoi) d e s es

" familiers"

( oikeioi),

v oire d e s es

" ho mes" ( anthropoi) 5°) T ous c eux-lä, q ui s e d istinguent p our n ous d es p arents, n e s 'en s gparent p as d ans 1 a c ti on m ise e n s cene p ar l 'historiographie b yzantine. L e p lus b ei e xemple d 'un t el g roupe e st s uggerg p ar l a c onjuration e t l 'exil d 'Andronikos D o eas p endant l a m inoritg d e C onstantin V II ( Georgius M onachus, p . 7 89) 51) . C 'est a vec u n t el c oncours q ue l 'on s 'avance v ers l e p ouvoir. L es r ecits d u m eurtre d e M ichel I II a ssocient f rares e t c ousin a c c B asile p rgsente j usque l ä c omme u n i nconnu i solg ( ibid., p . 7 50). A u Xe s iècle , l 'echec d es D oukai , l e s uccas t emporaire d es L ekapenoi , c elui d es P hokades a llies a ux M aleinoi e t a ux S klgroi s ont l es e xemples l es p lus n otoires d e s trategies f amiliales c aractgristiques d e t oute l 'epoque e t d e t oute l 'aristocratie . C 'est l a r aison p our l aquelle l 'historiographie d u t emps n ote l es p arentgs e t l eurs p ratiques , e t c ela d ans u ne t erminologie p ropre a ux b esoins d e s on r gcit p olitique , c omme l e m ontre l a c omparaison a vec l 'historiographie a ntgrieure ,

3 2

e t a vec l e d roit c onte i iporain , i nterdits d e n ariage 52 L e

r epgrage

o i l s 'achave a lors l 'glaboration c anonique d es

d e l oin l e p lus f rgquent e st c elui d es p ares/fils.

N ous

r elevons s auf e rreur q uatorze m entions, a uxquelles s 'ajoutent u n f ils " naturel" ( physikos, T heophanes C ont. p . 4 42). E n o utre , k ata t on ( sept f ois), d éjà u sitg c hez T h&ophane , i ntroduit g galement l e n om d u p are. L a f ratrie s e m anifeste d irectement d ans l 'action : l es G ongylioi, m glgs a u s oulavement d e L gon P hokas, s ont d eux ( ibid ., p . 3 86), l es P hokas a ussi ä l a g gngration d e N ic6phore I I; l es f rares P arsakoutgnos , s ont t rois ( Leo D iac o nus , V II,1). L e t erme r enforcg d 'autadelphos " propre f rare" , c omme c elui d e " frare s elon l a c hair" ( a. s arkikos, T heophanes C ont. p . 1 75 , e tc .), s e d gveloppent c hez n os a uteurs e t a illeurs, c c q ui a tteste l 'importance p rise p ar l e l ien f raternel , c om m e p ar s a m gtaphore. C ette d erniare n 'est p as s eulement u tilisge p our l a f raternitg m onastique, e t l a f raternitg v olontaire, q ue n ous g voquerons p lus l oin , m ais c ouramment, d ans l es i ntimitgs l aiques d ont s ubsistent l es t gmoignages g pistolaires 3 )• L a f ratrie a u f eminin t ranspose l e m ouvement d ans s on r egistre p ropre. L e C ontinuateur d gtaille l es m an ages d es t rois s oeurs d e T heodora , d evenue l 'gpouse d e l 'empereur T hgophile ( ibid., p p . 1 74-175). A insi , l 'association p are/fils n e s emble p as r evgtir d ans l a p ratique u ne i mportance p roportionnelle ä c elle d e l a f iliation d ans l e s ystame d es n oms : l e p are d eneure a vant t out u ne r gfgrence. L e b ätard n 'est p as u n p ersonnage d u r gcit. L e p arakoimomenos B asile d éjà c ite, f ils d e R omain Ie e t d 'une c oncubine ( pallakg), a e t e castrg, cc qui le pla ait dans une carriare p olitique a u c oncurrente .

p alais,

m ais

p rgvenait

L a s tratggie a ristocratique

a ussi

l a

n aissance

j oue b eaucoup d e l 'alliance ,

d 'une

l ignge

q ui u nit d eux

o u p lusieurs h omnes p ar l e m oyen d 'une f emme q ue l e r gcit n e n omme p as, l e p lus s ouvent , s auf s 'il s 'agit d e l a f amille i mpgriale . L e r ole p remier e st i ci c elui d u g ambros,

l e " preneur d e f emme",

t hygatri) o u d e l a s oeur ( g. e p‘adelphg). i ndirectenent p ar l a p ratique d es e mpereurs,

g poux d e l a f ille

( g.

e pi

S on i mportance e st a ttestge q ui g vitent, s emble-t-il , d e

s 'en d onner . L es c inq s oeurs d e M ichel I II s ont e nvoyges a u c ouvent a pras l e m eurtre d e T heoktistos, l e m inistre d e s a m are ( ibid ., p p. 1 70 e t 1 74). L es q uatre f illes d e B asile Ie s ubiront l e m gme s ort ( ibid ., p . 2 64), e t l es c inq s oeurs d e R omain I I, m algrg l eurs s upplications ( ibid ., p . 4 71). E n r evanche , l e c hoix d es g ambroi d e R omain L ekapenos e st t out a ussi g clairant. L e m an age d e s a f ille H glane a vec l e j eune e mpereur a g tg l e m oyen d 'une p romotion d gcisive p our l ui-mgme e t s es f ils, p arce q ue C onstantine V II e st d evenu l eur g ambros ä t ous. U ne a utre d e s es f illes, A gatha, g pouse R omanos A rgyros ( ibid ., p . 3 99). I l s e m ontre a ttentif a ux " co-beaux-pares" ( sympentheroi, t erme i nconnu d e l a l angue a ntique) q ue l ui v alent l es m an ages d e s es f ils. L e b on u sage d e l 'alliance a pparait d ans l 'gpisode o ü J ean G aridas,

n ommg d omestique d es

s choles,

r gclame u ne

p romotion p our

l e

" frare d e ( sa) f emme" ( gynaikadelphos), T heodoros Z ouphinezer : i i " conclut u ne a nitig" ( symphiliotheis) a vec R omain L ekapenos , a ppuyge s ur u n & change d e s erments , e t l es d eux h ommes d gcident q ue l eur e ntente s era s cellge p ar u ne " alliance m atrimoniale" ( gamikon s ynallagna , i bid., p . 3 92)/ D e l a m gme m aniare, A ndronikos D oukas a vait c u l 'appui d e G regoras I bgritzgs, s on s ympentheros,

d ans l 'gpisode d éjà c ite d e s on d epart e t d e s a t entative s ur

l e p ouvoir. M ais C onstantin V II b loque l e m ouvement ä l a g gngration s uivante: i l f ait c astrer l e f ils d e C onstantin L ekapenos, R omanos, l orsqu 'on p rojette l e t rop b eau m an age d e c elui-ci a vec l a f ille d e J ean K ourkouas ( ibid ., p . 4 26). P lus t ard , l e p rogras d e l 'aristocratie l 'emporte s ur l 'immobilitg v oulue p ar l es p orphyroggnates. L a g gngalogie d 'Alexis I e

3 3

C omnAne

t racge p ar N ikephoros B ryennios,

g poux d e s a f ille A nne

5 4)

,m et e n

r elief l es g ambroi , g poux d es 5s oeurs d 'Alexis o u d es s oeurs d e s a f emme. L e 5 , t erme d evient mg me u n t itre ), a c ette é poque o ü , c omme l 'a m ontrg K azhdan , l a p arentAle i mpgriale c onstitue l e g roupe s ocial l e p lus g levg . L 'alliance i llggitime i ntervient p our s a p art. C 'est M ichel I II s 'attache B asile , s on f avori e t f utur m eurtrier .

p ar e ile q ue " Georges l e

M oine" r apport q u'il " unit" s a s oeur T hekla , l 'ainge s ans d oute ( ibid., p . 8 9 e t p assim l a n omme l a p remiAre) A B asile " pour q u'il l 'eüt ä l ui e n p articulier" ( Georges M onachus , p . 7 38). M ichel s ubstitue a ussi ä l 'gpou e l ggitime d e B asile s e p ropre c oncubine

( pallakg),

E udokia f ille d 'Enger 5 6) ,

s ur q uoi e st c onsidgrg c omm ie s ons " fils a doptif" ( thetos h yios , T heophanes C ont. p . 2 08): c hoix d gconcertant ä p remiAre v ue, m ais q ue j ustifie l 'impossibilitg d 'une r elation d 'eg ia 5 u 7) x av ec l 'empereur; l a p aternitg e st l a s eule p arentg v olontaire p ossible c i . D u r este , l orsque l e m gme B asile , p lus t ard , a pprend q ue T hekla v it a vec N eatokomitgs, i l m et b on o rdre ä u ne s ituation d angereuse , e n f aisant d e c e d ernier u n m oine , e t e n c onfisquant l a f ortune d e T hekla ( Georgius M onachus , p . 7 58). A lliance i llggitime e ncore c elle q ui v aut ä Z aoutzgs l e t itre d e b asileopatör d e L eon V I, l e m gme q ue l e m ariage d e C onstantin V II d onnera ä R omain L ekapenos, t itre s pgcifique , d ont P . K arlin-Hayter a m ontrg l e s ens p olitiquement p regnant , p our l equel l e s imple " beau-pAre" ( pentheros) n 'eüt p as s uffi; m ais j e n e p ense p as , a u v u d es e xemples q ui v iennent d 'e 'tre c ites, q ue l a l ggitimiti d e l 'union f onde i di u ne d iffgrence 58) C e p oint s emble a ttendre d 'ailleurs u ne g tude p lus l arge. En r evanche, c e q ui a pparät c lairement d ans l e r gcit h istoriographique, c 'est l 'action c ommune d u g ambros e t d es d onneurs d e f emme, b eaux-frAres, e t b eau-pAre: M yron , b eau-pAre ( pentheros) d e P etronas, f rAre d e l 'impgratrice T heodora , e st a ccuse d 'aspirer ä l 'empire ( ibid ., p . 7 05). G regoras I bgritzgs, s ympentheros d 'Andronikos D oukas, p arce q ue b eau-pAre d e s on f ils C onstantin , j oue d ans l a t entative d es D oukai , a u d ebut d u X e s iècle , u n r ole d gja m entionng . L e p atrice N ikgtas a urait

v oulu

p ousser v ers

l e

t röne

s on

g endre ,

l e

b asileus

C hristophoros

L ekapenos, e t i l e st e n c onsequence e xpulsg d e l a c apitale e t t ondu , c 'est-äd ire f ait m oine ( Theophanes C ont. p . 4 17). O n s upposerait v olontiers q ue l es b eaux-pAres g taient p lus j eunes q ue l es p Ares, c ompte t enu d e l 'äge a uquel o n m ariait l es f illes 59)

c e q u i e xpliquerait l eur a ctivitg .

L 'oncle/la t ante s ont d gsigngs e n p rincipe p ar l e t erme u nique d e t heios/theia l m ais l a p rgcision d es c ötgs s e r encontre a u m om s ä l a f in d e l 'Antiquitg °°) e t s e r etrouve ä l 'occasion , p articuliArement d ans l 'hagiographie 61) L 'importance c oncurrente d es c ötgs d e l a p arentg s 'affirmera d ans l e c umul d es n oms l ignagers ä p artir d es C omnAne . L 'oncle j oue u n r ole q ui n 'est p as n ouveau d ans l e r ecrutement m onastique 62) . T heodore l e S toudite e t s on msle m aternel P laton 6 3) , N icolas l e S toudite e t s on o ncle p aternel T hgophane d e s oeur , N icgphore I I P hokas 6 5)

M ichel M aleinos e t s on i mperial n eveu , f ils e n s ont d es e xemples. S i u n d gpouillement

h agiographique c omplet a ttestait e ffectivement d ans c e c as u ne f rgquence p lus g rande d e l 'oncle m aternel , c elle-ci p ourrait e xpliquer l a m oindre i mportance

d u f rAre d 'gpouse ( gynaikadelphos) f ace al 'gpoux d e s oeur , q ue n ous a vons d gjä c onstatge d ans l e r gcit h istoriographique. L e r ecrutement p atriarcal

a tteste ä l a m e i ne é poque u n p assage d 'oncle p aternel ä n eveu : T arasios ( 7848 06) e st u n " oncle p aternel" ( patrotheios) d e P hotios a u d e s on pre 6 6) . S ergios, l e m oine " pAre s pir ituel" d e R omain Ie , e st ä s on t our u n " neveu" d e P hotios ( anepsios , i bid., p . 4 33). L e v ieux m ot d 'anepsios p rgsente , e ntre " cousin" e t " neveu" ,

a u r egard d e l a d istinction f ran aise ) 6 7 . A u

u ne a mbivalence q ui r emonte a ux o rigines

3 4

s urplus ,

d ans l e s chgma c anonique d es d egrgs d e p arentg ,

E go s e t rouve A l a

m eme d istance d e l 'oncle/de l a t ante , e t d u f ils/de l a f ille d e f rare/soeur. C ependant , i i n 'est p as i ndifferent s ocialement d 'être o u n on d e l a m eme g eneration , e t c eci j ustifierait l a v igueur c oncurrente d u t erme a delphidous " issu(e) d e f rare/soeur" q ue P rocope u tilise d ans s on H istoire S ecrete: G ermanos, c ousin d e J ustinien , y e st d gfini a nepsios d e c elui-ci ( V ,8), e t l 'empereur l ui-mgme a delphidous ( VI,

1 9) d e s on o ncle e t p rgdgcesseur J ustin .

