Zbornik Radova Vizantološkog Instituta
Primary tabs
Publisher: Institute for Byzantine Studies of the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts
ISSN: 0584-9888
eISSN: 2406-0917
Pages
-
- The byzantine title of Constantine Bodin
- The paper considers the use of the title exousiastes on the newly discovered seal of Constantine Bodin. It analyses the meaning and use of this title in the sources of a diplomatic character of the 10th century, as well as its use in the 11th century sources. The question is posed why this title was used on Bodin’s seal instead of the title archon, which had been used for former Serbian rulers, as well as whether this phenomenon had any connection to the fact that Serbian rulers, beginning at the end of the rule of Bodin’s father Michael, used the title of king.
-
- The castle in late medieval Serbian lands
- U radu se razmatra tip utvrđenja sa primarnim rezidencijalnim funkcijama vladarskog ili vlasteoskog dvora, koji bi se na području srpskih zemalja srednjeg veka, slično evropskim primerima, mogao označiti terminom zamak. Izložene su strukturalne odlike zamka koje ga izdvajaju od utvrđenja, kod nas obično označavanih opštim terminom "srednjovekovni grad". .
-
- The co-rulership of John V Palaiologos
- Despite the overall opinion that John V Palaiologos was not a co-ruler while his father, Andronikos III, was alive, this article tends to show that the successor of Andronikos the Younger was bestowed the title of βασιλεύς shortly after his birth. This would, in fact, be a rather logical act of Andronikos III, who, due to his fragile health, sought to secure the throne for his minor offspring. In addition, it seems that it was a practice of the Palaiologan emperors to proclaim their eldest sons as co-rulers, at a very early age, because of a strong need to ensure the legitimacy to the new ruling family, as well as to prevent the passing of the throne into the hands of the members of the side branch of the family. [Project of the Serbian Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development, Grant no. 177032: Tradicija, inovacija i identitet u vizantijskom svetu]
-
- The concept of marriage in Roman, Byzantine and Serbian mediaeval law
- In this paper the author is exposing definitions of marriage that were accepted in Byzantium and mediaeval Serbia, although it was not insisted in them on wedding as a religious rite. Leo VI, at the end of the 9th century, was the first to prescribe Church benediction as an obligatory form of entering into marriage. Novels of latter Emperors placed marriage under the complete jurisdiction of the Church, but they were not incorporated in Serbian translations of Byzantine legal miscellanies (Nomokanon of St. Sava and Syntagma of Matheas Blastares). Therefore in articles 2 and 3 of Dušan's Law Code it was prescribed that no marriage could be contracted without wedding ceremony and Church benediction. .
-
- The data on Serbian history of the 13th century in the chronicle of Ephraim from Ainos
- Ephraim from Ainos wrote a chronicle (Chronikē Istoria), in the twelve-syllable verse, which covered the history of the Old and New Rome from the 1st century A.D. to 1261, i.e. the period covering twelve centuries. While writing this chronicle, he predominantly relied on the world chronicle by John Zonaras and the historical works by Niketas Choniates and George Akropolites. In regard to Serbian 13th century history, it should be pointed out that Ephraim mentioned three pieces of information. Chronologically speaking, the two of them, the first and the third, are well known from other sources as well. The first one was the information that Eudokia, daughter of the Byzantine emperor Alexios III Angelos, had been married to Stefan, son of Nemanja, and the third one was about the well-known and well-documented event, the Serbian invasion into the European territories of the Empire of Nicaea, in the vicinity of towns Kičevo and Prilep, in 1257. The second news in order, and controversial to certain degree, spoke about the alleged occupation of the part of Serbian territories by the ruler of Epiros Theodore I Angelos during the first years of his rule. The contemporary historian George Akropolites, who was much closer to these events, did not list the Serbian territories among those conquered by the ruler of Epiros.
