This electronic thesis or dissertation has been

downloaded from the Kings Research Portal at

https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/

Byzantine Monemvasia

Kalligas, Haris

The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from it
may be published without proper acknowledgement.

END USER LICENCE AGREEMENT

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0

International licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

You are free to:

Share: to copy, distribute and transmit the work

Under the following conditions:

Attribution: You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author (but not in any
way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).
Non Commercial: You may not use this work for commercial purposes.
No Derivative Works - You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work.

Any of these conditions can be waived if you receive permission from the author. Your fair dealings and
other rights are in no way affected by the above.

Take down policy

If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact librarypure@kcl.ac.uk providing
details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

Download date: 06. Sep. 2017

 Harts Kalligas

Byzantine Monemvasia

19".

PhD Dissertation

King's College

University of London

31L.
L. !Ji fd.
1J-//
'
 Abstract

The study examines the history of the city of

Monemvasia, situated in the South-Eastern Peloponnese,

from its foundation in the 6th century A. D. until the

year 1460.

Chapter 1 deals with the foundation of the city.

The sources which refer to it are analyzed, mainly the

Chronicle of Monemvasia, which places the foundation

during the reign of emperor Maurice by refugees from

the city of Lacedaemonia and connects it with attacks

by the Slavs. It is concluded that the foundation

should be placed about three decades earlier.

Chapter 2 compiles existing information on Mo-

nemvasia from the 6th to the end of the 12th century,

which shows that it had developed into an important

port of the Byzantine empire and that some of its insti-

tutions had survived from antiquity.

Chapter 3 deals with the activity of the Franks

in the Peloponnese after 1204, their relations with Mo-

nemvasia and the role of a series of local rulers. The

chronology of the conquest of the city by the Franks is

defined and the events that led to its recovery in

1262 are presented.

 Chapter 4 comprises information on the period

1282-1380, when Monemvasia gained most of its wealth

and importance. A series of documents issued by the

byzantine emperors are presented and analyzed, as well

as the privileges granted.

Chapter 5 refers to the years 1380-1460 when the

advance of the Turks, local rebellions and ecclesiasti-

cal controversies seem to have led to a decline of the

city despite some intellectual activity. It describes

the move of the local authorities to bring the city

under papal protection after the submission of the Pe-

loponnese to the Turks in 1460.

Chapter 6 concerns the ecclesiastical history

of Monemvasia,... the evolution of its See and analyzes

the imperial documents which granted it important pri-

vileges.
 Preface

This research on the history of Monemvasia start-

ed several years ago as a consequence of a professional

occupation with the rehabilitation of houses there. ori-

ginally it had a completely different form and the ma-

terial gathered gradually covered many aspects of its

long history. Part of the material concerned the poli-

tical and ecclesiastical history, and part of it in

turn is the subject of the'present study, which covers

the period from the foundation of Monemvasia in the

6th century A. D. up to 1460, when it came under papal

protection.

I thank Professor Donald Nicol for accepting to

supervise this: thesis'leading to its"submission to the

University of London, for the confidence he showed during

the long time it took to complete and for his substantial

help and advice.

To the friendly incitement of Professor Chara-

lambos and Dr. Laskarina, Bouras I owe the fact that

I started to study systematically Monemvasia's history.

I thank them not only for that but also for their constant
interest and encouragement at moments of disappointment.
 5

Among the large number of scholars who readily

offered their help I particularly have to mention Itiss

Julian Chrysostomides-, Dr. Michael Angold, Dr. Robin

Cormack, Father Jean Darrouzas, M. Michel Balivet,

Professor Manoussos Manoussacas, Professor Athanasios

Kominis, Dr. Panayotis Nicolopoulos, Professor Atha-

nasios Marcopoulos and Dr. Agamemnon Tselikas.

For their encouragement, their patience and their

consideration for many years I would like to thank

also Alexander and George Kalligas, Alexander in parti-

cular for his help with the English text and George for

the graph of the metropolitan Sees in 1324.

I heartily thank them all for their contribution

to this work, the errors and weaknesses of which they

have taken no part in.

 Contents

Abstract 2
. 4. eo
Preface 4

Table of contents 6

List of plates 9

List of abbreviations 11

Bibliography 14

Introduction 60

Chapter 1: The foundation of Monemvasia

I. Laconia up to the 6th century 62

II. The Chronicle of Monemvasia 64

III. A marginal scholion by Arethas 80

IV. A Petition of the metropolitan

of Monemvasia 83
.. 900
V. Two Notices from manuscript

Kutlumus 220 91
. 000.
VI. Archaeological evidence 93
. 0000
VII. Conclusions 97
0.0*0
Chapter 2: Monemvasia until 1204

I. The Polis of the Lacedaemonians 101

.....
II. The Dark Centuries 108

III. Monemvasia during the 9th

and 10th centuries 113

IV. The years up to 1204 135

 s
7

Chapter 3: 1204-1282. The relations with the Franks

I. Leon Chamaretos 144

.. *. *
II. The despot loannis Chamaretos 156
... so
III. The surrender of Monemvasia

to the Franks 164

....
IV. Monemvasia under the Franks 176
.. *so
V. The recovery by the Greeks 180
see.
Chapter 4: 1282-1380. A century of prosper ity

I. Privileges granted by

Andronikos II 187
. ***.
II. The chrysobull in the Chronicon

Maius 212
... so
III. Monemvasia and the Kantakou-

zenoi 242
*. so*
Chapter 5: 1380-1460. The Peloponnese

under the Palaeologoi

1. Palaeologos-Mamonas 253
ease
II. The careers of Photios and of
Eudaemonoiannis 273
. **so
III. Isidore's collection of letters 290
**so*
IV. Pro-unionists and anti-union-

ists in Laconia 304

Chapter 6: The ecclesiastical history of

Monemvasia

I. The Synodicon of Monemvasia 327

 8

II. The first list of the Synodicon 335

.....
III. The second list of the Synodicon 344
.....
IV. The metropolis of Monemvasia 351
9. oo.
V. Privileges granted by Androni-

kos II 358
..,
VI. The so-called false chrysobull

of 1293 373
***. *
VII. The successors of Nicolaos

and the Palamite controversy 389

VIII. Controversies in the Pelo-

ponnese 400
*0.00
Conclusions 413
. 0*40
Appendix: List of Monemvasials documents. 417
000e.
Plates 420
got**
 List of Plates

1: The Peloponnese.

2: The peninsula of Laconikd.

3: Boundaries between the territory of Sparta and of

the Eleutherolacones. (after Chrimes)

4: Ms. Kutlumus 220, fol. 194 r beginning of the

Chronicle of Monemvasia.

5: Ms. Kutlumus 220, fol. 189 r Short Chronicle

41,4 a/b.
6: Ms. Kutlumus 220, fol. 196 r the
second part of

Chronicle of Monemvasia.

7: Monemva-sia and Epidauros Limera. (Admiralty Chart,

1838)

8: The port of Hierax. (Admiralty Chart, 1838)

9: Ms. Vat. Gr. 1904, fol. 116 r, the ta-

original of
boullarikon gramma of 1426.

10: Ms. Paris. Gr. 3067, fol. 195 r, 17th century copy

of the taboullarikon gramma with calculations.

11: Ms. Barb. Lat. 4424, fol. 29V drawings of Ciria-

,
co of Ancona, including the walls of Epidauros

Limera.

12: Ms. Vat. Gr. 1879, fol. 158 rj the fragment the
of
"Life of Saint Theophanes" from the autograph
drafts of the Petitions to the Patriarch by Isi-

dore.
 10

13: Miniature in the chrysobull of 1301 (B).

14: Chrysobull of 1314 (A). -

15: Miniature in the chrysobull of 1314 (A).

16: Chrysobull of 1314 (A), first part of the text.

17: Chrysobull of 1314 (A), second part of the rext.

18: Chrysobull of 1314 (A), third part of the text.

19: Ms. Neapol. Gr. C-II-36, fol. 62 r, 6f

copy chry-

sobull A by Macarios Melissenos, first part.

20: Neapol. Gr. C-II-36, fol. 62V A by Maca-
, copy of

rios Melissenos, second part.

21: Neapol. Gr. C-II-36, fol. 63 r, A by Maca-
copy of

rios Melissenos, third part.

22: Neapol. Gr. C-II-36, fol. 63v, copy of A by Maca-

rios Melissenos, fourth part.

23: Neapol. Gr. C-11-36, fol. 64 r. copy of A by Maca-

rios Melissenos, fifth part.

24: Neapol. Gr. C-II-36, fol. 64v, copy of A by Maca-

rios Melissenos, sixth part.

25: Contributions of the metropolitan Sees of the By-

zantine Empire to the Patriarchate of Constanti-

nople in 1324.
 Abbreviations

AASS . Acta'Sanctorum Boll'andiAna

ABME '*AP)(Erov* TOV BUCCLV-r'LV0v' MvYjIIC'CO'V TIC *EXXd8oC

AA '*Ap)(aLO; LOYLu6v- Atkctov

AE . .#AP)(aLoXoY'tXA' '@EtP'nuePIr.
An*. Bol, l. 'Analecta, Bollandiana

B -Byzantion

BCH -Bulletin'de*Correspondance*Hel'li6nique

BHG -Bibliotheca*HatjiotjraphIL-a'Graieca

BIIL -Bibliotheca, liagiographica*Latina

BNJB -Byzantinisch-neugriechische*jahrbUcher

Bonn Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae

(Bonn, 1828-97)

BSA Annual'of'tht! 'Britilh'Schbol*ht'Athens

BSOAS Bulletin, of'the'School*bf'Orii! nthl*hnd'Afri-

can'Studies

BZ Byzantinische'ZipitsChrift

XHE XpLaTtcLvtuA' Uctl' *OHOLkA' 4EyUUxXbftaC8ttct

CFIIB Corpus Fontium Historiae Byzantinae (Berlin-

Rome- Washington-Vienna,, 1967-

XTM -Chronicle of'the*Morea

AXAE Ackrtov* -rft XpLcrTLcLvtUjC' 4ApXctto)Loytxft: ' 4E-

TCLLPC (CLC

AIEE AcXTtov 'rjj: ' 410-roPLUjc'xcLf' 'E3voXo-ytxflc 'E

TCLLPCCCLCTIC' *EUdL6oC
 12

D. O. C. 'Diplomatari de 1' Orient Catala

DOP Dumbarton Oaks Papers

EEBE 'a ETtcrylpCc -rfic *ETCLLPCCac BUCCLVTLvC)v Enou8(Zv

EMA * ETtcrnpCC* -roG McaaLcavLuoG *ApxcCou xflc *AxcL-

bnutac "AOrivOv

EO 'Echos d'Orient

GRBS Greek Roman and Byzantine'Studies

JOB -jahvbuch der Osterreichischen Byzantinistik

JOBS Jahrbuch der Osterreichischen Byzantinischen

Gesell'schaft

MEFRA Mdlanges de llEcolerrangaise de Rome (Anti-

quit6)

''MGIISS Mon=enta' GerMahilmb Hi*stbriiza*. * Scriptores

14E Ntor, ' '*EXXyjvo, 4vAwv

OCP Oritntalla Chrittlatia' Periodica

TLALE ITpcLKTL'K-6: Irfl'c* '4A*pycLLoXoyt'xfjC "ETaLpetac

PG Patrolbgiae'cursus*completus'. 'Seriies, aei o. -

latina.

PLP Prosopographi'sches' I; exikon 'der Palaiologen-

RE Pauly-Wissowa-Kroll, Real-EncyclopHdie

REB Revue des ttudes Byzantines

RESEE Revue des'ltudes Sud-Est 'Euro]245ennes

RIS Muratori', Rerum Italicarum Scriptores

RSBN Rivista di Studi Bizantini e Neoellenici

 13

TM Travaux et M6moires

VV Vizantijkij Vremenik

ZRVI Zbornik Radova Vizantolokog instituta

 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Collections of sources

Acta Sanctorum Bollandiana (Antwerp-Paris-Rome-Brusselss

1643- )

Acts of Athos

Esphigmenou: J. Lefort, ' Actes d'Esphigmenou (Ar-

chives de 1'Athos, VI: Paris, 1973)

Protaton: D. Papachrysanthou, * Actes du Protaton

(Archives de VAthos, VII: Paris, 1975)

Lavra: P. Lemerle, D. Papachrysanthou, N. Svoro-

nos, A. Guillou, ''Actes''de'Lavra,, II (Ar-

chives de 1' Athos, VIII: Paris, 1977)

de Andrds, Gregorio. ' Catalege *de log Codiceg *griegos de

la Real* Biblioteca, de 'el: Escori'al, Vol. III

(Madrid, 1967)

Annal'i genovesi di Caffaro 'e *de* 'suoi, *conti'nuatori, ed.

L. T. Belgrano and C. Imperiale di Sant' Angelo -
(Fonti per la storia d'Italia, XI-XIV: Genoa-Rome,
1890-1929)

Balard, M. Gdnes et l'Outre-Mer. 1: Les Actes de Caffa

du notai're Lamberto di Sambuceto 1289-1290 (Docu-

ments et recherches sur les pays byzantins, isla-

miques et slaves et leurs actions co=erciales au

moyen age# XII; Paris-11ague, 1973)

 15

Berger, Elie. Les Registres d'Innocent IV, 3 vols. (Bi-

bliothbque des Ecoles Frangaises d'Athbnes et de

Rome, 2e s6rie, I-III: Paris, 1884-97)

Bertolotto, Gerolamo. "Nuova serie di documenti sulle

relazioni di Genova coll'impero bizantino. " Atti

della societA ligure di storia patria, 28(1898),

339-573.

Boissonade, J. F. ' Anecdota Graeca, 5 vols. (Paris, 1829-

33)

Boissonadel J. F. Anecdotac Nova (Paris, 1844)

Buchon, J. A. C. ' Chroniques*6trangt)res .relatives aux ex-

p6ditions'frangaises pendant le XIIIe siacle

(Paris, 1840)

Buchon# J. A. C. Recherches''et: matdriauxpour*servir A

'une histoire de' la domination 'franqaise erf Gr?! ce

(Paris, 1840)

Cessi, R. - M. Brunetti., Le 'del'iberazioni: 'del Consiglio

dei Rogati'(Senato), serie "mixtorum", vol. II,

books 15-16 (Deputazione di Storia Patria per le

Veneziel n. s. XV : Venice, 1961)

Cirillo, Salvatore. 'Codices'Graeci Manuscripti Regiae

Bibliothecae Borboni'cae,, vol. Ii (Naples, 1832)

Darrouz6s, Jean. Notitiae Epi'scopatuum Ecclesiae Con-

stantinopolttanae'. 'Textq pritiquef introduction

et notes (Gdographie eccldsiastique de llempire

byzantin, I : Paris, 1981)

 16

Do-lger, Franz. Regesterl der Kaiserurkunden des ostrb-

mischen Reiches, 5 vols. (Munich-Berlin, 1925-

32, rept. 1960-65)

D61ger, Franz. Facsimiles byzantinischer Kaiserurkunden

(Munich, 1931; rept. Hildesheim, 1976)

D61ger, Franz. Sechs'byzantinisce Praktika (Munich, 1949)

Giomo, Giuseppe. "Lettere di Collegio, rectius Minor Con-

siglio. " Miscellanea di storia Veneta (R. Deputa-

zione si storia patria, 3d ser., I: V enice, 1910)

Hahn, Wolfgang. Moneta Imperii Byzantini, vol III (Ost-

erreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil. -

Hist. Klasse, Denkschriften, 148: Vienna, 1981)

Hendy,, Michael F. Coinageand money In the Byzantine

Empire. ''1081-1'261 (Dumbarton Oaks Studies XII:

Washington D. C., 1969)

Hopfp Charles. * ChroniSjues'-grSco-romanes inddites ou

. 'peu'connues (Berlin, 1873)

Hunger, Herbert-Otto Kresten. Das'Register'des Patriar-

chats von Konstantinopel, vol. 1: 1315-1331 (CFHB,

XIX/l: Vienna, 1981)

Jaff6, P. -G. Wattenbach. Regesta Pontificum Romanorum,

vol. I (Leizig, 1885)

Jorga, N. Notes et extraits pour servir A 11histoire

des croisades au We si? lcle, 6 vols. (Paris,

1899-1916)
Krekid,. Barisa. 'Dubrovnik (Raquse)-etle Levant 'au

moyen Age (Paris, 1961)

 17

Lampros, Spyridon P. HaXatoX6ycta xat ncXonovvncrtax6

4 vols. (Athens, 1912-30)

Laurent, Vitalien. Le Corpus des sceaux de llempire

byzantin, vol. 5: Lldglise (Paris, 1963)

Mansi, J. D. Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima col-

lectio, 31 vols. (Florence-Venice, 1759-98; rpt.

Graz, 1960-62)

Migne, J. P. Patrologiae cursus- 'completus. Series graeco-

latina, 161 vols. (Paris, 1857-66)

Miklosich, F. -J. MUller. ' Acta' *et Di'plomata graeca rnedii

aevi: 'sacra'et 'profana, 6 vols. (Vienna, 1860-90)

Miller, E! Catalogue des manuscrIts qrecs do A biblio-

th8que del"Escurial (Paris,, 1848)

Monumenta Germaniae Hi'storica,, eds. G. H. Pertz,, T. Mom-

sen, e. a. (Hanover, 1826-; -new edition in progress)

Morozzo della Rocca, R. -A. Lombardo. ' Documenti del com-

I mercio Veneziano nei-secolk XI-XIII, vol. I (Rege-

sta Chartarum Italiae: Rome, 1940)

Muratori, L. A. Rerum. 'Italicarum. Scriptores, 25 vols.

(Milanp 1723-51; new edition in progress)

Noiretp H. Documents''inddits* pour'servir A 11histoire

- de la dominatfon lv6ftiti*enn6 'erv Crate de -1,380 A

1485 (Paris# 1892)

Oudot, J. 'Patriarchatus Constantinopolitant Acta Selecta,,

vol. II (Fonti, ser. 11, fasc. IV: Rome 1967)

Partheyl G. Hierocles_Synecdemus et Notitiae graecae E-

piscopatuum (Berlin, 1866)

 18

Pasini, G. -A. Rivautella-F. Berta. Codices Manuscripti

Bibliothecae regii Taurinensis Athenaei (Turin,

1749)

Predelli R. I libri commemoriall della republica di Ve-

.
nezia regesti (1293-1787), 8 vols. (Monumenti sto-

rici publicati della R. Deputazione Veneta in Sto-

ria Patria, lst series: Venicer 1876-1914)

Ralles G. A. -M. Potles. EOVTayua x8v OcCm xaC Qcp&h?

,
Nvols. (Athens, 1852-59)

Ratti Vidulich, Paola. ' Duca di Candia. Bandi 1313-1329

(Fonti per la Storia di Venezia, sect. I: Venice,

1965

Les Rggestes des Actes du Patriarcat de Constantinople

vol. I: Les Actes des Patriarches. eds. V. Grumel,

V. Laurent, J. Darrouze's (Socii Assumptionistae

Chalcedonenses, 1931- ; in progress)

Rubi6 y Lluch, A. Diplomatari de 110rient CatalA (1301-

1409) (Barcelona, 1947)

Sathas, C. N. MvnUcCa *EX; kTlvLuflc 4laToplac. Documents

inMits relatifs A l'histoirede'la Grbce au moyen

age, 9 vols. (Paris, 1880-90)

Schreiner, P. Die byzantinischen Kleinchroniken (CFHB

XII/1-3: Vienna, 1975-79)

Tafel, G. L. F. -G. M. Thomas. Urkunden zur ltesten Handels-

und Staatsgeschichte der Republik Venedig (Fontes

rerum Austriacarum, II, XII-XIV), parts I-III

(Vienna, 1856-7)
 19

Thiriet, F. Rdgestes des d61ib6rations du Senat de Ve-

nise concernant la Romanie, 3 vols. (Paris, 1958-

61)

Thiriet, F. D6lib6rations des Assemb16es Wnitiennes

concernant la Romanie, 2 vols. (Paris, 1966-71)

Thomas, G. M. -R. Predelli, Diplomatarium Veneto-Levanti-

num (1300-1454), 2 vols. (Venice, 1880-99)

Individual sources

Agathias. Agathiae Myrinael Historiarm libri quinque,

ed. R. Keydell (CFHB, 11: Berlin, 1967)

Akindynos, Gregory. 'Letters, ed. R. -J. Loenertz, "Dix-

huit lettres de Grggoire Acindyne analysges et

dat6es". * Byzantita et Franco-graeca (Rome, 1970)

Akropolites, George. 'lli'storial ed. A. Heisenberg (Le-

ipzig, 1903)

Akropolites, George. * Histarlia, ed. 1. Bekker (Bonn,

1837)

Alexander, P, J, "A chrysobull of the Eniperor Andronicus

II Palaeologus in favor of the See of Kanina in

Albania". B, 15(1940-41), 167-207.

Bartolomeo de Neocastro. Hi'stori'a Sicula, ed. G. Paladino,

RIS, new ed. vol. 13, part 3 (Bologna, 1922)

Bees, N. A. T6 "IlepC x1c uTCacG)c TflC MovcuOcLoCac" xpovLx6v,

at nnyaC xat h tcy-roptxA orjuavTLx6Tnc aftoo". RuLav-

-rec, 1(1909), 37-105.

Binon, St. I'Llhistoireetlaldgendededeuxchrysobullesd'An-

dronic II en faveur de monembasiew. EO, 37(1938), 27A-331 .

 20

Canisius, Henricus. Antiquae lectionis. Volume IV.

Part II. "Hodoeporica 2 S. Willibaldi, et eius

vita". (Ingolstadt, 1603), pp. 481-513.

Chalkokondyles, Laonikos. Laonici Chalcocandylae Histo-

riarum Demonstrationes, ed. E. Dark6,2 vols.

(Budapest, 1922-27)

Chomatianos, Demetrios. Ed. J. Pitra, Analecta Sacra et

Classica Spicilegio Solesmensi Parata, VI (Rome,

1981)

Chomatianos, Demetrios. Ed. G. Prinzing Die nOVAILaTCL

,
6L&pop(x des Demetrios Chomatenos (Munster, 1980)

The Chronicle of the Morea, ed. J. Schmitt (London,

1904; rpt. Groningen, 1967)

Comnena, Anna. 'Alexiadl eds. L. Schopen-A. Refferscheid,

2 vols. (Bonn, 1839-78)

Constantine Porphyrogenitus. *De Thematibus. Ed. A. Per-

tusi (Studi e Testi, 160) (Vatican City, 1952)

Constantine Porphyrogenitus. De administrando imperio.

Eds. Gy. Moravcsik-R. J. H. Jenkins (Washington

D. C. , 1968)

Da Canal, Martin. La Chronique des Veniciens du maistre

Martin da Canal: Cronaca Veneta del Maestro Mar-

tino da Canale dall'origine della cittA, sino all'

'anno MCCLXXV. Ed. F. -L. Polidori, transl. G. Gal-

vani (Archivio Storico Italiano, VIII: Florence,

1845) p 229-766.
 21

Danduli, Andreae. Chronicon, RIS, vol. 12 (Milan, 1728)

cols. 1-524.

Dujcev, Ivan. Cronaca di Monemvasia (Istituto Siciliano

di Studi Bizantini e Neoellenici. Testi, 12: Pa-

lermo, 1976)

Enveri. Le Destan d'Umar Pacha (DUstarname-i Enverl),

ed. Irane Mdlikoff-Sayar (Bibliothaque Byzantine,

Documents, 2: Parisp 1954)

Eustathius of Thessaloniki. Ed. 1. Bekker (after Leo

Grammatidus) (Bonn, 1842. )

"MVTIILCrCL MCCFCLLCo)VLXAC 'EXXnVLXAC
Gedeon, Manuel. TIOLA-

accaC". "ExxXnGLaaTLU *AXA8CLCL, 3(1882-3) 201-05;

,
4 (1883-4) 223-26.
,
Genesius. Ed. C. Lachmann (Bonn, 1834)

Georgius Monachus Continuatus. Ed. I. Bekker (after The-

ophanes Continuatus) (Bonn, 1838)

Gregorast Nikephoros. Byzantiba: Ifistoria. Ed. L. Schopen,

3 vols. (Bonn, 1829-55)

Ilierokles. Le Synekd6mos'dlHilSroklL'As *et llopuscule gdo-

graphique de Georges'd6 Chypre. Ed. E. Honigmann

(Corpus Bruxellense Historiae Byzantinae. Forma

Imperii Byzantini. Fasc. I: Brussels, 1939)

Histori'a Politica, et Patriarchica Cons tantinopol eos. Ed.

I. Bekker (Bonn, 1849)

Isidorus Archiepiscopus Kiovensis et totius Russiae. Ser-

mones inter Concilium r1orentinum conscripti. Eds.

G. Hoffmann-E. Candal (Concilium Florentinum, Docu-

menta et scriptores, X/I: Rome, 1971)

 22

Kinnamos, Ioannis. Historia. Ed. A. Meineke (Bonn, 1836)

Kritoboulos of Imbros. De rebus per annos 1451-1467 a

Mechemete II gestis. Ed. V. Grecu (Bucarest, 1963)

Kougeast S. "'EnC ToG xcLXoulitvou "XpovLxoG Tfir. MovclLocL-

aftLC" . NE, 9 (1912) , 473-80.

Kydones, Demetrios. Letters. Ed. R. -J. Loenertz, a6m6-

trius Cydon6s, Correspondance, 2 vols. (Studi e

Testi, 186,208)(Vatican City, 1956,1960)

Lampros, S. P. "MoveliDamartud". TT(xpvaac6c:, 7(1883),

471-76.

Lampros, S. P. "T6 ncpt xTCaccaC TIC MovcjiDcLcrCac XPOVLx6v".

'IOTOPLUdL MEXCTAUaTa (Athens, 1884), 97-128.

Lampros, S. p. nTaDouXXcLpLx6v ypdLujia ToO IA* cLtOvocu-

AIEE, 5(1900)p 159-60.

Lampros, S. P. Ecthesis*Chroni*ca' and Chronicon Athena-

. rum (London, 1902; rpt. Chicago, 1979)

Lampros, S. P. "Wor. x(MLE 'rofJ XpovLxoG Movclipaotar. ". HE,

9 (1912) , 245-51.

Lampros, S. P. "A130 &VCUpOpalJ1nTPOnOXCTOU

MoveliDoLalac

np6c T6v naTpLdpXnv". NE# 12(1915), 257-318.

Laurent, V. "Les bulles m6triques dans la Sigillographie
byzantine". 'EXknvt, xci, 4(1931), 210-11.
Laurent, V. "La liste episcopale du Synodicon de Monem-

vasie". EO, 32(1933), 129-61.

Laurent, V. "Le Vaticanus Latinus 4789: IV. Alliances et

filiations des Cantacuzbnes au We sibclew. REB,

(1951 ), 64-105.
 23

Laurent, V. "Les faux de la diplomatique patriarcale:

un pri5tendu acte synodale en faveur de la m6tro-

pole de Monembasie". REB, 210963), 142-58.

Lemerle, P. "La Chronique improprement dite de Monemva-

sie: le contexte historique et 16gendaire". REB,

21(1963), 5-49.

Leo Grammaticus. *Chronographia. Ed. I Bekker (Bonn,

1842)

Libro' de los*. Fechos' et Con'qui'stas' del Pr'incipado de la

Morea. Ed. A. Morel-Fatio (Geneva, 1885; rpt. Osna-

brUck, 1968)

Livre' de la Conqueste' de la: PrfftcftCde Chroni-

que de Mor6e, ' 1,204-1305. Ed. J. Longnon (Paris,

1911)

Ljubid, Sime. 'Llstine (Monumenta spectantia Historiarum

Slavorum meridionalium: Akademia scientiarum et

artum slavorum, vol. 22: Zagreb, 1891)

Loenertz, R. -J. "Res Gestae Theodori loann. F. Palaeo-

logi. Titulus metricus A. D. 1389". =BE, 25 (1955)

207-10.

Loenertz, R. --j. "Lettres de George Bardanos m6tropolite

de Corcyre au patriarche oecum6nique Gemain II

(1226-1227c)"., EEBE, 33(1964), 87-118.

Lopez, R. S. "Il principio della guerra veneto-turca nel

1463". Archivio' Veneto, 5th ser. 15(1934), 45-131.

Manuel II Palaeologus. Funeral, Orati=on hi's brother

Theodore. Ed. J. Chrysostomides (CFHB, XXVI: Thessa-

loniki, 1985)
 24

Mazaris' Journey to Hades or Interviews with deadmen

about certain officials of the Imperial court.

Eds. J. N. Barry, M. J. Share, A. Smithies, L. G.

Westerink (Buffalo, 1975)

Medvedev, I. R. "Pozdine kopii vizantijskich dokumentov

v sobranij Biblioteki Akademij Nauk CCCP'l. VV, 32

(1971 ), 223-31
.
Meletios. rccoypapCa TEaXaLdL
xaC v6a, (Venice, 1728)

Messarites, Nicolaos. Ed. A. Heisenberg, "Neue Quellen

zur Geschichte des lateinischen Kaisertums und

der Kirchenunion. 111. Der Bericht des Nikolaos

Messarites ber die politischen und kirchlichen

Ereignisse des Jahres 1214". 'Quel, l*en undStudi: en

zur 'gptbyz'aritihi: scheri 'Ges*chLchte, no. * III (London:

Variorum Reprints, 1973).

Michael Choniates. MLxaAX 'AHOULvdLTOU TOO XwvLdT02 TdL

owCfteva, ed. S. P. Lampros, 2 vols. (Athens, 1879-

80)

Muhammed Ibn Muhammadd al Idrisi.. * G6o*graphie, d'rdrisi.