P rocope s emble s 'en t enir ä c ette r gpartition . L e d roit c anon a c hoisi p our s a p art e xadelphos d ans s on e laboration d es i nterdits d e m an age, a u c entre d esquels s e t rouvent l es " fils/filles d e f rare/soeur" a u m om s d epuis l e c oncile d e 6 92. L a t erminologie s uivit s ans p eine l orsque l 'interdit s 'gtendit a ux " petits-enfants .." ( disexadelphoi), p uis a ux " arriarep etits-enfants .." ( trisexadelphoi). L a t ension d e l 'usage c ourant e t c anonique d emeure e ncore p g Keptible b ien p lus t ard, l ige p eut-etre a l a v aleur e xtensive d e t heios " ) . N otre h istoriographie t end a s pgcialiser a nepsios p our l e " neveu". E lle s e l imite p our l es " cousins" a ux t ermes

p rimaires, e xadelphos, a delphidous, t andis q ue l e t erme d e s yngenes s uffit p robablement ä c ouvrir l es c ousinages p lus g loigngs 69) . L 'historiographie d es I XeXe s iacles n 'atteste p as,

e n e ffet,

d e d ifficultgs d 'alliance

c omparables ä c elles q ue t raite l a j urisprudence c ivile e t c anonique ä l a f in d e Xe e t a u X Ie s iacle 7 °) . E n t out g tat d e c ause , l a r echerche d u g ambros d ans c ette a ristocratie e n v oie d e c onstitution d evait a lors t rouver u n c hamp e ncore a ssez l arge. L es c ousins d es p rotagonistes p assent d ans l e r gcit h istoriographique : l e v aleureux p atrice T iridate , e xadelphos d 'Artavasdos, l e g ambros d e L gon I II e t d e s on f ils ( Theophanes, p . 4 18); A syle6n , e xadelphos d e B asile, q ui p rend p art a u m eurtre d e M ichel I II ( Georgius M onachus , p . 7 50); M ichel , e xadelphos d e C onstantin D oukas , q ui l 'accompagne d ans s a t entative m alheureuse c ontre l e p ouvoir ( ibid. 8 01). R estent s ir

e nfin l es

l 'alliance.

L a

p arentgs

q ui n e r eposent n i s ur l a c onsanguinitg n i

p arentg

p ar

l e

b apteme

e st

u ne

p arentg

v raie,

p uisqu 'elle f onde d es i nterdits d e m an age, e ntre p arrain e t f illeule d epuis l a l egislation d e J ustinien , e ntre c ompare e t c ommare ( synteknoi) d epuis l e c oncile d e 6 92 7 1) .

C e d ernier o bstacle e st i nvoqug ä l 'encontre d u m an age

d e T heophanö , v euve d e R omain I I, a vec N icgphore P hokas ( ibid ., p p. 8 61-62 ; S kylitzas 2 61). L eur c as s e s itue e n f ait d ans u ne p ratique d u c ompgrage i mperial c omme l ien p rivilggig a vec u ne p ersonnalitg j ugge i mportante. L eon Vp arraine l e f ils d u f utur M ichel I I, e t i nstaure a insi u ne " filiation" a vec l 'enfant ( hyiopoiesato , G enesios I , 1). T hgophile p arraine l es e nfants d u d omestique d es s choles M anuel ( Theophanes C ont. p .

1 20),

t andis q ue s on

9 e

se T heodora a urait e u p our " compare" l e p atriarche i conoclaste J annis ' , e t p eut-gtre l e l ogothate T heok5 ptos ( Georgius Monachus, p . 7 18).

P hotios

e st

l e

" compgre" d e B asile

le

) .

L e

c ompgrage

i mperial

p ouvait

d onc c onstituer u ne g tape d ans l a m arcbe v ers l e p ouvoir , o u v ers s a f igure p atriarcale. P eut-gtre f aut-il a pprgcier e n c c s ens q ue l a t radition h istoriographique h ostile ä M ichel I II l e m ontre g aspillant l e s ien e n f aveur d e f gtards o bscurs ( Theophanes C ont. p . 1 72; S kylitzas, p p. 9 6-97). L 'historiographie n e n ous a pprend f at-ce d ans l 'aristocratie.

r ien e n r evanche s ur l a p ratique c ommune ,

L a f iliation p ar l e b apteme , h ien d istinguge d e

l 'adoption d ans l a l oi e t l es c anons , l a c oncurre inait s ans d oute d ans l a p ratique. L 'historiographie n e d it r ien ä c c p ropos n on p lus, e t ä p eine d avantage s ur l a " fraternite v olontaire" ( adelphopoia), d ont l a r epression o ccupe p ourtant l a p ensge c anonique. L e l ien c ontractg p ar l e f utur B asile Ie , e ncore i nconnu , a vec l e f ils d e l a v euve D anielis ( Theophanes C ont. p . 2 28) c onstitue u ne e xception p eut-gtre s ignificative, a ttestge d ans u ne b iographie i mpgriale , m ais s ituge n ganmoins e n u n l ieu s ocial p griphgrique. E nfin , l a m gtaphore p gnitentielle e t m onastique d u " pare" , c elle d es m oines

3 5

c o me " fratrie" ( adelphotgs) n e p euvent q u' are s ignalges p our m gmoire. q ue l e " pere s pirituel" n 'ait u n r öle c ertain a u p alais e t

N on d ans

l 'aristocratie , m ais s on g tude d gborderait n otre p resent p ropos. I i f aut c onclure e n e ffet.

E t d 'abord ä l 'originalitg ,

ä l a n ouveautg

d u d gveloppement b yzantin ä p artir d u V III e s iècle. D e C onstantin V ä B asile I I l e m iroir d e l 'historiographie m ontre l es f ormes t raditionnelles d u p ouvoir p olitique i nvesties p ar d es h o mes a ppuygs s ur l eur p arentele , e t d ont l es s urnoms p eu ä p eu t ransmissibles a ttestent l 'origine n on p as p opulaire , m aiE c ommune. C 'est u ne a ristocratie n euve q ui s e f raie a insi u n c hemin d ans l 'histoire d e B yzance , o ü e ile n 'avait p as d e p rgcgdent , e t o ü r ien n 'avait j amais r essemblg ä l a R ome d es A nicii , m gme s i l a g randeur d e / 4 c es d erniers a vait a ussi t ouché C onstantinople ) L es v oies d e l 'ascension d ans l 'aristocratie , e t j usqu 'au f alte i mperial , s ont a lors p our b eaucoup c elles d e l a g uerre. S i l 'ascendance i llustre c onstitue d epuis t oujours u n g lgment o bligg d u d iscours d 'gloge, s a p ortge p olitique d evient a lors b eaucoup p lus g rande. O n l e v oit a ux v ersions c ontradictoires d es o rigines d e B asile Ie , o u e ncore d e T heophanö g pouse d e R omain I I ( Theophanes C ont., p . 4 58; L eo D iaconus, I I, 1 0). L a v gritg g gngalogique v iendra s ouvent r ejoindre , a u f il d es g gngrations , l a r egle r hgtorique. I i r este q u l e p robleme p ose p ar l 'historiographie n 'est p as l ä. L 'histoire e lle-mgme n 'a l aissg i mperial.

p asser j usqu'ä n ous q ue l es r gcits c entres s ur l e p ouvoir C e d ernier d emeure a insi l e s eul o bservatoire d ont n ous

d isposions p our d gcouvrir l 'aristocratie ä l aquelle i i d onnait u n p rincipe d 'organisation s ociale e t u ne f inalitg i dgologique. F aut-il f aire p lace d ans s a g enese ä u ne i nfluence v enue d es p ays c aucasiens a vec l eurs s oldats d 'aventure? 7 5) C omment c omparer a vec l es O ccidents d e l a m gme p griode? E nfin , q ue s e p assera-t-il ä B yzance a u X Ie s iècle, e t s urtout ä p artir d es C omnenes? L 'gtude d es p arenteles i mpgriales , d ans t out l eur d gveloppement , e st s ans d oute , f ois e ncore K azhdan , l a m eilleure o uverture ac es q uestions.

p our s uivre u ne

* A bbrgviations d es t itres d es t extes c ites c i-dessus G enesios

J osephii G enesii R egum L ibri, Q uattor, g d. A . L esmueller-Werner e t I . T hurn ( Berlin/New Y or k, 1 978).

G eorgius M onachus

G eorgii M onachi d icti H amartoli C hronicon , M uralt ( St. P gtersbourg ,

L eo D iaconus

L eon's D iaconi H istoriae , g d. C .B. H ase

P rocopius

P rocopius, W irth

S kylitzes

H istoria A rcana,

( Leipzig ,

T heophanes

E .

J .

H aury,

1 828). r ev.

G .

C d.

I . T hurn

C .

D e

1 973). t om

I ,

C d.

D oor

1 883).

T heophanes C ontinuatis ,

3 6

d e

1 963).

T heophanis C hronographia, ( Leipzig ,

T heophanes C ont.

C d.

( Bonn,

I oannis S cylitzae S ynopsis H istoriarum , ( Berlin/New Y ork,

g d.

1 859)

C d . I . B ekker

( Bonn ,

1 838).

E NDNOTES 1 .

P ositions d e p roblemes e t i ndications d e m ethode: G . D uby, ' La n oblesse d ans l a F rance m edievale. U ne e nquete ä p oursuivre', d ans G . D uby , H ommes e t s tructures d u m oyen ä ge R euter ( ed.),

( Paris/La H aye,

T he M edieval N obility. S tudies

1 973),

p p.

1 45-66; T .

i n t he R uling C lasses o f

F rance a nd G ermany f rom t he s ixth t o t he t welfth c enturies H olland,

1 978),

m edievale'

n otamment,

( 1975),

p p.

L .

G enicot,

1 7-35;

G .

' Les

r echerches

T ellenbach,

h ochmittelalterlichen A dels ( 9-12 J h.)', d es s ciences h istoriques ( Vienne , 1 965),

( North n oblesse

' Zur E rforschung d es

X It -t C ongres i nternational I , p p. 3 18-37; K .F. W erner ,

' Adel. F ränkisches R eich , I mperium, F rankreich', M ittelalters, I , 1( Zürich/München , 1 977), c c. 1 20-8. 2 .

ä l a

S ur c ette d efinition h eritee d e M arc B loch,

c f.

P h.

d ans L exicon d es

C ontamine ( ed.),

L a

n oblesse a u m oyen ä ge, X I eXV e s iecles. E ssais ä l a m emoire d e R obert B outruche ( Paris, 1 976), p p. 1 9-35; G . T abacco , ' Su n obiltä e c avalleria n el m edioevo. U n r itorno a M arc B loch ', I taliana , 9 1,1 ( 1979), p p. 5 -25. 3 .

H .G.

B eck,

' Byzantinisches

G efolgschaftswesen ',

und P ealitäten i n B yzanz

( London,

1 972),

' Observations o n t he A ristocracy i n B yzantium ',

R ivista

d ans F .G. X I;

G .

s torica

B eck ,

I deen

O strogorsky,

D OP 2 5(1971),

p p.

3 -32

( en d ernier l ieu). R . G uilland, ' La n oblesse b yzantine. R emarques', R EB 2 4(1966), p p. 4 0-57, p osait l a q uestion ä p artir d es t itres e t d 'une c onception q uelque p eu a nachronique d e l a n oblesse.

L es d onnees

s eraient t out a utres ä p artir d u X IIe s iècle, c f. D . J acoby, a rchontes g recs e t l a f eodalite e n M oree f ranque', T M 2 (1967), p p.

' Les 4 21-

6 5, r eproduit d ans D . Jacoby, S ociete e t d emographic ä B yzance e t e r R omanie l atine ( London, 1 975), V I; D . J acoby, ' The E ncounter

o f

P eloponnesus r eproduit

T wo

S ocieties:

a fter

W estern

t he F ourth

d ans

D .