-
- The dispute between Theophylact, the archbishop of Ohrid, and the Paroikos Lazarus
- Alexios I Komnenos, one of the greatest Byzantine emperors, was forced to carry out military and fiscal reforms. As a result, state taxes were notably raised; the powers of tax officials (praktors) were enhanced; and cases of confiscating Church land and other real estate appeared. These general tendencies during Alexios I’s reign are fully confirmed by the data laid out in several letters that Theophylact, the Archbishop of Ohrid, wrote. We learn from them, among other things, that a paroikos (peasant) named Lazarus launched a dispute before the emperor himself, accusing the archbishop of setting fire to his property and then of expelling him from the village. Theophylact was also accused of generating excessive income and possessing a costly estate, as well as of usurping a village near Ohrid. Over the course of the long-standing legal case, by sending letters to influential state officials, he tried to diminish and rebut the accusations. In his defence, he pointed out that attempts were being made to spread hostility against him both among the residents of Ohrid and across Macedonia. Also, he complained that state taxes were raised enormously. Although at a first glance it appears unusual that an archbishop should become entangled in a serious and prolonged dispute with a paroikos, the situation becomes clearer on learning that Lazarus’s grudge was in fact spurred and fully taken advantage of by the state’s tax officials. Through the case of Lazarus, who was used as their mouthpiece, they, in fact, undermined the ownership and immunity rights and privileges of the Archbishopric. All of that worked in favour of raising the income of the state at the expense of that of the Church. In other words, it appears that through the said dispute some sort of “interventionism” in favour of the state and at the Church’s expense was at work.
-
- The earliest cults of Saints in Ragusa
- The peripheral zones where the Constantinopolitan and Roman ecclesiastical influences met often contain evidence of the intermingling of the cults characteristic of both Churches. The cult of St Pancratius, well established in Ragusa (Dubrovnik) during the Early Middle Ages, could be a good example for the studies on ecclesiastical matters in Dalmatia. The question is, when and under which political circumstances the cult of St Pancratius was established in Ragusa. Whether it was caused by unilateral action of Pope or joint policy of Constantinople and Rome.
-
- The earthly and the heavenly Jerusalem in the Serbian Alexander Romance
- The motif of Alexander’s visit to Jerusalem in the Serbian Alexander Romance is distinctive in the context of Classical, Byzantine and Hebrew literature. The role of Jerusalem as a sacred space is analyzed in accordance with A. Lidov’s theory of hierotopy, and the symbols of the Heavenly and the Earthly Jerusalem in the Serbian Alexander Romance are considered in relation to the various theological and ideological points of view.
-
- The emergence of the title Velikii Kniaz’ in Rus’ and the Povest’ Vremennykh let
- This article examines the issue of when the title of Velikii Kniaz’ was first used in the light of accumulated textual analyses of the Povest’ Vremennykh Let. Section 2 presents the current state of research. Section 3 outlines the historiographical viewpoints on the Povest’ and how the time of its composition relates to first use of the title. Particular emphasis falls on four Byzantine-Rus’ treaties mentioned in the Povest’. It is argued that the time when first version of the PVL emerged - the 1110s - sets a terminus ante quem on the introduction of the title of Grand Prince in Kievan Rus’. Section 4 investigates two other sources discussed in current research: a letter by Metropolitan Nikephoros to Prince Vladimir Monomakh, and the seal of Prince Mstislav. Section 5 offers two explanations of why the title entered Byzantine usage and of when conditions for it became ripe in Kievan Rus’.
-
- The establishment of the Metropolis of Patras and of Athens and the Slavs of the Peloponnesus
- By the end of the 8th century, after the expedition of 783 led by Staurakios the imperial forces began the reestablishing of the imperial control over those parts of the Peloponnesus which had previously been in the hands of independent Slavs for about 200 years. The result was the administrative reorganization of the whole of the peninsula. The administrative reorganization was followed by the ecclesiastical one. Thus, in the so-called Notitia 2, written after 805/806 and before the end of 814, we find an entirely new image of the ecclesiastical organization of that part of the Empire. Alongside the old Metropolis of Corinth, there are now two new metropolitan sees - that of Patras and that of Athens. The Metropolis of Patras was founded by the charter of the emperor Nikephoros I, between 1st november 805 and 25th february 806. But, the Church of Patras already existed even before that moment, as an autocephalous archbishopric, subordinated directly to the patriarchical throne of Constantinople, and its existence in that rank was attested as early as 787. The Metropolis of Athens was established sometime during that same period, in the reign of patriarch Tarasios, but after the Council of 787, so the date of its establishment could be placed between 787 and 806. Like the Church of Patras, the Church of Athens also had the rank of autocephalous archbishopric, subordinated directly to Constantinople, before it was