Ed. A. Jaubert, 2 vols. (Paris, 1836-40)

Muhammed Ibn Muhammadd al Idrisi. K. Miller, Die Welt-

karte' *des' 'Idr'is'i* 'vom *Jahr' 1,154 ri. Chr. (Stutt-

gart, 1928)

Muntaner, Ramon. ' The Chronlcle'of Muntaner, tr. Lady

Goodenough, 2 vols. (The Hakluyt Society, 2nd

ser., 47,50: London, 1920-91)

Nicetas Choniates. Historia, Ed. I. A. van Dieten (CFHB

XI/1 : Berlin, 1975)

 25

Nicolaos (Katrames), Archbishop of Zante. OLXoXoyLudL

'A'VdLXEX-UCL6x ZOLX6'VOOU(Zante, 1880)

Hosios Nicon. "b OCoc_ ToG NCxcovoC ToG Me-rcxvoeU-cF-". Ed.

S. P. Lampros, NE, 3(1906), 131-228.

Hosios Nicon. Od. Lampsides, 40 eX H6VTOU O"CrLoGNCxwv

6 Me-ravor-t-re. KE: CliE:,vcL, ox6>. LCL (*ApXeUov 116vTous

ITapdLp-cillicL 13; Athens, 1982)

Partitio Terrarum Imperil Romanie. Ed. A. Carile, Studi

Veneziani, 7(1965), 125-305.

Pausanias. Ed. J. H. C. Schubart (Leipzig: Teubner, 1881)

Peeters, P. "Miraculum Sanctorum Cyri et Johannis in

urbe Monembasia". 'Anal. Boll., 25(1906), 233-40.

Peeters, P. "Une invention des SS. Val6re, Vincent et

Eulalie dans le P61oponnase". * 'Ariad'. Boll., 30

(1911 )1 296-301
.
Pegolotti, Francesco Balducci. ' La inerca-

'tura. Ed. Al. Evans (Mediaeval Society of America:

Cambridge, Mass., 1936)

Pepagomenos, Demetrios. Gudrun Schmalzbauer, "Eine bisher

unedierte Monodie auf Kleope Palaiologina von De-

metrios Pepagomenos". 'JOB, 20(1971), 223-243.

Philotheos, Patriarch of Constantinople,, Beog xcLe IIoXt-

-CCCa Hat 6YX(bVtLOV TOG 6V- &YtOL9 TEcL-rp6g ft8v 'IGL-

MPOU, TIa-[PL&pXou KcovcrravTLvoun6Xcwg. Ed. A. Papa-

dopoulos-Kerameus, * Zitija d-,,-uh vsel*enskih patri*ar-

hov XIV veka (Zapiski istorikofilologiceskago Fakul-

jtet imperatorskago S. Peterburskago universiteta,

76: St. Petersbourg, 1905)

 26

Philotheos, Patriarch of Constantinople. Btog dLyCou *I-

GL86POU ITOL-CPLdLPXOUKW'VqTa-v-rVvouTE6XF-(ac. Ed. D. G.

,
Tsamis, OLXoa6ou K(ovcTavTLvoun6Xcwc ToO KoxxCvou.

4AYLOXOYLU& 9PY(X ( K6vTpov BuCavTLv8v 'Epeuv8v 1:

Thessaloniki, 1985)

Piccolomini, Enea Silvio. Pii Secundi Pontificis Max.

Commentarli Rerum Memorabilium. Ed. J. Gobellinus

(Frankfurt, 1614)

Piccolomini, Enea Silvio. "The'Commentaries'of Pius II.

Books IVandV". Eds. W. D. Gray-H. V. Faulkner,

trans. F. Gragg, 'Smith College Studies in History,

30. (1946) -*
..
Pliny. ' Natural History. Ed. R. Rackham, (London-Cambridge

Mass: Loeb Classical Library, 1961)

Pseudo-Dorotheos. BLDXCov taTopLx6v TEepLdxov tv cruv&sL

8LCL(p6pouQ xaC 6E6xouc tcrropCac (Venice, 1761)

Pseudo-Kodinos. Ed. J. Verpeaux, 'Ps*eudo-Kodi'ncfs*, 'Trai--

tA- des offices (Paris, 1966)

Pseudo-Phrantzes (see Sphrantzes)

Raynaldus, Odoricus. ' Arirfa: l*es' ECcle'slastlci (K61n, 1693)

Regel, W. Analecta Byzantino-russica (St. Petersbourg,

1891-98)

Riedinger, R. ' Die Pr'a'senz- und*S'ubscriptionsli*sten

VI. 'oekumeni'scherl Konzi*ls '(680*/81')' und 'der Papy-

rus Vind. G. 3 (Bayerische Akad. der Wissenschaften,

Philos. -Hist. Klasse, Abhandlungen. New series

no. 85: Munich, 1979)

 27

Saint Theodore of Kythera. "40 DCog -voG "AyCou 8eo66-

3
pou Kuapcov (10og cLC. ) (12 Matou, BHG 2430)"

Ed. N. Oikonomides, Acts of the 3d Panionian Con-

gress, I (Athens, 1967) 264-91.

Schreiner, Peter. "Ein Prostagma Andronikos' III. fr

die Monembasioten in Pegai (1328) und das gefl-

schte Chrysobull Andronikos' II. fUr die Monemba-

sioten im byzantinischen Reich". *JB, 27(1978),

203-28.

Skylitzes, Ioannis. *Synopsi's histori'arum. Ed. I. Thurn

(CFHB V: Berlin-New York, 1973)

Specialis, Nicolaus. Historka: Sicula, RIS, vol. 10 (Mi-

lan, 1727), cols. 917-1092.

Sphrantzes, George. *Chrord'coft Minus. Georgios Sphran-

tzes, * Memo'ril T401-1,48T. * Ift 'anexa: Pseudo-Phran-

*tz'e's*: ' Ma:carle Mellsselics*, ' Croni'c'a: 1258-1481 Ed.

.
V. Grecu (Bucarest, 1966)

Strabo. Ed. -tr. H. L. Jones (London: Loeb Classical Li-

brary, 1961)

Symeon Magister. Ed. I Bekker (after Theophanes Conti-

nuatus) (Bonn, 1838)

Le Synodikon de Ilorthodoxie. Ed. J. Gouillard; W. 2

(1967), 1-304.

Syropoulos, Sylvester. Ed. V. Laurent,, * Les "Mdmoires"

du Grand Eccl6siarque Syl*vestre'Syropoulos'sur

le Concile de Fl'orence, (1'438-1439) (Concilium

Florentinum. Documenta et scriptores, IX: Rome,

1971)
 28

Tachiaos, A. -E. "The Testament of Photius Monembasiotes,

Metropolitan of Russia (1408-1431): Byzantine Ide-

ology in the XVth century Muscovy". Cyrillometho-

dianum, 8-9 (1984-85) 77-109.

,
Theophanes. Chronographia. Ed. C. de Boor, 2 vols. (Le-

ipzig, 1883; rpt. Hildesheim 1963)

Theophanes Continuatus. Ed. I. Bekker (Bonn, 1838)

Villehardouin, Geoffroy de. ' La Corqudte-de Constantino-

ple. Ed. N. de Wailly (Paris, 1874)

Villehardouin, G'eoffroy de. ' La: ConquA-te*"de' Constantino-

ple. Ed. Ed. Faral, 2 vols. (Paris, 1938-39)

Westerink, L. G. "Marginalia by Arethas in Moscow Greek

MS. 231 " 42 (1972) 196-244.

.'B, ,
Ziegler, A. W. "Vier bisher nicht verffentlichte griechi-

sche Briefe isidors von Kijev". 'BZ, 44(1951),

570-77.

Ziegler, A. W. "Die restlichen vier unverffentlichten

Briefe Isidors von KijeV". * OCP, 180952), 135-42.

Ziegler, A. W. "Unverbffentlichte Gebete Isidors von

Kijev" OCP, 21 (1955) 327-34.

.' ,
 Modern Works

Abrahamse, Dorothy Z. ' Haqlogra'phfc* 'sources 'for Byzantine

cities' 500'-900 A. D. (PhD Diss., University of Mi-

chigan) (Ann Arbor, 1967)

Ahrweiler, H6lane. * Byzanc*e 'e*t '1'z( Me'r. ' Le( marine de

'guerre, ' la '1*e*s Irfstitutions mariti-

Ines* 'de' Byzance -a:ux VI, I-e,-xVe 'siE)cles (BibliothP--

que Byzantine. rtudes 5: Paris, 1966)

Allen, P. "The "Justinianic" Plague". *B,, 49(1979), 5-20.

Amantos, c. rx6)acrLxa mexe-mi-ta-ra (Athens, 1964)

Anastos, M. "The transfer of Illyricum, Calabria and

Sicily to the jurisdiction of the Patriarchate

of Constantinople". * STI: l'o*g6 BIZantilia: Tft 'onore

'di 'S. G. * Me'rcra:ti (Rome, 1957) 14-31.

Andrews, Kevin. *Czcstl*es*o*f'the Morea (Gennadeion Mono-

graphs IV: Princeton, 1953)

Angold, Michael. "The shaping of the medieval Byzantine

City". * B*yz'aritlni*sch6 Fo'fs'chuftgen, 10 (1985) -11 .

,1
Antoniadis-Bibicou, Mane. * Rechercheg'surle's'Douanes

2L Byzance (Cahiers des Annales, 20: Paris, 1963)

Antoniadis-Bibicou, Mane. * 'Etudes-d'histolre*mari: time

de Byzance. *A *propos du"'thame deg'Ca: ravisiens"

(Paris, 1966)

Athenagoras of Paramythia and Filiata. '_H MnTp6TtoXLq

Moveiii3aaCaQ (Athens, 1930)

 30

Aupert, P. "Uramique Slave a Argos (585 ap. 7. C. )".

BCH (Supplgment VI. ttudes Argiennes: Athens,

1980), 373-94.

Avramea, Anna. "NOJILGLaTLROC "OnCaUPOV' XCLC UCUOVW116VCL

vo4CovtcL-rcL dLTt6 *rtv rIeXoTE6vvTlcyo (ET'-Z 'CLC

.)".
Z,6tjic Lx-ra, (19 8 3)
,49-89.
Barker, J. W. ' Manuel TI* Palae'ologus' '(1*391'-1'425). A -study

in Late'Byzantin'e'Statesmanship (New Brunswick,

N. J., 1969)

Bees, N. A. Ot' XaLdLpc-roL'. `Iq-ropLA6'v 'KaC yE:vcaXo*yLK6, v

cMLcCcojiq (Athens, 1903)

Bees, N. A. ""0 "EXx6lLevog: XPLCFT(5(C TfIC: MOVCLDCLC7ICLr- JIF-Tdt

TCCLPEXDdLCYE:
(OV TCCPCTfIC a6T68L T'rjQ XPUCrCL(PL-
nCLVOLYCCLr.

-cCacyng" .' BNJB, 10 (1933-34) 199-262.

,
Bees, N. A. A MO'VE:UDCLCYL6TL(7CTCLII*'
"ITCLVCLYCOL "'E(P-TIIICPCQ HPOL"Cit

20. IX. 1942.

BeliS, Heleni. "Z-UCL"CLCrCtXd aTOLXCEa 'rftC 6TZCLPXCCLQ'Entba6-

pou ALjiTjpdg". AaxwvLxcLe Znou8ae (1980) 60-117.

,5 ,
Bibliotheca' Hagiographi: c'a: La'Uria:. Antiqua: e 'et mediae 'aeta-

- tis. Eds. Socii Bollandiani. I-11 (Brussels, 1898-

1901); Supplement (Brussels, 1911)

Boak, A. E. R. -W. G. Sinningen. A history of Rome to A. D.

565 (London, 1965)

Bodnar, P. E. W. Cyriacus'of Ancona and Athens (Collection

Latomus, XLIII. - Brussels, 1960)

Bon, Antoine. Le P6'1'oponnP-se Byzantin jusqulen 1204

(Biblioth8que Byzantine. ttudes, 1: Paris, 1951)

 31

Bon, Antoine. La Mor6e Franque. Recherches historiques,

topographiques et arch6ologiques sur la Princi-

paut6 d'Achale (1205-1430) (Biblioth6que des E-

coles Franqaises d'Ath6nes et de Rome, 213: Paris,

1969)

Bosch, Ursula V. Kaiser Andronikos III. Palaiologos.

Versuch einer Daestellung der byzantinischen Ge-

schichte in den Jahren 1321-1341 ( Amsterdam,

1965)

Bouras, Ch. "City and Village: Urban Design and Archi-

tecture". ' 'Acts, 'o'f* the' l6th International Byzantine

Congre'ss, vol. 12 (Vienna, 1981), 611-653.

Bourazeli, Heleni. "*H MO'VOD&CLa (-La) XCLC A LOVOP&TLCL

(-LdL) ". IlXdL-cwv (1953) 255-78
,5 , .
Bratianu, G. ' PriViIZ'ge's' 'et 'frarichise's* lnuniclpales dans

*1"Emp'ire' By=atin (Bucarest-Paris, 1936)

Brdhier, Louis. ' lies' -iris ti tutkofts de' 11' ernpire byzantin

(Paris, 1970)

Brouskari, Ersi. "'ELTEOPLXQ UEPM6TELEC TOO UnTPOnO-

XCTTI (DLXOL8E:X(PEccLc rcLDPL4X ECDPOQ. MLdL tTtLCFTOA. A

TOG MLXCLAX EDTIPOO (1612) ". 8TjcrcLupCcrucL-ccL,18

(1981), 307-24.

Bryer, A. -D. Winfield. * The B*yz'anti: ne Monuments 'and topo-

-graphy of''the Pontos ( Dumbarton Oaks Studies,

XX: Washington, D. C., 1985)

Byzantine Museum. KcLTdLXoyog: NEXIDCCMYLdL TdL txcxT6 xo6-

vLa Tfig XpLcYTLavLKflQ' *Apx(xLoXoy'txfj'Q' "EratpE: CcLQ

(1884-1984) (Athens, 1984)

 32

BcvcTCcL HeXoTcovvaou
CalogerAs, C. MovctoaoCa, Tflg

(Athens, 1955)

Caratzas, S. C. Les Tzacones (Supplementa Byzantina, 4:

Berlin-New York, 1976)

Caratzas, S. C. "'rHTCLV (PLXOTt6XE:jIOL dLTE6XCIIOL Ot DUCaV-

TL VO C ITE:XOTEOVVa L0L ETEL OTTILOV L lt ' Ene TTI PCc

ViC OLXO(: YO(pt. Rflg EXOXfi(;: TOO rIOLN)E:TELCY-CnjlCOU E)E:CFCYCL>,

O-

vCxTIC, 17(1978) 125-38.

,

Carile, A. ' 'Per Una: 'storia: 'dell" Impero latino 'di Constan-

tinopol'i '(1204-1261) (Bologna, 1972)

Cartb ledge, Paul.. 'Sparta: 'and La: co*fti: a:. ' A Regional History

1 '1300-362 B'C. (London-Boston-Henley, 1979)

Chalandon, F., Les, 'ComnP-'n*e"s'.

' JeArf ComnAane' '(11,18-1,143)

.et Manuel Comn6tfe (1143-1180) (Paris, 1912)

Charanis, P. "The Chronicle oE Monemvasia and the que-

stion of the slavonic settlements in Greece".

DOP, 50950), 141-66.

Charanis, P. "On the capture of Corinth by the Onogurs

and its recapture by the Byzantines". *Specul'um,

27 (1952) 34 3-50.
,
Charanis, P. "The transfer of populationas a policy in

the Byzantine Empire". ' Stisdies' 'oft the Demography

'of the Byzantine' Erapilre, no. III (London: Vario-

rum Reprints, 1972)

Charanis, P. "Some remarks relating to the history of

the Byzantine Empire in the seventh century".

Tribute to Andreas' N. * Stratos. Ed. N. A. Stratos

(Athens, 1986), vol. 1,59-64.

 33

Chassiotis, J. K. I
MaRCLPLOC, Ge68capog xcLC Mxnp6poc ot

MEXLGCY'n'VOC (MEXLGCFOUpYOC) ( Thessaloniki, 1966)

Cherf, W. J. The Dhema Pass and its early Byzantine For-

tifications, Topography, Archaeology (PhD disser-

tation: Loyola University of Chicago) (Ann Arbor,

1984)

Chrimes, K. M. T. Analent Sparta. ' Are-examination of the

evidence (Manchester, 1949)

Christidis, V. 4H XCLTdLXntnTfjQ KpATnc dLn6 To6c *ApaocQ

824) ( Athens, 1982)

Christidis, V. " The raids of the Moslems in Crete and

the Aegean sea. Piracy and Conquest". B, 51(1981),

76-111.

Chrysanthopoulos, Ep. "IICPC TOO XPOVLROID TflQ MOVeIID(YCYC-',

ac". LEBE, 21(1951) 238-53.

o,
Chrysostomides, J. "Corinth 1394-97: Some new facts".

BUCaV-rLVdL, 7 (1975) 83-110

r 1 .
Chryssos, E. C. "Ot cy-uAv riE:XoTc6vvTicyo C396-397
BYICTL-Y6'rltDOL

VL.X. )". 'Acts'of the'2rid'International Congress of

Peloponnes-i'aii Studies, vol. li (Athens, 1981-2)

181-91.

Claude, D. Die byzantinische Stadt Im ! Jahrhundert

(Munich, 1969)

Curtius, E. ', Peloponnesos. 2 vols. (Gotha, 1851-52)

Da Costa-Louillet, G. "Saints de Gr6ce aux VIIIe, IXe

et Xe si6cles". B, 31(1961), 344-46.

Daremberg, Ch. -E. Saglio. Dictionnaire'des Antiquit6s

Gracques et Romaines (Paris, 1875-1919)

 34

DarrouzOs, Jean. "Ekth6sis Nea. Manuel des pittakia du

XIVe siicle". REB, 27(1969), 1-127.

Darrouzas, Jean. Le R6gistre Synodal du Patriarcat by-

zantin*au XIVe'si8cle ( Archives de l'Orient La-

s
tin, 12: Paris, 1971)

Darrouz6s, Jean. "Listes 6piscopales du Concile de Ni-

c6e" . REB, 33 (1975) 1-76

, .
Darrouz6s, 'Jean. "Notes inddites de transferts 6pisco-

paux". REB, 400982), 157-72.

Darrouz6s, Jean. "Sur les variations num6riques des 6v&-

ch6s yzantins". ' REB, 44(1986), 5-44,

Delehaye, H. ' Les 16gezides, hagIographiques (Brussels,

1955)

Dennis, G. T. ' The relgri 'of MaMlel' TI- Pal'a: eologus 'in

Thessalonica, ''1382-: 1387 ( Orientalia Christiana

Analecta, 159: Rome, 1960)

Diehl, Charles. '-L'AfrIque Byzahtihe (Paris, 1896)

Diller, Aubrey. "The Scholia of Strabo". * Traditio, 10

(1954), -29-50.

Dokos, K. '"R 6V nCXOnOVVAaCp6XXXnaLao-rLxA nCPLOUaftL

Ra-C& TAV Ttepeo5ov Wig B"Eve-roxpcL-rCag"., BNJB,

21 (1971 -74) 43-168; 22 Cl 977-84) 285-374

, , .
Do'llger, Franz-j. Karayannopoulos. ' Byzantinische Urkun-

denlehre. I. Die'Kaiserurkunden (Munich, 1968);

2nd ed. by J. Karayannopoulos. BUCCLVTLv ALnXCOjLCL-

TLxA. A. A6ToxpCLTOPLX(i *EyypcLq)cL (BUCCLVTLVdLXEC-

IICVCL X(I VLEXTCLLI 4: Thessaloniki, 1972)

 35

Dlger, Franz. Beitrge zur Geschichte der byzantinis-

chen Finanzverwaltung (Leipzig-Berlin, 1927)

D61ger, Franz. BZ, 310931), 439-42.

Dblger, Franz. Byzantini'sche Diplomatik (Ettal, 1956)

Drandakis, N. B. "Ex(x(pL-K(xCEpE:uvcxL 6-v KunapCocY4) -cfjr_ MdL-

'VTIQ"- TIAE '. (l 95 8)

,
19 9 -217.

Drandakis, N. B. "Ac6lievoL &YLOL 6TCC TOG TC-UOLP-COCF(PCLtPCOU

& I E)OC E: Cg 6jjxXTcF I cLg -rfl C M&yCL mdL-vTl C". 'ApXa L OXOY L Rd
_

*AvdLXex-ra 6E 'AaTlvC)-v, 4 (1971) 232-39.

,
Drandakis, N. B. -N. Ghiol6s-C. Constantinides. "4AvcLoxcL-

(A a-c6 TT)ydLVL -[fig Md'v'nQ" . MAE (1978) , 183-91 .

Drandakis, N. B. -N. Ghiolds-E. Dori-S. Kalopissi-V. Ke-

petzi-C. Constantinides-M. Constantoudaki-M. Pana-

yotides. "'EpE:, uva cy-cAv 'ETEC6cLupo ALlInP6". HAE

(1982), 349-466.

Drandakis, N. B. -S. Kalopissi-M. Panayotides. ""Eosuva

cr-rAv 'ETtCbaUpo ALIITlP(i". ITAE (1983) A', 209-263.

Ducellier, Alain. * La' fa: q'ade maritime' 'dq I'Albanie au

Mcyeri Age'. ' Durazzo' *et Valona 'dif Xle 'au 'siecle
_xVo
(Institute for Balkan Studies, 177:. Thessaloniki,

1981)

Duval, N. -V. Popovid. "Urbanisme et Topographie Chrd-

tienne dans les provinces s6ptentrionales de l'

Illyricum". ' Reports'of*the'10th International

Congress of Christian*Archeology (Thessaloniki,

1980), 369-402.

Dvornik, F. * Les S*l'ave's', * Byzancef 'et Rome 'au *IXe .siP-cle

(Athens, 1926)
 36

Edwards, K. M. "Report on coins found in Corinth". He-

speria, 6(1935), 241-56.

Eickhoff, E. Seekrieg und Seepolitik zwischen Islam

und Abendland (650-1040)_ (Berlin, 1966)

Etzeoglou, Rodoniki. 'tIIcxXcLLoyptcyrLcLvLxA BcLcrLLxA Tcctp

-ro6r- MoXdLoug AaxwvCa(; ". AE (1974)

,
244-57.

Etzeoglou, Rodoniki. " Nta &PX(XLOXO'YLXdL 8660LVCL LdL

-C DU[a'V-CLVA MovejiDaaCa". ' Acts' 'of 'the lst 'Inter-

national Congress-of Peloponnesian'Studies, II

(Athens, 1976-78), 320.

Evangelatou-Notara, Florentia. 11"H me.%D6,

vTl . a*r(xal16(; cFrA

TCLEC6La PUCCLV-rLV@'V alftoxpa-r6pcov aT Alkm". IleXo-

Tto-vvTlaLcLxdL, 16 (1986) , 97-107.

Failler,, A. "Les insignes et la signature du Despote".

REB, 40 (1982) 171-86.

,
Faklaris, P. B. 4ApxcL6cL KuvoupkL. ' "Avap6TtLvYl 5PcLcy"uTIPL6

TnTcL ncpLDAXXov (*ApLa-voTX640 n(XVentO-rAJILO.

xcLC
'ETCLG-rTjjlOVLlt4 *ETTe-rTlptc OtXocToqtxftc ExoXflg. HcL-

PdLPTTIIICL 54: Thessaloniki, 1985)

Falcetta, Caterina. "Racconto di Paolo di Monembasia

sull'Eremita Pirro e il "Demota" Sergio. RSBN,

2-3 (1965-66) 189-91

, .
Falier-Papadopoulos, J. B. "Les r6liques des SS. ValA-re,

Vincent et Eulalie et le Castel Damalet". Miscel-

'lanea Giovanni' Mercati, III (Studi e Testi, 123:

Vatican City, 1946), 360-63.

 37

Fallmereyer, J. P. Geschichte der Halbinsel Morea wh-

rend des Mittelalters (Stuttgart-Tbingen, 1830;

rpt. Hildesheim, 1965)

Fallmereyer, J. P. Fragmente aus dem Orient (Stuttgart-

Tubingen, 1845)

Ferjancid, B. * Despoti* u Vi'zantiji* I jusnoslovenskim

zemlama, (Belgrade, 1960)

Ferluga, J. ' Byzantium on the Balkans (Amsterdam, 1976)

FestugiE)re, A. J. ''SaInte' Th6cle, 'Saints C6me et Damien,

Saints' Cyr et Jeaft '(extraits)', ' Saint George

(Paris, 1971)

Fonkid, B. L. ' Drevnerus'sko'6 'i's'skusstvo. ' Rukopii'snaja

. kniga (Moscow, 1972)

Fonkid, B. L. "Nikolai Karadza i Leningradskij sbornik

bizantijskich dokumentob". * VV, 37(1976), 140-50.

Gabrielli, F. "Greeks and Arabs in the central Mediter-

ranean area". ' DOP, 18 (1964), 59-65.

Geanakoplos, D. J. "Greco-Latin relations on the eve

of the byzantine restoration: the battle of Pe-

lagonia, 1259"V DOP, 7(1953), 99-135.

Geanakoplos, D. J. ' Emperor Michael' Pa:l*aeol*ogus and the

West (1258-1'282)'. ' A studyln Byzantine-Latin re-

lations (Cambridge Mass., 1959)

Gerola, G. "Le Fortificazzioni di Napoli di Romania".

Annuarlo della'Regi'aC Scuola Archeologica di*Ate-

ne, 13-14 (1930-31), 347-410.

Gerola, G. "L'effige del Despota Giovanni Cantacuzeno".

6(1931) 379-87.
,
 t

38

Gill, J. Personalities of the Council of Florence and

other Essays (Oxford, 1964)

Graebner, M. D. The role of the Slavs within the Byzan-

tine Empire, 500-1018 (PhD dissertation Rutgers

University) (Ann Arbor, 1975)

Graf, G. Geschichte der christlicheftarabischen Lite-

ratur, 2 vols. (Studi e Testi 118,133: Vatican

City, 1944-47)

Gregory, T. E. "The Late Roman wall at Corinth". He'spe-

ria, 48 (1979), 264-80.

Gregory, T. E. "Fortification and Urban Design in Early

Byzantine Greece", in R. L. Hohlfelder,. ed. *. Ci'ty,,

To*wft 'arid Couritryslde *i*rf the Early Byzantipq Era

(East European monographs, 120. Byzantine series

1: New York, 1982), 43-64.

Guglielmotti, A. ' 'Sto'ri*aC del'IaC Ma:rkria: PoritifIcia, 10

VOls. (Rome, 1886-93)

Guilland, R. ' Recherches' byzantines,

2 vols. (Berliner Byzantinische Arbeiten, 35:

Berlin, 1967)

Guillet, Andr6 Georges Cde la Guiletiore). ' Lac6d6mone

. aftcienne et nouve'l1e, 2 vols. (Paris, 1676)

Halkin, Fr. ' Rib*l': Lothe'ca Raqi*ographi'ca graeca, 3 vols.

(Brussels, 1957)

Halkin, Fri AuctAriUm Bibliothecas Hagiographicae grae-

. cae (Brussels, 1969)

 39

Hayer, D. "Saint George pr6s de Skala (Laconie)".

AXAE, Ttep. A' l2 (1984) 265-86

, .

Heisenberg, A. Quellen und Studien zur sptbyzantini-

schen Geschichte (London: Variorum Reprints, 1973)

Hermann, E. "Appunti sul diritto metropoli. tano nella

chiesa bizantina". OCP, 13 (1947), 522-55.

Herrin, Judith. "Realities of Byzantine Provincial

Government: Hellas and Peloponnesos, 1180-1205".

DOP, 29 (1975), 253-87.

Hetaireia MeletonPerivallontos. N6TLO9

HcXon6vv'naog.
MeXftn 'AvaTc-ri5Eccocj,I (Athens, 1974)

Heyd, W. Histoi're' dil commerce dil Levant au Tnoyen-age,

2 vols. (Leipzig, 1885-86)

Hitti, P. K. * History of the Arabg 'from the earliest times

. tothe present (London, 1956)

Rohlfelder, R. L., "Migratory people's incursions into

central Greece in the late sixth century: New

evidence from Kencreai", ' Acts' 'of* the 14th Inter-

natibnaci Byzantitie Congress, III (Bucarest, 1976)

,
333-338.

Hohlfelder, R. L. "Trans-Isthmian Walls in the Age of

Justinian". 'GRBS, 18 (1977), 173-79.

Hohlfelder, R. L. *TheCoins, vol. III of Kenchree's

. Eastern*Port of Corinth (Leiden, 1978)

Hopf, K. Geschicht'e Griechenlands, 2 vols. (Ersch-

Gruber, Allgemeine Encyklopdie, vols. 85-86:

Leipzig, 1867-68)
 40

Horn, Heinrich. Foederati*. Untersuchungen zur Geschi-

.chte ihrer Rechsstellung im Zeitalter der rmi-

schen Republik unddes frhen Principats (Frank-

furt, 1930)

Hunger, H. Prooimion. * Elemente der byzantinischen Kai-

seridee in den Arengen der Urkunden (Wiener By-

zantinische Studien, 1: Vienna-Graz-Ko*ln, 1964)

Hunger, H. ' Johannes Chort'asmeno's'*(cz(. l'370-ca. *1436/37)

. Brief e', ' GedIchte und k'l*efne Schriften (Wiener By-

zantinische Studien, VII: Vienna, 1969)

Huxley, G. L. "The second Dark Age of the Peloponnese".