C onquerors

C rusade',

Jacoby,

A ristocracy

i n

t he

a nd B yzantines 7 8(1973),

R echerches s ur l a

o rientale d u X IIe a u X Ve s iècle ( London, B yzantine

A HR

p p.

i n

M edieerranee

1 979), I I; A . L aiou,

P alaeologan p eriod :

t he

8 73-906 ,

a s tory

o f

' The

a rrested

d evelopment', V iator, 4 (1973), p p. 1 34-51. R appelons a uusi l es s uggestions d 'A .A. V asiliev , ' On t he q uestion o f B yzantine f eudalism ', B 8 ( 1933), p p. 5 84-604. 4 .

C f.

G .

D uby

e t J .

L e G off

( eds.),

F an nie e t p arente d ans l ' O ccident

m edieval ( Ecole f ranvaise d e R ome, 1 977); D . B ullough , ' Early M edieval S ocial G roupings: t he t erminology o f k inship', P ast a nd P resent, 4 5 ( November 1 969), p p. 3 -18. B ibliographie r ecente r assemblee p ar A . G uerreau-Jalahert, ' Sur l es s tructures d e m edievale', A nnales E SC, 3 6(1981), p p. 1 028-49. 5 .

A .P.

K azhdan ,

p arentb

d ans

l 'Europe

' Ob a ristokratizatsij v izantijskogo o bshchestva V III-XII

v v.', Z RVI 1(1968), p p. 4 7-53. 6 .

A .P.

K azhdan ,

' Kharakter,

s ostav i e voljutsija g ospodstvujushchego

k lassa v V izantij X I-XII v v . P redvaritel en yje v yvody', B Z 6 6 ( 1973), p p. 4 7-60; A .P. K azhdan , S otsial'nyj s ostav g ospodstvujushchego k lassa V izantii X I-XII v v.

( Moscou ,

1 974).

6 (1976), p p. 3 67-80.

3 7

C f. l 'analyse d 'I. S orlin d ans T M

7 .

P r sentation

g gn rale

p ar

H .

p rofane L iteratur d er B yzantiner , 4 41. 8 .

B ibliographie d ans K azhdan ,

H unger,

I ( Münich ,

S ostav,

D ie h ochsprachliche

1 978), n otamment , p p. 3 31-

p p. 8 8-101. A jouter W . S eiht,

D ie S kleroi. E ine p rosopographisch-sigillographische S tudie ( Vienne, 1 976); N .M. P anagiotakis, ' He b yzantine o ikogeneia t ön P levstön. S ymbole s ta g enealogika t ön P h8kadön l, D ödöe , 1 (1972), p p. 2 45-64. 9 .

V oir n otamment P .J. A lexander,

' Secular B iography a t B yzantium ',

S peculum , 1 5(1940), p p. 1 94-209, r eproduit d ans P .J. A lexander, R eligious a nd P olitical H istory i n t he B yzantine E mpire ( London , 1 978), I ; A .P. K azhdan, lI z i storij v izantijskoj k hronografij X v eka. 2 . I stotchniki Llv a D jakona i S kilitsy d lja i storij t ret le j t chetverti X s toletija', V V 2 0(1961), p p. 1 06-28; P . K arlin-Hayter , ' Etudes s ur l es d eux h istoires d u

r egne d e M ichel I II',

B 4 1(1971),

p p.

r eproduit d ans P . K arlin-Hayter, S tudies i n P olitical H istory. S ources a nd C ontroversies ( London ,

4 52-96,

B yzantine 1 981), I V ; A .

M arkopoulos, ' Le tanignage d u V aticanus G r. 1 63 p our l a p eriode e ntre 9 45-963', S ymmeikta , 3 (1979), p p. 8 3-119. V oir a ussi F .H. T innefeld , K ategorien d er K aiserkritik i n d er b yzantinischen H istoriographie ( Münich ,

1 971).

1 0.

S ur l es s ources c onstantinopolitaines u tilisges p ar T hgophane p our l es V II e e t V ille s iecles, c f. A .S. P roudfoot, ' The S ources o f T heophanes f or t he H eraclian D ynasty', B 4 4(1974), p p. 3 67-439 .

1.

E .

P atlagean,

' Families

c hr f tiennes

d 'Asie

M ineure

e t

h istoire

da lographique d u I Ve s iècle', d ans E . P atlagean , S tructure s ociale, f amille, c hrgtientg a B yzance, I Ve-XIe s iecles ( London , 1 981), I X . 1 2 .

J . e t P . Z epos,

I us g raecoromanum , I V ( Athens,

G . W eiss, ' Hobe R ichter i n K onstantinopel. s eine K ollegen ', J OB 2 2 ( 1973), p p. 17-43 . 1 3.

1-260.

C f.

H . M oritz, D ie Z uname b ei d en b yzantinischen H istorikern u nd C hronisten ( Landshut ,

1 4.

1 931), p p .

F ustatbios R homaios u nd

C f.

1 897-98),

2t omes.

L 'onomastique l atine - C olloque i nternational d u C NRS 1 975

( Paris ,

1 977) , n otamment I K ajanto , ' The e mergence o f t he l ate s ingle n ame s ystem', p p. 4 21-28. N ombreux t ravaux d e L . R obert, n otamment N oms i ndigenes d ans l 'Asie M ineure g reco-romaine,

le p artie

( Paris,

1 963); 1 5.

K .F. l J erner,

' Liens d e p arent( e t n oms d e p ersonne.

h istorique e t mf thodologique

l,

U n p robleme

d ans D uby e t L e G off,

F ami ne e t

p arent6 , p p . 1 318 , 2 5-34. C f. K .F. W erner e t M . H einzelmarn , ' Les c hangements d e l a d enomination l atine A l a f in d e l 'Antiquit6', i bid., p p. 1 9-24. V oir a ussi P . T oubert, L es s tructures d u L atium m& ligval. X IIe s iècle 1 6.

L e L atium u kridional e t l a S abine d u I Xe s iècle ( Paris,

al a

f in d u

1 973), p p. 6 93-703.

F . Z onabend, l Jeux d e n oms. L es n oms d e p ersonne a M inot', E tudes r urales, 7 4(1979), p p . 5 1-85; i d., ' Le n om d e p ersonne l, L 'Homme , 2 0/4 ( 1980), p p. 7 -23; C . S even , ' Le n om d e l ignge. d ans u n v illage d 'Emilie l, i bid., p p. 1 05-118 .

3 8

L es s obriquets

1 7.

S .D. G oitein , AM editerranean S ociety. T he J ewish C ommunities o f t he A rab W orld a s p ortrayed i n t he d ocuments o f t he C airo G eniza , I II - T he F amily

1 8.

( Berkeley,

P atlagean ,

1 978), p p.

1 -15,

S tructure s ociale ,

3 14-19.

I X ,

p .

1 75

e t

n .32 ;

J .G.

n ames F lavius a nd A urelius a s s tatus d esignations E gypt', Z eitschrift f ür P apyrologie u nd E pigraphie , 6 3; 1 2(1974), p p.283-304. 1 9.

C f. u nd

R . H irzel ,

K eenan ,

' The

i n L ater R oman

1

( 1973),

p p.33-

' Der N ame. F in B eitrag z u s einer G eschichte i m A ltertum

b esonders

b ei

d en

G riechen',

A kademie d er W issenschaften,

Abhandlungen d er s ächsischen

3 6(1927); G .J.M. B artelink,

' Sur l es

a llusions a ux n oms p ropres c hez l es a uteurs g recs c hretiens', V igiliae C hristianae, 1 5(1961), p p .32-39. P ar e xemple l 'epouse d e J ustin I er c hange s on n om ' ridicule' d e L upicina p our c elui d 'Euphemia : P rocopius, H istoria A rcana , I X , 4 9. 2 0.

G ermanos

' cousin '

d e

J ustinier

e t

J oannis

' neveu e d e

V italien:

P rocopius, H istoria A rcana , V , 8 e t s . J ustinien ' neveu d e J ustin ; i bid., V I, 1 9. S ur l es t ermes g recs, c f. c i-dessous p p. 3 4-35. 2 1.

P our l es n iveaux d e l angue , q ui j oueront u n r öle d ans l a s uite d e n otre e xpose , n ous r envoyons u ne f ois p our t outes ä R . B rowning , M edieval a nd M odern G reek

( London ,

1 969).

N otre

i nterpretation

d es

s ur-noms

s e

f onde s ur l e M ega L exikon t es h ellenikes g lösses d e D ir itrakos. 2 2.

M onumenta A siae M inoris A ntigua,

I II

( Manchester,

1 931),

i ndex

s .v.

' Zunamen ': p .c. J oannis, f ahricant d e b outeilles, d it F mpoisonneur ( Pharmakos) - n o.136; G eorges f ils d e P riskos, m archand d e v in , d it P as-de-parole ( Dikha h orkou) - n o. 2 82 . 2 3.

C f. W erner d ans P uby e t L e G off, I d.,

F amille e t p arente ,

' Important N oble F amilies

p p.

1 3-18 ,

2 5-34;

i n t he K ingdom o f C harlemagne - a

p rosopographical s tudy o f t he r elationship b etween k ing a nd n obility i n t he e arly m iddle a ges', d ans R euter , M edieval N obility , p p.137-202 . 2 4.

C f.

l a m ethode p roposee p ar H .

N eveux ,

( 1568-1775)', A nnales d e N ormandie, 2 5.

A ctes d eLavra I ( Archives d e l 'Athos V )

2 6.

M ethodii

P atrieichae

4 -5,

6 ,

( Paris,

C onstantinopolitani

C onfessoris, e d. V .V. L atyshev p o i stor.-filol. o tdeljeniju, n otamment c h.

' Les p renoms m asculins ä C aen

3 1/2(1981), p p.115-45.

2 0.

1 970), n o.6.

V ita

S ancti

T heophanis

d ans Z apiski r ussiiskoj A kademii N auk 8 e s er., 1 3/4(1918), p p.1-40. V oir

S ur l es n oms f eminins e n -ö ,

R obert,

N oms

i ndi &nes, P assim . 2 7.

V ie e t o ffice d e S aint E uthyme l e J eune, d e'l O rient C hretien ,

8 (1903),

p p.155-205,

C d.

L .

P etit d ans R evue

5 03-36.

V oir n otamment

c h. 3 , 5 , 6 , 8 . 2 8.

D es

K lerikers

G regorios

B ericht

ü ber

L eben ,

W underthaten

u nd

T ranslation d er M etaphrase d er H l. T heodora v on T hessalonich d es J oannes S taurakios, C d. F . K urtz d ans Z apiski r ussijskoj A kademii N auk p o i stor.-filol. o tdeljeniju , c h. 6 .

3 9

8 e s er.,

6 /1(1902),

p p.1-49.

V oir

2 9.

V ita E uthymii P atriarchae C onstantinopolitani, ( Bruxelles,

3 0. 3 1.

b d.

P .

K arlin-Hayter

1 970), p .133.

E d. I . V an d en G heyn d ans A B 1 6(1897), p p.142-63. C f. E . P atlagean,

' Saintetg e t p ouvoirt, d ans S . H ackel ( ed.), T he

B yzantine S aint ( London ,

1 981), n otamment p p.102-4.

3 2 .

C f. G . M oravcsik, B yzantinoturcica,

3 3.

A .P.

K azhdan ,

V oir c h. 4 .

2 e e d ( Berlin ,

' Oh a r istokratizatsii

1 958),

I I, p .93.

v izantijskogo o bs l -chestva l, Z RVI

1(1968), p p. 4 7-53. 3 4.

P our

t out

( Paris, 3 5.

3 6.

P our

c e

q ui

1 949), p p.

l es

s uit,

v oir A .

M irambel ,

G rammaire d u g rec m oderne

2 05-15.

A rmgniens,

c f.

P.

C haranis,

T he A rmenians i n t he B yzantine

E mpire ( Lisbon, 1 963), r eproduit d ans P . C haranis, D emography o f t he B yzantine E mpire ( London , 1 972), V .

S tudies o n t he

K olöniatgs:

i bid.,

p .366;

T heophanes

C ontuatus,

p .71;

' surgeon d e c ette v ille i mpgriale':

T ripolitgs;

3 7.

H ellade:

3 8.

R . J anin , C onstantinople b yzantine,

3 9.

E d. M . H . F ourmy e t M . L eroy d ans B 9 (1934), p p.85-170.

4 0.

W .Seibt, D ie S kleroi, p .20.

4 1.

S .

3 66;

i bid., p .357.

R unciman,

2 e U.

( Paris,

1 964), p .375.