elevated to the rank of metropolis. It is not certain when the Church of Athens received the rank of autocephalous archbishopric. What were reasons for the creation of these new metropolitan sees within the old province of the Metropolis of Corinth? The ancient Metropolis of Corinth was the ecclesiastical center of the ancient province of Achaia, which in the later Roman times covered all of the Peloponnesus and Central Greece. But, the province of Achaia existed no more and so the rights and claims of the See of Corinth lost their value. For during the two-century-long rule of the pagan Slavs in vast regions of the Peloponnesus, the ecclesiastical organization in these regions vanished, and the jurisdiction of the See of Corinth was limited only to those parts of the former province of Achaia which remained under imperial control (that is the lands east of the Corinth-Malea line). When the Slavs of the Peloponnesus were defeated and subdued, after 783, the process of their christianization began, but the territory once controlled by them was not placed under the jurisdiction of the See of Corinth. In that territory, the autocephalous archbishopric of Patras was established and subjugated directly to Constantinople. Later, after the emperor Nikephoros crushed the Slavic rebellion, he established an independent Metropolis of Patras, in 805/806 which jurisdiction exclusively covered all of the former Slav-controlled territory of the peninsula. The new theme of the Peloponnesus was created out of the old imperial possessions in the peninsula, cut off from the old theme of Hellas, joined by the newly gained territories of the former Slavic parts of the peninsula. The theme of Hellas was thus limited to the territory that lay north of the Corinthian Isthmus. As a result of the separation of the new theme of Peloponnesus from the old theme of Hellas, which left Corinth in the territory of the new theme, the new ecclesiastical authority was established for the territory which was left to the theme of Hellas, i.e. for the territory north of the Corinthian Isthmus - the Metropolis of Athens. That event occurred after the Ecumenical Council of 787 and before the death of patriarche Tarasios in 806. Thus, as a result of all these changes in the administrative and ecclesiastical framework, the entirely new image of the Peloponnesus and Central Greece appeared at the beginning of the 9th century. Old, now smaller, theme of Hellas got its new Metropolis of Athens. The old Metropolis of Corinth remained head of the new theme of Peloponnesus, and the new Metropolis of Patras was created for the Slavic part of the theme of Peloponnesus. New administrative division caused new ecclesiastical organization. It was not based on patterns of old, late Roman principles, nor they were revived, but it was that new conditions demanded new responses. The Empire found them, in the finest manner of Byzantine oikonomia.
-
- The first marriage of despot Leonardo III Tocco
- The marriage between Leonardo III — the last member of the Tocco family who ruled the Heptanese (1448-1479) — and Milica Branković, the daughter of the Serbian Despot Lazar Branković and Helen Palaiologos, concluded in Dubrovnik on May 1 1463, is an intriguing issue: it was concluded under unusual circumstances, and its significance was variously presented by the couple's earlier and later contemporaries. An analysis of several historical sources (mainly those of documentary character, also some of a narrative nature) shows that, despite the belittlement of its significance made by some of the pair's contemporaries, the marriage was generally seen as a prospective alliance, designed not only to satisfy the existential needs of the couple but also to enhance the interests of various important political factors of the time: Thomas Palaiologos, the authorities of Dubrovnik, the Roman Curia and Cardinal Bessarion. As widely known, the political prospectives opened by this marriage were not fully accomplished due to the short duration of this relationship (Milica died soon after the wedding). Yet this conjugal alliance proved useful for the Tocco party even after its conclusion. In the time following Leonardo's flight from the Ottomans to Naples (after 1479), he referred to the lineage with Milica as an alliance with the Byzantine imperial family, supposedly in order to achieve certain benefices from the Italian environment where he repatriated. In parallel to the analysis of the sources about the motives and significance of the first marriage of the last Tocco despot, in this paper I also deal with several pro-sopographic and topographic details of regional importance, mentioned on the occasion of the Tocco-Brankovic wedding ceremony (e.g. Bishop of Bologna Blasius Constantii Paliki, etc). .
-
- The genoese citizenship of Carlo I Tocco of December 2, 1389
- The Genoese citizenship, granted to Carlo I Tocco and his regent mother Magdalene by the authorities of the Republic of Genova (December 2, 1389) is a document the existence of which is widely accepted in the scholarly circles despite the fact that the details of its content have still remained largely unknown. Attempting to contribute to a better understanding of the circumstances under which the grant was issued, the first part of this paper brings the transcription of the entire document as well as an analysis of its political and legal context. The paper's second part deals with the document's paleographic, diplomatic, and sigillographic features, as well as with its prosopographic and topographic details.