Act)icavLuctt Enou8C t3 (1977) 84-110

, .
Imhaus, Brunehilde. "EnchP-res des'fiefs et vignobles

de la RA-publique V6nitienne en Crate-au XiVe si-

acle". EEBE, 41 (1974)t 195-210.

Jacoby, D. "Un aspect de fiscalit6 V6nitienne dans le

P61oponnase aux XIVe et XVe siacles: le lzovati-

cum". '. *Soci6t6 'et d6mographie'a Byzanco et en

Romanie latine (London: Variorum Reprints, 1975),

IV.

Johnstone, Pauline. The Byzanti*M5 Tradition'in Church

Embroidery (London, 1967)

Jones, A. H. M. ' The Greek City frora Alexander to Justi-

ni'an (Oxford, 1940)

Jones, A. H. M. Sparta (Oxford, 1967)

Jones, A. H. M. The Empd're, vol. II of A History of Rome

through the fifthcentury (London, 1970)

 41

Jones, A. H. M. The Roman Economy. Studies in Ancient

economic and administrative history. Ed. P. A.

Brunt (Oxford, 1974)

Kalligas, A. G. -H. A. Kalligas. Monemvasia (Traditional

Architecture IV: Athens, 1986)

Kalligas, H. "The Church of Haghia Sophia at Monemva-

sia: its date and dedication"., AXAE, Tcep. A#,

9 (1977-79), 217-21.

Kalligas, H. '"'H 6XXXTjCFLaCYTL'KA 6LPXLTCXTOVLRA OTA MOVEIL-

Dacr Ca xaTdL -vv B''' E-vcTOXPCLTCCL XCL T6 xaaOX VK6

TtCLPeXXXAGL Tft 'AyCar_ *Avvag". *ExxXTjatsg aTv

"'EXX66a Us-ra Tv wAXcixyn (Athens, 1979), 245-56.

Kalligas, H. "'EpCLTtWtL6VOL VCLOC TfIC TTCpLoXfJC MO'VEUDCL-

crCcLr-". ' 3d Sympio'sl= bf Byzantirie 'and postByzanti-

.ne Archeoloqyl And 'Art., 'Summa:ri'es* 'of Papers

(Athens,. 1983)r 35-36.

I
Karamessini-Oiconomidou, Manto, "MCcL IICLPTQPCCL 8LdL TAV

x6Oo8ov -c8v 'Epol5XWV ceg TAv En6pTnv T6 267 ji. X. ".

XaPLOTAPLOV etg A. K. 'OpXW8ovj III (Athens, 1966)

376-82.

Karayannopoulos, J. "Zur Frage der S,lavensiedlungen auf

dem Peloponnes". RESEE,, 9 (1971), 442-60.

Kazhdan, A. "La ville et le village a Byzance aux XIe-

XIIe sibcles". * Le ModalTsme ' Byz'arice (Recher-

ches Internationales la lumiare du marxisme,

79: Paris, 1974), 75-89.

 42

Kinga, Heleni. "T6 AaXo68i. -cflg MovoDcLoLdr_". Aw56vTl, 14

(1985) 103-29
, .
Kirsten, E. "Die Byzantinische Stadt". Acts of the 11th

International Byzantine Congress (Munich, 1958),

1-48.

Koder, i. "Arethas von Kaisareia und die sogenannte

Chronik von Monembasia". JB, 25(1976), 75-80.

Koder, J. "Zur Frage der slavischen Siedlungsgebiete

im mittelalterlichen Griechenland". BZ, 71,

(1978) 315-31
, .
Koder, J. "Anmerkungen zu den Miracula Sancti Demetrii".

Tribute to'A. N. 'Stratos. Ed. N. A. Stratos (Athens,

1986), vol. 11,523-38.

Kominis, A. D. "Paolo di Monembasia". *B, 29-30 (1959),

231-48.

Konstantopoulos, K. M. ' BuCay-cmud moXuO86PouVXcL 6,v "rO

'E8vL'x&5 NowcrjiaT'Lx45 MouCEW (Athens, 1917)

Kordosis, M. S. ""R EXCLDLX 6notuncm cyTAv IIcXoTE6, vvncyo

116 D6CM TdL EXCLDLXd TOTECOV16JILa". AC066Vn, 10 (1981)

,
381-429.

Kordosis, M. S. ""H TceptypcL(pA TflQ VoTLoav(xToXLxflQ neXo-

dLTE6
TtovvAcyou -16v "Apaoa UEPLTlynTA Wrisi"
. Acts

of the''2nd International Congress-of Peloponne-

sian Studies, vol. II (Athens, 1981-82), 261-68.

Kordosis, M. S. ""Eva ACLXWVLx6 -xda-rpo -roO 6y8oou atc5va

vrl(:Yoc) 11. A(xx(.OIJLXCLC ETtou8cLC, 6C 19 8 2) ,

(* EXcL(p6,

259-67.
 43

"T6 BuCCLVTLvA ACLKCO'VCCL

Kordosis, M. S. 6Vtl'E6PLO
c7TA

Wat. -1204)". Acts of the lst local Congress

of Laconian Studies (Athens, 1983), 107-12.

Kordosis, M. S. 4laTOPLXdL XCLC TOTtOYPCL(pLX6L TCPODXftCLTCL

XCLTdL TLC TEOXCjILRft CYU'YXP06CYr:, LC TflQ TEP6TTIC TtCPL6-

8ou -rflg opcLyxoxpaTCaC aT N6TLa 'EXX68a (1204-

62) (Athens, 1984)

Krajcar, J. "Metropolitan Isidore's journey to the

Council of Florence. Some remarks". OCP, 38

(1972)01 367-80.

Krekid, B. "0 Monembasiji y doba papskog protektorata

(Monemvasie sous la protection papale)"; ZRVI, 6

(1960), 129-35.

Kresten, Otto. Eine' 'Sammlung 'von Konzilakten aus'

Besitze des' Kardinal's 'I'sidoros' von Kiev (Oster-

reichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philos. -

Hist. Klasse. Denkschriften, 123: Vienna, 1976)

Kresten, Otto. "Zur Echtheit des Sigillion des Kaisers

Nikephoros 1. fUt Patras". 'Ro*'mi: sche HIstori'sche

Mittellungen, 19 (1977), 17-78.

Kriaras, E. AeELx6 Tfic Mcq(xLcavLxft UnvLuficq 6nii68oQg

ypaLIAa-ree(xg. 1100-1669, vol. 7 (Thessaloniki,

1980)

Krimbas, B. D. "'0 XaC at TEOLULMaL dLjlTEVOU MCLX-

_01VOC
Pacca" 'ETtLcrrTjjiovLxA TpLaxov-raTEcvTac-rTjpeg xa-
.

N. A. KpTI-cLKoiD j (Athens, 1944), 112-44.

-DTjyTj'coir)

Kyriakidis, S. I. BuCOLVTLVCLCMCX6TcLL ( Thessaloniki,

1948)
 44

Laiou, Angeliki E. Constantinople and the Latins. The

Foreign Policy of Andronicus 11.1282-1328 (Har-

vard Historical Studies, 88: Cambridge Mass,

1972)

Laiou-Thomadakis, Angeliki. ""EIITEOPOL XCLC VCLUTLXOC'

-ifir. MovcuDacrlac; cyr6 13o-14o aC6va" . Lectures by

Monemvasiotikos omilos, Monemvasia, July 1979.

Laiou-Thomadakis, Angeliki. "The Byzantine Economy in

the Mediterranean Trade System; Thirteenth-Fi-

fteenth Centuries". '-DOP, 34-35 (1980-81), 177-

222.

Laiou-Thomadakis, Angeliki. "Saints and Society in the

Late Byzantine Empire". * Charaftis' 'Studies: ' Essays

III Hoftor of' Pete'r 'Char'ariis. Ed. A. Laiou-Thoma-

dakis (N. Brunswick, N. J., 1980), 84-114.

Laiou-Thomadakis, Angeliki., "The Greek Merchant of the

Palaeologan period: a collective portrait".

HpawrotdL Wig 'Axa8rjjiCag *AOnVC)'V, 57 (1982) 96-

,
132.

Laiou- Thomadakis, Angeliki. "'0 8cc3116r. Vig llv'nCTE: Cctg

a-r6 Uxccro -rpl-ro atcbva". *A(pl, Pwjia qT6 NVhl2_jpo-

p8vo, I (Rethymnon, 1986), 280-98,

Lampros, S. P. "Die erste Erw'ahnung von Astros, Leonidi-

an und Areia". 'BZ, 2 (1893), 73-75.

Lampros, S. P. Catalogue of the Greek Manuscripts in

Mount Athos, II (Cambridge, 1900)

 45

Laurent, Vitalien. "Les signataires du second Concile

des Blach6rnes". EO, 26 (1927), 144-48.

Laurent, Vitalien. "Un groupe de signatures 6piscopa-

les". EO, 32 (1933), 319-23.

Laurent, Vitalien. "L'drection de la m6tropole d 'Ath6-

nes et le statut 6cclgsiastique de l'Illyricum

au VIlle siacle". ttudes* Byzantines, 1 (1943),

58-72.

Laurent, Vitalien. "La liste 6piscopale de la mtropole

d'Ath4-nes d'apr6s le synodicon d'une de ses 9-

glises suffragantes"., M6morial Loui's Petit (Bu-

carest, 1948), 272-89.

Laurent, Vitalien. "La chronologie des Patriarches de

Constantinople de la lare moiti6 du XiVe si6cle

(1294-1350) " REB, 7 (1949) 144-55,

.* ,
Laurent, Vitalien. "Isidore de Kiev et la m6tropole de

Monembasie". 'REB, 17 (1959), 150-57.

Laurent, Vitalien. "Les prdliminaires du Concile de

Florence. Les neuf articles du Pape Martin V et

la r6ponse in6dite du Patriarche de Constanti-

nople Joseph II (Octobre 1422)". ''REB, 20 (1962),

50-60.

Laurent, Vitalien. "La chronologie des Patriarches de

Constantinople au XIIIe siacle (1208-1309)".

REB, 27 (1969) 129-49.

Laurent, Vitalien. "Notes de chronologie et d'histoire

byzantine de la fin du XIIIe siacle". REB, 27

(1969), 209-228.
 46

Laurent, Vitalien. "Le tris6piscopat du Patriarche

Matthieu ler (1397-1410). Un grand proc6s cano-

nique & Byzance au debut du XVe si6cle. " REB,

30 (1972), 5-166.

Lavagnini, B. "Demenna e Demennitai". Tribute to A. N.

Stratos. Ed. N. A. Stratos, I (Athens, 1986)

,
123-28.

Lavvas, G. "Ot Tt6XP-LQ T65V XPLCTTLCLVLxC3 BCLCYLXLX&V". Re-

'ports'of the '10th'International Congress of Chri-.

stian Archeology (Thessaloniki, 1980), 1-03-35.

Leake, W. M. ' Travel's 'in'the Morea, 3 vols. ' (London,

1830)

Leake, W. M. Peloponftes'i'aca: 'A 'suptd*eMe*nt to Travels in

the morea (London, 1846)

Legrand, tm. * BiblTographie' hel, 16rilquq jwe 'et XVIe 'si-

acles), 4 vols. (Paris, 1885-1906)

Lemerle, Paul, L" Wirat d'AydinV Byzance et I'Occi-

dent. ' 'Recherche *s,ur "La' 'geste_ d'Umur Pasha"

(Biblioth6que Byzantine, Mudes, 2: Paris, 1957)

Lemerle, Paul. "A propos de la Chronique de Monembasie

et de. quelques textes apparent6s". *ZRVI, 8/11

(1964) (M61anges G. Ostrogorski, 11), 235-40.

Lemerle, Paul. Les plus 'anci'ens'recueil'sdes Miracles

de*Saint D6metrius. II: Commentaire (Paris,

1981)

Lewis, Ar. Naval Power 'and Trade'inthe Mediterranean,

AM 500-1500 (Princeton, 1951)

 47

Lilie, Ralph-Johannes. "'Thrakien' und 'Thrakesion'

zur byzantinischen Provinzorganisation am Ende

des 7. Jahrhunderts". JB, 26 (1977), 7-47.

Loenertz, R. -J. "Aux origines du d6spotat dltpire et

de la principaut6 d'Achaie". B, 43 (1973), 360-

94.

Loenertz, R. -J. * Byzantina et Franco-Graeca (Studi e

Testi', 118: Rome, 1970)

Loenertz, R. -J. * Byzantina 'et Franco-Graeca. Series al"

tera (Studi e Testi, 145: Rome, 1978)

Longnon, J. L"erapire latin de Constantinople et la

. princlpaut6 de'Morge (Paris, 1949)

Longnon, J. ' Le's Tou'cy eft Grient et eri *Ital*i'e au XII'Ie

si6cle (Extrait de la Soci6t6 des Sciences Hi-

storiques et Naturelles de l'Yonne. Ann6es 1953-

56: Auxerre, 1958)

Magdalino, P. "A neglected authority-for the history

of the Peloponnese in the early thirteenth cen-

tury: Demetrios Chomatianos, Archbishop of Bulga-

ria". ' BZ, 70 (1977) 316-23.

,
Maksimovid, Lj. ' Vizantij'ska' 'pr'ovi: ftzi'jskac 'uprava 'u doba

PalAeologa (Belgrade, 1972)

Maltezou, Chryssa. 'o Dcq46g ToO tV KWVCrTCLVTLvouTE6Xc L

BF-'Vr:. -roiU BcLCXou (1268-1453) (oEavut6v nat KcLTco6L-

CTTPLax6v IlaVETUCT11LOV 'ADnvC)v. OLX0009LX EXOX.

BLOXLoOxTI Eo(pCag N. EapLn6Xou, 6: Athens, 1970)

Maltezou, Chryssa. "Ot LCFTOPLXQ TCCPLndTCLCQ Tflc Ko-

pCv, Dou OT& TdXTI ToG IA'aMva".

E6LUCLXTCL,
(1973), 1-26.
 48

Mango, Cyril. Byzantine Architecture (New York, 1974)

Mango, Cyril. Byzantium. The Empire of New Rome (Lon-

don, 1980)

Manfroni, Carlo. Storia della Marina Italiana dal trat-

tato di Ninfeo alla caduta di Constantinopoli

(1261-1453), 1 (Leghorn, 1902)

Manoussacas, M. "*APXLCPEUC ME:O(bv7lQ, KopcbvTlc_ xaC Mo-

TIE: XOTEO'VvTla
VE; VLDcLaCcLQ- Y6PC-) G-CdL1500". L awi, 3

(1959), 95-147.

Marcopoulos, Ath. *EXXTjvLx6r 30 (1977-78), 477-80.

Masp6ro, j. "OoLftpd-coL et CYTPCLTL8T(IL dans l'armde by-

.

zantine au Vle siacle". *BZ, 21 (1912), 97-109.

Medvedev, 1. P. "K voprosu ob istochnikakh 'Zhizneopi--

sanija loanna Kantakuzina"'. * VV, 36 (1974), 145-

46.

Meliarakes, A. Otxoy6veLa Majuovd (Athens, 1902)

Menardos, S. "HoVoL aav ot Tadxwveg". npcLxTLx(i TfjQ

'Axa8TjjieaC *AOTlv8'v" 1 (1926), 260-65.

Mercati, G. ' Scritti dl, Is, i: doro I'l cardiriale, Ruteno (Stu-

di e Testi, 46: Rome, 1926)

Mercati, G. 'Noti*zi*e di Procoro'e' Demetrio Cidone, Ma-

nuele Caleca 'e Teodoro'Meliteniota ed altri ap-

punti (Studi e Testi, 56: Vatican City, 1931)

Meyendorf, J. ''Introduction a 1'ttude-de Gr6golre Pala-

mas (Patristica Sorbonensia, 3: Paris, 1959)

Meyer, K. Altkirchensl'avi'sch-gr'i'echisches W8rterbuch

des Codex 'Suprasl*iensis (GlUckstadt-Hamburg, 1935)

 49

Miklosich, F. Lexicon Pal'a'eosl'ovenico-Graeco-Latinum

(Vienna, 1862-65; rpt. Darmstadt, 1963)

Miller, W. "Monemvasia during the Frankish period

(1204-1540)". Essays on the Latin Orient (Cam-

bridge, 1921)

Millet, G. t1dcole gracque dans l'Architecture Byzan-

tine (Paris, 1916; rpt. London, 1974)

Moravcsik, Gy. ""H xeLp6ypcx(poc 'roG De Admi-

TtCLPdL8OCYLQ

nistrando Imperio". EEBE, 7 (1930), 138-52.

Moravcsik, Gy. Byzantinotirci*ca, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1958)

Moravcsik, Gy. "Zur Geschichte der Onoguren". Studia

. Byz'antina (Amsterdam, 1967), 84-118

Morgan, G. "The Venetian claims commission of 1278".

BZ, 69 (1976), 412-38.

Moschou, L. -T. Moschos. "KL6VLa A". ' rICXOTEOVVnCYLCLXdL,

13 (1979), 72-92.

Nicol,, D. M. " The date of the battle of Pelagonia". *BZ,

49 (1956), 68-71.

Nicol, D. M. ' The Byzantfne Faintly of Kantakouzenos (Can-

'tacuzenus), ca:., 1100-1460. * 'A 'genealogical and pro-

sopographical'study (Dumbarton Oaks Studies, XI:

Washington D. C., 1968)

Nicol, D. M. "The Doctor-Philosopher John Comnen of Buca-

rest and his Biography of the Emperor John Kanta-

kuzenos". RESEE, 9 (1971), 511-26.

Nicol, D. m. The Last Centuri'es of Byzantium. * '1261-1453

jLondon, 1972)
 50

Nicol, D. M. "The Byzantine Family of Kantakouzenos.

Some addenda et corrigenda". DOP, 27 (1973), 309-

15.

Nicol, D. M. "Refugees, mixed Population and local Pa-

triotism in Epiros and Western Macedonia after

the fourth Crusade". Reports of the 15th Interna-

tional Byzantine Congress (Athens, 1976)

Nicol, D. M. *The Despotatebf Epiros' 1267-1479. A con-

tribution to the hi'story of Greece'in the middle

ages (Cambridge, 1984),

Nicolopoulos, P. G. "'H dLPX(XLO'rPCL (IIIECTOC 'YPCLTt"rA WeCCL

Tfir. MovejiDacrCar- 898 ji. X. "., Acts of the lst Laco-

ni'aft Congress, II (AaxG)VLUCLC Enou5ctt, 5: Athens,

1980), 227-46,

Nystazopoulou-Pelekidou, Maria. 'H tv TcLupLut XepcrovA

a(4) TE6A.Lg Eouy8aea da16 -rofJ initxa Too iE' caa-

-vog ('YTEnpeaCa *APXCLLOTftov XaC *AVCLovnX(baecaQ.

Anjiome6tcaa ToC 'ApXaLoXoyLxoC AeXTeou, 7:

Athens, 1965)

Nystazopoulou-Pelekidou, Maria. "Les Slaves dans Vem-

pire byzantin". 1'7th International Byzantine

Congress. Major Papers (New Rochelle-New York,

1986), 345-67.

Obolensky, D. The Byzantine Commonwealth. * Eastern Eu-

.rope 500-1453 (London, 1971)

Obolensky, D. 'Byzanti= and the Slavs. ' Collected Stu-

dies (London: Variorum Reprints, 1971)

 51

Oiconomacos, A. 4ApXcLIcL 4Ene8(xupoC AL]ITIP6L, MLV(bCL Tfl(

AcLxwvLxflc (Athens, 1957)

Oikonomides, N. Les Listes de pr6s6ance byzantines des

IXe et Xe siacles ( Paris, 1972)

oikonomides, N. "La d6composition de l'Empire Byzantin

la veille de 1204: la 'Partitio Romaniael".

Reports*of' the 15th'International Byzantine

Congress ( Athens, 1976)

oikonomides, N. Ro mmes d'affaire5 Grecs et Latins a

Constantinopl'e'(XII'I'e-XVe'si'6cles) (Montreal-

Paris, 1979)

Oikonomides, N. "La Chancellerie imp6riale de Byzance

du 13e au 15e siacle". ' REB, 43 (1985), 167-95.

Orlandos, A. ""AVC4TOXCCOUCYCLL
CLCYLXLXCLtrf!G ACLXCJVC(DLGII-

EEBE, 4 (1927), 342-51.

Orlandos, A. "*Ex -rc3v BuCciv-rLvav "ATctgwv". ABMEr 1

(1935), 125-39

Orlandos,, A. "'H Hawidvaccia Wic: MoveLDcLaCag". ABME, I

(1935) 139-51
1 .
Ormerod, R. A. "Laconia. Il. Topography"V BSA, 16

(1909-10) 62-71
, .
Ostrogorski, G. * Pour' Vhistoiref de Ia *f6-oda: lit6 by-

zantine (Brussels, 1954)

Ostrogorski, G. "Pour 11histoire de 1' immunit6 21

Byzance ". B, 28 (1958) (Manges R. Guilland),

165-254

Ostrogorski, G. 'Historyof-th6 Byzantine State. Tr.

Joan Hussey (Oxford, 1968)

 52

Pagoulatos, S. A. OL Ta(ixwvcg xcLC T6 TccpC-rfjq. w

-x-rCqE:
Tft XpovL116v
MO'VEVLDaCYCCLC (Athens, 1947)

Pagoulatos, S. A. Ot EXdLooL tv NeXonovvftp 116XpL Tou-

Nt-KTI(p6pou'A' (805 IL. X. ) (Athens, 1948)

Papadopoulos, A. "0 "AyLog Ac6vTLOC; ITcLXaLoX6yog McLvLco-

vdc (1377-1453) $H Vtov TcLELcLpX8v ACyLcLXcCcLC

.
(1620-1940) (Thessaloniki, 1940)

Papadopulos, A. Versuch 'einer GenealogrIe 'der Palaiolo-

- 'gen, ' T259-1453 (Munich, 1938)

Pargoire, Jean. "Saint M6thode de Constantinople avant

821 " EO, 6 (1903) 126-31

.* , ..
Patrinelis, Ch. G. ""EXXilveQ R(06LXOYPd(POL -r&5v xp6vwv

-rfic: *Avaycvvcccoc". EMA, 8-9 (1958-59), 63-124.

Patrinelis, Ch. G. "'lIcL-rpLap-XLK(j -ypdLtjjcL-rcLjjcLC 6,%XcL 9-y-

Ypa(Pa 0-njleL6jLa-Ca TOO IET'-IH* 6H TOO X(B-

CLUS'VOC
8t, ROQ -COO 41palioQ (*EOv. BLDX. "E%X. 1474) If.,

EMA, 12 (1962)t 116-65.

Pauly, A. F. von. ' Real-Ericyclopadief der 'clas'stschen Al-

'tertumswi*ssenschaft (Vienna, 1837-52); new ed.

G. Wissowa, W, Kroll e. a. (Stuttgart, 1893 ff)

Philippson, A. ' Der Pelaponries. 'Versuch einer Landes-

kunde *auf geologiseher, 'Grundlage (Berlin, 1891-2)

Pierling, Paul. ' La Russie* et Ie' Saint-S*iAge. ' ICtude di-

. 'pl'omatique, I (Paris, 1896)

Pingree, D. Albumasaris de revolutionibus nativitatum

(Bibliotheca Teubneriana: Leipzig, 1968)

Platon, N. "IIE: pC -[AV 6vollcLCYC(Yv -rflc! tTEcLPXC(DLQMcLXE:DC10-

Kp'nTLXdL XPOVLXdLj 6 (1952) 156-58.

,
 53

Popovid, V1. "Les t6moins archdologiques des invasions

Avaro-Slaves dans l'Illyricum byzantin". IIEFRA

87 (1975) 1,445-504.

Prosopographisches Lexicon der Palaiologenzeit. Eds.

E. Trapp, R. Walther, H. -V. Beyer (Vienna, 1976-;

in progress)

Raes, Alphonse. "Les livres liturgiques grecs publift

a Venise". 'M61anges*E. Ti'ssserand, III (Studi e

Testi, 233: Vatican City, 1964), 209-22.

Rouillard, Germaine. "Les taxes maritimes et commerci-

ales dapr6s les actes de Patmos et de Lavra".

- Mange's' Charles* Diehl,, I (Paris, 1930),. 277-89.

Runciman, St. ' The Sitillarf Vespers (Cambridge, 1958;

rpt. 1982)

Sabatin, N. "06-rLog"* XHE, XII (1968), cols. 31-33.

Sabbadini, R. ' 'Guarifto Verorie*se e' IT *suo* 'epi'stol'ario

.. edito 'e' Inedito (Salerno, 1885) 55. '

,
Salaville, S. "Le titre eccldsiastique de 'proedros'

dans les documents byzantins". *EO, 29 (1930),

416-36.

Sauget, J. M. "Le Paterikon du manuscrjt arabe 276 de

la Bibliothaque Nationale de Paris". *Le Musg-on,

82 (1969), 363-404.

Schilbach, E. Byzantinische Metrologie (Handbuch des

Altertumswissenschaft, XII. 4: Munich, 1970)

Schmid, H. F. "Byzantinisches Zehntwesen". --JOBG, 6

(1957), 45-110.
 54

Schreiner, P. Studien zu den BpaXgct XpovLx (Miscel-

laneaByzantinaMonacensia, 6: Munich, 1967)

Schreiner, P. "Chronologische Untersuchungen zur Fami-

lie Kaiser Manuels II. ". BZ, 63 (1970), 290-93.

Schreiner, P. "Note sur la fondation de monftvasie en

582-3". TM, 4 (1970) 471-75.

,
Schreiner, P. "ITCLPCLTllp4CYF-Lr-
bLdL TdL Ttpov6LLCL TfJQ MO'Vell-

OcLaCag". Acts of the '2nd 'International Congress

of Pelopohnesiari Studies (Athens, 1981-82), 160-

66.

Scranton, R. L. *MedieVal ArchItecture-in'thecentral

area''of Corinth (Corinth, XIV: Princeton, 1957)

Setton, K. M. "The Bulgars in the Balkans and the occu-

pation of Corinth in the seventh century". ' f2fcu-

I lum, 25 (1950), 502-43.

Setton, K. M. "The emperor Constans II and the capture

of Corinth by the Onogur Bulgars". Speculum, 27

(1952), 343-50.

Setton, K. M. '"Tho Catal'aris' amd. FlOrentlnes 'irf Greece, 1-380-

1462. ". A History 'of' 'the' Crus'ades, ed. K. M. Setton,

III (Wisconsin-London, 1975),. 225-77.

Setton, K. M. ' The Papacy a dthe Levant'(1*204-1571), II

(American Philosophical Society, II: Philadel-

phia, 1978)

Shdban, M. A. *Islamic History. A new Interpretation

(Cambridge, 1971)

Simonet, F. ' Historia de los Mozarabes' de Espafia (Memo-

rias de la Real Academia de la Historia, XIII:

Madrid, 1903)
 55

Sorlin, IrA-ne. "Un acte du Patriarch Antoine IV en ver-

sion slave". REB, 43 (1985), 253-58.

Spatharakis, I. The Portrait in Byzantine Illuminated

Manuscripts (Leiden, 1976)

Stanitsas, S. "T6 'XpovL-x6 -coG 15701 xcLC ot TEcxp(xXXcLydQ

'rou: T6 XPOVLXdL TOO TeU60-AWPOUOU XCLC YiCLVOUAX

McAcLEOG"- rIcXoTEovv-ncrLandL, 16 (1986) , 593-633.

Stein, E. Histoire du Bas-Empire, 2 vols. (Paris, 1949-

59i

Sterghellis, A. "'H 6LaOAxTI -rori rcLoptA; k EcDApou xcxC A

P150JILcul -r8v xpe8v -rou (1617-1647) ". OTICFOLUPCCYTla'v(lr

9 (1969),, 182-200.

Stratos, A. N. T6 BuCdLVTLOV qT6v ZI cLtcbvcL, IV: Ko)vaTcLv-

-crvoc re (K6vaTawl), 642-668 (Athens, 1972)

Svoronos, N. "Recherches sur le cadastre byzantin et

la fiscalit6 aux Xle et Xlle siacles: le cadastre

de Thg-bes", ftudes' 'sur 1"orgarils'actiori 'int6rieure,

la soci6t6 'et 1`6conoraie de 1'EmPi're BYzantin,

no. III (London: Variorum Reprints, 1973)

Symeonidis, Ch. Ot TadmcoveC ucLt Taax(OVLdL (EULDOXA

PjInVCCL T8v 6vowiTcov xaC ToG ftwv6uou puCqvTL-

VOG 0601100 T8V RCLCTTPO(PUXdLXWV)

(Thessaloniki, 1972)

Talfacos, I. G. "Ot P(-)jiaCoL xcxC -r(5 xoLv(5v -cC)v Amic8aL-

UOVCCOV(IGV1 1146)". 'EXX7jvLx6g A6yoc_, 1 (1973),

23-39.

Talfacos, I. G. Pwjiaex TEOXL-voi tv Aaxcov. 2 (Athens,

1974)
 56

Talbot, C. H. The Anglo-Saxon Missionaries in Germany

(London-New York, 1954)

Theocharis, Maria S. "rIavayCcL "ApToxcocyTd, La Beata

Vergine delle Grazie". AE (1953-54), 111,232-52.

Theocharis, Maria S. ""0 liqrpoTtoXCrilG P)aCcLG OchLoG

xaC 6 XeLTOUPYLx6c Wxxoc Tou". Lectures by Mo-

nemvasiotikos Omilos, August 1984.

Thiriet, F. La Romanie v6ftitfe'nne 'ail Moyerf clge (Paris,

1959)

Tivcev, N. P. "Sur les citds byzantines aux XIe-XIle si-

(1cles". Byzantkno'-Bulgari'ca, 1 (1962), 145-82.