T he E mperor R omanus L ecapenus a nd h is r eign . A S tudy o f

t enth c entury B yzantium ( Cambridge, 4 2 .

p .

i bid., p .154.

1 963), p .63, n .l.

G . D agron e t J . P arame]le, ' Un t exte p atriographique. L e ' rgcit m erveilleux , t r?, s b eau e t p rofitable s ur l a c olonne d u Urolopbos' ( Vindob . S uppl. C r.

1 72 , f ol. 4 3v63 v ) ', T M 7 (1979), p .518 ,

4 3.

L eo D iaconus ( Bonn), p .112 e t s .

4 4.

C f.

L .

R obert,

' Noms

d e m gtiers

d ans

K haristerion e is A . O rlandon ( Atb6 les, ' Quelques

n oms

d e

metiers

g recs

l es

d ocuments

1 964), e n

1.207 s s.

b yzantins',

d ans

I , p p.324-347; O . M asson,

-gs

e t

l es

n oms

g recs

c orrespondants', Z eitschrift f ür P apyrologie u nd E pigraphie, 1(1973), p p. 1 -19. L e p rocgdg e st b ien c ompris p ar l es c ontemporains , t gmoin l e p artisan d e B ardas P hokas, S ymeön " paysan c ultivateur d e v ignes q ui t ira

s on s ur-nom d e s on m étier ,

L eon s ans

D iacre ( VII, 1 ), q ui s ouligne q u'il g tait " issu d e g ens o bscurs, n aissance", e t s e d istinguait p ar s a v aillance e t l a f orce d e s es

m ains.

L gon D iacre

l ui-mgme

e t f ut a ppelg A mpelas", c o me e xplique

l 'appelle

d gsormais A mpelas

S ymeön

( VII,

5 ). 4 5.

A .P. K azbdan , A rmjane v s ostave g ospodstvujushchego k lassa v izantijskoj i mperij v X I-XII v v . ( Erevan , 1 975). C f. J . L aurent, L 'Armgnie e ntre B yzance e t l 'Islam d epuis l a c onqugte a rabe j usqu'en 8 86 ( Paris, 1 919).

4 0

4 9.

V ita E uthymii, e d. K arlin-Hayter , p .49.

5 0.

U ne

e tude

d e

o bservations

l '"amitig" d 'E.

b yzantine

B enveniste,

f erait

e ncore

s on

L e v ocabulaire d es

p rofit

d es

i nstitutions

e uropgennes: I - E conomic , p arentg , s ocietg ( Paris , 1 969), p p. 3 353 53. L '"entente a micale" e st a ussi b ien c elle d 'une m anoeuvre p olitique ( Theophanes C ontinuatus ( Bonn) p .393 , a vec s er r n ents) q ue c elle d 'une l iaison a moureuse p ublique ( ibid., p .357). S ur l es " hommes", c f. V . A rutjunova, ' K v oprosu o b ' anthropoi' v t ipike G rigorija P akurjana ', V V 2 9(1968), p p. 6 3-76; c f. a ussi J . V erpeaux , ' Les o ikeioi. N otes d 'histoire i nstitutionelle e t s ociale', 2 3(1965), p p. 8 9-99. 5 1.

C f. P . K arlin-Hayter ,

' The R evolt o f A ndronicus D oucas', B S

p p.23-25, r eproduit d ans P olitical H istory ( London , 5 2 .

C f.

J .

D auvillier e t C .

P . K arlin-Hayter, 1 981), V I.

d e C lerq,

S tudies

R FB

2 7(1966),

i n B yzantine

L e m an age e n d roit c anonique

o riental ( Paris , 1 936); E . P atlagean , ' Une r epresentation b yzantine d e l a p arente e t s es o rig ines o ccidentales', L 'Homme , 6 /4(1966), p p. 5 9-83 , r eproduit d ans P atlagean , S tructure s ociale , V II. 5 3.

J . D arrouz s, E pistoliers b yzantins d u X e s iècle ( Paris,

1 960), p assim .

5 4.

N icgphore B ryennios, H istoire , e d. P . G autier ( Berlin/New Y ork,

1 975),

p . 7 5 e t s . 5 5.

L .

S tiernon ,

' Notes

d e

t itulature

e t

d e

p rosopographie

b yzantines.

S ebaste e t g ambros', R EB 2 3(1965), p p.222-244. 5 6.

C f.

C .

M ango,

' Eudocia I ngerina,

t he N ormans a nd t he M acedonian

D ynasty', Z RVI 1 4-15(1973), p p.17-17. 5 7.

V oir F .

D ölger ,

B yzanz u nd d ie e uropäische S taatenwelt

( Ettal ,

1 953),

p p. 3 4-69 , 1 83-96; K . H auck, ' Formes d e p arentg a rtificielle d ans l e h aut m oyen a ge', d ans D uby e t L e G off , F amilie e t p arente , p p . 4 3-61. 5 8.

C f. A . L eroy-Molinghen e t P . K arlin-Hayter , p p . 2 78-81.

5 9

C f.

E .

P atlagean ,

' L'enfant

e t

' Basileopator l, B 3 8(1968),

s on a venir d ans

l a

f amille b yzantine

( IV e II e s i kles)', d ans E . P atlagean, S tructure s ociale , 6 0.

P .

e x .

t heios p ros m etros :

L ibanios,

D iscours,

C d.

J .

X , p p.85-93.

M artin ,

t r .

P .

P etit ( Paris, 1 979), I , 1 , v .; t heios p ros_patros/pros m etros: T heophilus A ntecessor, e d. C . F errini ( Berlin , 1 884), p p.289-90, p assim . 6 1.

P .

e x .

m itradelphos :

V ie d 'Evstratios,

gou r n& ie d u m onastare d 'Abgar ,

e d. A . P apadopoulos-Kerameus d ans Analecta h ierosolymitikg 's s takhyologias, 4 (1897), p p.367-400 ( ch. 4 ); e k p atros t heios : p ros m etros t heios: V ie d 'Ir & le, a bbesse d e C hrysobalanton d ans A ASS , V I, p p.602-34 ( ch. 6 ).

4 1

J ulii

6 2 .

E xemples d es V e-VIIe s i kles :

V ie D e N icolas S toudite d ans M igne ,

1 05,

d e

c .

8 69;

T hgodoret

C yr,

H istoire

P hilothge

P G

- 4 :

H istoire d es m oines d e S yrie, g d. P . C anivet e t A . L eroy-Molinghen ( Sources c hrgtiennes, 2 34) ( Paris, 1 977), p .294; V ie d e N icolas d e S ion , g d. G . A nrich , H aghios N ikolaos ( Berlin , 1 913), I , p p .3-35 ( ch. 2 ); V ie d e G eorges d e C hoziba , g d. C . H ouze d ans A B 7 (1888), p p. 9 71 44 , 3 36-59 ( ch . 2 ). C f. J . B remmer , 1 -A v unculate a nd f osterage', J ournal o f I ndo-european S tudies, 4 (1976), p p.65-78 . 6 3.

P ros m etros t heios : 1 21.

6 4.

E k p atros t heios :

V ie d e T heodore S toudite

V ie d e N icolas S toudite

d ans M igne ,

d ans

M igne ,

P G 9 9 ,

P G 1 05,

c ol .

c ol .

8 69. 6 5.

V ie d e S aint M ichel M aleinos, b d. L . P etit d ans R evue d e l 'Orient c hrgtien , 7 (1902), p p.549-68 ( voir c h. 3 ).

6 6.

P hotius,

E pistulae,

A hrweiler,

I ,

2d ans M igne,

P G

1 02 ,

c ol.

6 09B.

C f. H .

' Sur l a c arri re d e P hotius a vant s on p atriarcat',

B Z

5 8(1965), p p.348-63; C . M ango , ' The L iquidation o f I conoclasm a nd t he P atriarch P hotios', d ans A . B ryer & J . H errin ( eds), I conoclasm ( Birmingham ,

1 977) p p.133-40.

6 7.

C f. B enveniste , V ocabulaire d es i nstitutions e uropgennes, I , p .234.

6 8.

C f.

J .

D arrouz s,

3 5(1977),

' Questions

p p.107-57 ,

d e

n otamment

d roit

m atrimonial :

p p.144-5;

S t.

172-1175',

B inon ,

' A

p ropos

R EB d 'un

p rostagma d 'Andronic I II P algologue', B Z 3 8(1938), p p.133-55; 3 77-407. 6 9.

L 'interfgrence e ntre

' cousin ' e t

V ie d 'Evariste l e S toudite ,

' parent' a pparait p ar e xemple d ans l a

m ort e n 8 97,

g d.

C .

V an d er V orst d ans A B

4 1(1923), p p. 2 95-325. A l a r echerche d 'une p rotection d ans l a c apitale , l e j eune h omme s e d gfinit c omme ' parent ( syngenes) s cion l a c hair ' d e B ryennios, e t c omme ' cousin ' ( exadelphidous) d e l igpouse d e c elui-ci ( voir p .300). 7 0

C rumel, R ggestes,

n o.

8 04 e t s .; A . S chminck,

E ntscheidungen a us d em 1. 3 (1979), p p.221-79. 7 1.

C odex J ustinianus,

e d. P .

J h.',

d ans D .

K rüger ( Berlin ,

' Vier e herechtliche

S imon ( gd.),

1 877), V ,

i v ,

F ontes M inores,

2 6,

2 ; c oncile

d e 6 92 , a non. 5 3: e d. F . L auchert, D ie K anones d er w ichtigsten a ltkirchlichen C oncilien n ebst d en a postolischen K anones ( Fribourg/ L eipzig ,

1 896), p .123.

7 2 .

S ymeon M agister ( Bonn), p .647.

7 3.

P hotius, E pistulae , I ,

7 4.

A . M omigliano,

1 6 d ans M igne, P G 1 02 , c ol. 7 72A.

' Gli A nicii e l a s toriografia l atina d el V I s ecolo

d .C.', d ans A . M omigliano , S econdo c ontributo a lla s toria d egli s tudi c lassici ( Rome, 1 960), p p.231-52 ; L . C racco R uggini , ' Nobilitä r omana e p otere n ell'etA d i B oezio', A tti d el c ongresso i nternazionale d i s tudi b oeziani ( Rome , 1 981), p p .73-96. C f. C h . P ietri , ' Aristocratic e t

4 2

s ocigtg

c lgricale

T hgodoric',

d ans

l 'Italie

c hrgtienne

a u

t emps

M élanges d e l 'Ecole f rar f lise d e R ome

d 'Odoacre

e t

d e

- Antiquitg,

9 3/1(1981), p p.415-67. 7 5.

C f.

C .

T oumanoff,

' The B ackground t o M antzikert',

d ans P roceedings o f

t he X IIIth I nternational C ongress o f B yzantine S tudies p p.411-26.

( Oxford,

1 967),

C HAPTER 3 - T HE A RISTOCRACY A ND T HE

I MPERIAL I DEAL

A lexander K azhdan

O f

t hose

i mage o f

l iterary w orks,

w ay o r a nother, s ort o f ' Mirror t he

w hich a im a t

t he B yzantine e mperor,

a t

l east

c onjuring u p

t hree

t he

i deal

a re c onnected,

i n o ne

w ith t he n ame o f B asil 1 ( 867-86). T he f irst i s a o f t he P rince e ntitled H ortatory C hapters b y B asil

E mperor o f

t he R homiioi.

T here a re s ome d oubts

a s

t o w hether i t

w as r eally B asil's w ork, b ut t he a rguments a re n ot w eighty e nough t o r eject t he manuscript t radition. T he q uestion o f w hether P hotius s hould w ork

b e r egarded a s i s,

a fter a ll,

i ts

a uthor i s

i rrelevant

t o o ur

c onsidered a s a c reation o f

p urpose:

t he

t he s econd h alf

o f

t he n inth c entury. T hese C hapters a re c onsistently

t raditional b oth i n o utlook

a nd

i n c ontent. T he a uthor, w hoever h e may h ave b een, r epeats a ncient m axims a nd c onstantly r efers t o h e W isdom o f S olomon, t he ( Pseudo-) I socrates, a nd E cclesiasticus. T he t ext i s o bviously c hristian: b oth i mperial p ower a nd i mperial v ictories a re r egarded a s p roceeding f rom G od, a nd t he b eauty o f t he s oul i s p roclaimed a s b eing o f h igher v alue

t han c orporeal b eazty.

T he

3

l ist 5 o f

i mperial r rtues

i nc y ldes

r ighteousgess o r j ustice, p hilanthropy, g enerosity, c hastity, l ove o f t ruth, °a nd i ntelligence lo M ore s pecifically, t he a uthor e mpha 7

s izes w ith

r espect f or k nowl Oge a nd s everal t imes e xpresses h is g ood c ounsellors " a nd g enuine f riends. 1 2 I n n o c ase

e mperor

e ulogized a s a warrior;

s ame t erm, E panagoge, 14

r ather h e

i s

c oncern i s t he

t he p eacemaker 13

- t he

e irenopoios, i s a pplied t o B asil i n t he t itle o f t he t h mh i n t he e arlier P rocheiron h e i s c alled v ictorious

a nd t riumphant. N or n ot

i s

b rag',

t he

e mperor p laced a t

w arns

t he a uthor,

t he h ead o f

' about

b ody, n or b e s cornful o f l ow b irth n or t urn a side f rom u gliness, b ut b e

l oving

t hose

o f

t he s oul.

w ho a re n oble

a re

d ear b ecause o f

t he

h orse's

d og

t heir

A nd h e

w hile m an's

a nd

a llegedly,

s uccessor a nd, r ecommended a ccording

a chievements.

i n

t he

a dmit

t hose w ho

e xplains

s tature, i s

t hat

d etermined

t hat o f

a b y

t o o ne's

a ncestors,

s erve b etter,

f ortunately w e p ossess a ( 886-912), B asil Is s on

a ddressee o f

h is T aktica t hat

T he a uthor e ven a sserts

g lorious a ncestors

t he

s oul. a re v ague e nough, b ut t he T aktica o f L eo V I

a ssessed

' Do

o f

a nd

b ut

f urther

n obility

T hese f ormulae c ontemporary s ource, e mperor

r espect

t heir b ody,

i n i ts m agnificent

i n i ts h unting q uali ges,

t he v irtues o f h is

' Do n ot

b ec vre o f

s pirit.'

n obility c onsists

a ristocracy.

( dysgeneia); d o n ot h onour b eauty, l ook a t t he b eauty o f t he s oul a nd

And a gain:

. 16

( eugeneis)

a n

t he n obility ( eugeneia)

s ince 4 3

t he C hapters.

n obility b ut

t hat

s hould

a ccording

n ot

t o o ne's

T he b e o wn

g enerals w ho d o n ot h ave

t hey a re e ager

t o

c ompensate

b y t heir o wn d eeds f or t heir h umble b irth. 1 9 T he i dea o f n obility h as a lready b een b orn, b ut t here r emained s trong r eservations a s t o w hether n oble o rigin c ould b e c onsidered a d esirable v irtue. L eo V I w as p robably t he a uthor o f a s peech d edicated t o m emory o f h is p arents, t he E mperor B asil I a nd E udocia I ngerina.

t he T he

a uthor e xpressly s tates t hat h is p ortKAyal o f B asil i s c onceived a s a p aradigm ( ton a rchetypon h ypodeigma). ' A mong h is i deal q ualities w e r e-encounter t hose s ame v irtues t hat a re l isted i n b eauty o f s oul, i mperial i nte higence, p hilanthropy, a nd p rotection o f m ilitary s uccesses

t he C hapters: r ighteousness,

t he p oor. L eo c ertainly m entions h is f ather's a nd t he t rophies h e h ad e 59cted a fter h is v ic-

t ories o ver t he S aracens i n t he E ast a nd W est, b ut n othing i s s aid a bout B asil's o wn f ortitude: o nly t hat h e t ransformed c owardice, a d isease w ise s loth h ave t hat

t hat h ad b een r avaging t he a rmy,

i nto c ourage,

f or b eing a

p hysician o f t he s oul a nd b ody h e c ured t he w orst a ilments a nd i dleness. 23 T he m eaning o f a s econd p assage, w hich m ight r elated t o t his s ubject, r equires e lucidation. L eo a ffirmed h is f ather " stretched o ut h is a rms a cross w hole ggions o f t he

e arth a nd w arded o ff t he b iaiotatoi f rom e very s ide." t ook b iaiotatoi t o m ean ' enemies a nd r endered t he

T he e ditors s entence a s

f ollows: ' repoussa d e t outes p arts l es e nnemis l es p lus v iolents.' T he b iaiotatoi a re, h owever, t he u njust ' powerful' r ather t han e nemies, a nd t he s entence i n q uestion s eems t o r efer t o B asil's d omestic p olicies L eo

a nd h is c oncern f or t he o ppressed.

c onsidered

t hat h is

f ather's o rigin w as a s eparate

t opic.

H e t ouched u pon i t b riefly, s o t hat h e c ould n ot b e w as a ccused o f i gnoring t he r ules o f p anegyric, w i lgh d emanded t he p resentation o f t he h ero's f atherland a nd l ineage. B ut h e i ns 4ted t hat i n h is f ather's c ase t his t radition w as o f l ittle v alue. ' T hough a lluding t o t he s emi-official, b ut q uite l ggendary, v ersion o f B asil's o rigin w ith t he A rsacids a nd A rtaxerxes, 2/ h e p laced h is m ain e mphasis, n ot o n h is f ather's f amily, b ut o n h is p ersonal q ualities. F or L eo a h umble m an w as e mbellished b y h is o wn d geds, w hile a n oble h ad, o f H e q uoted ' a w ise m an' w ho n ecessity, t o b ask i n i nherited g lory. 2 b i b elieved t hat i t w 2g b etter t o e stablish a n oble f amily t han t o r efer t o s ome a ncestor. B asil m ight n ot h ave c ome f rom i mperial s tock, b ut h e a cquired e nough g lory t o m ake h imself f amous; e ven i f h e d id n ot o riginate w ith t he s ceptres', h e i nherited a bundant g lory f rom h is

f amily. T he

3 0

m ain

i deas

r evealed i n L eo's s peech w ere e ventually

d eve-

l oped i n t he d etailed b iography o f B asil I p roduced e ither b y t he e mperor's g randson, C onstantine V II P orphyrogenitus ( 913-59), o r b y s omebody o f C onstantine's m ilieu. I n i t w e f ind a t raditional l ist o f i mperial v irtues, w hich i ncludes p iety, r everence t owards o ne's p arents, s ympathx w ith t he p oor, c hastity, f ortitude, i mpartiality, a nd i ntelligence. J1 I n s till m ore t raditional v ein C onstantine g oes o n t o e numerate

t he q uartet o f v irtues' p ossessed b y B asil :

t ude a nd i ntelligence, c hastity r eiterates p iety a nd r everence ( this s ympathy

w ith

t he p oor,

f orti -

a nd r ighteousness. 32 H e t hen t ime t owards p riests a id m onks),

r ighteousness a nd

i mpartiality.

3 3

W here

C onstantine i s m ore s pecific, h e i s u sually r epeating s tatements t aken f rom L eo's p anegyric. B asil t oiled d ay a nd n ight, s triving t o t he b est o f h is a bilities t o s ee t o t he w elfare o f h is s ubjects; h e p romoted t he b est t o t he h ighest p ositions; h e m aintained

4 4

r ighteousness

a nd

i mpartiality a nd d id n ot p ermit

t he

p owerful

t o

o ppress t he p oor, s o t hat ' Briareos's h ands', s tretched o ut t o s eize t he p roperty o f o thers, g rew n umb; a nd t he f eeble l imbs o f t he p oor w ere s trengthened. E veryone w orked h is o wn p lot o f e arth a nd h arves t ed h is

v izeyard,

h aving n o

f ear o f

l osing h is

f ather's

o live-tree

f ig-tree. T he e mperor p resided i n p erson o ver t he G enikon, c hief t reasury; h e b rought p eace t o t he C hurch, a nd ' cleansed l aws. 35

o r t he t he

B asil's o wn m ilitary a chievements a re n ever m entioned i n h is b iography. H is g randson r ather v aguely a ffirms t hat B asil e xtended t he f rontiers ( andria), a nd

o f t he E mpire t hrough h is o wn e fforts, m anliness l ofty s pirit ( gennaiotes). 36 B ut h e a scribes t his t o

s uccessful a dministration r ather t han t o h is g randfather d rew u p l ists o f s oldiers

c ommand o n t he b attlefield: p aid t heir w ages, t rained

t hem a nd p olished t heir m ilitary s kills. 7 H is e xpeditions t urn 5 1 o ut t o b e l ess s uccessful: t he s iege o f iphrike w as a f ailure; s o w as h is f irst a ttack a gainst M elitene. T he o nly ' martial" e pisode i n h is g randfather's l ife, w hich C onstantine d wells u pon , i s t he c rossing o f t he E uphrates. H ere t he e mperor d istinguished h ims elf b y z urying a l oad t hree t imes h eavier t han t hat o f t he o rdinary s oldier. P aulicians

T here i s a d et eled a ccount o f t he v ictory o ver t he a t t he B athyryax, b ut t hat w as a b attle i n w hich B asil

d id n ot p articipate.

d oes

C onstantine r epeats t he s tory o f B asil's A rsacid o rigin, b ut n ot s tress h is g randfather's n oble o rigins. T his t heme i s

a pparently s econdary t o t he e xercise o f i mpartiality a nd t he p rotect ion o f t he p oor. T hus w e c an s um u p a nd s urmise t hat f rom t he t urn o f t he n inth c entury o n, w hen t hese t hree w orks a re s upposed t o h ave b een w ritten , t he t raditional q uartet o f i mperial v irtues, c ombined w ith t he i dea o f c hristian p iety, c onstituted t he c ore o f t he i mperial i deal. M ilitary p rowess a nd n oble o rigin, o n t he o ther h and, e ither r emained i n t he b ackground o r w ere c ompletely r ejected. A r ather d ifferent a pproach p revailed, t he l ate e leventh c entury.

a s w e s hall s ee,

i n w orks o f

I n M ichael A ttaleiates's p aradigm o f i mperial v irtue w e f ind, b esides t raditional e lements, s uch a s p hilanthropy, r ighteousness, g enerosity, p iety, a nd i ntelligence, t wo 4zo ther q ualities s ingled o ut H is i deal w as N icephorus - n obility o f b irth a nd m ilitary p rowess. I II B otaneiates ( 1078-81), a llegedly a d escendant o f t he P hokas f amily, w ho i n t heir t urn c ould a pparently t race t heir o rigins t o t he f amous F abii. B otaneiates i s p resented a s i mpeccably n oble, h eir o f a g lorious l ineage; h e c ould c ount a mong h is a ncestors t he S cipiones a nd A emilius P aulus, a nd, p assing f rom l egend t o r ecent h istory, c ould l ook t o t he d istinguished d eeds o f h is f ather a nd g randfather. E verybody, A ttaleiates i nsists, w as o vercome w ith l ove f or t heir n ew s overeign w hen t hey l earnt o f h is g lory i n b attle a nd o f h is v alour, w hich m atched h is n obility, f or n ot o ne m ajor w ar h ad b een f ought w ithout h is p ersonal p articipation. T he h istorian c onstantly r eturns t o h is h ero's m ilitary a chievements: f or e leven d ays a nd n ights h e a nd h is m en h eld o ff t he a dvancing P etcheneks - a f eat n ot b y a ny o ther R oman o r ' Persian' i n a ncient t imes o r m odern. d ecisive b attle n ear N icaea,

d uring t he c ivil w ar o f 1 057,

e qualled A t t he

h e d istin-

g uished h imself a bove a ll o thers. I n 1 064 h e b ravely r esisted t he U zes i n t heir c rossing o f t he D anube. T he l ist o f h is h eroic d eeds 4 5

c ould e asily b e e xtended. A y ounger c ontemporary o f A ttaleiates, a rchbishop o f O hrid, p uts m ilitary p rowess

T heophylact, t he f uture a t t he t op o f h is l ist o f

v irtues f or a r uler. ' Do n ot i magine', h e w arns h is y oung C onstantine D oukas, w ho h ad b een c hosen b y A lexius I C omnenus

p upil ( 1081-

1 118) a s h is h eir, t hat y ou c an m ake t he s ervants o f A res o bey y ou, i f t hey s ee y ou d ecked i n g old a nd p urple, r ather t han i n t he a rmour o f a g eneral - .43 C onstantine i s p raised f or h is s kill i n r iding a h orse, t hrowing a j avelin , pd a s a m ounted a rcher. H e t rained h ims elf b y r unning a nd h unting. P i 2y i s, o f c ourse, p resent i n T heop hylact's l ist o f i deal q ualities. O therwis9 z o nly p hilanthropy i s i ncluded f rom t he l ist o f t raditional v irtues.'" 4