Tobler, Titus. Descriptiones Tevrae Sanctae 'ex saeculi

VIII, ''IX, XII 'et XV (Leipzig, 1874)

Topping, Peter. "The post-Classical Documents. The Mi-

nessota-Messenia expedition",. Studi'es' 'on Latin

Gree'ce, 'A. D. ' 1,205-1715, no. VIII (London: Variorum

Reprints, 1977)

Topping, Peter. "Co-existence of Greeks and Latins in

Frankish Morea and Venetian Crete". Reports of

the'15th 'International Byzantine Congress

(Athens, 1976)

Tourtoglou, M. A. "T6 "ADLwTCxLov'. EuliDoXA etc T6 BU-

Cav-rLv6v KXTjpovovLLx6'v ACxcLLov"., "r-?6vLovl * Fest-

schrift fUr P. J. Zepos, 1,632-45.

Toynbee, A. Constantine Porphyrogenitus and his world

(London, 1973)
 57

Trapp, E. "Zur Identifizierung der Personnen in der

Hadesfahrt des Mazaris". JOB, 18 (1969), 95-99.

Traquair, R. "Monemvasia" in "Laconia. I. The Medieval

Fortresses". BSA, 12 (1905-6), 270-74.

Trojanos, S. "KCLCTPOliTLaCa. Einige Bemerkungen ber

die finanziellen Grundlagen des Festungsbaues

im byzantinischen Reich". BuctvTtvdL, 1 (1969),

39-57.

Tsaras, A. "La fin d'Andronic Pail.A-ologue dernier, de-

spote de Th6ssalonique". ''RESEE, 3 (1965), 419-32.

Van der Vin, J. P. A. ' Travellers 'to 'Grleece *and Constan-

tinopl*e. ' AncLent Monuments* end Traditfons 'in Me-

. di'eval: Travel'l'erg'*Tal*es (Nederlands Historisch-

Archeologisch Institut: Istanbul, 1980)

Van der Vorst, Ch. "Les relations de S. Th6odore Stu-

dite avec Rome". ' Aftn`. BoIl., 32 (1913), 439-47.

Vasiliev, A. A. ' Byzance' *et *1*e*s''Arahes, II/T La: dynastie

mac6donienne, ed. M. Canard (Corpus Bruxellense

Historiae Byzantinae, 2.1: Brussels, 1968)

Velisariou, P. "XOLp6Xa-xxOL"o rrCXOnOVVnCYL(XXdL,

16
(1985-86), 418-22.

Vlachoiannis, I. %ICYTOPLUA (Athens, 1927)

_*AvDoXoyCcx
Vocotopoulos, P. "HcLpcLTTjpAacLc uTAv Xcyojitvn BCLOLXLXA

ToG 4AyCou NCxwvoc". * Actsof*the'l*st Interna-

tional Congress of Peloponnesian Studies ( Athens,

1976-77), 273-85.
 58

Voordeckers, E. "La 'Vie de Jean Cantacuzone' par Jean-

Hieroth6e Comn6ne". JOB, 20 (1971), 163-69.

Voyatzides, I. K. "Ot HPCYXLTEEC XSLXdbCQ xfiQ AcLxc8aCILo-

voc". NE, 19 (1926), 192-209.

Vranoussi, Era. "Notes sur quelques institutions du

P61oponnOse byzantin". ttudes balkaniques, 14/IV

(1978), 81-88.

Vryonis, Sp. Jr. "Recent Scholarship on continuity and

discontinuity of culture: Classical Greeks, By-

zantines, Modern Greeks". * Byzantina-Metabyzantina,

1 (1978), 237-56.

Wace, A. J. B. -F. W. Hasluck. "Laconia. Topography". BSA,

14 (1907-8) 176-82.
,
Waterhouse, H. -R. Hope Simpson. "Prehistoric Laconia"

'BSA, 55 (1960), 67-107 ; 56, (1961), 114-75.

Weithmann, M. W. * Die' 'slavi's'che Bevo-lkeruncr auf 'der grie-

chi'scheft HaClbifts'el (Munich,. 1978)

Wilson, N. ' Greek l'iterary Boohands (Cambridge Mass.,

1973)

Witteck, P. "The Castle of Violets, from Greek Monemva-

sia to Turkish Menekshe". 'BSOAS, 20 (1957),

601-13.

Woodhouse, C. M. ' George Gemistas' Plethon. ' The last of

the Hellenes (Oxford, 1986)

Woodward, A. M. BSA, 26 (1923-5), 156-57.

Xanalatou-Dergalin, H. -A. Kouloglou-Pervoloaraki. Mo-

vgviDagla (Athens, 1974)

 59

Xyngopoulos, A. ""H eCxc5,v rflc E'rcLuP60E:cOQ eCc T6v VCL6v

-COO 'EkKOVt6volu MOVEUDCLOCaC".HeXOnOVVTjOLaX I

(1956), 23-49.

Yannopoulos, P. "La p6nftration Slave en Argolide".

BCH (Suppl6ment VI. ttudes Argiennes: Athens,

1980) 327-71
, .
Zakythinos, D. Ot EXdLpoL tv 'EXXdL8L. EuJIDOXOLe ECC Tv

tCYTOPECLVTOO MECYCLL(OVLROC
"EXXTIVLOJIOO (Athens,

1945)

Zakythinos, D. "MZX&-raL TEcp -rfir_ 8LoLxTj-rLxfjr_ 8vxtp6--

6TECLpXLaXflc
CyECA)C
IjaC -rjjr 6V T45DUCCLV
6tcLLp6CreCoQ TL

.;
v45 xp6L-cc i; "' . EEBE ,21 (19 5 1)
, 17 9 -2 09.

Zakythinos, D. "McvvoluX B'HaXcLLoX6yoc x(xC 6 UCLPbLVdLXLOQ

'IcYC8wpoc 6v IIE: XoTEovvcrcp". ' M61'anges Merlier, III

(Athens, 1955), 45-69.

Zakythinos, D. "La grande BrP-che dans la tradition hi-

storique de 1'h61lenisme du septieme au neuvibme

siE)cle". XCLPLCFrPLOV etc A. K. *OpXdLv8ov, III

(Athens, 1966), 300-24.

Zakythinos, D. ' Le Despotat'grec de Mor6e. I. Histoire

Politique; II. Vie et Institutions. Rev. by Chr.

Maltezou (London, 1975)

Zesiou, C. "'ETELypwpat XpLarmvLx8v Xp6vcov Tft "EXXd-

bog". BuCa'v'rCC, 1 (1909), 114-25.

 Introduction

The interests of Byzantine chronographers were

always centered on the Capital rather than on distant

provinces like the Peloponnese and consequently the

examination of Monemvasia's history is faced with the

difficulty that the relevant information is fragmentary

and confused. Further difficulties are posed by peculia-

rities of the various historical periods. Concerning

the foundation of Monemvasia, which has always been

related to the raids of the Slavs, the sources are few

and laconic but the literature is vast. Little infor-

mation has survived on the centuries up to the Fran-

kish conquest and is mainly found in hagiographic sour-

ces. The preference shown by historians for certain

sources on the. Frankish rule has left lot of informa-

tion unexploited, *For the Palaeologan period the con-

fusion has deepened on account of the fact that a num-
ber of imperial and pat riarchal documents have been

considered forged.

Up to now there has been no general study-on the

history of Byzantine Monemvasia and the effort in the

following pages will be the analysis of existing sources

 61

and their evaluation and correlation, in the hope that

certain facts could be established, illuminating the

evolution of the city and its importance within the

Byzantine Empire.
 Chapter 1. The foundation of Monemvasia

Laconia up to the 6th century

In the Roman Empire Laconia, along with the rest

of the Peloponnese, was part of the province of Acha-

ia, which belonged to the Illyricum and depended ad-

ministratively from Rome. In the 4th century follow-

ing the division of'the Empire, it came under the

jurisdiction of Constantinople. Its church, however,

remained under the ecclesiastical administration of

1
Rome.

The cities of the Peloponnese seem to have pros-

pered during the long period of peace from Augustus's

time up to the 3d century and for Laconia this is

attested by numerous sources. Pausanias in his "Tra-

vels" gives a detailed account of Sparta with its

territory and smaller settlements and of the cities

of the federation called the Eleutherolacones with

their territory, which covered the southern Pelopon-

nese from Parnon to Messenia. Both Sparta and the

Eleutherolacones had managed to preserve the privi-

leges of municipal autonomy, which elsewhere in the

1 jusqulen 1204_
A. Bon, Le Peloponnese'Byzantin
(Paris, 1951), gp-. 1-26.
 1 63

Empire had began to disappear. (Pl. 3)

In the 4th century, after the destructive attack

of the Goths and Herouli in 267-8, Sparta had reco-

vered and, due to the conservatism that always cha-

racterized the area, it appears to have preserved

2
the old customs and institutions.

It is not easy to estimate the extent of the de-

struction caused by the next barbaric attack, by the

Goths in the late fourth century. The city seems,

1 *III,
Pausanias, 11,1-22,1, ed. J. H. C. Schubart
(Leipzig: Teubner, 1881), pp. 218-63; Strabo, VIII,
5,1-6,1, ed. -tr. H. L. Jones (London: Loeb Classical
Library, 1961), IV, 148-50; Pliny, Natural History,
IV, 15-17, ed. * H. Rackham (London-Cambridge Mass.:
Loeb Classical Library, 1961), 11,128-30; K. M. T.
Chrimes, Ancient Sparta. -A reexamination of the evi7.
dence ( chester, 1949), Fp.-56-83t 435-41; Paul
Carteledge, Sparta and Laconia. A regional History
1300-362 BX. (London-Boston and Henley, 1979), pp.
322-23; I. G. Talfacos, " Ot PcoucLUoL xcLC T6 xoLv6v T&Sv
AcLxe8(xLjiovCcov- (IGV1 1146) 11 4EXXnvLx6C Myoc, 1 (1973)
,
345-51; I. G. Talfacos, PW11CXXA TEOXLTLUA tv Aawoviq
(Athens, 1974), pp. 23-39; "Sparta. Geschichte, " Pau-
ly-Wissowa, ' Real'Encyclopadie der Klassischen Alter-
tumswissenschaft, 2nd ed. (Stuttgart, 1894ff), III A,
cols. 1447-1528; "Eleutherolakonesi" RE, V, col. 2353;
"Eleutherolacones, " Ch. Daremberg-E. ET-a-glio, Diction-
naire des Antiquit6s Gr6cques''et Romaines (Paris,
1892ff), 11 1, col. 582a; A. H. M. Jones, The Greek City
from Alexander to Justinian (Oxford, 1940T-, -pp-. 129,
324 n. 63; A. HM. Jones, Sparta (Oxford, 1967), pp.
165-66; Bon, P61oponn6se, 10-17.

2. 5,6,13;
Bon, P61oponnose, Jones, ''Sparta,
165-66; Ta1facos, PcojiqNTj noXLTLxA, 37-39; Manto Kara-
messini -Oiconomidou, "MecL liap-ruptcL bLd -vAv xdft8ov
T8v `EPoi5Xwv etc -cAv ETcdLPTTiv T6 267 vL. X., " X(XPLOTA-.
'OpXdv8ov, (Athens, 1966), _
pLov etQ A. K. III pp.
376-82.
 64

however, to be thriving. Lacedaemon, as it was usually

called, was a large Roman city, the See of a bishopric,

and is mentioned by the Synekdemos of Hierokles as

the "metropolis of the LaconikV, which proves that

up to the 6th century it continued to be the most

1
important city in the area.

II The Chronicle of Monemvasia

.

In 1749 a Chronicle, which among others, men-;-*

tioned the abandonment of Lacedaemonia*during the 6th

century and the foundation of a new town, Monemvasia,

was published for the first time, from a manuscript

in the Library of Turin. The contents of the manus-

cript, half of which concerned Monemvasia, indicated

its origin from there as well as a special interest

Bon, ', Peloponn6se, 9,13-14,17,23; Ernst

Honigmann ' Le Synt-krIP-mos'
ed. ique d` Hierokl: es 'et 1" Opus-
cule G6ogra; de Georges de Chypre (Brussii-ls,
1939), p. 18; Ch. Bouras, "City and VIllage: Urban
Design and Architecture, " Acts ofthe 16th'Internatio-
nal Byzantine Congress, 12 (Vienna, 1981), pp. 621-
22; T. E. Gregory, "Fii-r-tification and Urban Design in
Early Byzantine Greece, "City, ' Towftand Countryside
in the Early Byzantine Era, ed. R. L. Hohlfelder (,New
York, 1982), pp. 54-55; E. C. Chryssos, Ot BncrLy6"rIDoL
(xrAv HeXon6vvwo (396-397 ii. X. ) " Acts the "2nd'Inter-
national Congress of Peloponnesian Studies, II FAthens,
198T-Z'2-), pp. 181-91. Bibliography on Laconia has been
collected in: Aqx(ovLxcxC Enou8aC, 2 (1975), 417-87.
 65

1
of the owner for the town's history. The text of the

Chronicle, which has been called Chronicle of Monem-

vasia is composed of two parts; one, which is a con-

tinuous narration of Avar and Slav invasions during

the reign of emperor Maurice and the diaspora of the

inhabitants of some Peloponnesian towns, as well as

the recovery of control by the central administration

two centuries later k and a second, which has no conne-

ction with the first and is a series of notices

I
G. Pasini, A. Rivautella, F. Berta, *Codices
Manuscripti'Biblicithecae Regi: i Tauri: nensi's' Wthenaei
(Turin, 1749), pp. T17-18. Description pp. 417-33.
Contents: f. 1: "on the foundation of Monemvasia";
f. 8: Office of Saint Anthony the Younger, a local
saint of Monemvasia; f. 27: Office of Saint Theopha-
nes, a local saint of Monemvasia; f.. '54: Three "edi-
fying to the , by Paul bishop of Mo-
soul" narrations
nemvasia; f. 58: Synodicon of Monemvasia; 'f. 61: Sy-
nodical decision of 1570 on the dispute between Mo-
nemvasia and-Christianoupolis for the bishopric of
Androusa. From f. 67 to the end; f. 135, the con-
tents had no relation with Monemvasia. Pasini, p. -417,
that * the belonged to the Monem-
suggested manuscript
vasiot G4briel Seyiros, metropolitan of Philadelphia
in the 16th century, since the majority of his manus-
cripts came to the Library of Turin after his death.
Cf. A Sterghellis, ""H 6La0Axn -roa rcLapox zoApou
xcLC A p6ftLcm Tav xpeC)v Tou (1617-1647) " GnacLuptaug-
-ral 9 (1969),. 182-200, esp. 195. The presence among
the contents of the decision of 1570, F. Miklosich-J.
. MUller, Acta et diplomata medii aevi sacra et profana,
(Vienna, 1860-1890), V0,175-78, points to its owner--
ship earlier by Macarios Melissenos, metropolitan of
Monemvasia in the 16th century, involved in the dis-
pute for which the decision was issued and presumed
forger of Monemvasials documents. He must have taken
it with him when he left Monemvasia in 1571 and given
it to Seviros in Venice in March 1575, J. K. Chassio-
tis, MaxdLpLo;, ec68wpog xaC NLxTI(p6poC ot MEXLGCMV0C
(MEXLCTCYOUPYOC) (Thessaloniki, 1966), p. 52. The ma-
nuscript perished during a fire in the-Library in
1904.
 66

concerning the metropolis of Lacedaemonia starting

from 1260.1 For almost a century after its first pub-
lication the Chronicle remained practically unnoticed

until Fallmerayer based on it his theories concerning

the extent of the Slav penetration into the Pelopon-

disputes 2
nese. The that followed still last.

In 1884 Spyridon Lampros discovered two other

versions of the same text in Mount Athos. The first

in a manuscript in the Kutlumus monastery, very simi-

lar to the Turin version and also from Monemvasia.

The second was found in Iberon and. contains only the

first part on the Avar and Slav attacks. This version

has been considered by modern historians to be the

oldest and also to be nearest to the original source

S. P. Lampros, ' "T6 nepC Tfic xTtacwc Tfig Moveu-

Pactac XPOVLX6V, " 'IaTOPLX& Mr:.Xs-rUqT (Athens, 1884
rpt 1979), pp. 98-108.
2
J. P. Fallmerayer, ' Fragmenteaus'dem orient
(Stuttgart-TUbingen, 1845), 11,367-458, esp. 412-
15; Geschichte der Halb'inse1, Moreaw'a*hrerfd 'des' Mittel-
alters (Stuttgart- TUbingen, 1830--rpt. Hildesheim,
MIS-), pp. III-XIV, 191-92. On the Ivan
controversy:
Dujcev, *'Cronaca di' Monembasia -(Palermo, 1976), pp.
XI-XXXVI; bibliographical additions: A. Marcopoulos,
'EXXnvLxdLr 30 (1977-8)i 477-80;. M. 'Kordosis, "EXaDL-
x tnoCxTjaTj ji6 D&jTj TdL EXaDLUdL TOMOV611LCL, " &_086VT1,
10 (1981), 381-429. Cf. Sp. Vryonis Jr., "Recent
Scholarship on continuity and discontinuity of cultu-
re: Classical Greeks, Byzantines, Modern Greeks, "
Byzantina-Metabyzantina, 1 (1978), 237-56.
 67

1
of the Chronicle.

Despite the fact that other sources do not asso-

ciate the abandonment of Lacedaemonia and the foun-

dation of Monemvasia with the Slavs, their mention

by the Chronicle has always led(the)historians to

' Both versions were published and commented by

Lampros, `-'IcY-ropt, xdL ME:Xe-rAlia-ca, 97-128, with the Turin
version. The first from ms Kutlumus 220 (Athous 3293)
fols. 194-196, * description: S. P. Lampros, Catalogue
of the Greek Manuscripts in Mount Athos, II (Cam-
bridge, 1900), pp. 298-301. It belonged to the Monem-
vasiot family of Likinioi for which there is no spe-
cial study.. Cf. Lampros, "Icr-roptuck MeXe-rjia-ra, 120-22
N. A. Bees `0 'EXx6lievor- XpLcYT6c TfiQ MoveLDaatag
,"
11ETdL TtaPEXOdLaC(OV TLEPC TflQ CLOT60L IICLVCLYCCLQ. VIC XQUCYCL-
QLTCCF0`TjQ, " BNJB, 10 (1933-4)
,
199-262, esp. 240-52.
Schreiner, ' Die byzantini'schen Kleirichroniken (CFHB
XII 1,2,3) (Vienna, 1975-1979), I, 3T7-18. It inclu-
des copies of official documents, Short Chronicles,
tables of emperors and patriarchs, theological texts,
narrations of marvels, many of which concern.. Monem-
vasia. The second version is from ms Iberon 329
(Athous 4449) fol. 203, description: Lampros, ' Catalo-
gue, 11,8-84. The origin-is not. '. indicated, but P.
Schreiner, Studieri 'z u deri Bpa)cd'a 'XPOVL'XdL (Miscella-
nea Byzanti'na Monacensia, 6) (MunicF_, _1967) believes
it is Peloponnesian. , The 3 versions have been publi-
shed again by N. A. Bees, "T61flepC *vft KrtaecoQ -rfir.
MoveliDaaCaclXpovx6v, at rblyaC 'KaC h tCYTOPLRA Gnj1CLV-
TLx6Tnc a6xoU, " BuCavrCQ, 1 (1909), 59-105, and subse-
quentlyseveral'times in part. P. Lemerle, "La Chroni-
que improprement dite de Monemiiasie: Le contexte hi-
storique et 16gendaire, " REB, 21. (1963), 5-49, publi-
shed only the Iberon version. Dujcev, * Cronaca, publi-
shed only the first part of the Chroni-cle. The view
that Iberon is the oldest version was expressed by Le-
merle, Chronique, 8,22-23 and generally accepted,
e. g. G. L. Huxley, "The second Dark Age of the Pelo-
ponnese, " AaxcavLxaC Enou&xC, 3 (1977) 87. Schreiner,
Studien, 132 n. 4, remarks that the form of the Chro-
nicle of Monemvasia is not that of a Short Chronicle.
The second part, however, is a Short Chronicle of the
metropolitan See of Lacedaemonia. A separate manus-
cript version of this part was found by Lampros, * WE,
9 (1912), 245-51.
 68

establish a connection between their invasions and

the foundation of Monemvasia.

1

An attempt will be made to clarify the condit ions

that prevailed in Laconia and eventually led to the

abandonment of Lacedaemonia and the foundation of

Monemvasia, by examining the parts of the Chronicle

that bear on Monemvasia and comparing them to the

other sources. In the following pages the text of the

Chronicle as given by the three manuscripts is pre-

sented side by side to illustrate the similarities

and. differences of the respective versions. It is se-

parated in parts and those that are. identical are

put together. When differences of minor importance

occur only one version is used and the others are

2
mentioned in parenthesis.

1
e. g. Bon, P&loponn8se, 34-35,57,61; D. A. Za-
kythinos, Ot -EXdDOL tV 'EXXd, 5L. EujiDo?, cLC *etj -rAv tcy-r -
PCCLV TOO MCC7CLLWVLX05*EXXnVLC7j10G (Athens, 1 945), pp.
42-43, who suggests a later date; ,
S. P. Pagoulatos,
Ot EX600L &V I1CX0Tt0VVACT4) V16XPL "roG MxTjp6pou A' (805
IL. X. ) (Athens, 1948), 35-36; P. Schreiner, "Note sur
la fondation de Mon6mvasie en 582-3, " TM, 4 (1970),
475; Huxley, Dark Age, 92. On the SlavF-in the Byzan-
tine Empire: M. Nystazopoulou-Pelekidou, "Les Slaves
dans llempire byzantin, " 17th International Byzantine
Congress. Major Papers (New Rochelle-New York, 1986),
345-67.
2
For the Iberon version the Lemerle edition,
Chronique, pp. 9-11, was used. For the other two the
Bees edition, XpovLx6v, pp. 61-68, except for p. 69,
11.1-7, where the text is reproduced without the edi-
tor's corrections. Sigla: I: Iberon, T: Turin, K: Ku-
tlumus, +: and, or plus.
 IBHPQNT0YPIN0Y KOYTAOYMOYEIOY

laca
T6
EPC 'rfjQ ivrCcre- xep O"nou x-
: TfiQ MOVellDCL- TLOCV 11OVEUcL-
CCLQ XCLC nrog.
.
ECc -cv hjitpav
5 c6v dLDdLpov &xpL-
-Cv alluepov 11(p
c
*EV 9TEL Ti jCTE(o TfiC, -tO0 revor- OL Aapsg 98V0C OIVLU6V
U6C9OU XCLTCLCYXCUfiQ1O"nep UCLCBOUycLptx6v-
10 V E,TOG X*Tfig CLCYLF-CCLG
*IOUCYTLVLCLVOO TOO Ilgyd-
ou, etafiX, 50V tV K)vCTCLV-
TLVOUTL6XCL nPgOELG gZVOUG
TCCLP(186E0U TIZV *Apcov XE: -,
15 YOlleVWV, WIC C;UV9TPCXC Ttd-
Cra A UMLG Etg TAV 59CLV
(II6TG)V G. 11T189TLOTE eWPCL-A(5-
TEG 93V0C TO4O0T0V.

EEXOV YdLp -cdL(;

x6liao, liaxpdLc ndLvu 6c6cuvag npavbCOLC Rae Tte-
20 TEXel'6VaQf 86. XOLTEA 61LOCCL XOLTEC)V
(POPCCYCCL CLOTC)V TC)V OGVWV.
06-ro L

6
xcLO(BQ EO(iypLog XyF-L tv lbnfipXov
Trp TE611TVC4) CL15TOfJ ;k6ycp Tfic
6XXXTjCYLaaTLRfiQ LCYTOPCCLQ,

25 cavoc
6VTCQ

TU)v &uaEoDCcov T8v bup (bn6 T+K) T6v Ka6xacov, TdL 6n6xcLvcL
TEC6CCLvel16lLEvOL, tREC. RCLXaQ' (6TTL%dLxcog T+K)
TEeTt6V%5CLCFLTICLPdL
TC)V YELTVL6VTWV CLOT0% To6px(ovr To6TouQ (pc6yovTcQ, TflQ Cbe-
30 CLQdLTECLVCLaTAVTCQ X(bPCLCRCLC T6v CLCYLCLX6v EuEeCvou
dLPCXOVTO tiiC
ToO 8LcLadLv-
TEQj T6V B6aTtopov. 'Euct0r:, v 86 dLTtdLPCLVTCQ
bLfjx-
6OV63V
Oov T6noUQ TtOXXC)V
TO% TEaPCLTUYX(iVOUULV cL6- Toi5ToLQ naPCLTUYXdVOUCYLV
TOVQ DCLPDdLPOLC

35 &vTaycavLC64evoL, UXPLQ 06 TdQ 6X0(XQ TOO 'IGTPOU RCLTCLXA-

(P(xaL xaC np6c 'IouaTLvL(xv 6v tnpeaDc6cavTo, cLtToovTcc be-
XOfiVCLL a6T06c. ,
TOO U OCLCFLX6(A)Q (PLXa-VDP(STEWQCLU'-ro6'gTtpoa6eEQLvL6-
Vou (5eE(XU6VOU T+K). gXcx)cov nap ^a6TorJ 9Xe: Lv TAv xa-robinaL dv
X6PqL MUCFCCLr. 6VTE6A. P-L Awpog-r6q), cfiVC)V-*ICCL. XOU116VTI &PCqTPqL. *v Kac
40 tE dLn6pwv e0nopoL yev6-4evoL xaC CCQ TtXfiOoc noX6 txTaUv-
6LIlVAILOVEC dLXdPL(JTOL XOV
Teg, xaC XaC CGPC06VTCQ, PCOllaC-
ouc xaTcLoTpet6lievoL. 6PLxac xcLC Maxe86vac cLCxucLXWTCCovTcc
Rac CLOTAV TAV Damxcba RCLTCLTp6xovTcc
 70
-AOLL -rd TECPC Cvb-rv a(PEL8%
XTI
LMievOL . rICLPXCLDOV66
xaC -r6 E[pliLov, Tt6XLv Tfig
E6p6TcqC bitaqliov, T"ITLC 6v

5 BouXyapCq o6ca v5v xaXeU-

TCLL ETPCG)lloc,
bTt6 reTZL63V Ttp6nv jlv
XPaTOU116VnV,
'Ioucrrtvp U T) OCLCLXEV
TECLPCL800EVOCLV TECLP*CL6TC)V.
10 ALdL TCLOTCL 06V CTUVOfiRCLL 6-

TtOVEC6LCYTOL 6TE6 Pw=Ccov

bTEO-
ycy6vCLCFL np6c CLOT06C,
CFXOVLtVG)V TtCLP6XELV a6TOtQ
6TTICLOV XPUCFOO XL-
(p6pov
6Tt
15 ALdL5aC TE'. Kat To6-
TOL9 tlTnYYeCXCLVTO Ot *ADcL-
PeLQ hC7UXdLCELV.

ToO (+U, T+K) MaUpLxtou T6v crxAnTpwv 6nctXjjjLUdvou xaTd T6

tECL'KLCTXLXLocYT6, li'E'; -roc

v ,
'AapeLc 0450-
20 TEPE:O`De6OUCYL'V Ot
crT (tECLXLCYXLXLocYT6V
K)
TEp6c al6T6v, dLELOOVTCQ uTixoaT6v Cftoc, 6 86
TCXQ TE'XLXLdLUL TOO XPUCTOO
cLg 6XdLtLDcLvov TtapdL PwlicLCcov
npocrTe0etvaL 6XXoLg eCxo-
2 CFL. "O 66 DOLCYLXE)g Tfig; S-tp-

VTIQ &PL6jLCVOQ 86ECLTO,

XCLTE: --
'AX, %"oG86 Pxcae 6-
-ToiriTo.
Tfic cyuv,.)4xnQ Myoc: Trcpavr-
PC_660 6VLCLUTOV.