A ccording

t o T heophylact,

t he e mperor s hould n ot p ermit h imself

t o b e o bsessed b y t he p ursuit o f p leasure; 47 h e eguld n ot s trive t o g ain p ower b y f orce n or s tain h is r obe w ith b lood"" ( an a llusl _Rn t o A lexius Is a scent t o t he t hrone?); h e s hould r epel b uffoons " a nd s upport

h is

t rue f riends,

f or a n e mperor,

w ho r elies u pon

h imself

a lone, w ill a lways b e i solated. H e n eeds t he s upport o f f riends. T hey s hould b e a llowed t o i ntroduce m easures t hat a re f or t he b enefit o f t he E mpire, e ven i f i t m eans t hat t hey h ave t o f ollow t he e xample o f a g ood s urgeon a nd c ut a nd c auterize w hat i s r otten. 50 F or T heop hylact n oble b irth i s a nother u ndeniable v irtue. H e p raises C ons tantine's m other, t he E mpress M aria o f A lania, f or h er n oble l ineage: n ot o nly d id h er p arents, h er g randparents a nd h er g reatg randparents o btain g lorious p ositions, b ut ' thousands u pon t hous ands

o f h er a ncestors w ere k ings! T hese p rinciples t welfth c entury.

t he

5 1

w ere a ccepted a nd d eveloped b y t he a uthors o f T heodore P rodromos i s w ell k nown a s a p ane-

g yrist o f t he E mperor J ohn I I C omnenus ( 1118-43) a nd h is s on M anuel I ( 1143-80). W olfram H örandner h as d rawn u p a l ist o f t he i deal T he i mperial q ualities d escribed b y t he t welfth-century p oet. 52 p ious

i mitation

e ulogy,

b ut

o f

G od o ccupies a l eading p lace i n

l ittle a ttention i s

t he

P rodromic

p aid t o t he t raditional v irtues

o f

t he B yzantine e mperor: p hilanthropy a lone i s o ccasionally m entioned. T he e mperor i s m ostly p raised a s a w arrior a nd a s a v ictor i n b attle, a s a s kilful h unter a nd a s a s aviour - t he s un , w hose l ight n ot o nly w arms a nd h eals, b ut c an a lso b lind a nd b urn a ny a dversary. A ccordi ng t o P rodromos, M anuel l ived d ay a nd n ight i n h is a rmour f or ne s ake o f h is s ubjects, w ithstanding t hirst, c old a nd t hunderstorms. K innamos i s M anuel s a lour. b ravery.

5' In

a nother a uthor, w ho l ays s pecial e mphasis u pon H e n otes h ow a stonished t he ' Persians' w ere b y h is

b attle h e b rought

d own m any ' Persian' w arriors a nd d rove

o thers t o f light. 55 B randishing h is s pear h e r ushed a gainst t he ' Scythians', k illing t hem t wo a t a t ime. 56 H e d ispersed a S aracen a rmy, l ittering t he w hole v alley w ith c orpses. 5 7 T housands, t ens g i t housands, H e

w as

o f

t he e nemy s urrendered o r r etired b efore h is a ttack.

t he f irst aw.o ss

t he D anube a nd e ven a ttempted

t o

s cale

t he

w alls o f Z emlin. 5 1 H e n ever t ired i n c ombat a nd r esembled t he m ightiest h eroes i n h is u se o f a rms a nd i n h is s kill a s a h orseman. 60 H e w as e ver r eady t o h elp h is

b rothers-in-arms.

D uring t he c rossing

o f t he D anube a b oat w as d amaged a nd b egan t o s ink. T he e mperor i mmediately j umped i nto t he w ater a nd, d isregarding t he w aveg s upp orted

t he v essel o n h is

s houlders u ntil t he c rew w ere s aved.

4 6

H is

s trength

w as

t ruly m iraculous:

c lad i n a h eavy m ail c oat h e

c ould

n ot o nly d isTqunt w ith e ase, b ut a lso l eap i nto t he s addle w ith a s ingle b ound. " A b raxe h unter, h e s talked t he b ear a nd t he w ild b oar w ith h is s pear. 6J O nce h e e ven m anaged t o k ill a m onster, a c ross b etween a l ion a nd a l eopard, a t 64t he s ight o f w hich e mperor's c ompanions h ad f led i n t error. E ustathios o f T hessalonica 65

a ll

t he

c onjures u p a s imilar p aragon.

H is

M anuel i s a n i deal ' knight w ho s corned d anger a n t ook g reater p ride i n h is w ounds t han i n t he g litter o f h is d iadem .'" H e s lept l ittle, a te svringly, l iked w alking , e ndured e xtrgees o f h eat a nd c old w ith e ase, a nd e xcelled a ll i n s teadfastness. M anuel s n oble b irth w as h is a dornment. E ustathios e ulogizes t he a ncestors o f M anuel t hose r oots w hich p roduced s uch a b eautiful b loo9ö 6 9 M anuel s b rill iant d eeds v ie w ith t hose o f h is f orefathers.' F rom t he v ery c radle h e a spired t o t he h ighest v irtues, f ollowing i n t he p ath o f h is a ncestors a nd i nspired b y h is f ather's e xample. 71 L ikewise, E ustathios s aw M anuel s q ualities r eflected i n h is s on, t he y oung e mperor A lexius I I

( 1180-83).

7 2

I n c ontrast,

h e w as s hocked t hat

E mperor A ndronikos I ( 1183-85), a m an o f n oble f amily, w ho r eceived d ivine a ssistance i n h is a scent t o t he t hrone, c ould w ith s uch t yrannical c ruelty. 73

t he h ad a ct

W e c an c onclude t hat B yzantine p olitical t hought a round t he y ear 9 00 h ad c onsiderable r eservations a bout ' chivalrous' v irtues, s uch a s m ilitary p rowess a nd n oble b irth: t hese h ad s till t o p roper p lace i n t he l ist o f i mperial q ualities n ext t o

a cquire a p iety a nd

t raditional G raeco-Roman v alues. T his, a s w e h ave s een, h ad o ccurred b y t he t urn o f t he e leventh c entury. C an w e f ind o ut m ore p recisely w hen t his A t i mage

s ubstantial s hift f irst s ight,

t ook p lace?

t his c hange m ight w ell b e c onnected

o f N icephorus P hokas

( 963-69).

I n h is

w ith

t he

f inal c haracterization

o f t his e mperor, L eo t he D eacon m akes g reat p lay w ith h is q ualities a s a w arrior: N icephorus o utdid a ll h is c ontemporaries i n m anliness a nd w ar;

p hysical s trength; h e w as h ighly e xperienced a nd e nergetic i n h e w as a ble t o e ndure a ny 74U nd o f h ard w ork, n or w as h e w illing

O nly a fter t his e numeration o f h is t o g ive h imself u p t o p leasure. m ilitary q ualities d oes L eo i ntroduce t he e mperor's ' civilian' v irt ues: h e w as a h igh-minded a nd n oble s tatesman, a r ighteous j udge, a nd

a

s teadfast

l e eglator;

h e w as,

o f c ourse,

c onstant

i n

h is

p rayers a nd v igils. I n t he f oreground o f L eo's n arrative a re p laced N icephorus's t riumphs: t he e mperor w as i nvincible i n b attle a nd e asily s ubdued h is e nemies, a s t hough a ided b y G od, s o t hat a ll t he t ribes t rembled b eg9re h im a nd l onged t o h ave h im a s a l ord, n ot a s a f oe.'" H e h ad a lways b een v ictorious. h appened t hat m ightily v exed,

a f riend a nd W hen i t s o

h e f ailed t o s eize T arsus a t t he f irst b low, h e w as f or p reviously, w hen o nly D omestic o f S chools, h e h ad

r uined a nd p lundered t housands o f t owns, c aptured r ich l ands a nd t urned w arlike t ribes t o f light, b ut n ow t hat h e h ad a ssumüd t he i mperial o ffice, h e w as d riven a way f rom t he w alls o f T arsus. / 7 I n t he f ace o f a dversity N icephorus b ehaved a nd t hought d ifferently f rom B asil I - a s p resented b y h is g randson: C onstantine P orphyrog enitus's

B asil c almly a ccepted h is

f ailure

t o c apture e nemy s trong-

h olds. L eo's

c ontemporary,

J ohn G eometres,

4 7

p resents N icephorus,

f irst

a nd f oremost, t o

t he E ast

a s

a nd

a v aliant w arrior: t hen t o

l ike t he s un,

t he e mperor d ashes

t he W est w ith h is s hining a rms;

t he s un

c an

b e c overed w i A c louds a nd d arkness, w hereas t he e mperor i s i mmune f rom d isaster. J ohn p uts t he f ollowing w ords i nto t he m outh o f t he d ead N icephorus: T he s word c ut o ff m y h ead, a nd i n t he d arkness t he m urderous h and s tole m y e mpire, b ut w ho c an e rase t he m onuments o f m y g reat t riumphs? A nd J ohn i ndulges i n e numerating N icephorus's v ict ories o n n oble C rete a nd g lorious C yprus, o ver i nvincible T arsus a nd o ther C ilician t owns, a t t he w alls o f A ntioch a nd o f o ther A ssyrian c ities, o ver t he P ersians, P hoenicians, A rabs, a nd t housands o f t ribes o f t he e arth w hich s urrendered t o t he e mperor's s pear. L eo

t he

D eacon a nd J ohn G eometres

l ived a nd w rote d uring

t he

B asil

I I's r eign, a t t he v ery e nd o f t he t enth c entury. T he i mage o f t he g reat w arrior-emperor N icephorus P hokas w as j ust b eing c onjured u p. T heodosius

t he D eacon w ho w as

t heir s enior b y o nly o ne g eneration

s till f ar f rom t his i dea, N icephorus's c apture o f C rete.

i s

e ven t hough h e w as d ealing w ith F or T heodosius t he m ajor h ero i s n ot

N icephorus b ut t he p eople, t he c ommunity o f s oldiers. I n o ne e pisode a n u nnamed g eneral, ' slow i n f light, b ut f ast i n p ursuit', c alls u pon h is w arriors t o d ie f or t he m ost p ious l eader o f t he p eople' ( that i s, t he E mperor R omanus I I ( 959-63) - a w eakling w ho s tayed i n C ons tantinople, f ar f rom t he b attlefield), s o t hat t he e mperor w ould e nlarge h is e mpire a nd r ule a lone o ver t he w hole e arth. 8U T heodosius a lso p raises t he h eroic d eeds o f a nother u nnamed g eneral w ho h ad n o f ear o f d aggers a nd r ushed a lone a gainst t he b arbarian c avalry: h e s howed w hat k ind o f m en ' Rome' w as s till c apable o f r earing. 8 1 T heodosius p resents N icephorus's v ictory i n c osmic r ather t han i n h uman t erms: t he c rowds o f s tars w ere r ejoicing a nd t he o rder o f a ngels d ancing, b ecause t he i nvincible b east w as k illed a nd t he a bominable L eviathan d estroyed. 82 T he t ime h ad n ot y et c ome f or t he i dealization o f t he w arrior a s s omehow a part f rom t he a morphous m ass o f s oldiery - p ious a nd s trong d efenders o f t he B yzantine E mpire t hat t hey m ight

b e.

N icephorus's i mage a s p resented b y L eo t he D eacon a nd J ohn G eometres l acks a n e ssential t rait t ypical o f l ate-eleventh-century p anegyrics: t he e mperor m ay a ppear a s a p aragon o f m ilitary v irtues, b ut h e h as n ot y et b een i nvested w ith ' knight'. F or A ttaleiates t he P hokas

t he q ualities o f f amily p ossessed

l ineage w ith a l ong p edigree r ooted i n a g lorious p ast, o f n ot i nterest t o e ither L eo o r J ohn G eometres.

o ut

b ut

a a

n oble n oble

t his

i s

B ut e ven t his o ne-sided i mage o f t he v ictorious e mperor t urned t o b e t ransitory: i t d id n ot l ong s urvive t he g eneration t hat

r emembered a nd c herished N icephorus's s uccesses. T he w arrior-emperor v anishes f rom t he e ulogies o f t he m id-eleventh c entury. T here r ee merges, i nstead, t he t raditional i mage o f t he p ious r uler a dorned b y t he f our i mperial v irtues c elebrated i n B yzantine r hetoric.

d rawn

M ilitary p rowess d id n ot f ind a p lace i n t he i mperial p ortraits b y C hristopher o f M itylene. W hile o ther e mperors m ight b e

i nvolved i n b attles, o r f avour h orse r acing, o r m ight b e p atrons o f s cience a nd l iterature, M ichael I V ( 1034-41) w as m ost i nterested i n a lmsgiving. g enerosity: P actolus),

8 3

C hristopher

s ingled o ut C onstantine I X

M onomachus's

t he e mperor n ot o nly s treamed w ith g old ( like t he R iver b ut a lso s treamed w ith h onours ( timorroos - a n eologism);

4 8

t he

p oet m akes g reat p lay w ith t he f oungz o f h onours

o f g old, w hich t he e mperor r eleased. e loquent w as C hristopher's c ontemporary, W e d o n ot n eed t o q uote M auropous

a nd

t he

r ivers

E ven m ore e xplicit J ohn M auropous.