30 XcLy6LvoC

ydLp 6 CL6-CC)'VhYE: 116V-, 6AXOTe MeL TdLQ O`nOV6dQ

6A), Tlv Ttp6(pCLCFLVTEOLO611evoQ
etc T6 e6peVv dupopuAv Tto-
Atpou Rae

35 CLCTC)v bn6poyxa

&Q CV
TLVL napnRO60`8n, X6- Rae
EL TdLQ. ouv, &Axac Rae 6EcxTtL-
VLCLCWQ ELyyL66VCL TtcLpaXaVt-.,
DdveLr n6; LV TfiQ ePXnQ
40 6Lcp6xaxTov TCL6Tnv e6pc6v,

np6c 86 Rae Albyo6oTag

Rae x6 BLjlLV6XLOV, VflGOQ
U tCYTL TOOTO ILEYdAn TOO
"ICYTPOU- nap6xaoe 86 Rae
45 TAv 'AyXCcLXov Tv -vGv Me-
cyCvnv xfig Maxe8ovCag, xat
noXXdLc T6pac n6XCLQ 6XCL-
p6oaTo TdLQ bn6 T6 *IXXUPL-
x6v TeXo6aag. 'HXOe 66 Rae
50 VtdXPL TC)v TOO BUCavTCOU
 71

TtpoctaTecwv nLC6-
-rdL TEdLv-rCL
IIEVOG, ATICCXP-L 8e MCLC T
Maxpd TECXn UaTaCTPetCLL,
6XCYOL U TLVEG CL)TrOV T6V
5 nopeli6v TfiG *Ae8ou 8La-
(VTEr. XcLC -r Tfic *AaCctr-

XCJPCCLnLCLIICVOL CL13LQ-
V9CrTPE: )CLV. '0 89 CLCLXE1G
TTpgap-t, g lTP6Q
tEcxTtga-rcL;
-r6v xctydvov
10 kcv *EXTZC8Lov na-
TpCxLov a)v KoltcvTt6Xcp,
TtpoaeAxnv Triv ndxTcav noL-
oiucvoG, -ACLC tnc TOI5TW et-
PAVnV dYELV 6 dLPCLPOQ
15 XaDOUOXynCYC. MLXPV 69 CU-
-
X6Lactcn(ixtv -rG O-nov8dLc t; ct-
MEL XCXC XCLTCLTtOXE1ICZ 8EL-
vroc -rAv* Te axueccLv -xpav
mac TAV muacctv, XCLTOLOTpg-
20 kLQ U QPOPLOL ndLILTZOXCL.
`EV TepQL 89 EtaoXe

tXF-LP6aCLTO (+ TEELCYCLV
TV I) E)E:CFaCLXC(X'v (8e-c-rcL, %CcLv T+K)
C+ xaC -rAv I) 'EXX68a

TAV
TEELGCLV Te 'HTEeL-
TLCLXCLLdLV
25 pov xaC

*ArrLliAV XCLI EGomv

ot 6 xaC tv HcXonovvAop neXoTE6vvnaov

x(xC
6(pOpjIAC7CtVTeQ nox114)- T(x6Tnv
E:rXOV, xat 6XCLX6vTec TdL
30 eGyevfl xcLU'XXTIvL-Rd Eftrl

'ACLC XCLTCLOOeCPCLVTSQ (+ TdL YtV71 T+K)XcLToxnaav CL15TOC 6V a6T.

ot 66

TdLQ LLQL Q 6vouc cLu'T&5,v XE: V

PcLr.

35 6UVn, 56VTCQ 6MOUYCVV (+ C'LXXOQ 6LXXCLXfl, I) 8LCTtdLPTICFCLV. KaC

116V T&V IICLTPC)'V TE6>utc UE: TCpXC&OTj (1kUrydCarl, T+K) tv "cfj T&Sv xaXau-
PC)'v X6Pqt 'roG PLY eob, 'Ot 86 'A pysUoL 6 rfl, '(+V4CT43 Tfl, XCIXOU4Wl I)
'op6DT, I, ot 86 KopCVOLOL tV Tt (+ '40(p T XCGkOUjItV7. j I) At-
YCVTJ, VLE:-C4)XLGaV. T6Te 84 XCLC ot AdLXG)'VeQ T6 TEaToC)ov Mupoc
40 RCLTCLXLTc6vTec, ot ILv tv rfl. EL-AE:
XCqL MC74) ttliCXCCLQ I) 6ETXXCuCav

ot xat eCQ 8TL etc7lv tv xaTOLXOUVTCQ

tv T6TE4) XCXXOU116V4) A61leVVCL,

xat AcjievVTaL 6LVTC Aaxe- , XaC dLVTC ACLXC6CLLUOVLTC)V AEIICLL-

45 6CLLIIOVLTaV XCLTOVOjICLC6uevoL VtTCLL XCLTOVOjldLCOVTCLL
XCLC T4V CbCaV TCOV ACLX(BVCOV
8LdACXTOV 5L(XCY(b[OVTCQ*
 72

Ot. 86(%OLTEoC T+K) (6X TU)V 6TELaLwv T) 616coaTov

T6TEov TEap6LT6v Tft
0aX6.aaTjc aCYLaX6v C6P6VTE: Q XCXC Tc6XLV6XUPdLV OCX060j1CYCLVTCQ *ACLC
MOVELPOLGCCLV 'rCL6TTIv 6vOjtdLOCLVTE: (;,, 6LdL T6 I. LCCL IEXE: LV T&V 6V CLGTq) ECCr-
TCOPEUO116VWV 'TV C ECY080V , 6V CL6Tfl. Tfl. n6Xc L xcmxnocxv jLcTdL (+
5 4CLL' 1) TOO CUOU (+aOT8i) T+K) tMax6nou. 0t 56 (+C"TCPOL TCjV
trLLCYJICOV liCT6L T) TC)V 15PCVLVL(iTWV VOILCUC XCLC dLYPLXLXOC XCLT4)XC-
Gana= 6V TOVQ nCLPCLX6Lj16VOLQ 6REVaC TPCLXCLVOr-. *Ot--
6n'tCTXdLT(0V -T6TEOLc,,
XCLC TECLXOVCCLL 6TE(0VOjLdL(YanCYCLV.
ITC(ixwvcLg
owUTC.oQ
6Ld T6 XCLC (x6To6Q To6Q AdLXG)VCLC
10 UETOVOjlaCFaflVCLL. ToCvuv
ot 'ADOLPOL Tv IIE:XoTc6vvTlaov xaTao-x6vTcc(xcLTcLax6vTec Tv He-
XoT16vvnaov T+K)

xcLC xcL-roLxacLvTE: Q tv a6-rt

- 6Lpxecyav tTcC xp6vOLQ 6LCLROCFCOLC 6XTCbXCLC5CXCL (, CFLn' T+K)

15 (+ ,
Te T) I) TC)V PCOUOLCON DaCFLXCV, bATC, tTtP(p bTtOXECjiE-
VOL , TAIYOUV dLTE6 Too dThcyT' (cyT ou ki U. K) gToug
aT Tfig
, 6TEEP . AV 9XTOV
Too x6aLou xa-cacxeufig, ETOQ Wig DaaLXCCCLQ
MCLUPLXCOU, xaC u (, CYT TPLCLXOCFTOO TPCtQ
ILXp6uToG aT TLYr
xaC 8exdLTou T, aT TPL, CLIAOCYTOO TPLo-AaL8CXdTou K) CTOUQ
20 (+ Tfic Too x6c4ouoa-raaxcufic; I) AV 9ToQ
, o"TEE: p TtTcLpTov
(ETOC 6-T, CTOQ 6 K) TfjC DCL0LXeCCLC NLunp6pou TOO nCLXCLL-
oO Too 6xovTog ut6v ETCLUPdLXLOV. M6vou 66 Toa, dwaToXLioO u6-
pouc Tfic HcXonovvaou 4TE6 KopCvOou (+xat T+K) MCL-
46XPL
XCLCOU TOO EIDXCLDLVOC 98VOUQ 6Ld 86cyDaTov
T6 TpcLXO xat ucLOci-'
25 rIeXoTcovvAaou tv C+TCPrA"+K) CL16T45.
pe6owcoc, aTpcLTTj-y6c; j16PE: L OTE6 TOO'
PCOllaCCOV DCLCLX6Wr- XCLTCTt64TtCTO. E% U T&V (+6Tt6 I) TO L 016-r(A)V
awcany6v, 6pvv4icvoc u6v 6n6 4ApjiE: vCag,
Tfic I.LLupdc; (pcLTpL-
dQ U Trov tnovollacoll6vow Exxnp@v, go-
CyullBcLx6v T) EaxaDLVI
VE: L'. TTOXE:IILX&SC_ P-TX6 TE XCLC ApdLVLCYC eCQ TXog RCLC TOVQ dLp-
30 XOEV OCXATOPaLV &nOXCLTaaTftVaL TdL OCXeVCL nCLp6aXeV. TOOTO
1=06V 6 TEPOCLPq46VOQ 5CLaLXS6Q Mxnp6poc xaC xcLpdg nXna. &eCg
6L6L(, ppOVT, c6oQ- CacTo (--T6 xcLC- 1) T&Q 6xeVac dLvcLxatvCaCLL-,
Tz6Xctr.
XCLC CIQ Ot OdLPOCLPOL ULPLUCLV (xcLrTlbdLpLacLv T+K) tXUXTjCrCCLQ dLVOLxO
6o4fiaaL, xaC-aftol6c'To6c OCLPDdPOUQ XPLCTTLavoi3g ITCOLficyaL .

35 AL6 xaC dLVCL4aAD6V TV UCTOL- TAV 66 IIETOLXCaV (jlETOLXeaCCLV

XCCLV 06 bLaTPCDOUCYLV Ot ITcL- K) T6v Ilcapwv (ITcLTpC)v K) dLvcL-
Tperg, xexe6ceL ao-roO -ro'3- UCL86V Ti
Touc Trp 6E dLpxq! g

68dLPEL (+
TUN IICLTP&A)V (X6TO75C T, T65v IICLTplv (xOToi5Q K) dLTEE-
40 (+xaC
xaTtaTTIcre lie-rd I) ToO. C66ou a16TC)v I-EOLVLVOQ, 6c v
(+T6 TnVLRCLOTCL I) 'AacLvCLCrLOC 'TO15VOILCL

'APXLeTcLuxoTEA
xcLC urj-rpoTE6Xccag bNaLa -raVc (+U K) TUYXdvou-
lIdLTpaLQ naP6CFXCTO &PXLEnL-
cya TEp6-repov &-rLjiAOn etc linTp6-
T06TOQ
axonfic nP6 XPnIlCLTL- noXLV TECLP6 ToG a6TOG NLun(p6pou.
45 Co6cMQ. 'Avyxo86Ana6 Te 6x UCLTPLapXoOvToC U Tapaaou Wan
PdLOPWV XaC TAV Tt6XLV CL6TC)V np6c CL)TV XCXT'tnC5OGLV RaC
RCLC T6Q TOO Ocoo &YC(XQ tx- &YLG)TdLTn tTILCUOTEA AaXC8aLjLOVC-
xXnaCac,
naTPL(XPXOGVTOC aC. xcLC h MeO6vn xaC h Kop6vn.
TL TcLpcLaCou ToG tv' '
 73

4-ylmg ncurp6c ftDv. Tv

Aaxe8aCVLwvcL n6XLV tX 06-
apwv XCLC CL6TAV dLvcyecp(xg
XCLC VOLXCOCL9 6V CL6Tfl, XCL6v
5 06LJILXTOV, KCL(PAPOUQ TE XCLC
E)pqxTjaCouc xat 'ApjleVCOUQ
XOLTE069 dLTE6
XCLC 6LCLp6pcov
T&Ecav Te xaC 6TTL-
n6kecov
10 GUVCLXa6VTCLQ, btLCYXOTtAV X(XC
CL60LC TCL6T71V RCLT6CYTT)Ge XCLC
IbTtO-K6VCYaCLL Tt TaV IICLTP&5'V
VJTPOTt6XCL tUCMLCYeVj ITPOCY-
CL(PLEPCbCYCLQ XCLt TtPCLQ 4560
15 6TtLCTXOTTdLQrT'V TE MEa(B'VnV
-xcLC TAv Kopd)'VTI'V. AL6 -ACLC
Ot 06LPOCLPOL Tfl. TOO a600
DOTIOCCqL XCLC XdLPLTL XCLTnXTI!-
a6vTeg toan-rccrancyav KCLC Tfl,
20 T&V XPLCYTLCL'V&5VTtPOCYCT60n-
CTCL'V TECOTEL, etc E)6Eav XCLC
66)(CLPLCFTCa'V TOG TECLTp6c XCLC
TOO utoo xac Toio-aycou
nve6ucaog RCLC,
Viov XCLC dLee
25 xaC eCQ'Tol6QCLMVCLr-dLMv.

The comparison of the three-texts shows clearly

the numerous and important differences. between the

lberon version. and the other two. The differences

between the Turin and the Kutlumus version are of

minor importance and are limited to the first 4

lines. Consequently they will be considered as one

version. One has to note more specifically the follow-

ing:

p., 69,, 11*.,l'-3: The difference of the titles be-

tween the Turin and the Kutlumus and the lack of

title in the Iberon can be explained by the fact

that the original from which all the texts were co-

pied had no. title. The owners of the Monemvasiot

 74

manuscripts, the Turin and the Kutlumus, were both

collectors of documents on Monemvasia and added a

title to the text to indicate that the-foundation of

their native town was cited in it, without any other

alteration or intervention, otherwise there would

have been differences between the two texts. It is

not possible that one copied the other, for in that

their titles would have been identical. '

,-case

p. 69,11.4-7. The first phrase of the Kutlu-

mus, which a"' seems to be an addition, possibly by

an older possessor of the text, is unclear because

of the incomplete date. (Pl. 4) The interpretation,

which has been proposed, i. e. that the copyist adopted

the method of chronological calculation used in other

parts of the manuscript, namely that of defining the

interval between two events, cannot be accepted,

because all the other examples in the same manuscript

do not make use of the dative case, which has been used
(Pl-5)'. 2
here The sentence seems not to indicate the

1
It must be noted that the correct word used
in the title of the Kutlu; iius manuscript is AxTLaev,
cf. Schreiner, Kleinchroniken, 11,77, and not oC-
xTjae, v,. as cited by. the editors. B.eeS', 'XP0VLx6, , 61j
omits it. it has _uspally
been suggested that the Chronicle of
Monemvasia might have been a fragment from an official
document for the See of Patras Otto Kresten, "Zur
Eclitheit des Sigillion des Kaisers Nikephoros I fUr
Patras, " Ro-mische Historische Mitteilungen, 19 (1977),
69-70, n. 173.
2
Schreiner, Note, 474 n. 10; Schreiner; 11ein-
chroniken, 1,319-20.
 75

interval between two events but a sequence of events

starting from the time of the Avars and up to the

year the phrase has been written. It is possible that

it is an addition by one of the intermediate owners

of the text and that the scribe of the Kutlumus ma-

nuscript was not able to decipher the date, as in

other cases in the same manuscript. The remaining

numerals should be read either P. (TE: L) "on the

c74(. ,
kv-0- 6 th th (th)
y(ear)", or, cYT(P.. c((P) RTEL), "on the-6_ 5
...
lip 1
(year)", i. e. some time before 1492 (70.00)-.

p. 69 , 11.8-43, p. 70 * P. *.71r '11.1-26. In this

part for which common sources have been used impor-

tant differences also appear. Iberon gives the imp-

ression of a more elaborate treatment which has led

to a more "scholarly" style. Fu rthermore in p. 9,1.

18, when the. facts of the reign of Maurice start,
the Iberon uses the Byzantine system of dating

1
Lemerle, Chronique, 23 n. 30, interpreted it
CP
e'; Bees, XPOVLx6v, 61 : w'; Lampros, "ICFTOPLI(dL
MEXETAIIOLTCL, 128, read the date CTCOC', which is 6805
or 1296"7, believing it to be the date of the composi-
ti6n ol the Chronicle in its complete form; Dujcev,
Cronaca, 2, changed arbitrarily to: c'. The similari-
ty between the incomplete date and the various dates
in the second part of the Chronicle, refe3ing to the
See of Lacedaemonia in the 14th centrury, might sug-
gest its insertion by the compilator of the two parts
-of the Chronicle. All the dates, however, of this
part contain the indictio, which is missing here,
and furthermore the date is lacking in the Turin ma-
nuscript. Consequently this hypothesis should be re-
jected. (Pl. 6)
 76

whereas in the other version the older Alexandrian

system is used. This must be taken into consideration

and allows f. Or two possibilities only; either both

versions are contemporary, copied from the same ori-

ginal, which contained the chronology in the Alexan-

drian system, and the copyist of the Iberon in his

elaboration of the original changed the date to the

system, which was in use at the time, or the Iberon

is an arrangement of the older Turin-Kutlumus version.

The possibility, which. is generally adopted that

,
the Iberon is the older version, seems unacceptable.

If it were so then the system of dating which was in

use at the time must have been changed by the copyist

of the Turin-Kutlumus version to the Alexandrian,

1
which was out of use , and this would be absurd. .

.p. * 71, 'll., '27-, 47,, p. ' 72, -1--41. The Iberon and

the Turin-Kutlumus versions do not differ essentially

in this part, the sources of which are not known. The

laconic description of the abandonment of the impor-

tant Peloponnesian townsis followed by an identical

and detailed account on the fate of Lacedaemonia.

1
On the use of the Alexandrian system in another
source on the foundation of Monemvasia, Schreiner,
Note, 474-75. The fact that the Turin-Kutlumus version.
simply mentions the donation xcLT`tnC6oaLv of the three
bishoprics to Patras is another indication that the I-
beron has gone through a further elaboration. Cf. Le-
merle, Chronique, 23; P. Lemerle, "A propos de la Chro-
nique de Monemvasie et de quelques textes apparent6s, "
ZRVI, 8 11 (.1964), 235-36.
 77

It has to be accepted that a common source has been

used giving all the details on the movements of the

inhabitants of Lacedaemonia and its abandonment as

well as on the foundation of the new town. This spe-

cific source will be called Chronicle of Lacedaemonia

and Monemvasia to be distinguished from the so-cal-

led Chronicle of Monemvasia, which has incorporated

it.

p. 72, '11.42-49, p'. 73,1-25. The fact that the

versions differ in this part points again to-a further

elaboration of the Iberon text, with the addition

from a separate source of the information on the re-

foundation and recolonisation of Lacedaemonia in the

2
10th century.

Taking into account the preceding remarks one

could propose the following division of the contents

of the Chronicle of Monemvasia.

: p. 69 and p. 70, *11.1-17.. General information on

the Avars before the time of Maurice.

: p. 70,11'. 18-50, p. 71', '11.1-35. Attacks of the

Avars during the 6th year of the reign of -

1
Lemerle, Chronique, 21.
2
Cf. Lemerle, Chronique, 20.
 78

Maurice against Greece and the Peloponnese.

III : p. 71,11.35-37. Abandonment of Patras by its

inhabitants and settlement in Calabria, follow-

ing another attack by the Slavs.

IV : p. 71,11.37-39. Abandonment of Corinth and

Argos.

v : p. '71, ' 11.39-47, p. ' 72, * 1'1,1-10. Abandonment of

Lacbdaemonia towards three directions, Sicily,

the Parnon and the newly founded Monemvasia, i. q.

Chronicle of Lacedaemonia and Monemvasia.

vi : p. 72,11.10-26. Establishment of the Avars in

the Peloponnese for 218 years, except for the

eastern part where a strategos was sent.

VII : p. 72,11.26-34. Submission of the Slavs.

VIII : p. 72,11.35-41. Return of the descendants of

the inhabitants of Patras.

Ix : p. 72,11.42-49, p. 73,1.1 Elevation of Pa-

.
tras to the rank of a metropolis within the f"ra-

mework of the Patriarchate of Constantinople.

x : p. 73,11.2-16. Rebuilding of Lacedaemonia.

xi : p. 73,. Jl. 16-25. Christianization of the bar-

barians.

I
The history of the See of Patras is not clear:
Kresten, Echtheit, 24-25 and n. 44. The Chronicle as
well as the Scholion of Arethasl which will be subse-
quently examined, imply that it held the rank of an
archbishopric, before being raised to a metropolis
by Nicephoros I. Its subordination to the Patriarcha-
te of Constantinople must have taken place at this
time and not earlier, as is usually accepted for the
Sees of Illyricum, see chapter 6 1.
 79

Section V in particular, i. e. the Chronicle of Lace-

daemonia and Monemvasia, could be further subdivided

in the following parts.

i : p. 71,11.39-40. The Laconians abandoned their

native soil.
ii : p. 71 11.40-47. Part of them went to Sicily.
,
They settled in a place called Demenna, calling

themselves Demenitai instead of Lacedaemonitai

1
and pres'erving their Laconian dialect.

: P. 72,11.1-4. The rest of the inhabitants

found an inaccessible rock near the sea and

built a fortified town, which they called monem-

vasia, and they settled there.

iv : p_. 72,11.4-5. Their bishop them.

accompanied

V, : p. 72,11.5-10. The the

, peasants and cattle-bree-
ders went to live in the wild areas-which
-a

1
There seems to be no reason to reject the con-
nection of Demenna with Lacedaemonia as does Lemerle,
Chronique, 14. B. Lavagnini, "Demenna e Demennitai, "
Tribute 'to Andreas' N. ' Stratos (Athens, 1986), 11,
123-28, esp. 125-26, beli that the link between
the two should not be rejected, since it would be
difficult to explain how the name of an obscure ita-
lian town, ignored by the historians, could have oc-
cured in a local chronicle if it had not been based
on some real fact. Demenna was conquered by the Arabs
before 965, who used the name of. "Achares" for it:
Lavagnini, 125,127-28. Consequently the relevant part
of the Chronicle must have been composed before that
date. Cf. '.D. Lemerle, Les plus. anci: ens recueils des mi-
racles de Saint D6metrius II. Commentaire (Paris, 1981),
62-65. A. similarity of style with the De Administrando
Imperio of Constantine Porphyrogenitus is notice e:
J. Koder, "Anmerkungen zu den Miracula Sancti Demetrii",
Tribute to Stratos, 11,523-38.
 80

are situated around Sparta and which have been

lately called tzaconiai because the Laconians

1
were renamed Tzaconians.

III Marginal scholion by Arethas

.A

It has been generally accepted that "virtually

every notice contained in the Chronicle is confirmed

by another source", which is a scholion in the margin

of a manuscript belonging to Arethas, metropolitan

2
of Caesaria in the early 10th century. After the

examination of the Chronicle of Monemvasia it would

3
be useful to compare the two sources.

The identification of the Tzacones with the

Lacones occurs only in the Turin-. Kutlumus version.
It should not necessarily berejected, as Lemerle,
Chronique, 23, doestfollowed by most historians.
The etymological interpretation, however, is doubtful.
On the subject see below, pp. 137-41.
2
P. Charanis, "The Chronicle of Monemvasia and
the question of the Slavonic settlements in Greece, "
DOP, 5 (1950), 162-63.
3
S. B. Kougeas, "EnC TOO RCLXOUIItVOU XPOVLXOG
Vic MovF-uDaaCac, " NE, 9 (1912), 473-80; L. G. Weste-
rink, "Marginalia by Arethas in Moscow Greek Ms 231, "
B, 42'(1972), 196-244. J. Karayannopoulos, "Zur Fra-
'ge der Slavensiedlungen auf dem Peloponnes, "' RESEE,
9 (1971), 455-56, believes the Scholion not to be
by the hand of Arethas and dates it in the 12th c.
S. I. Kyriakidis, BuCcLvTLvaC MEXTaL. VI OC EX&DOL
6v neXonovvAc4) (Thessaloniki, 1948), p. 91 and J. Ko-
der, "Arethas von Kaisareia und die sogenannte Chro-
nik von Monembasia, " JOB, 25 (1976), 75-80, believe
that Arethas could have been the author of the Chro-
nicle of Monemvasia. It is significant that in his
Scholion Arethas does not mix Avars with Slavs, as
does the author of the Chronicle. The Scholion is
reproduced from Kougeas, 474-75.
 81

1 NLx7l(p6poc / T45 TE:TCiPT4) ETE: L Tfig DCLCYLXeCCLr-

CLOTOU h I7CLTPC0VTfig IIEXOTEOVVACYOU TflQ TEa-rPC-
609 hjl&V JASTOLRUL dLTc6 TflQ KaXCLUP&5v TE6Xscog
TOO PnyCou dwexojiCaaq eCc T6 dLpx(xUov n6XL-
5 alia TC)v HaTpZv. *E(puya6c60q y6Lp youv lieT-
(pxCaOq bTt6 TOO ExXaunvC)v 90vaug TtoXdji4) t(p-
OpuncavTcov eecacLxcq T TtpeoTn' XCLC 8euTtpqL
XaC TtpocF6TL AtVLCiCL TE XCLC Aoxpotg &U(poT-
poLc xcLC *ETEL%'VnjlL5COLQ Te XaC 'oC6XaLg xaC
10 64 XCLC Tfl, TECLXCLL4'HTEeCP(p XCLC 'ATTLXfi. XCLC
EODOCqL xcLC rleXoTtovvftp xaC txDcLX6vTcov litv
TdL tYYCVfi tXXnVLXdL 9,DVn. XCLC XCLTCL(PaELPdL-V-
TCk)V, XCLTOLXL(JUVTCJV 66 cLi5-r&5v dLn6 DaaLXE: Ca(r.
MoLupLxCou ftoug UTT li6xpL -rcTdLpTou ftoug NL-
15 x-n(p6pou, t(p'65 TOO dLvcxToXLxo(3 Upoug rieXo-
Ttovv4crou dLTc6KOPCVOou xcLC lidXpL MaXtag TOO
ExXcLunvoO xa0ape6ovTog, eCc o' xaC oTpaTny6c
XCLTE:7tdllTieTo Tfl, IIE:;kOTEO'V'VAC4).'Ex To&rcav T&V
20 urpa-rny6v dLn6 Tfic utupdc 6pli6lievoc 'Aplie-
VCCLQ, (P(XTPCCLC 156 T8V tTEOVOjLaCOVLV6)V EXXn-
P@V, C`UU0CLX6V T) EXXaU7jV65V 80VEL, TtOXCILL-
RC)Q erx6v Te XCLC A(P(ivLcycv ecc TXOQ XCLC
Corc dLpxflee OCRATOPULV 6LTEORaTaaTflVCLL Td
2,5 ,V
ONCtCL TldpCYXCV. BCLCYLXC6C YdP 6 CCPnIldVOQ
&VCLllaO6'V TAV IIE: TOLRCaV 01) 8LCL'rPCDE: LV XEAC6-
CYCL CLOTOO T6v Te Xa6v Tq) 9E dLpXflQ gbdLQCL
. &noxcLT&rTnaev 8CRCXL(X TCLrQ
xaC jInTpoTE6Xe(oQ
IIdLTPCLLQ, naP60XCTO, dLPXLET'TLC`XOTtflQ np6 cL6-
30 TOO XPnjLCLTLCO6CMQ.

A division of the contents of the Scholion simi-

lar to that used for the Chronicle produces the fol-

lowing sections:

a: ll. T-S. Return of the descendants of the inha-

bitants of Patras, in the 4th year of Nicepho-

ros I, from Calabria.

b: ll. 5-6. Abandonment of Patras.

c: ll. 6-13. Description of the attacks of the

Slavs against Greece and the Peloponnese.

d: ll. 1'3-19. Establishment of the Slavs in Greece

and the Peloponnese, starting from the 6th, year

of Maurice and up to the 4th of Nicephoros,

 82

except for the eastern part where a strategos

was sent.

e: ll. 19-23. Submission of the Slav-q.

f: ll. '23-30.. Promotion of Patras to the rank of

a metropolis by Nicephoros I.

The comparison of the contents of the Scholion

of Arethas with those of the Chronicle of Monemvasia

shows that the entire text of Arethas coincides to

some extent only with the Chronicle, i. e. a=VIII,

b =III, C=II, d=Vl, e=VII, f=IX, and that sections

IV, V 1
I, X. a nd XI are missing from Arethas.

So far sections IV and V have been considered

to form an integral part of the Chronicle. The fact

that'they were missing from Arethas was-either not
In .
noticed or attributedto. hisla ck of interest the east-

ern Peloponnese. It would be, however. more reasonable

to accept that Arethas was in possession of a Chroni-

cle of the metropolis of Patras, which was used by

him for his Scholion and which did not contain-the se-

parate information on Lacedaemonia and Monemvasia,

the Chronicle of Lacedaemonia and Monemvasia, neither

the information on the abandonment of Corinth and Ar-

gos. Since Arethas ignored the Slav settlement in

-

1
Section X is also missing from the Turin-Kutlu-
mus section.
 83

the eastern part of the Peloponnese, stating that it

had remained free from Slavs, it is possible that

the Sla settl*ed only in the north-western regions of

the pen insula, during the reign of Maurice at least,

as, /seem to suggest some sources

IV Petition by the Metropolitan of Monemvasia

.A

Spyridon Lampros published in 1915 two petitions

addressed to the Patriarch of Constantinople, written

for the metropolitan of Monemvasia by Isidore, later

metropolitan of Kiev, in the 15th century. The long-

v-
est contains the following section on the foundation
I--
2
of Monemvasia.