a t a ny l ength,

a nd

b ecause J acques

L efort h as a lready d rä r o ur a ttention t o h is t raditional t reatment o f t he i mperial i mage. °I n t wo s peeches d edicated t o t he P etchenek s ettlement o n B yzantine t erritory a nd t o t he s uppression o f T ornikes's i nsurrection r espectively, M auropous a sserted t hat i t w as n ot

a rms

t hat

p rovided v ictory o ver b oth t he

r ebels. T he w arlike h ordes w ere t herefore d oomed t o b e d efeated.

b arbarians

a nd

t he

i mpious, i gnorant, a nd l awless, a nd I n c ontrast, t he E mperor C onstan-

t ine M onomachos w as p ious, i ntelligent, a nd l aw-abiding. H e w on t he d ay, a lthough ( or r ather b ecause) h e w as a p eacemaker. I t w as n ot, i n M auropous's o pinion, t he b usiness o f a g ood e mperor t o w age w ar, f or

h e

w ould

k now o nly t oo w ell

t he

u ncertainty

a ssociated

w ith

v iolence : m uch b etter t o r ely u pon p ersuasion r ather t han f orce. T he e mperor s ought n either t yranny n or d espotic s way, b ut p referred t he k ingly a nd f atherly m ethods, w hich G od H imself u ses t o r ule t he w orld.

b een

M ore c omplicated i s t he c ase o f K ekaumenos, w ho i dentified b y G ennadij L itavrin a s a g eR2ral a nd

h as r ecently c haracterized

a s a n a dvocate o f t he B yzantine a ristocracy. " ' T his i s n either t he t ime n or t he p lace t o r eturn t o t he b urning q uestion o f K ekaumenos's s ocial s tatus. T he e ssential p oint i s t hat, w hoever h e m ight h ave b een , h e m aintained t he t raditional i dea o f t he f our i mperial v irtues o f f ortitude, r ighteousness, c hastity, a nd i ntelligence. N or d id K ekaumenos c onceive o f f ortitude a s m ilitary c ourage, b ut r ather a s a f orm o f s piritual p erseverance. N or, a gain, d id h e c onsider e ither f ortitude o r i nt gligence a s a bsolute v irtues, s ince t hey m ight b e p ut t o e vil u se. C onfor gng w ith t radition K ekaumenos p rgglaimed t he e mperor a s G od's e lect e mperor, i n h is v iew , m ust

a nd t he f ather o f h is s ubjects: t he t ake e qual c are o f a ll s tr e o f s ociety,

s oldiers, m embers o f t he S enate, a nd o rdinary c itizens. A bove a ll, h e m ust b e j ust. 91 O nly o ne o f t he t raditional v irtues s uffered t he l ash o f K ekaumenos's p en, t hat o f g enerosity : h e w ould t hat t he e mperor l avished h is g rants o nly o n t he ' worthy . 92 K ekaumenos's a dmonitions t o a n e mperor c ontain n o r eference t o t he r uler's p ers onal p articipa Oso n i n b attle. T hough t he e mperor i s o bliged t o c are f or h is t roops, ' t he f leet, a nd a rmaments, t hough t he a rmy i s d esc ribed a s t he e mperor's g lory a nd t he m ight o f t he p alace , ,94 t he a uthor d oes n ot d emand a d isplay o f m ilitary c ourage o n t he p art o f t he e mperor h imself. N or h ave n oble o rigins y et a cquired a p lace a mong

t he v alues m andatory f or a n i deal p rince. T he B yzantine a ttitude

a nd n ot b lood

t owards n oble o rigins w as

i n t he e leventh

t welfth c enturies f ar f rom u niform . S ome a uthors p revaricated, k nowing t o w hich q uality t hey s hould g ive p reference - n oble o r m oral p erfection .

P sellos m ight

a ssert

t hat p romotion

t o

t he S enate a nd t he h igher m ilitary p ositions s hould n ot j ust d epend o n t he a ristocratic c onnections o f t he c andidates, 95 b ut h e w as a lso d ispleased b y t he B yzantine h abit

o f p romoting h umble p eople t o

h igh

r ank, s ometimes e ven s laves p urchased f rom t he b arbarians. 9 1 0 S ome a uthors w ent s o f ar a s t o m ock t he s earch f or f ashionable p edigrees. I n h is d irge o n A ndronikos, J ohn I I's s econd s on, M ichael I t Oyi kos m entions h is h igh t itle, m ilitary s kill, a nd k een i ntelligence, " b ut 4 9

d oes

n ot

d edicated

t ouch t o

u pon h is n obility o f

A lexius Is

b irth.

s on A ndronikos,

I n

I talikos

a nother

m onody,

r eminds u s

t hat

t his p rince b elonged t o t he f irst a nd i mperial k in, 98 b ut i mmediately a fter t his h e e mphasizes t hat A ndronikos w as f ar f rom o verweeningly p roud o f h is n oble a ncestors, u nlike s o m any p eople o f h igk i r ank. O nly i n p assing d oes h e m ention M anuel Is i mperial o rigin , " t hough h e d oes p rovide a l ong d escription o f E irene D oukaina's f orefathers a nd d escendants, w ho w ere k ings a nd g enerals. 1°° B ut h e t hen i ndulges, a s a lso i n h is m onody o n A lexius Is s on A ndronikos, i n a q uite u ntraditional d eviation . M yth , h e c laims, t races l ineages t o P eleus a nd A jax a nd t hrough t hem t o Z eus, c limbing t hus e ver u pward. H e p refers t he d ownward p ath, f or o nly t hen w ill h e b e a ble t o r each t he a pex o f t he a ristocracy, t he E mpress E irene. 101 I talikos's p olem ics a re o bvious; t hey a re d irected i n t he m ain a gainst h is c ontemp oraries, w ho, i n t he s ame w ay a s A ttaleiates, h ad b een i nventing g enealogies f or t heir h eroes. I n h is p anegyric f or t he P atriarch M ichael K ourkouas ( 1143-46) I talikos i ronically e xclaims t hat h e c ould h ave t raced t he p atriarch's o rigins t o t he A rsacids, a s o thers m ight t o A jax, a nd l isted a ll t he s uccesses, r iches, t hrones a nd t itles o f M ichael's a ncestors, i n o rder t o e ulogize h im m ore t han h eroes o f e pic a nd m yth, b ut h e n il r efrain f rom d oing s o s ince M ichael's l ineage d erives f rom G od. D espite a ll

t hese f luctuations a nd i nconsistencies

i t w ould s eem

t hat b y t he e nd o f t he e leventh c entury a n ew s ocial i deal w as d eveloping - t he i deal o f t he n oble a nd c ourageous ' knight'. T his n ew t endency a ppears t o c orroborate a nd, i n p art, e xplain t hat r adical s hift i n t he p opularity o f h agiography d uring t he t welfth c entury, w hich P aul M agdalino h as s o b rilliantly i lluminated: FUJ t he i mage o f t he h oly m an c eased t o b e p opular w ith t he i deologists o f t he C omnenian d ynasty, a nd t he p roduction o f s aints l ives d windled r adically. I f E ustathios o f T hessalonica, t he s taunchest s upporter a nd a dmirer o f a ' chivalrous' M anuel I , c omposed t he L ife o f t he o therwise u nknown S t. P hilotheos o f O psikion, i ts c ore c ontained a n egation o f t he a scetic w ay o f l ife . A scetics m ight s eek s olitary p laces i n w hich t o l ive, c rawling i nto c aves o r f issures i n t he e arth, b ut t hey w ere o nly h iding f rom m en a nd e scaping t he m arket p lace o f l ife. E ustathios g oes o n t o c haracterize l ife a s a t heatre i n w hich G od a cts a s a j udge ( agonothetes). H e a dmits t hat i t i s q uite p ossible t o f ight t he d emoniac a rmy i n i solation, h aving b ut a s ingle w itness, G od H imself. O n t he o ther h and, t hose w ho d efeat t he a dversary w hile o bserved b y a t housand e yes o ught n ot t o f eel s hame b efore t he s olitary a scetic, n ot i n t he s lightest, s ince t heir d eeds a re t he m ore i mpressive. W hile t he l atter t ravels h is s mooth p ath m eeting n o o bstacles, t he f ormer, s truggling i n t he e veryday w orld, h as t o c ontend w ith a ll k inds o f s tumbling b locks. I f h e w ins, h e d eserves a ll

t he m ore c redit.

S urely,

c oncludes E ustathios,

t he s un

i s b eautiful w hen i t s inks b eneath t he e arth a nd d isappears f rom v iew, b ut h ow m uch m ore b eautiful i t i s w hen i t r ises a nd s hows i ts p erfection t o t he w orld. tO4 T he i deal o f t he v ita c ontemplativa g ave w ay

t o

t hat o f

t he v ita a ctiva,

t he n oble w arrior,

t he

i deal o f

t he h oly m an t o

t hat

t he n ew i deal b eing e mbodied i n t he f igure o f

o f t he

e mperor . T he a ble

i n a

p alp-

f orm a r adical b reak w ith t he t raditional i mperial i mage:

t he

e mperor i s

g old c oins o f

I saac I C omnenus

( 1057-59)

s hown g rasping t he s cabbard w ith h is

5 0

r eveal

l eft h and a nd h olding

a

s word

a gainst

h is

r ight

s houlder.

N ot

1 °5

o nly

d o

w e

p ossess

I saac's c oins, b ut a lso m temporary c omments o n t heir s ignificance. A ccording lui t c ) A ttaleiates " a nd t he C ontinuator o f t he C hronicle o f S kylitzes, t he e mperor e njoined t hat h e b e d epicted o n h is c oins h olding a s word, i n o rder t o i mpute h is a scent t o t he t hrone, n ot t o G od, b ut t o h is p ersonal p rowess a nd t o h is m ilitary e xperience. o pposition w hich I saac's i nnovation c learly p rovoked m ust h ave t ributed t o t he c oinage.

T he c on-

t he s uppression o f t he m artial e ffigy o f t he e mperor o n T he C omneni, n evertheless, c ontinued t o p roclaim t heir

m ilitary c oncerns o n t heir c oins. I nstead o f u tilizing p ortraits o f t he e mperor, t hey t urned t o t he d epiction o f s aints. A lexius I C omnenus i ntroemsed S t. S t. G eorge, M anuel I S t. T heodore. ' T he m ilitarization o f

t he i mperial

D emetrios,

i mage w as

m ilitary m ilitary

J ohn I I u sed

r eflected i n

s tate

r itual. T he l ate R oman c ustom o f p roclaiming a n e mperor b y r aising h im o n a s hield w as p robably r evived a round t he m id-eleventh c entury. T he f act t hat N istantine P orphyrogenitus m entions t his c eremony a s a K hazar c ustom i ndicates t hat i t h ad f allen i nto d isuse i n B yzant ium l ong b efore t he t enth c entury. T he r evival o f t his c ustom m ore o r l ess c oincides w ith I saac Is a ttempt t o i ntroduce t he m ilitary i mage o f t he e mperor o n t he c oinage. A ccording t o P sellos, t he r ebellious B ulgars p ri f laimed P eter D eljan r uler i n 1 040 b y r aising h im u p o n a s hield. T his e vidence m ay b e q uestioned s ince i t r efers t o a B ulgarian u prising, b ut s oon a fterwards, i n u surper L eo T ornikios w as r aised u p o n a s hield i n a

1 047, t he t horoughly

B yzantine m ilieu. 111 I n t he t welfth c entury t he d escription o f a r uler r aised u p o n a s hield e ven a ppears a s a s cene i n P rodromos's r omance R odanthe a nd D osikles, 1 12 i nterest i n m ilitary c eremonial b eing q uite n atural i n s uch a n a dvocate o f c hivalrous i mperial v irtues a s P rodromos. W hen i n 1 254 T heodore I I L askaris w as e levated o n a s hield, A kropolites a s T he t oo.