1
These remarks make improbable the authorship
of Arethas for the Chronicle. The archeological finds
suggest that the-. abandonment of the cities of the
eastern Peloponnese must,, ethave - happened in the 6 th C
as early as Maurice's reign, V. Popovid, "Les t6moins
arch6ologiques des invasions Avaro-Slaves dans 1' Il-
lyricum Byzantin, " MEFRA (Antiquit6), 87 (1975), 445-
504, esp. 452,455-57,503-04.
2
S. P. Lampros "AT50 &VCLpopac "roG 11TIrPoTtoxcTou
,
Moveuf3cLoCac np6c T6, v 1ICVrPLdLPXTjV, " EE, 12 (1915), 55-
318, from 226, fols. 69 r_133
ms Palatinus Graecus
.
He announced, p. 258, but never fulfilled, his inten-
tion to comment on the text. On the manuscript and the
texts : G. Mercati, Scritti'd" Isidoro il cardinale
Ruteno (Studi e Testi, 46) (Rome, 1926), pp. 9-17.
On Isidore and the petitions see below chapters 5
and 6. The text, containedin-fol. 121, is reproducedfrom
NE, 12 (1915), 286-87.
 84

1 AuOUv 'rotvuv aecopOujI6'Vcov &X(bCYCWV TfIG KoPCV-

DOU
, 116-Cd TAV PWILaCWV 6TLLRPdLTCLCLV TflQ IIEXO-
TEOVV4CFOU, JILULQ U6V 6116 TC)V hllCPC)V 'IOUCFTL-
VLCLVOO TOO XYdLXOU, 6C WCLOT6 xaC T6v t-
5 XCCCYC C0%0fjl6V U'GTePOV 9TSCXLCYe' RCLT'CL6T6v
YdP TPL@V CFXUiDLX6V 'YE'V3V T6v"Icrupov 45LCLTEC-
PCLCFdLVTC4V, KOTTLYdLPOUQ, 06TTLY(iPOUC XCLC 06-
VLYdPOUQ To6Touc 6)v64CLEOV, T6 lAv 6v To6Tcov
Y6VOQ MUCYCCLV TV'&VCO XCLC IICLVVOVCCLV XCXC ACLX-
10 UcLTCcLv xaC TdjAXpLg 6C '16VLOV x6XTLOV 1EX
JILELQ 6(p68ou x=68pajicv, 06TTCYCLPOL 66 eP4-
R71V TLa0CLV RCLC Tv 6v EXX7jcm6vTq) Xepp6VTICYO'V
XCLC TdL tvT6c 'Eppou'TL6VTCL 116XPL T&V TflQ KWV-
CYTCXVTCVOU TCPOCLUTe6(0V, OU"Q 84 XCLC dLVCXCLCTLGC
15 BCXLC7dLPLOQ, XCLTCLCTTPCLTnYljCYdLj1CVOQ
XCXCCYUVTPC-
C6tO69, " 0)VC*YCLPOL86 maxebovcav
kCLQ. eeT-
xac
TCLXC(XVX(Xt "EXXdL8oL xcLC TdL vT6c E)EP4OTtU-
ACOV XTILCFdLUCVOL TtdVT(X XCLC 116XPL- KoPCVOOU
(PULCIONTEC, CTXOV 71CLPCLXPfillCL T4V TE6XLV XCLC
20 CLGT01306C. ETtCLPTLCLTU)V 86 T6 u6v cyup(pcTC)6ec
XCLC dLYEXCLUOV TAV RF, 'JOLC-'KOL*VVdLX06CYCLV"CE: (;
&XWCILV, TOVQ 6j1TEEPLCLXTjjIU6VOLQ Tfl, Aaxe6cLC-
UO'VL ROLC TECLVeaTnx6CFLV all'TdLPXCOC TEPocTQuy6v-
TCQ 6PEOL'i TOGTO 61 dV EC71 lldXXov. T6 Ilap-
25 06VLOV 8pog, TCXVQ6XeCVOU XCLpdL8pCLL9ROLCTOCQ
0'nqX(ICOLQ XCLC TOVQ DCLPdL%)PO6Q 6yxcLTa5s5u%6-
TSQ, CL6TO159, ,
bUCEE:PUCY(XVtXE: CVOU 64 T013 OCLP-
D(XPL'KOG PC611CLTOQXCLC, acbCovTsc CTL T6 TtCLXCLL-
6v tReUvo T65v Aaxcbvcov 6volia, TC4,KcavcLQdLvTC
30 Aaxcbvcov aU-rox% 15TEODcLpDapCCOVTSQ Xg:-YOUCYLV.
Ot 61 CL6 6T6yX(XVOV tUTEOPLx6v dyovTec &ELT-
5EU1.ICLy (P,5dL0a*VTEQ TLCLPdLT6 r6oeLov 6TECVCLOV
TrOV ETtCLPTLCLTC)V 6REVVO* YUVCLLECV C"LILaXCLC T6-
MjPCbGCL'VTE: Q 66 ,
XVOLQ, '. Ttz TdQ CFQ65V VCLOQ, n0LPA
35 ELReXLCLV 60EOV- TEPOCYOREEXCLVTeC66 CCQ MECCTA-
V71V, iXnCAXV XEUGC, XCLC AcUevCTCLQ CL6TO69 6
I=xp6c EtTES xp6vog, DCLPDCLPI(YCLVTCXQ xaC CLO-
T06C TOGVOIICL' Ot 86 66YEV6CYTEPOL T06TWV
V.aC TflQ_ XCLUTLPdQ T6XnQ XCLt T6V 668CLL116VCOV,
40 jLaa6vTec T& TC)v KOPLVOCWV 6XCVVOL 8A TdL TECLAY7
XdXeTLCL XCLI CL6TOL' 56CCTCLVTCQ jl T& 0011OLCLXATEL
CQCCL'V CL6TOVQ Y6VTITCLLp TEp6c moveul3acFZcLv k
erXOV 6x(bpouv eba6g 5%p no8c, V-ncrcov &u-
xeClievov Tfl, A(xxczvLxt, vncFCov btnMv xaCt-
45 TCCUnXCQ XCLC dLn6Toliov eC86TEC TEdLVTIJ XCLC TflQ
0CLXdLT"Q LXCLVI% bTEEPXEC4eVOV XCLI OLXOVLXOGV
&(z Ttp6c T6v CLC,56PCL TCPOCYCLjILXX6LCY-&CLL XCLC TLCLPCL-
(CL6CLV CLOTOO 4CLXXOV 8OXEVV XaC TECIVTcLx6Ocv
TLCPLeLXnjljl6VOV // UPTIILVOVQ 6PaCOLQ XCL4 dLodL-
50 TOLQ X(IC ndUL crxe86v TOZQ bTE' oOpav6v daCL-
T6v Te xal dLVeTELXECPnTOV, T6V TtPOXCLTeLXn(p6-
T(j)'V XCLC U(5VCO'V dVCU TUYXdVO'V, T(5 116XPL T(5TE
lin8elICCLV tcyxnx6c oCxncrLv, 6XV0066 TOO TflQ
MOVEOCLaCCLQ uc-ccLXax(5v 6v6iicL-ro(;.
 85

There are two distinct parts in tIje text. The

first, 11.1-20, contains a completely new element,

the attacks by three barbarian tribes against the By-

zantine Empire during the reign of Justinian and the

capture of Corinth by one of them. The second, 1.20

to the end, describes the abandonment of Lacedaemo-

nia by its inhabitants, as an indirect consequence

of the capture of Corinth, and the foundation of

Monemvasia. Since this part seems very similar to

section V of. the Chronicle of Monemvasia, the Chro-

nicle of Lacedaemonia and Monemvasia, it may be rew-

arding to start by examining this part and by subdi-

viding it into parts.

Cb
- 11

1: 1:1. ' 20-30. The4people of Sparta sought refuge

in the high mountains around Lacedaemonia. They

preserved their old name of Laconians calling

themselves barbarously Tzaconians.

2: 11'. ' '31-38. The merchants went with their families

to Gytheion, which was the port of Sparta. They

filled their own ships, sailed to Sicily and

settled there, in a place near Messene. They

were called, barbarously also, Demenitai.

3: 11'. 39-54. The nobles fearing that they would

suffer the same as the Corinthians, left immedia-

tely for Monemvasia, a steep and inaccessible

 86

island, which had never been inhabited till

that time.

A comparison with section V of the Chronicle of

Monemvasia, i. e. the Chronicle of Lacedaemonia and Mo-

nemvasia, shows a perfect coincidence ofinformation

with the exception of two points: the mention of the

port of Gytheion, contained in part 2 of the Petition,

which is not found in the Chronicle and the mention in part

iv of the Chronicle of the bishop among those who

went to Monemvasia, which is missing in this part, but

Is presumed subsequently The striking similarities,

which extend to the etymology of Demenna and of Tza-

cones, make it obvious that the duthor of the Chroni-

cle and Isidore used the same source, the Chronicle

of Lacedaemonia and Monemvasia. This Chronicle did not

have anything in common with the Chronicle of the me-

tropol is of Patras, used by Arethas, which did not

contain information on Lacedaemonia. Most probably it

2
was found locally, in the Archives of Monemvasia.

1.
NE, 12 (1915), 286. Parthenion should be identi-
fied with mount Parnon: Ernst Curtius, ' Peloporinesos
(Gotha, 1852), 11,308 n. 7.
2
Cf. Schreiner, Studien, 132-33.
 87

Coming to the first part of the Petition, it must

be noted that there is no positive evidence for an

attack of the Onogurs directed specifically against

1
Corinth during Justinian's reign. Agathias Scholasti-

cus records a series of attacks by Bulgarian tribes

against Constantinople and some parts of Greece. For

one of them he mentions a stratagem used by Belisa-

rius to drive the barbarians away from Constantinople.

Since the Petition mentions also that Belisarius used

a stratagem during the attack, one must assume that

2
both sources refer to the same series of events.

Indeed both agree that tribes of Hunnic origin,

I

1
Cf. D. A. Zakythinost "McLjou4A. B" 6 ncaaLoA. 6-
. ..
'YOr- XCLC 6 Xa)806?, LOQQ "IGC6C0P0Q &V IICXOTEOVIVU(P, " L6-
1anges MerIfer, III (Athens, 1955), 16-19 on another
reference to Ehe attack against Corinth during Justi-
nian's reign. The attempts to identify it are not very
convincing: K. M. Setton, " The Bulgars in the Balkans
and the occupation of Corinth in the seventh century, "
Speculum, 25 (1950), 502-43; P. Charanis, " on the ca-
pture of Corinth by the Onogur Bulgars, ` Speculum, 27-.
(1952), 343-50; K. M. Setton, "The emperor Constans II
and the capture of Corinth by the Onogur Bulgars, " Spe-
culum, 27 (1952), 351-62. On the raids against Thermo-
pylai : W. J. Cherf, ' The Dema Pass and its early Byzan-
'tine Fortifications, Topography, Archaeology, Diss. Lo-
,
yola University of Chicago (Ann Arbor, 1984), 72-73,
88,90. The fact that there were frequent barbarian
raids in the second half of the 6th century seems
certain, Popovid, MEFRA, 87, pp. 458-502.
2
Agathias ed. Keydell
R. (CFRB, II)
,
(Berlin, 1967), p. 194. The attack and the stratagem
are also briefly mentioned by Theophanes, ed. De Boor,
I, 360-6l. '
 88

including Kutrigurs, crossed the Danube in the time

of Justinian and were divided into three groups; one

plundered north, the second invaded th( Hellespont

threatening also Constantinople and was thwarted by

the stratagem of Belisarius, and the third went south

to Greece. According to Agathias-allthese events took

place during the year 559 and the invasion against

Greece was a failure, since the barbarians were not

able to attack the Isthmus. According*, to. the Peti-

tion, however, one tribe among them managed to cap-

:ture Corinth although no date can be deduced f or

,
this fact.

Concerning the three tribes of Onogurs, Kutri-

gurs and Utigurs, there is some confusion in the sour-

ces. Some definite facts have been established by Mo-

ravcsik, which can be summarized as follows. In the

middle of the 6th century all three tribes are men-

tioned as being active. Onogurs, in particular, were

active between 558 and 576. Kutrigurs and Utigurs

were related and they were found in the same areas

as the Onogurs, Great Bulgaria. The Utigurs are some-

times identified with the Onogurs. In 568 they all

1
came under the rule of the Avars.

I
Gyula Moravcsik, "Zur'Geschichte der Onoguren, "
Studia Byzantina ( Amsterdam, 1967), pp. 84-118, esp.
93-95,104-07; G. Moravcsik, 'Byz'anti'noturc'i*ca (Berlin,
1958), 11,220.
 89

It is therefore possible that sections of the

three Hunnic tribes found their way towards the

southern parts of Greece, although it is difficult

to identify an attack against Corinth such as the

one described in the Petition. In the-'attack of 559,

however, the failure mentioned by Agathias refers to

the Isthmus and not to Corinth. The exact expression

used %LA-re -r8 'IcOI4 npoaDcLX6v-r, ec" implies some kind

of activity around. the area, even f unsuccessful,

and it is hard to imagine any other reason why the

Isthmus should have been mentioned by the historian.

Agathias presumably drew his information from offi-

cial reports in. which the attack against the fortifi-

cations of the isthmus and their garrison, which did

1 hand
not surrender, was mentioned. On the other the
I
town of Corinth, much weakened by epidemids of plague

in 540 and later and by a severe earthquake in 551,

was an easy prey. The Hunnic tribes could have sacked

the town and plundered it and spread panic to the

neighbourhood. The fact that reconstructions were

carried out in the next decade supports this sequence

2
of events. Towns were plundered continuously during

1
Agathias, 194.
2 "The Justinianic " B, 49
P. Allen, Plague,
(1979), 5-20; R. L. Scranton; Medieval Architecture , in
the 'central' area of Corinth (Corinth, XVI) (Princeton,
1957), p*8.
 90

this period when barbaric attacks were frequent and

the fact was not often thought worthy of mention.

That could be the reason why for Agathias the Huns

in Greece "did not do anything worthy to narrate".

In conclusion, although the Chronicle of Monem-

vasia and the Petition to the P-atriarch, having obvi-

ously used the same source, are in perfect agreement

concerning the diaspora of the Lacedaemonians and

the foundation of Monemvasia they totally disagree

as to its cause and chronology. The Petition presents

the attack.. against Corinth and the abandonment of La-

cedaemonia as two isolated events, having no other

implications. 'According to it the foundation of Mo-

nemvasia was an indirect consequence of the sack of

Corinth by the Onogurs during Justinian's reign and

should therefore be placed between 559 and 565, Accor-

ding to the Chronicle of Monemvasia, however, the

events were of a more general significance for the

Peloponnese. Patras and Corinth with Argos and Lace-

daemonia were attacked by the Slavs and subsequently

abandoned after the year 587-8, while, this being an

inconsistency of the Chronicle, the eastern part of

1
lloWv rL dLELcupAyn-rov C8pcLacLv", Agathias,
194. Cf. R. L. Hohlf elder, "Trans-Isthmian Walls in the
Age of Justinian, ", GRBS, 18(1977), 173-79; T. Gregory,
"The Late Roman Wall at Corinth,, " Hesperia, 48 (1979)
,
264-80
.
 91

1
the Peloponnese was clear of Slavs. Since the two

sources disagree, more evidence will be needed to

check their information and their respective dating

in order to arrive to a safe conclusion.

V. Two Notices from Manuscript Kutlumus 220

The Kutlumus manuscript, where one version of the

the Chronicle of Monemvasia is found, contains a

Short Chronicle with two notices concerning the

foundation of. Monemvasia. (Pl. 4)

-4H moveliDacrea oTxLuev datt., r6v xE: p6, v. ToO'

IlaUPLRCOU TOO DCLCYLX&0Q &CC 9TOUQ CYTOU067jeot)o-
86 9cog o"Tou 96cocav
bn6To
(X6TOO
ot DeveTCxoL 6LIinpc*l EOUXa. ClldLVL
T6 cyouXT(iv
OCXOVOLOOVTCLL XP6VOL '7rOy'.

Erg dX-aT' h MoVeilDCLOCCL 6TtOU

2 TdL etvaL OCROL-
oev xp6voL ii-W i-0-39
. .3

The dates given in these notices were thought to

I
Ep. Chrysanthopoulos, "rICPC TOG XPOVLROiO VIC
Movew3aaCcxc, " EEBE, 21 (1951), 245, has noticed that
the descriptions of the attacks in the Chronicle are
quotations of the attacks by the Huns from Procopios.
This is in favour of the credibility. of the Petition.
2 67 n. 1.
From fol. 1 8 qr. On the manuscript, above p.
First published by Mauiuel Gedeon, "MvTjjiEXcL -cfig 'EXXn-
'VLXfjQ IIOL4CFe(0Q, " *ExxX7jcrLaCYLTK4 'AXAOeL (1882-3)
,3 ,
202. Schreiner, Kleinchroniken, no. 41,4 a/b, vol. I,
317-19, vol. 11,77-78, with older editions. A French
translation in Schreinerf Note, 473.
 92

be wrong because the year 6075 corresponds to 566-7,

which is before the reign of Maurice. It has been

shown, however, that although 6075 doeq not corres-

pond to the reign of Maurice according to the byzan-

tine system of chronology, according to the older

Alexandrian system, which was in use up to the 9th

century corresponds precisely with the year 582-3,

the first year of the reign of Maurice. This fact in-

dicates that the sources used for the notices were

1
not only reliable but also very old.

Since the notices record only the date of the

foundation of Monemvasia without any further details,

it is not easy to understand which stage of the proce-

dure is meant by the word "foundation". It has been

suggested that the information of the notices was

drawn from the Archives of-Monemvasia, which still

2 hand
existed in the 16th century. On the other the

selection of a suitable place for the building of a

new town, the construction of defence works, te ,

abandonment of Lacedaemonia and the settlement in the

I
Schreiner, Note, 474. The year 1606 must have
been the year the author of the notices , Ioannis Li-
kinios, was writing: Schreiner, Kleinchroniken, 1,317-
19. There is a remote possiblity that the date 6075 was
taken from the Chronicle of Monenvasia, in the Turin-
Kutlumus version of which the first year of Maurice
is given also in the Alexandrian system of chronology,
2 475.
Schreiner, Note,
j
 93

new town are stages which need several years and

probably did not permit a regular keeping of re-

1
cords. By the time facts started to be recorded

again the authorities of Lacedaemonia must have been

established in the new city. This means that the

foundation ofll. onemvasia must have taken place at

least a few years before 582-3.2

In conclusion the notices confim that the

abandonment of Lacedaemonia and the foundation of

Monemvasia should not be related to the abandonment

of Patras or the attacks of the Slavs, which accord-

ing to the Chronicle of Monemvasia started in the

6th year*of the reign of Maurice, in 587-88.

VI Archeological evidence
.

It might be helpful to test the evidence of the

sources examined so far against archeological or

other evidence, wherever available.

1,
In
the Chronicle of Monemvasia, above p. 72,
1.2, it is indicated that the. Lacedaemonians built
a fortified-town.
2
It is significant that the two. notices are be-
lieved to be a source for an unrecorded Slav invasion
against the Peloponnese, although Slavs are not men-
tioned in them: Schreiner, Note, 475 and n. 17; P. Cha-
ranis, "Some remarks relating to the history of the
Byzantine Empire in the seventh century, "* Tribute to
Stratos, 1,59-. 64.
 94

In a recent study it has been shown that the on-

ly positive evidence for the presence of the Slavs in

the Peloponnese is a number of tombs in Olympia, which

date from the late 7th century. The numismatic finds

show that during the second half of the 6th century

there were frequent raids against the cities of Greece

but most of them remained far from the lines of pene-

tration of the Slavs and from their large scale inva-

sion of 586.

For Corinth in particular archeological evidence

exists , excavations having been carried out over many

years. The evidence is against the abandonment of

the city at the end of the 6th century and through

the first half of the 7th century. "... it is clear

that the city suffered a. number of shoc of some mag-

nitude under Justinian... and an inscription which

has been dated to about 575 may provide contemporary

evidence of reconstruction immediately following the

calamities. ' As to the so-called "Avar objects" in

Corinth, on which were based many of the arguments

for the dating of the Slav invasions, they do not

form evidence, since their use was widespread in the

2
Byzantine Empire and their dating is uncertain.

1 87,
Popovid, '. MEFRA, pp. 454-503.
2
Scranton, Corilith, 8,26,28.; PopoviO-, -. MEF'RA.
87, pp 454-55.
.
 95

It is therefore clear that the petition and not

the Chronicle of Monemvasia gives a more accurate pi-

cture of the situation in Corinth around the middle

of the 6th century. Far from being abandoned Corinth

continued its life without interruption until at

least the middle of the 7th century and this view is

reinfo+ed by re, ferences in literary sources.

At Argos excavations have been carried out for

approximately as long as Corinth but no systematic

conclusions have 'been presented The f act that the

bishop of Argos was present at the 6th Oecumenical

Council of 680, along with the. -bishop of Corinth

could be an indication that Argos followed Corinth's

2
fate and was not deserted from the 6th century.

1
Bon, P'61oponn6se, 51-45; Setton, Specul 25,
,
p. 519; G. D. Mansi, Sacrorum Conci'l'iorum nova'et'am-
plissima Collectio (Florence, 1759ff), XI, 612,624,
645,667; XII, 998; P. Jaff6- G. Wattenbach, Regesta
Pontificum Romanum, I (Leipzig, 1885), nos. 1243,
1373,1378,1379,1497,1683.
2
Mansi, XI, 612,624,645,667. Bon, 'Moponna
se, 103, is not correct in maintaining that only Co-
Hinth was represented'in the Council of 680 from the
Peloponnese, since Argos and Lacedaemonia were also
represented, but,. significantly, not Patras. P. Yan-
nopoulos, I'La p6n6tration Slave en Argolide, " BCH,
Supplement VI, 327-71 and P. Aupert, "C6ramique Slave
a Argos (585 ap. J. C. ), "* BCH, suppl6ment VI, 373-74,
attribute to the Slavs a raid against Argos in the
6th century and take it as a confirmation of the infor-
mation in the Chronicle of Monemvasia that it was then
abandoned.
 96

In Sparta the archeological finds suggest a com-

plete desertion of the town starting approximately at

the beginning of the 7th century, which means that La-

cedaemonia's abandonment was not contemporary with Co-

rith's. To suppose that the emigration was caused by

the Slavs who came to Laconia by other than the natu-

ral way, bypassing Corinth and Argos, would postulate

a very long advance for whichthe few years of the

reign of Maurice would not suffice. On the other hand

the total abandonment of Sparta after, as it is implied

in the sources, the building of a new city, is a long

procedure, which must have started a few decades be-

fore its completion after the middle of the 6th cen-

tury. This-is supported by the fact that in Monemvdiia

the earliest archeological finds reported belong to

I
the middle of the 6th century.

1
A. M. Woodward, ' BSA, 26 (1923-5), 156-57; C.
Christou, LA. 17 (1961=f2-) xpovLud, 84. Bibliography
on excavations in Sparta: AcLxcovLxaC Enou&LC, 2 (1975)
425-29; Bon,, P61,oponn6se, 51; Huxley, Dark Age, 94-95,
n. 4; Bouras, City and Village, 621-22. There seem
to be no finds betwqen the 7th and the 9th c. However,
P. VOCOtOPOU10S, "rICLPCLTTJ PAGEL Q OTAV XCY0j1dVn BaaLXLXA
-voiU "AyCou WxcavoQ, " Acts of the 1'st International, Con-
gress of Peloponnesian Studies ( Athens, 1976-7),
273-85, dates, on stylistic grounds, the so-called ba-
silica of Saint Nikon in the 7th c.. In Monemvasia du-
ring restoration works conducted by A. Orlandos in
Saint Sophia, in the upper town in 1956-7, three tren-
ches had been made and the few finds belonged at the
earliest to the middle of the 6th c. I would like to
thank professor Christou for this information.
 1 97

VII . Conclusions

It is clear from the detailed examination of

the sources that the author or compilator of the

Chronicle of MonemVasia in his effort to stress the

importance of the recolonisation of Patras in the

9th century and its promotion to the rank of a me-

tropolis tried to make the impression of the aban-

donment of the Peloponnese stronger by using material

which, most probably, had no connection with the

events that occured during the reign of Maurice. The

diaspora of the inhabitants of Patras could be attri-

buted to an attack of the Slavs which happened in

the 6th year of the reign of Maurice. But the infor7

mation on Corinth, Argos and Lacedaemonia, although

genuine, cannot be accepted as relating to .the same

period. For the desertion of Corinth and Argos it

seems reasonable to accept the late 7th century.

1
. Cf. R. L. Hohlfelder, "Migratory People's incur-
sions into central Greece in the late sixth century, "
Acts of the 1,4th International' ByzantineCongress,
III (Bucarest, 1976), 333-38, although the interpre-
tation of the evidence is not always convincing. Gre-
gory, Fortifications, 51-53; Bouras, City and Village,
617-20, with recent bibliography; Huxley, Dark Age,
93; D. Z. Abrahamse,, Hagiographi'c Sources*for Byzantine
Cities 500-900 A. D. Diss. Univ. of Michigan FAnn Ar-
bor, 1967), 75; R. D. Graebner, 'The Role of the Slavs
p.
within the Byzantine Empi're, **500-1018 Diss. Rutgers
Univ. LAnn Arbor, 1975), p. 32; Y_. Koder, "Zur Frage
der Slavischen Siedlunsgebiete im r1ittelalterlichen
Griechenland, " BZ, 71 (1978), 315-31, esp. 322,
Nysatzopoalou, Les Slaves, 351.
 98

The case, however, of Lacedaemonia seems different.

Its abandonment and the foundation of Monemvasia must

have started earlier, possibly during the reign of Ju-

stinian, shortly after 559 and before the raids of

the Slavs. The source on the emigration of the Lace--_

daemonians is, as has been shown, a chronicle which

did not contain information on Patras. The fact that

this Chronicle of Lacedaemonia and Monemvasia appa-

rently did not refer to a specific barbaric attack as

the cause for the emigration of the Lacedaemonians

might suggest that this movement of population was

not organized as a consequence but in anticipation of

a barbaric attack, before 582-3.1

The building of a new town is fully in line with

the policy of Justinian of founding new towns and

2
fortresses all over the Empire. The abandonment of

Lacedaemonia and the foundation of Monemvasia might

Huxley, Dark Age, 92, is, as far as I know,

the first to have expressed a.? similar view,
2
Cyril Mango, Byzantine Architecture,. (New York,
1974), pp. 37-49; Ch. Diehl, ' L"Afrique Byzantine
( Paris, 1896), passim; D. Obolensky, ' The Byzantine
'Commonwealth. Eastern Europe 500-1453 (London, 1971),
p. 46. on early byzantine cities: D. Claude, Die b
S*ta:dt im 6, ' 'Jahrhundert (Munich,
E. Kirsten, "Die Byzantinische Stadt "' Acts-of'the
,
11th International' Byzantifte Congress (Munich, 1958),
pp. 1-48; Mango, * Byzantine Architecture, 30-57; G.
Lavvas, '10C TE6XCLQ TCOV XPL(7TLCLVL-A6v BCLCFL? LL'A65Vj," and
N. Duval-V. Popovid, "Urbanisme et Topographie Chr6-
tienne dans les provinces s6ptentrionales de 1' Illy-
ricum, " Reports of the* 10th 'International: Congress, *of
Christian Archeolo2y (Thessaloniki, --1980)r PP- 103-
35 and 369-402.
 99

be seen as spontaneous, caused by the panic which

spread after the sack of Corinth, but it would make

more sense to interpret it as an initiative of the

central authority after careful planning! Indeed the

location of Sparta was not suitable for resistance

against repeated attacks and its port was situated

at a long distance, around the treacherous cape Malea,

which made communications with the capital difficult.

On the contrary the rock of Monemvasia could be very

effectively defended with the minimum of troops, while

the eastern coast has several good harbours with di-

2 (P1.1
rect access to Constantinople. These advanta-

ges made Monemvasia a good alternative to Corinth in

case of barbaric attacks through the Isthmus.

Consequently the foundation of Monemvasia could

be considered to form part of a series of measures

which were taken by Justinian to strengthen .

1
P. Charanis, "The transfer of population as a
policy in the Byzantine Empire, " no. III kri Studies * on the De-
mography of the Byzantine Empire (London, 1972) 141-42.
,
IT,
On the eastern coast of the Peloponnese: Hetai-
reia Meleton Perivallontos, * N6TLOQ 1TeXoTc6v-v7jcYog. ' ME: X-
Tn *AvcLn-C6Eco)c Athens, 1974), pp. 45-50; A. Philip-
Der ,C
Pelbponnes (Berlin, 1891-2), 157-83. Cf.
pson,
E. Bel1g, '1E[CLrL0-rLX6L CFT0LXEVa Tft- 6TCCLPXCCLQ "ETEL6a'6-
pou ALjXnP6LQj" Acts of the I'st 'Internati'onal' Congress
of Laconian Studies, II, (AaxC0VL%CXC Enop8qC, 5 C1980)),
105, for an official report on the ports in 1828. In
the same report, p. 103 an echo of the Chronicle of
Monemvasia TCL6TTjV. (pc&vc-raL 6TL. xa-r6qpyov ot
&VOPCOTEOL CCQ TdLQ tIMOX611OUC TTE:PLaTdL(TCtQ, CTj-C0GVT6Q
CCQ Ta6TTIV TAv 6xupAv 6H q7kFC(0Q 06CFLV 6XEU0CPCaV XCLC
dLcYqdL?, eLa'v dLTE6 xa-rax-rTyrft VIC TIE;XonovvAcrou... if
 100

communications by sea, at a time when road communica-

tions became particularly difficult and to secure the

1
sea route from Byzantium to Sicily and T,.
taly. In this

context the settlement in Sicily of merchants from La-

cedaemonia could be also justified as securing a perma-

nent link between this island and the Peloponnese,

the settlement of the "rustic peolple and the herds-

-and

men" on the mount Parnon for-defending the passages

against possible attacks.

Evidence on this inferences is still poor and

2
interpreted in conflicting ways but the fact that

Monemvasia could continue its existence more or less

unaffected by the conditions that contributed to the

disappearance of a great number of towns in the Pelo-

ponnese as well as in the rest of the Byzantine Empire

during the Dark Centuries would support an interpreta-

tion of the sources and a course of events such as

3
presented above.

1
H. Ahrweiler, ' Byzarice* 'et Ia Mer (Paris, 1966),
pp. 7-9; A. Lewis,, Naval' Power and Trade in the Medi-
terranean, 'A. D. '500-1000 (Princeton, 1951), pp. 26-29.
Abrahamse, 299.
2
E. g. Bon, P61oponn6se, 49 and n. 3, on finds
which have been wrongly attributed to the Slavs; P. Top-
ping, "The Post-Classical Documents. The Minessota-Mes-
senia expedition, " no. VIII in Studies on Latin Greece,
p. 64, on the wall of the Altis in Olympia.
3..
N. Cafogeras, MoVCVL0qLCrCcL BeveTUL -rft rIq_XoTTovvA-
cou (Athens, 1955),. 3, maintains that the rock of Monemvasia
was formed following a vulcano eruption in 375 A. D. How-
ever, the phenomenon does not seem to be recent: P. B. Fa-
klaris, `ApXcLC(x KuvoupC(x (Thessaloniki, 1985), pp. 6-7.
 Monemvasia until 1204

I.. The Polis of the Lacedaemonians

About a century after its abandonment the name of

Lacedaemonia occurs again for the first time in the

Acts of the 6th Oecumenical Council, held in Constan-

tinople in 680. Among the signatures from Greece is

found that of Theodosios "bishop of the polis of the

Lacedaemonians". Since, -the site of Lacedaemonia

was deserted at the time, the mention should refer

to the city founded by the Lacedaemonians on the rock

with the nly entrance. And although this only en-

trance was to give later to the city its name, it

seems that for some time, officially at least, the

1
Mansi, XI, 612,624,645,667; R. Riedinger,
Die Prsenz- und Subscriptionsl: Isten *des VI. ' oekume-
nischen Konzils '(680/81)* und der Papyrus Vind. G. 3
(Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philoso-
phisch-Historische Klasse, Abhandlungen. N. S. no.
85) (Munich 1979), pp. 7-8,14-23; Huxley, Dark
,
Age, 92; R. -J. Lilie, l"'Thrakien" und "Thrakesion"
zur byzantinischen Provinzorganisation am Ende des
7. Jahrhunderts, " JB, 26 (1977), 43 n. 159. An oppo-
site view is expre-s-sed by M. W. Weithmann, ' Die Slavi-
sche Bevlkerung aufder Grli'echis'chen Halb7lFn-sel
(-Munich, 1978), pp. 100-01.
 102

name of Lacedaemonia was being used.

Apart from the name, the new city must have in-

herited also some, at least, of Lacedaemonia's insti-

tutions, which had survived from ancient times. The

author of the Petition to the Patriarch, mentioned

previously, maintains that that the inhabitants of

Monemvasia were "6n6cmov8OL" to the Byzantine Empire,

that they were its loyal and indefatigable "allies"

and that they were "free", having preserved their

2
"well known, customary and ancient Dorian freedom".

The term 6n6anov8OL and its equivalents 8vcmov8oL.,

I
Cf. Bon, P61oponn8se, 47. The form Monovasia
must have been the older: A. Diller, "The Scholia of
Strabo, " Traditio, 10 (1954), 34. The etymology would
require a specialized study. The derivation from "on-
ly entrance". is obvious but the form I'MovoD&mj" has
also been reported in an unpublished inscription of
the late 13th c. -in Helos on the name H. -Bourazeli,
""H MOV006LCYLCL (-LdL)- 'KCXC j.LO-VODdLCYLa(-Ld) nX&TCOV,
,"
5 (1953) 255-65; H. Kinga, "T6 XaXo65L. -rfir_ MOVODCLCTL-
dQ .
Ao)56vTj, 14 (1985) 109.
. ,
2
NE, 12 (1915), 289,11.17-23: "% 0*? jTEocm6v-
8our. -rw_, voCx-nT6pcav -ro6c DouXoutvouc aftflg tEeXOstv
I-LeTdL TOO CY(PMVaftu)v dpxovxoc. PE 86 AV- PflYEQ -Aac
ydLp tx uanpU)v 6v a6Tfl, T&5v xp6vwv 6LpxovTec xexcLpoT6-
V71VTO, 061111CLXOL Tt DCLGLX6CqL P(OjIaCWV TCXOGVTEQ &SC TEL-
aToC Te xaC &oxvoL xaC 8LdL TEdLVTCOVtXE158CPOL, TAV ndL-
TPLOV XCLC UCLXaL6v tHeNnV T&W ETECLPTLCLT&5V tXEUaEPCCLV
-re XCLC e6yVeLCLV XCLC 86PLOV &PVLOVCCLV CTL nepLa6cov-
"ueg. ". The author refers to the 13th c. Cf. D. A. Za-
kythinos, Le Despotat Grec de Mor6e (London, 1975),
11,117, on "TEoXLTE: CcLr_ E:&yE'EE_La"mentioned in the pro-
oimion of the chrysobull of 1301.
 103

foederati and QOL8EPdTOL were used during the first

centuries of the Byzantine Empireto designate special

1
categories of barbarian troops. It woqld be absurd

to rank the Lacedaemonians among the barbarian sub-

jects of the Empire. The clue is given by the mention

further on of the ancient freedom of the Spartans, which points

to a still older meaning of the term. It is well es-

tablished that Lacedaemonia was one of the Greek ci-

ties which retained in Roman times the privilege of

municipal freedom, renewed by emperor Augustus, as

2
did also the cities of the Eleutherolacones. Some

free cities secured their status by a special treaty

called "foedus", whence the term foederatae. Further-

more they often styled themselves as "allies" of the

Roman Republic and Empire and the words "a-61ijiaxoL P(O-

liaCwv" were often used officially to define their

J. Maspero, "OoLftpdToL et aTpcLTL8TcLL dans 1'

arm6e byzantine au We si6cle, "' BZ, 21 (1912), 97-109;
E. Stein, ' Histoire du Bas-Empire, I (Paris, 1949), pp.
55,185,2N8 and passim; II (Paris, 1959), pp. 85-88;
A. H. M. Jones, ' The Empire, vol. 11 of A H: Lstory'of'Ro-
me through the fifth century (London, 1970), pp. 174-
77; D. Obolensky, "The principles and methods. of By-
zantine Diplomacy, " no. I in Byzantiumand the Slavs.
Collected Studies (London: Variorum Reprints, 1971)-,
p. 57.
2
Chrimes, ' Ancient Sparta, 71-72,436; Jones,
Sparta, 165; Jones, Greek Cit 129,131,324 n. 63;
,
Daremberg-Saglio, 11 1,582a;, RE, III A, 2353; A. E.
Boak-W. G. Sinningen, ' A Hi: storyof Rom6to A. D. 565
(London, 1965), pp. 139-40.
 104

1
relations with the Romans. It is noteworthy that in

the text of the Petition these same words are used,

echoing the survival of the ancient privileges of La-

2
cedaemonia several centuries later.

We may assume that the activities of the inha-

bitants of Monemvasia were regulated by the maritime

importance and proficiency of the city since they

were to become traditional in later times. The abun-

dance of wood and iron in the surrounding area and

the existence of a series of ports, well suited to

the purpose, point to the possibility that the buil-

ding of ships and maritime activities in general were

a very important factor in the selection of the site

for 3
the new city. In Justinian's vast empire the

Jones, ' The: Greek-city, 117-22, -129-34,319-25;

A. H. M. Jones, The Roman Economy (Oxford, 1974), pp.
4-7; Jones, I-Ii'story, 223; Boak- Sinningen, * Hi*story*of
Rome, 365-69; Heinrich Horn, ' Foe'derati'. Untersuchungen
zur Geschichte ihrer Rechtsstellunglm Zeitalter der
r6mischen Republik und des'friihen Principats (Frank-
T-urt,. 19 3 0) Cf Barisa Kreki6, - Dubrovnik , (Raguse) * et le
. .
Levant au Moyerf age (Paris-Hague, 1961) 9=1 7, mentioning
-1
an"alliance" in 980 between Ragusa and Byzantium and
refering. to the city as "confederata"with the Emperor.
2.
NE, 12.0915), 289,11.20-21; Jones, Greek City,
324 n. 67.
3
Chrimes, Ancient'Sparta, 75; Hetaireia Meleton
Perivallontos, 46,60-r-, 71; Philippson, 'Peloponnes, 176-78;
Belia, ETcLTLcYTLxdL, 102,105j, Cf. 'S. P. Lampros, 11qXqLoX6--
YC LCL XCLt I16XOTEOVVnCYLOLXdL( Athens, 1912-30)
, III
,
43-44
,
a letter of Bessarion to Constantine Palaeologos; also
Enea Silvio Piccolomini, "The Commentaries of Pius II, 11
tr. F. Gragg, Book IV, 'Smi'th_College Studies in History
XXX (1946), p. 321, on the harbour and shipyards.
 105
f/I

- - A--,
O-A

road system had collapsed and the unifying element

was formed by the sea. The supremacy of Byzantium in

the Mediterranean was attained by a small number of

battle ships, which were stationed in a chain of ma-

ritime forts placed along the coasts. In the case of

war the merchant ships, which were constantly moving

between the ports of the Empire could be mobilized

,
1
to be added to the military force. The newly created

maritime post must have been of some importance for

the"communications by sea. and it should be accepted

that the successors of Justinian were interested to

secure its privileges. Two references in later sources

mention that Maurice issued a document with privile-

ges for Monemvasia. One is found in the controversial

Chronicon Maius and was rejected because until recent-

ly--it- could not be cross-referenced. The compilator,

however', of the Chronicon Maius gives a perfectly

sound date during Maurice's reign, the year 6101, in-

dictio 11, which corresponds precisely with 592-93.

He also mentions that Maurice was the first to grant

privileges to Monemvasia, which were the rise of its

church to the rank of a metropolis and "other

1.
A. Lewis, ' Naval Power, 26-31; Ahrweiler,, Mer,
7-14; Abrahamse, 264-300.
 106

1
privileges concerning the freedom of the city".

There seems to be no reason for rejecting this piece

of information which is confirmed by the second sour-

ce, a recently discovered copy of a chrysobull by

John VI Kantacouzenos for Monemvasia. The name of

Maurice, although corrupted, is mentioned first in a

series of emperors cited in strict chronological or-

der, who had granted privileges to Monemvasiallaccord-
2
ing " to chrysobulls, some of which were "ancient"
.

It could be accepted, consequently, that the

continuity of institutions and privileges of Lacedae-

monia was secured by a document, the first issued for

1
"KaC nP&rov jL6v T6 TEepL6vuuov xcxC bnePVCPeXtQ
(PP06PLOV, 6MCIXOnA 060cx TflQ KOPCVOOU
jinTpon6Xecac xcLCr
Wft CCTEOIICV dLPCTdLC TC5V TOO 6ZTC-
TZOXLTrOV XCXC XdLPLTCLC
dLeCjivnaToC
(0Q, 6 PamXe6C xaC VLdpTug McLupCxLoc 6 xaC
TLDdPLOQ etc unTp6noXLv dveDtOacev xaC TPLaxoaT6v T6-
TCLPTOV Op6vov CTaEeV bd CTOuC CV8LXTLC)-
scrTPa'OU,
voc 6cxdLTnC np6TnQ xcxe CTcpcx npov6jim nepC 6Xcu0cpCac
Tflc n6Xccoc MapAacL-ro 11 : Ps. Phrantzes, ed. Grecu, p-
538,11.11-16. F. D81ger, Reesten der Kaiserurkun-
den des ostro-mischen Reiches (Munich-Berlin, 1924-65,
rgt. Hildesheim, 1978), no. ,
92. He proposes the date
5 8p believing it not to be genuine.
2
I. P. Medvedev, "Pozdine kopii vizantijskich
dokumentov v sobranij Biblioteki Akademij Nauk CCCP, "
VV, 32 (1971), 227,, 11.18-19: "tntj3cj3cLtoGv TdL doxaVa
3;UC v& xpua6DouXXa Tlav dLoLUum DCLaLXICJV" and 11.35-
38: Nbac&rwc T6 cmtpyov F.XcLv RcLC T6 tntxupov etc
To6c tE% xaC 8LnvexcUc xp6vouc, xcLT6 Td xpua6DouXXa
TOO dLoLUjiou DamXtwc TOO mcxT&LCou, xaC Trav XoLnOv 6L-
CLILVAGTCJVaGTOXPdTOPCOVXCLCJ3(XGLXC6VKCZVCTrCLV-rCVOU Too
nwycavdTou, xupCou 'AXcECou TOO KojivnvoO, xal TOO jia-
xajpCou xcLC dLoLUjiou xupCou 'AvbpovCxou TOO UcLXaLoX6-
you! '. On the identification of Matthaios with Maurice,
below, pp. 251-53,398-405.
 107

the new town, by emperor Maurice in 592-3 and that all

later documents were based on it This could be the

reason for the association of the name. of Maurice

with the foundation of Monemvasia.

The next name mentioned in the chrysobull of Kan-

takouzenos is Constantine Poghonatos. His interest

for the city might have arisen from the fact that

it was situated on the lines of communication between

Constantinople and Sicily, where Poghonatos intended

2
to settle. Situated on the vital roads which con-

nected Byzantium, Asia Minor and Egypt with Sicily,

Italy and the West, Monemvasia was equally important

for commercial as well as for military purposes and

was indeed "guardian of the western entrance to the

3
Aegean Sea".

1
"tnaxoXouMv U xae 6 OaatAcx5c, K%5p 'AUELOC 6
Kolivnv6c xaC ftepot. -raG-r(x dweDlOacrav XCLC OcDaCcacav":
Ps. Phrantzest Grecu, 538,11.16-17.
2
document
The was not known to Dblger and is not
mentioned in the Regesten. A. N. Stratos, KWVaTCLVTrVOQ
r, (K6vcrTcLv, C) 642-668 vol. IV in T6 BuCdLvTLov aT6v
Fra-CcMi , ,
(Athens, 1972), 210-27; G. Ostrogorsky, Histo-
ry of the. Byzantine State, tr. J. Hussey (Oxford7, -
1968), pp. 122-23.
3 tkish
P. Witte k, "The Castle of Violets, from Greek
Monemvasia to Menekshe, "'BSOAS, 20 (1957),
601.
 II The Dark Centuries
.

After the middle of the 7th centuy the situa-

tion in the Pelponnese is obscure. The cities were

badly affected by all the calamities which gradually

piled upon them, earthquakes, epidemics and barbarian

invasions, but it is impossible today to define to

what extent each one of these factors affected urban

life. The decline of cities in the Peloponnese has

been attributed mainly to the presence of the Slavs,

but the predominence of this factor over the others

is not Justified by the meagre information given by

1
the sources or by the finds of archeology. Corinth,

for example, dramatically decayed and seems to have

been abandoned since some time after 680 until the

beginningof the, 9th century. This has been invariably

attributed to the activities of the Slavs, on the

sole evidence of the Chronicle of Monemvasia. But

it could have been also affected by the presence of

the Arabs in the Mediterranean, who after the creation

1
Boni P61oponnase, 27-63; D. A. Zakythinos, "La
grande Brache dans la tradition historique de 1' h6l-
lenisme du septiame au neuviame siacle, " XapLaTpLov
etc: A. K. 8OpAdLv8ov (Athens, 1966), 111, pp. 300-24;
Abrahamse, ,
7,, 64,68-78, with the earlier opinions on
the subject; C. Mango. ' Byzantium. The Empire of New
Rome (London, 1980), pp. 65-73; M. Angold, "The shap-
T-ngof the medieval Byzantine City, "'Byzantinische
Forschungen, 10 (1985), 1-11.
 1 109

of their fleet were to challenge the maritime suprema-

1
cy of Byzantium. Monemvasia, on the contrary, sur-

rounded by tall and impregnable precipices and situ-

ated on the vital sea routes soon replaced Corinth

as the most important port of the Peloponnese.

The importance of the port of Monemvasia

for the sea route to Egypt, with which relations must

have been established since the first years of the

new city's existence, is revealed by the fact that

a church in the city was dedicated to Saints Cy-

rus and Ioannis the Anargyroi, who were worshipped in

Alexandria. Their cult in the Peloponnese must have

been promoted either by refugees from Egypt after its

conquest in the middle of the 7th century or even

earlier due to contacts for commerce. It is inte- -

resting to note that it

survived until at least the
2
middle of the 10th century.

1
Ahrweiler, Mer, 169. The Arab fleet was created
after the middle 6-fthe 7th c. but there can be no e-
viddnce for raids from coins since the first Isla-
mic coins were struck in 685: K. M. Edwards, "Report
on coins found in Corinthl! '. Hesperia, 6 (1935), 241-
56; Fr. Gabrielli, "Greeks and Arabs in the central
Mediterranean area " DOP, 18 (1964), 60; E. Eickhoff,
Seekrieg und SeepolitilE-zwischen, Islam*und*Abendland
MO-1040) (Berlin, 1966), pp. 14-41; M. A. Shaban,
Islamic History. A New Interpretation (Cambridge,
1971), 1,68-89,81, =.

2 "Miraculum Sanctorum Cyri

P. Peeters, et Johan-
nis in urbe Monembasia, " An. Boll., 25 (1906), 233-40.
Cf. A. Festugiare, Sai_n_t_e_T_h_LK_c1*6,* Saints C6me -et
-J.
Damien, Saints'Cyr et Jean (extraits), Saint George
(Paris,, 1971), pp. 217-56, esp. 217-20.
 110

The sea route which connected Italy with the Holy

Land via Monemvasia can be traced in the description

of the itinerary of Saint Willibald, bishop of Eich-

statt. He made his pilgrimage in the third decade of

the 8th century, when he was a simple monk. His ac-

count of it he dictated to his relative,. -the nun Hune-

berc of Heidenheim and it is preserved in a manuscript

dating roughly from the time of the saint's death, *at

the end of the 8th or the beginning of the 9th centu-

1
ry. The extract of the journey from Italy to Ephe-

sos reads as follows:

navigerunt in terram, Calabriae, ad urbem

...
quae dicitur Regia ... et venerunt in insulam,
Siciliam, in qua est urbs Cathinensia ... et
ibi mons Aetna ... Et inde navigantes, vene-
runt ultra mare Adrium ad urbem Manafasiam,
in Sclavinica terra. Et inde navigantes in
insulam nomine Choo, dimittebant Corinthi-
os in sinistra parte. Et inde navigantes in
Asiam, 2
ad urbem Ephesum ...

It will be observed that Willibald's ship came

I
BHL, II, no. 8931. On the identification of
the autRo-ress: C. H. Talbot, TheAnglo-Saxon Missiona-
ries in Germany (London-New York, 1954), pp. 152.
J. P. A. Van der Vin, 'Trave'111'ersto Greece and Constan-
tinople (Nederlands Historisch Archeologisch Institut,
*IF-T-Istanbul, 1980), 1,15; Huxley, Dark Age, 94; Bon,
P61oponnase, 36.
2 (Paris, 1867),
AASS, July, II p. 505 and'MGHSS,
XV, I, T3-, with variations in th4 reading of. some
words, the most important being "in Slawinia ter-
rae".
 ill

directly from Sicily to Monemvasia. The journey con-

tinued towards Ephesos via Chios, somewhat north for

a crossing to the Holy Land and though Corinth is men-

tioned, probably because of its connections with

'
Siint Paul's visit, they did not go near it.

A few years after Saint Willibald's passage, in

746-7, the

pestilential death, which started from Sicily

and Calabria, like fire spreading, to Monova-
sia and Greece and. the nearby islands arrived
o* and this same disease of plague went strpight
the inperial city-on the 5th-indictio.
Monenivasia is the only port specifically mentioned

1
The port of Kenchrees must have not been fun-
ctioning sincethere are no coins of this period: R. L.
Hohlfelder,, The Coins, vol. III in* Kenchrees Eastern
Port of Corinth (LeMen, 1978), pp. 63-78. The fact
ta rare coin of Philippicos Bardanes (711-3) min-
ted in Sicily was found in Monemvasia is another in-
dication that the city was situated on the sea route:
W. Hahn, ' Moneta Imperii Byzantini, III, no. 24, pp.
198-99,27-7,312; M. oiconomidou M, 32 (1977), Xpovt. -
,
x&(Athens, 1984), p. 4, pl. 2, no'718. That Monemva-
sia was on the sea road to Ephesos is reinforced by
the existence near the rock of a ruined monastery de-
dicated to the Seven Sleepers: H. Kalligas, "'EpeLTEca-
ji6voL vcLot Tflc TtcpLoxflc Movc1iDaaCac, " Summaries of pa-
pers, * 3d S4posiumof Byzantineand Postbyzantine Ar-
cheology and Art (Athens, 1983), p. 35.
2,
XOLU66nQ OdVaTOC dLn6 Eixc, %((xQ xctC KcLXcLDpCcLQ
dLPEdLUCVOQoZ6V TC TtOP &ELj1CV6j1CVOV LTtC TAV MOVOOCLCrCCLV
xaC 'EXXdL6a XaC TdLC nCLPaXCLUdVaQ VACOUQ Xft ... hW
CLOTA XoLULxA v6oOC TOO 0ou138voc dLvd6pajiC T5 C'6TtLVC-
ILACYCL 6V Tt 0aaLXC6L Tt6XCL" : Theophanes, De Boor, 1,
456-57.
 112

in connection with the sp: reading of the dreaded pla-

gue carried by ships from Italy and Calabria. It prov-

es that it must have been busy and well connected

with the great centres of the then known world, other-

wise the plague would not have been transmitted so

easily.

In the description of Saint Willibald's journey

Monemvasia is locatedin "Sclavinica terra". Some have

doubted this statement regarding the itinerary as

worthless, on the grounds that the saint's biographer

I
had no accurate geographical. knowledge whatever.

Nevertheless the work is characterised by absolute

consistency and reveals a knowledge of geography

which is uncommonly clear and rare in that age.. Thus,

unless an error occured in the reading of the manus-

cript for the first edition from which all the other
.
editions seem to derive, this information seems to be

genuine and to refer to the relatively well documen.;.

ted raids, revolts and settlement of the Slavs in ma-

2
ny areas of the Peloponnese during the 8th century.

1 36.
e. g. Bony P61oponnAset
2
All the editions seem to derive from H. Canisi-
us, Antique lectionis, IV (1603 ? ), pp. 481-513, cf.
AASS, July, 11,584: "Henricus Canisius edidit vitam.
S. Will. ex auctore Anonymo perantico". on the-manus-
cript: T. Tobler, Descriptiones Terrae Sanctae (Leip-
zig, 1874), pp. 309--09. On the Slavs in the Peloponne-
se: Karayannopoulos, ' RESEE, 9, pp. 442-60; Chrysantho-
EEBE, 21, pp. -=,. 252-53; Bon, 'P61oponnZise,
poulos,
36-48; Zakythinos, ' Despotat, II,, 20-27f 383-4.
 113

Monemvasia, however, despite the settlement in Laco-

nia of two tribes of Slavs, the Milingoi in the high-

land and the Ezeritai in the marshes, qs their name

shows, and the confinement of its territory to its

eastern part, seems to have remained free and the

function of its port was unaffected by their activi-

1
ties.

Monemvasia during the 9th and 10th centuries

In the De Adminsistrando Imperio the author Con-

stantine Porphyrogenitus explains how after a period

of peace the Slavs in the Peloponnese had revolted,

during the time of emperor Theophilos. Michael III,

he continues, sent an army and succeeded to subdue

any remaining troublesome Slavs "and only the Ezeri-

tai amd the Milingoi were left towards Lacedaemonia

and Helos. And since there is there a great and very

high mountain called Pentadaktylos, which runs like

a neck a long distance out into the sea, and because

the place is difficult, they settled upon the flanks

of this same mountain, the Milingoi in one part, and

2
in the other part the Ezeritai". He continues giving

1
Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De Administrando
Im erio, ed. and tr. G. Moravcsik-'R. J. H. Jenkins
1) (Dumbarton Oaks, Washington D. C;, 1967),
50/1-70, pp. 232-35; Bon, ' P?Sloeonng-se, 48,63; Zaky-
thinos, Despotat, 11,25-27, Jd4.
2 233, tr. by 232.
DAI, 50/15-21, p. Jenkins p.
 114

details about the tribute they paid and their rela-

tions with the central administration. Then he goes

on to another subject. "The inhabitants of the city

of MaIna are not of the race of the aforesaid Slavs,

but of the ancient Romans, and even to this day they

are, called "Hellenes" by the local inhabitants, be-

cause in the very ancient times they were idolaters

and worshippers of images after the fashion of the

ancient Hellenes; and they were baptized and became

Christians in the reign of the glorious Basil. The

place where they. live is waterless and inaccessible,

but bears the olive, whence their comfort is. This

place is situated on the tip of the Malea, that is

beyond Ezeron towards the coast. Seeing that they

are perfectly submissive and accept a head man from

the military governor, they have paid from very an-

1
cient times a tribute of 400 nomismata!.

It has, almost unanimously, been accepted that this

passage concerns the inhabitants of the city of MaIna

and of the peninsula that took its name from the

2
city. But Porphyrogenitus speaking about the Slavs

of Tayghetos refers to the peninsula of MaIna as a

"neck" which runs a long distance into the sea and
he would have pointed to his earlier mention if he

1
DAI, 50/71-82, p. 237, tr. p. 236.
2
Bon, P61oponn6se, 71-73; Zakythinos, ' Despotat,
6-14,381-82.
 115

'
had really meant Maina, as he does in other cases.

Futhermore the rest of the information given in the

text, by which the exact geographical position of the

town is defined, does not accord with the situation-

of MaIna. It is said that the city was situated

on the tip of the. peninsula of Malea. But MaIna was

on the peninsula of Taenaron. This geographical error

thought to be common in the Middle Ages, of confusing

Taenaron with Malea, has been ascribed to the care-

2
lessness of the emperor. But this assumption is not

at all certain because there are more landmarks which

should lead to allocate the mistake elsewhere in the

text. "This place is situated on the tip of the Malea,

that is beyond Ezeron towards the coast", writes the

emperor. Ezeron or Ezeros is the slavonic equivalent

of Helos, the region where the Ezeritai had been set-

tled, the plain to the East of mount Tayghetos. The

emperor in defining the position of the city takes

Tayghetos as his starting point, on which he ha"

concentrated for the paragraphs which preceded, concer-

ning the Slavs. Speaking of the Ezeritai he is looking

towards the East, and consequently the expression "bey-

ond Ezeros, towards the coast" makes sense only if

I
DAI, 50/72, 236 "rt5v
p L76v TEPOPPTIOI! V'rc, )v
19/2, p. Mf 116 aOr6Q 00liap"; 42/39, P. 184 "ot)Toc
05V 6 TEpoppnocCc ancLoapoxav8LULToc rIeTpcA)vdr. ", e. a.
2 7 n. 3;
e. g. Zakythinos, Despotat, II, p. Diller,
Traditio, 10, p. 34.
 116

the place is situated on the eastern coast of the Pe-

loponnese, i. e. on the tip of the Malea. (pl. 1 ) If

he had really meant Malina, on the peninsula of Taena-

ron, he would have used a different expression, like

tvTeDDev ToG *ECepoG or something similar, which

would make sense, but certainly not txerftv. If it

is assumed that he started his description from the

eastern part of the Peloponnese, "beyond Ezeros"

would then be the. mountain and not the coast. There-

fore it is impossible to accept that the city de-

scribed by Porphyrogenitus is MaTna. One must suppose

that the official treatise contained another name

but that a scribe delivered it wrongly, or that there

was an intervention on the first manuscript by a

later hand. This view, that there is an error in the

name of the city mentioned in the De Administrando

Imperio, is further reinforced by the fact that no-

where else before or after is MaTna mentioned as a

city with privileges of autonomy, while the archeolo-

gical finds suggest that it

was a place administered
2
by officials from the capital. Furthermore the

I "
S. Menardos, "IIOCOL 71crav ot Todxwver., IIAA, 1
(1926), 262.
2
On the manuscript tradition of DAI: G. Morav-
csik, "H xeLp6ypa(poC TtapdbooLc ToG D6 Administrando
Imperio, " EEBE, 7 (1930)0,138-52. The name of a "comes"
appears in a 12th c. inscription found on Tigani as-
sumed to be MaIna: N. B. Drandakis, N. Ghiolds, C. Con-
stantinides, "AvacrxacpA oT6 TTlydLvL rflr. MdvnC, " TIAE
(1978), 183-91, esp. 190-91.
 117

abundance of early Christian monuments scattered

in the ruined site of MaIna and all over the penin-

sula would make the narration of Constantine Porphy-

rogenitus on idolatry sound ridiculous. It even led

some historians to reject Porphyrogenitus's statement

as worthless on these grounds.

The detailed examination of the geographical in-

formation contained in the text of Porphyrogenitus

showed that the city mentiohed could only have been

situated on the eastern coast of the Peloponnese on

the peninsul .a which en ds with the Malea promontory.

Consequently it couldlhaveonly been Monemvasia. The

emendation proposed is supported by the fact that the

two names have the same consonants and therefore the

abbreviated word could easily confuse the scribe. Fur-

thermore it is reinforced by all the references con-

cerning the survival of municipal autonomy in Monem-

vasia; by the known fact that the Slavs did not pene-
2 by
trate the area; the scarcity of early Christian

N. B. Drandakis, "ExapLxaC Epeuvat. - tv KunapCc-

cy MdLvnC, " ITAE (1958), 199-217, esp. 216-19 and also
nAE (1960) , 233; AA (1960) , 106; ITAE. (1963) , 129. N. B.
Drandakis, "Ac64CVOL' 6LYLOL tTtC TOO -rCtCLP-rOG(PaLPCOU dLq)C-
6oQ etc txxXnaCaQ -rfir. 146ca MdLvnc, " AAA, 4(1971), 239;
Kordosis, &386vn, 10, pp. 418-19. Later sources indi-
cate'that the inhabitants of-Hani were Slavs: Pachyme-
res, Bonn, 1,87-88; Chalkokondyles, Darkb, 1,30-31;
C. Sathas, Monuments relatifg'A 11histoire deIa Grace
au Moyen Age (Paris, 1880-90), 1, pp. XIX-XX; cf. Za! Z
thinos, EAdFot,, 61,66.
2 "Siedlungsgebiete, " 315-31.
Koder,
 118

finds in the peninsula where Monemvasia is situated;

by the pagan survival noticed in the worship of some

2
local saints; by the fact that the majority of local

folk tales deal with daemons and other similar spi-

rits showing a strong survival of ancient religion,

3
as well as conservatism. It is possible that there

is a connection between the survival of paganism

in the region and the old saying: "XpLar-rLav6r. et-

caL yLdL TadxcavcxQ; ,4 Another point which should be

stressed is that the peninsula of Mani was fertile

during the Middle Ages and that the phenomena of

erosion which led to its present state have started

15th 5
after the century.