T he

t he p ro T lure c ustomary.' '

r itual o f

w as

r egarded

b y

h is

c ontemporary

t he r aising o n a s hield i s w ell k nown i n p ainting

t heme w as o ften t reated b y B yzantine m iniaturists,

p articu-

l arly i n c onnection w ith t he c oronation o f t he k ings o f t he O ld T estament. R are i n t he n inth a nd t enth c enturies, t he t heme b ecomes m uch m ore p opular d uring t he e leventh a nd t welfth c enturies. 1 14 T he r aising o f a n e mperor o n a s hield s eems t o b e s hown , a s w ell, o n t wo m arble r oundels, w hich a re u sually d ated t o t he t welfth c entury. 1 15 T he p opularity o f t his t heme i n a rt m ay t hus b e r elated t o t he r ee mergence o f

t his k ind o f

T he n ew i mage o f o n

i mperial

d ecorated

t he w arrior-emperor h ad a n e ven b roader

i conography.

w ith

f rom

M anuel I h ad

h is

p alace

s cene $16o f h is o wn m artial d eeds a s 1

b attles o f a ntiquity. a ttire o n o bjets d 'art. d escribes p ursuing

i mperial c eremony.

a t w ell

i mpact

B lachernai a s

f amous

T he e mperor w as a lso d epicted i n m ilitary A n a nonymous p oet o f t he t welfth c entury

a g olden b owl d ecorated i n t he u sual w ay w ith M anuel I t he d efeated k ing o f t he ' Persians' a nd a n i nnumerable h ost

I conium.

1 17

I l eave

t ion o f t he i mperial a nd o bjets d 'art. 1 18

i t

i deal a s

f or a rt h istorians r eflected i n

t o

s tudy t he

i lluminated

e volu-

m anuscripts

T o c onclude: t he i mperial i deal a round t he y ear 9 00 w as f ounded o n b iblical a nd r hetorical t radition. I t i ncluded p iety a nd v arious

5 1

c ivil

v alues,

o ften i n t he s hape o f t he q uartet - s piritual

f orti-

t ude, r ighteousness, c hastity, a nd i ntelligence. B y t he m iddle o f t he e leventh c entury t wo n ew v irtues w ere i ntroduced i nto t he ' Prince's M irror - n oble o rigin a nd m ilitary p rowess. T hey w ere l ater t o o vershadow t he t raditional q ualities, e ven i f a t f irst t here w as s ome h esitation. I t s eems t hat t he c oncept o f n oble b lood w as a ccepted m ore r eluctantly t han t hat o f i mperial v alour. T he i mage o f t he n oble w arrior w as n ot c onfined t o t he i mperial i deal, b ut e xtended t hroughout t he u pper s tratum o f B yzantine s ociety, d islodgi ng t he t raditional i mage o f t he h oly m an . T hese i deological s hifts o f t he e leventh, a nd e specially t he t welfth c entury, t ion o f s ubstantial c hanges w ithin p re-Comnenian

w ere a r efleca nd C omnenian

s ociety: w hat m ight b e d escribed a s t he a bortive a ttempt a t ' feudalization' o r ' aristocratization' o f t he B yzantine E mpire. t his

i s

q uite a nother

t opic.

5 2

t he B ut

N OTES 1 .

S ee H . B yzantiner

Hunger, ( Munich,

2 .

M igne,

P G,

1 07,

3 .

I bid.,

c ol.

X XVCD,

4 .

I bid.,

c ol.

X XXIICD.

5 .

I bid.,

c ols.

6 .

I bid.,

c ol.

X XXIIIBC.

7 .

I bid.,

c ol.

X XIXD.

8 .

I bid.,

c ols.

9 .

I bid.,

c ol.

X XVIIIBCD.

1 0.

I bid.,

c ol.

X XXIIB.

1 1.

I bid.,

c ols.

XXXVIABC,

X LVAB.

1 2.

I bid.,

c ols.

X XVIIIAB,

X XXIIIAD,

1 3.

I bid.,

c ol.

X LVB.

1 4.

Z epos,

J us,

I I,

1 5.

I bid.,

p .114,1.4.

1 6.

M igne,

P G,

1 7.

I bid.

1 8.

I bid.,

1 9.

L eonis i mperatoris T actica,

c ol.

L VIB.

c ols.

X XXVIIB,

X LVIIID-XLIXA.

X LVIIIAB.

X XXVIBC,

1 07,

c ol.

D ie h ochsprachliche p rofane L iteratur d er 1 978), I , p .160.

X LVCD.

X XXVIC.

p .236,1.5.

c ol.

X XVBC.

L IIAB. e d.

R .

V an i ( Budapest,

1 917),

I ,

p p.27-29. 2 0.

A .

V ogt

a nd I .

f ils L eon V I

H ausherr,

l e S age',

2 1.

I bid.,

p .48,11.9,16-17,

2 2.

I bid.,

p .56,11.22-23.

2 3.

I bid.,

p .56,11.24-28.

2 4.

I bid.,

p .58,11.14-15.

2 5.

I bid.,

p .42,11.21-26.

2 6.

I bid.,

p .42,11.27-29.

O C

' Oraison 2 6,1

f unA 'bre d e B asile

( 1932),

p .58,1.7,

53

l er p ar

p .60,11.18-19.

p .60,11.1,4,9.

s on

2 7.

I bid.,

p .44,11.23,27.

2 8.

I bid.,

p .42,11.29-30.

2 9.

I bid.,

p .44,11.5-7.

3 0.

I bid.,

p .44,11.15-18.

3 1.

T heophanes C ontinuatus

3 2.

I bid.,

p .315,11.7-9.

3 3.

I bid.,

p .315,11.14-16.

3 4.

I bid.,

p p.257-8.

3 5.

I bid.,

p p.260-62.

3 6.

I bid.,

p .265,11.5-7.

3 7.

I bid.,

p .265,11.8-14.

3 8.

I bid.,

p .267,11.9-15.

3 9.

I bid.,

p .270,11.13-19.

4 0.

I bid.,

p .269,11.1-15.

4 1.

I bid.,

p p.272-6.

4 2.

S ee A .P. K azhdan, ' Sotsial'nye v ozzrenija M ikhaila A ttaliata', Z RV1 1 7 ( 1976), p p. 5 -8. C f. A . K azhdan, S tudies o n B yzan-

( Bonn ,

p .220,11.7-12.

t ine L iterature o f t he e leventh a nd t welfth c enturies b ridge, 1 984), p p.23ff. 4 3.

T heophylacte G autier

d 'Achrida,

( Thessalonica,

D iscours,

1 980),

T raitgs,

P ogsies,

( Cam-

e d.

P .

p .193,11.21-23.

4 4.

I bid.,

p .183,11.4-8.

4 5.

I bid.,

p .201,11.8-11.

4 6.

I bid.,

p .209,1.13.

4 7.

I bid.,

p .193,11.27-30.

4 8.

I bid.,

p .199,1.28.

4 9.

I bid.,

p .207,1.31.

5 0.

I bid.,

p .201,11.22-23,

5 1.

I bid.,

p .185,11.24-25.

5 2.

W .Hörandner, T heodoros P rodromos. H istorische G edichte ( Vienna, 1 974), p p.89-108. C f. A . K azhdan, S tudies o n B yzantine L itera t ure,

C f.

p .207,11.2-4.

p .203,11.26-27.

p p.87ff.

5 4

5 3.

H örandner,

5 4.

C innamus

5 5.

I bid.,

p .61,11.22-23.

5 6.

I bid.,

p .95,11.8-10.

5 7.

I bid.,

p .189,11.15-21.

5 8.

I bid.,

p .192,11.3-7.

5 9.

I bid.,

p p.240-1.

6 0.

I bid.,

p .96,11.3-4,

6 1.

I bid.,

p .221,11.18-21.

6 2.

I bid.,

p .187,11.16-18.

6 3.

I bid.,

p .127,11.12-15.

6 4.

I bid.,

p .267,11.1-12.

6 5.

S ee A .

K azhdan,

6 6.

E ustathii m etropolitae T hessalonicensis O puscula, T afel ( Frankfurt, 1 832), p .210,11.21-24.

6 7.

I bid, g rad,

O p.

c it.,

( Bonn),

p .31,1.6.

I ,

I I.

W .

e d.

T .L.F.

R egel, F ontes r erum b yzantinarum ( Petro-

E scor.

1 0,

6 9.

E ustathii O puscula,

7 0.

I bid.,

p .197,11.74-77.

7 1.

I bid.,

p .197,11.90-93.

7 2.

R egel,

F ontes,

7 3.

E ustazio d i

I ,

f ol.

4 4v.

p .197,11.58-59.

C f.

R egel,

p .122,11.26-27,

T essalonica,

K yriakidis

p p.115ff.

p .4,11.8-11.

6 8.

S t.

Y .

p .110,11.3-4.

S tudies o n B yzantine L iterature,

p p.209-10; 1 892),

n o.30,11.83-85.

( Palermo,

7 4.

L eo D iaconus

( Bonn),

7 5.

I bid.,

p .89,11.19-22.

7 6.

I bid.,

p .76,11.17-21.

7 7.

I bid.,

p p.55-56.

7 8.

M igne,

P G 1 06,

7 9.

I bid.,

c ol.

c ol.

F ontes, c f.

I ,

p .71,1.25.

p p.89-90.

L a e spugnazione d i T essalonica, 1 961),

p .36,11.24-29.

p .89,11.15-19.

9 26AB,

c f.

c ols.

9 32AB.

5 5

9 01C-902C.

e d.

8 0.

T heodosii D iaconi D eCreta c apta, 1 979), p p.18-19.

8 1.

I bid.,

p .33,11.857-79.

8 2.

I bid.,

p .35,11.922-5.

8 3.

8 5.

H .

C riscuolo

D ie G edichte d es C hristophoros M itylenaios, z ig,

8 4.

e d.

1 903),

I bid., J .

e d.

E .

( Leipzig,

K urtz

( Leip-

n o.19,11.1-4.

n o.55,11.3-6.

L efort,

d iscours

d e J ean

8 6.

S ee G . L itavrin, S ovety i r asskazy K ekavmena ( Moscow, p p.63-97. C f. G . L itavrin i n V V 3 6(1934), p p.171-4.

1 972),

8 7.

L itavrin,

8 8.

I bid.,

p .274,1.9.

8 9.

I bid.,

p .284,11.8-10.

9 0.

I bid.,

p .284,11.17-19.

9 1.

I bid.,

p .274,11.11-13.

9 2.

I bid.,

p .276,11.7-9.

9 3.

I bid.,

p .276,1.21.

9 4.

I bid.,

p .292,11.15-16.

9 5.

S athas,

9 6.

M ichael P sellos, C hronographie, I I, p .35: V 1, 1 34,11.4-17.

9 7.

M ichel

M auropous

-R h

f torique e t p olitique:

e n 1 047 - , T M 6 (1976),

O p.

c it.,

p .288,11.12-16.

M esaiönikA B ibliotheke,

I talikos,

t rois

p p.285-93.

I V,

p p.430-1.

e d.

E .

L ettres e t D iscours,

R enauld

e d.

( Paris,

P .Gautier

1 928),

( Paris,

1 972),

p .130,11.6-12.

9 8.

I bid.,

p .85,1.6.

9 9.

I bid.,

p .278,11.19-25.

1 00.

I bid.,

p .148,11.13-18.

1 01.

I bid.,

p .148,11.18-24.

1 02.

I bid.,

p .72,11.9-16.

1 03.

P . M agdalino, T he B yzantine H oly M an i n t he t welfth c entury - , i n T he B yzantine S aint, e d. S . H ackel ( London, 1 981), p p.51-66.

1 04.

E ustathii O puscula,

p .138,11.37-87.

5 6

1 05.

P .

G rierson,

C atalogue o f t he B yzantine C oins i n t he D umbarton

O aks C ollection , - 7 b3; p l.LXIII,

I II, n os.

p t 2 ( Washington, 1 ,2 - 2 ,5.

1 06.

A ttaleiates,

1 07.

I oannes S kylitzes C ontinuatus, l onica,

1 08.

M .F.

1 09.

p l.LIX ,

1 968),

e d.

E .Th.

T sokales

1 969),

D e A dministrando I mperio,

J enkins

1 10.

M ichael P sellos,

C hronographie,

1 11.

I bid.,

V I,104,11.4-5.

1 12.

T heodore P rodromos, R odanthe a nd D osikles i n R . E rotici s criptores g raeci ( Leipzig, 1 859), I I, c h.5,

1 13.

G eorgii A cropolitae O pera, 1 978), I , p .105,11.20-21.

1 14.

C .

p .18:

( Washington,

e d.

H .

P ierce

I ,

1 967),

p .77:

a nd

R .

t welfth c entury',

( n.b .

B enjamin o f T udela, p .53.

1 17.

S p.

L ampros,

T yler,

S ee P .

( Darmstadt,

8 (1982),

H ercher, v v.109-11.

t he

1 975),

p .4,n.13. o f

t he

p p.3-9. e d.

A .

' Ho M arkianos K odix 5 24',

t welfth

R EB

C f. H . Hunger,

' A M arble E mperor-Roundel

I tinerary,

M agdalino a nd R . o f

G y.

A .Heisenberg/P.Wirth ( Stuttgart,

( 1911), p . 1 72 [ translated i n C . B yzantine E mpire ( Englewood C liffs, N Y,

A rt

e d.

c ap.38,11.52-3.

I V,40