If the emendation is accepted the text of the

They*are limited to the ruins of a 5th c. basi-

lica in Gheraki: 'BCH, 61 (1927), 454, and a complex
of ecclesiastical buildings excavated near Molaoi, R.
Etzeoglou, TaXcLLoXpLaTLavLx4 BaoLA. LuA TEcLpdL To6Q MoXd-
ouc AcLxwvCaC, " AE, (1974), 244-57, dating from after
the middle of the 6th c.
2
The miracles of SS. Cyrus and Ioannis: Peeters,
An. Boll., 25, pp. 234-35; cf. H. Delehaye, Les ldgen-
U-es hagiographiques (Brussels, 1955), pp. 143-44.
3
K. Rhomaios, in an unpublished paper delivered
in the 1st local Congress of Laconian Studies, Molal,
June, 1982. He stated that the vast majority of folk
tales in the region of Monemvasia concern daemons.
4 'IOTOPLUA *Av%BoXoyl(x
I. Vlahoiannis, (Athens,
1927), p. 12. On Tsacones see below 2 IV.
5
H. Waterhouse-R. Hope Simpson, "Prehistoric Laco-
nia, " I, ' BSA, 55(1960) 68n. 117; II, 56(1961) 123n. 7O. As states
Ciriaco d' Aiicona Mani produced wine and cotton: Leda
Moschou-T. Moschost '1KL6vLcL A', " rrCX0Tt0VVTjCFLqx(j, 13
(1979),, 78-79 and n. 2.
 119

De Administrando Imperio offers some additional and

unknown from elsewhere information on the kind of rela-

tions which existed between Monemvasia. and the central

administration. They are defined principally by the

payment of a tribute of 400 nomismata to the emperor,

from very ancient times, as a form of guarantee

of submission and obedience towards the Empire, re--

presented by the strategos. Also by the nomination

of the archon by the strategos. This means that the

original privileges of Lacedaemonia have been limited

because in the 2nd century A. D. it did not pay any

tribute. The limitation could have been imposed during

a rearrangement of the territory of Lacedaemonia and

the Eleutherolacones, possibly when Monemvasia was

'
founded or even later. The fact that the payment of

the tribute is presented as a very old imposition

I
Sparta had not been tributary to the Romans:
Boak-Sinninge'n,, History of Rome, 1 39-4 C;Jones Economy,
6-7. The tribute-mFi-ght be comparable to tha -pay'EU-7Ey
the cities of Dalmatia to the strategos: DAI, 30/130-
131, p. 146; A. Pertusi ed., C. Porphyrogenitus, De The-
matibus (Studi e Testi, 160) (Vatican City, 19521-, p.
TY.-It could also be chronologically related. Cf.
G. Bratianu, ' Privil6ges'et'franchises municipal- es
dans 11 Empire Byzantin ( Bucarest-Paris, 1936), pp.
74; A. Toynbee ' Constantine Porphyrogenitus and
his world (London, 1-973), pp. 276-78,579, and esp.
638; A. Kazhdan, "La ville et le village A Byzance
aux XIe-XIIe siacles, " Le'fdodal'i'smef'A Byzance (Paris,
1974), p. 79; A. Bryer-D. Winfield, The Byzantine mo-
numents and topographyof the Pontos (Dumbarton Oaks
Studies, XX) (Washington, D. C., 1985), p. 301.
 120

would exclude the possibility that the inhabitants of

Monemvasia took any part in the revolts and other o-

perations against the central administration in col-

laboration with the Slavs during the 8th and 9th cen-

turies.

It is not clear how the appointment of the ar-

chon by the strategos is meant in the text. It could

be the enforcement of a person of his choice, but it

looks more likely that he simply ratified an election

by the citizens, or the aristocracy, or the elders.
The mention in-the petition to the patriarch that the
2
local rulers were "consecrated" reinforces this view.

The petition mentions also that the archon of the Mo-

11
nemvasiotes bore in the 13th century the title of
"rex". This title used mostly by western and barba-

rian rulers had certainly a derogatory meaning in the

1
DAI, pp. 228-45; Bon, P61oponnase, 36-48.
2
NE, 12(1915), 289,1.20. Cf. Pertusi, De The-
matibus-, 42; Jadran Ferluga, Byzantium on the -Balkans
TA-msteraam, -1976), 432-33; Maria Nystazopoulou- -
pp.
Pelekidou, 'H tv TaupLxfl XegoovAcro TE6XLc EouybaCct &n6
TOO Ir'UtXPL ToG IE'cLU3vog (Athens, 1965), pp. 75-81,
esp. 76. on the "elders", "anciani", etc.: F. D81ger,
Sechs byzantini'sche' Praktika (Munich, 1949), 19 and n.
-4-4; D. Jacoby, "Un aspect de la fiscalit& Vdnitienne:
le 'Zovaticuml, "' Soci6t6 et'd6mographie a Byzance et
en Romanie latine TL-ondon, Variorum Reprints, 1975),
no. IV, pp. 413-14; J. Longnon-P. Topping, Documents
.sur le Rdgirne 'des' Terres dans Iq Principut6 de Mor6ii
au XIVe s. (Paris, 1969), 26J. The administration of
Monemvasia could, as in Thessaloniki, have been exer-
cised by two persons: one locally elected and and one
imposed by the central administration: L. Brdhier, Les
Institutions de 1"Empire bylzantin (Paris, 1970), 17-T-.
 121

10th century. As the text of the Petition puts it, it

seems that the title was not in use after the Frankish
1
conquest.

From the passage of the De Administrando Imperio

one must assume that clusters of pagans may have sur-

vived until the time of emperor Basil I, but certain-

ly that not all the population had remained. pagan.

An incident cited in Theophanes Continuatus depicts

vividly what sort of idolatry may have been practic-

2
ed which strongly impressed the Emperor. It is al-
,
so related with events taking place in the area around

the cape Malea and Monemvasia after the capture of

Crete by the Arabs, during the siege of Syracuse by

them in the year 878,3-

1
NE, 12(1915), 289,1.19. On rex: Brdhier, 'Insti-
fftitions-, p.. 177-73; F. D61er, 'BZ, 31 (1931) 439-42.
For the Slav rulers, NystazopouIou, Slaves, 353-54. Cf. " PAE
'I'ra-kCar. " : De Thematibus, '
p. 40; %C-ce pAE, eC-re -r%5-
Pavvoc": Eustathius, Bonn, 417; "ETIQavoQ PAE 6 A06-
X(XQ", M. F. Hendy, * Coinage 'and Money in the Byzantine
Empire 1081-1261 (Dumbarton Oaks Studies, XII) (Wa-
shington D. r.. 1969), p. 27.
2
Also Skylitzes, CFHB, 159-60; Genesius, Bonn,
116-17. Some sources attribute the delay of the fleet
to the building of the Nea Ecclesia: Leo Grammaticus,
Bonn, 256-57; Symeon Magister, Bonn, 691; Georgios
Monachos, Bonn, 759. Cf. EickhoffSeekrig 222. A. A.
,
Vasiliev, Byzance 'et: Ies Arabes, IiTj(_Brussels, 1968),
73-74.
3
Theophanes Continuatus, Bonn, 309-12.
 122

immediately the naval forces which were pre-

pared for Syria are sent to Sicily, under
the command of a certain Hadrian as an admi-
ral... He had not the luck of convenient and
favourable winds and arrived with difficulty
up to the Peloponnese and in Monemvasia in
the port called"of Hierax"he anchored the
ships waiting for a suitable wind, being,
as it seems, lazi_Qr and not boiling with
passion so as by venturing against opposing
winds and by rowing through the intermedi-
ate stillnesses of wind and wave and hurry
towards the objective. And while he was
loitering for long in the afore_mentioned
port and the sons of Hagar having imposed
a stronger siege and used any means and hur-
rying to succeed before help to the besie-
ged arrived, the city was taken by storm...
ing" Hadrian heard of the fact in the follow-
circumstances. Not far from Monemvasia
in the Peloponnese, where the Roman navy
was stationed there is a place which is called
Helos after the thick and shaded forest a-
round it. In it some divine force was set-
tled and was often worshipped by the she-
pherds who pastured their flocks there, so
that, as they claimed, their flock remained
undamaged. These deities were heard by the
herdsmen as if discussing among them and re-
Joicing over the capture of Syracuse the
previous day,. its rasing to the ground and
its burning down. All these were narrated
at length by the herdsmen and the story ar-
rived to Hadrian.... He wanted to listen to
it personally and was guided to the place
by the herdsmen and through them posed the
question to the deitieso when Syracuse- is
going to be captured and_cp he heard that Sy-
racuse had been already captured which
he did not think ...
necessary to believe...
xatoiafter ten days the Mardaltai and the
of the Peloponnese, who had escap-
ed the destruction, brought the deadly news
they had seen, and from them Hadrian got
the information and quickly, since the
winds opposing to his sailing South became
favourable to going North, he arrived to
the capital and therehe sought refuge at
the great temple of God... -
 123

This strange narration on the daemonic forces in

Helos gives also a hint of how Monemvasia and its ports

were structured .
(Pl. 2) The rock was the centre of a

wider area and to it all the place-names were related.

The port itself must have been a complicated system

of piers for loading and unloading, docks and customs-

offices scattered on the rock and on the bridge. (Pl. 7)

one wonders if the lighthouse, which is mentioned in

2
the 13th century, already existed. Various functions

were accomplished by surrounding ports, where ships

could stay for longer, one of which was IIierax. -(Pl - 8) Si-

tuated at approximately 9 miles to the North of Mo-

nemvasia it comprises a long port, with deep water

and a narrow opening, which could be closed by a

chain and controlled by the castle and the little

town above it. There was even visual communication

with Monemvasia through a tower situated a little

higher up. The conditions were extremely favourable

for the repair and building of ships as well as for

a long stationing. This place could have housed the

shipyards which are reported to have existed in.

1 lteren
G. L. F. Tafel-G. M. Thomas, ' Urkunderi'zur
Handles--und Staats2eschichte'des__Republik Venedig
ZFontes Rerum Austriacarum. Diplomata et Acta XII-
XIV) (Vienna 1856-57), 111, p. 235 : "... intravit ipse
portu Monovasia, quod est ante terramIl.
...
2
- Bartolomeo de Neocastro, RIS, XIII, 133-34.
.
 124

Monemvasia .I Further to the North Kyparissi, as its

name impliesoffered wood in abundance from mount

Parnon, which must have been suitable for ship-build-

2
ing.

The port of San Nicolb as it is called in Venetian

plans and portulans, near the ancient town of Epidauros

3
Limera is also a well protected port. Between it and

Hierax there is another good port, called today Ari-

anna. It could be identified with San Polo, which is

found in portulans, after the name of the church,

nearby. A: little island in the bay has many ruins, in-

cluding achurch and is called Daskalei6, a name which

4
implies activities connected with a port. (Pl. 2) other

1
commentarkes, of Piusr TI, 321. W. M. Leake, Tra-
vels in the Morea (London, 1830), 1,219, mentions
that the Italians used a chain, whence the name of
PortoCadena-, wh*ich he found in old maps. A. J. B. Wace-
F. W. Hasluck, "Laconia. II. Topography BSA, 140907-
I"*
8), 167-73; a.. plan of the*harbour p. 168 and'of the
walls surround i-ncl the town p. 169; Philippson, Pelopon-
nes, 172-73.

Belid, ETaTLGTLX(i, 101-2,105.

3
Philippson, ' Peloponnes, 173-74, Wace-Hasluck
172-82 on the coast from Zarax to Maleal with a plan
of Epidauros Limera p. 180.
4 'ApXcLecL OETEC6aupoc ALIalpd,
A. Oiconomacos,
MLV6a -rc Agucaytuft Athens, 1957), 32. The settlement
on the little island must have been of considerablesize.
I would like to thank A. Tselikas, who is preparing
a study on similar place-names for the remark on Da-
skalei6.
 125

ports in the western Laconik6 could also have been

used alternatively when the crossing of the Malea

was dangerous, like Plitra, which has ubmerged ruins

1
of a town, and Archangelos. Their existence must
have been combined with a well kept road system, con-

necting the main centre, Monemvasia, with all of them.

The fact that an organized road system was being

maintained in the territory of Monemvasia can be de-

duced, for the 9th century, from a narration written
by Paul, bishop of Monemvasia in the middle of the
10th century, which. has survived only in translation

in arabic? It also contains other interesting details

on the town's life during the reign of emperors Leo

1
Leake, TravelS, I, 226-27; Philippson, 'Pelopon-
nes, 178-80, and 176: 778 on the coast from a to
Archangelos; Wace-Hasluck, 163-65, and 161-72 on the
western coast; Waterhouse -Hope Simpson, Prehistoric
Laconia, II, 134-40. The combined function of the two
ports, Plitra and Archangelos, gave in the 19th c.
the district the name of Dilimenia: rCVLXdL 'ApXcra
ToG KpdTouc, 'O0cjvLxA nepCo6oC, *Ynoupycro 'EowTcPL-
xOv, 0.111,9/21.111.1835.
2
On Paul and his narrations and on Nicetas, be-
low chapter 61 and II.

v
 126

1
and Alexander.

The narration first deals with the fate of a

castle called "of the cowherds", which existed before

the conquest of Crete by the Saracens. Its inhabitants

saw one day appearing from the sea two sarcophagi. One

contained the relics of Valerius the bishop, Vincent

the deacon and Eulalia the virgin and the other those

of a series of minor saints, all of them from Barcelo-

na. The sarcophagi landed on the beach and the "cow-

herds" decided to erect a church dedicated to them all

at that site. But during the night they disappeared

from the beach and miraculously found on a preci-

pitous spot near the castle next morning. it was there

that the church was erected and dedicated to their

memory.

1
P.
Peeters, "Une invention des SS. Valare,
Vincent Eulalie
et dans le P61oponnase An. BolI.,
I"
30 (1911), 296-301. The narration has sin-ce-Te-en re-
edited by V. Cristidis, "The raids of the Moslems
in Crete and the Aegean sea. Piracy and Conquest, "
B, 51 (1981), 106-08 and 4H xcL-HLXTIbn -rfic KpATnc:
2in6 To6c " pcLOcc (t 824) (Athens, 1982), pp. 181-83.
There are, however, some mistakes, e. g. in the name
of Eulalia, a well known saint, cf. Peeters, ' An. Boll.,
30, pp. 298-301, which is clear in the manuscript
( Bibliothaque Nationale, ms Arabe 276, fol. 246)
and has been changed in the edition to Eulabia. Coron,
also, former bishopric of Nicetas, is in the commenta-
ry, KcLTdLXnq)n KpATna, 186, cited as Modon.
 127

After the Arabs conquered Crete they captured the

castle "of the cowherds", situated on a small island

or a peninsula near the shore, and took prisoners all

the inhabitants. The site was abandoned. During the

reign of Leo and Alexander passers-by discovered by

chance the sarcophagi among the ruins. They opened

them in the hope of discovering a treasure. Before

completing their act they were thrown-to the ground

and their hands were paralysed. The news reached Mo-

nemvasia. Metropolitan Nicetas, formerly. a:. bishop-

of Coron, sent some clergymen to investigate on the

spot. They discovered the sarcophagi, opened them

and took the contents with them on their way back to

Monemvasia. In the meantime the metropolitan with the

rest of the clergy went in procession to welcome them.

The relics were placed in the chapel of Saint Irene,

in the right part of the largest church of Monemvasia

which was dedicated to Saint Anastasia the Victor.

When the narration was written the relics still existed

in '
the same place.

The editor of the text was unable to accept that

the relics of the three most popular saints of Spain

could have ever reached Monemvasia. He observes, how-

ever, that at about the time the facts of the story

took place the relics had indeed disappeared from their

I 30 (1911),
An. ' Boll., 299-300.
 128

shrines. The matter cannot be simply resolved but

certainly it cannot be excluded that some precious

relics may have reached Monemvasia, - perhaps through

Sicil; j--, - with successive waves of refugees. There

have been several attempts since the first edition of

the narration to identify the site of the castle "of

the cowherds". Some place it in Elaphonesos, others

2
in Damald, others elsewhere. All these places, how-

ever, are very ar from Monemvasia whereas the mention

of the procession and the ceremonial transfer of the

relics to Monemvasia seem to indicate that the ruins

of the castle were situated not very far away,

but somewhere in the surrounding neighboukhood.

Not very near, though, otherwise the metropolitan

might have joined the people who went to investigate

on the spot and the relics might have been transfered

in the sarcophagi. one such place could have been

e. g. the little island of Daskalei6, in the bay of

1
Peeters, * An. Boll., 30 (1911), 298-300; F. Si-
monet, * Historia-de los Mozarabe'sde Espafia (Memorias
de la Real Academia de la Historia, -,RIII) (Madrid,
1903) pp. 245-54; V. Christidis, KcL-r6ATjQ)Tj. Kp, vrjg,
,
184-85.
2 'J.
B. Falier Papadopoulos, "Les r6liques des
SS. Valere, Vincent et Eulalie et le castel Damalet, "
Miscellanea Giovanni Mercati, III (Studi e Testi, 123)
TV-atican City, 1946), pp. 360-63; Christidis, Raids,
86; Christidis, KcLrdLXTjLPn' KpA"cTig, 185-87; M. S. Kordo-
sis, "Eva ACLXWVLx6 KdLcr-cpo -rofj "Oy86ou cLt&v(i (*EXcL(p6-
v, ncFoQ) " ACLX(OVVKCLCETEOu8at, 6 (1982) 259-67.
,
 129

San Polo, mentioned earlier. It seems to have remai-

ned ruined for several centuries and is at aAreasonab-

PJC,
le distance from Monemvasia. (Pl. 2) One could also..

propose the site of Plitra, identified with the an-

cient cities of Asopos and Cyparissia. It is also

situated not far from Monemvasia and is well placed

for receiving refugees from the West. It has a sand

beach, as it is implied in the narration, and a small

peninsula, Xyll, with some ruins. In addition, the

name Plitra or Blitra, the origin of which is uncer-

tain, resembles that delivered in arabic as ALBIOAR.

In the same word a deformation of-Epidauros could

also be hidden, which is another possible site for

1
the castle "of the cowherds". But unless the Greek

text of the narration is found, or some other kind of

historical or archeological informationt any such

2
theories will remain uncertain.

The fact that in the narration the visit to the

ruined spot seems very easy and that the procession

could meet the visitors midway seemsto confirm the

1
Since the arabic text transmits the word as
ALBQR, without the intermediate vowels: ms Arabe 276
fol. 246,1.8, it is not necessary to interpret it
with the vowels assumed by Peeters, * Ar!. Ba1: l.,,, 30
(1911), 297, which give the meaning of buffaloes
or cows. It might reproduce the sound of the Greek
name of a castle or a town or a site in the region
of Monemvasia.
2
The relics of Eulalia seem to be still in Greece
as late as 1286: 'BHL, 1,406.
 130

existence of a road system in good conditipn. Further-

more it can be deduced that Monemvasia had numerous

priests and several churches, the largEst of which

comprised smaller chapels, one of which was chosen for

the deposition of the relics. The fact that the exact

origin of the relics was known to the inhabitants of

Monemvasia shows again that in the 10th century the

town was in touch with the important centres of the

then known world.

From the reign of Leo and Alexander dates another

interesting itemofinformation. It concerns a taboulla-

rios, a notary, whose existence in Monemvasia presup-

poses an organised city. Leo taboullarios of Monemvasia

was the owner of a manuscript, now in the Vatican Li-

brary, which he signed on Monday 28 August 898 and

expressed his relief in the colophon for coming to

the end of the text, stating that for scribes the last
1
verse is as s weet as a calm port for sailors.

During the occupation of Crete by the Arabs the

area around Monemvasia suffered from frequent attacks,

1
P. Nicolopoulos, ""H dLPXaLOTtPa 611600C YPCLUTA
live Ca Tfic MoveuDaaCac 89 8 L. X.
,"' Acts 'of the Ist Ioc-
al Congress of Laconi'a'n Studies, 11,227. On the offi-
ce R. Guilland, Recherches sur 1'es'I'nstituti*ons' byzan-
tines (Berlin, 1967), 11, p. 306.
 131

1
due to the proximity of their field of operation.
(the)
Monemvasia itself could not escape Arab aggression

despite its strong position. For the raid the only

source, as is often the case with this sort of Arab

enterprises, is a hagiographical text, written like

the one on the castle "of the cowherds" by Paul of

Monemvasia and also surviving only in translation in

Arabic, the miracles of Saints Cyrus and Ioannis the

Anargyroi, whose cult from Egypt had found its way to

Monemvasia, as was mentioned earlier. The first part,

2
where the attack is mentioned is as follows:

After the sons of Hagar, sent by God for

our sins, invaded the town of Monemvasia
and, after devastating-it, took prisoners
its inhabitants, they entered the church of
Saints Cyrus and Ioannis the Anargyroi and
Miracle prqducqr. One among them, when he
saw the portrait of Saint Cyrus, who, among
the just, suffered martyrdom and whose por-
traits, being prominent on the wall, were
admired by all, he threw his spear against
the forehead of the saint's portrait. In-
stantly, by-orders of the Creator from the
wounded face of the image, which was painted
on the wall, blood started flowing which des-
cended towards the beard. When this happened
and the barbarians saw it, they ran trembling
out of the church. But the one who threw the

Aft. Boll., 25 (1906), 233-40; An. Bol: l., 30 (.1911),

.I
296-301; N. A. Oikonomides, "'0 DCog -roG 'A-yCou fto5ea-
pou KuOAp(av (10og (xC. ), " 'Actsof the 3rd Pani'onian
Congress (Athens, 1967), pp. 264-91.
2
P. Peeters, An. Bol'l., 25 (1906), 233-40. The
extract is translated from the latin translation
by the editor, pp. 236-37.
q

132

spear was dashed suddenly against the earth

by a daemon. And up to our time the miracle
has never ceased to be manifest. Certainly
the blood is seen, as freshly flowing as
from a live human being from the forehead
of the portrait towards the eyes, the nose
and the chin ... Long ago my predecessor Ioan-
nis ... proposed to renovate it. While he
was doing this his right hand became thin
and weak ... his right foot dried-up as well.
And ... until he died, half of his body remain-
ed paralyzed...

The short description of the Arab attack makes

it hard to establish when it happened and also to eva-
luate its importance. To establish the date one must

relate the information contained in the narration to

information from other sources. The attack took place

before the time of Paul, who was bishop of Monemvasia

from at least 955. ' As he explains he was born and grew

up in the city, but he does not seem to have been an

1
eye-witness. Therefore the event must have taken

place before 925. Furthermore Ioannis, who undertook

the repainting of the portrait, was-not contemporary

with the attack. He is indicated by Paul as his pre-.

decessor. He was not, however, his immediate predeces-

sor since the Synodicon of Monemvasia records another

2
name. Ioannis must have occupied the See of Monemva-

sia, as will be seen later, during the first decade

A. Kominis, "'Paolo di Monembasia, ". B, 29-30

(1959-60), 231-48. "
2
Laurent, ' EO, 32 (1933), 131.
 133

of the 10th century, consequently the attack must have

'
occured before his accession to this office. Further-

more in the "Life of Saint Theodore of Kythera", whose

activity is placed between 920 and 944 nowhere is

there any hint on a recent attack of any kind against

the town although various operations against the wi-

2
der area are mentioned. All the sources- therefore

indicate that the Arab attack could only have happen-

ed around 900.

In the series of bishops mentioned by the Syno-

dicon of Monemvasia. there is a long gap of about 70

years between the first loannis, the companion of

Saint Methodius in Rome in-815-17 and the already men-

tioned Nicetas, metropolitan during the reign of Leo

and Alexander who reigned between 896 and 92.. It:

would be tempting to place the Arab raid during this

interval. Since, however, the narration on the relics

of the Spanish Saints, which takes place in Nicetas's

time, contains absolutely no suggestion of any attack

against Monemvasia by the Arabs even in a remote past

despite the fact that it deals extensively with their

raids in the area around and near-Monemvasia,

1
Chapter 6 11.
2' wAYLOQ 8c68wpoQ, 264-91.
Oikonomid6s,
 134

it is more reasonable to place the raid and the

short conquest of Monemvasia after Niceta'sts office,

at the very beginning of the 10th century. In this

case it must have been related to a series of attacks

undertaken by the Arabs against many towns of the

western Aegean, like Thessaloniki and, possibly, also

1
Athens.

For the importance of the attack the only hint is

the enslavement of the inhabitants. The text seems

to imply that all the inhabitants were taken prisoners.

Even if this seems exaggerated, the number of prison-

ers must have been considerable, otherwise a differ-

ent expression should have been used by the author.

The conquest does not seem to have lasted fof long,

however, because all the sources mentioned above, which

refer to the first half of the 10th century, present

Monemvasia as, a prosperous town with many ecclesiasti-

cal establishments, where an abundance of miracles

was taking place. The narration "about the blessed Mar-

tha", also by Paul, mentions two important monasteries,

in in lower 2 Also
one the upper and one the town".

the "Life of Saint Theodore of Kytherall, apart from

1
Christidis, Raids, 76-111, with bibliography.
2
G. Da Costa Louillet, "Saints de GrP-ce aux VIIIe,
IXe et Xe si6cles: 7. Vie de Sainte Marthe de Monemba-
sie Xe s., " B, 31 (1961), 344-46.
 135

the churches in and around Monemvasia, mentions the

port and a squadron of 4 chelandia under the command

1
of a tourmarches, patrolling the waters around.

IV The years up to 1204

.

From the 9th century, already, there were signs of

change in the conditions that had prevailed in the

Mediterranean since the end of the 6th century, and

contributed to the growth of Monemvasia. The towns

of the northern and western coast of the Peloponnese

began, after a break of two centuries, to grow again

for a multiplicity of reasons, among which a general

demographic increase, the return of refugees from Ita-

ly after the attacks of the Arabs there, changes in

2
the routes of navigation, the submission of the Slavs.

Corinth and-Patras were particularly favoured by the

new conditions. The redevelopment of Patras is espe-

cially evident in the efforts of citizens who had in-

fluence at the Byzantine Court, both to extract privi-

leges for the town and its church and to display

3
wealth.

1 'A-yLoQ Gc6bwpoc, 286-88.

Oikonomides,
2
Zakythinos, * Despotat, 11,162 and n. 4,5; Mango,
New Rome, 80-82; Angold, City, 11-18.
3 128-33; Bouras, City and Vil-
Bon,, P61oponn8se,
lage, 618-20.
 1 3
.

Lacedaemonia, which was refounded in the 9th cen-

tury was gradually becoming an important trade cen-

tre. Saint Nicon settled there after the recovery

of Crete from the Arabs and was active for several

both in the in 2
years, city and the surrounding area.
His "Life" mentions that he built two churches and

preached the repentance during a visit to the "coun-

try of the Dorians", a country of "ethniko: U. One wonders

if paganism was not still alive in some areas of the

country of the Dorians, as Monemvasials territory was

3
refered to.

"Dorians", used mostly by scholars, was not the

only name to designate the inhabitants of the region

around Monemvasia. Tzacones, a name which does not

seem to have been scholarly, was also used and it

still survives for the inhabitants as well as the

1
Bon, P61oponn6se, 44 n. 2,132-33; R. Morozzo
della Rocca-A. Lombardo, ' Do'cumeftt: Ldel*Commerci'O Vene-
ziano'nei-secolk XI-XIII--TR-ome, 1940), 1, pp. 69,1T7,
134,203,204,22-F, 307,312,334-35; m. S. Kordosis,
"T6 tim6PLO aT BuC(XVTLvA Acman)Ca (E)'at. -1204) "
Acts of the Tst local Cohgres's'of Laconi: aft Studies,
107-12; Ch. Bouras, "-Eva BuCav-cLv6 Aou-rp6 crT Aaxr:. -
8aCliova, " AE (1982), 99-112.
2
S. P. Lampros, 11'0 DCor_ Tob WxcavoQ TOG ME:TaVO-
eVTe, " NE, 3 (1906), 131-228; new ed.: 0. Lampsidis,
*0 6X rF6VTOU 6mog Ntuo)v 6 METCLVOEVTC ('APXeVov n6v-
13)
TOU, IICLPdLPTT111CL (Athens, 1982) ; Vocotopoulos, OA-
yLog NCxwv, 273-75.
3
Nicon, Lampsidis, p. 62; cf. pp. 436,638. On.
Dorians see below ch. 5 111.
 137

region situated in northern Parnon, which had been

I
part of the territory of Monemvasia. The earliest

known source to use it is the Turin-Kutlumus version

of the Chronicle of Monemvasia, which explain that

in the mountainous regions which were "lately"

,

called tzaconiai, settled the rustic people and the

herdsmen from among the Lacones, who were renamed Tza-

2
cones. All byzantine sources use the word to desi-

gnate either a specific military corps or the inhabi-

3
tants of south-eastern Peloponnese.

So far no satisfactory explanation has been gi-

ven as to the provenance of "tzacones" and the evo--

lution of its meaning, although the literature is vast

on the word, the area, its inhabitants and their lan-

4
guage. The derivation from Lacones, proposed by the

1
Possibly all the territory of Monemvasia: Ch.
Symeonidis, Ot TgAnco-veg xcLC Tcy(xK(O'VLdL (ZUJIOX CTUA
PuTjvcCcL -r&j 6voudL-m-v -RcLC -co(3 ftcav6jiou PuCavTLvob
ftoLob TCov x(xoTpo(puXdLxwv) (Thessaloniki, 1972)
, pp.
129-38.
2
Above p. 72,11.5-8.
3
S. Caratzas, ' Les Tzacones (Berlin-New York,
1976), p. 92.
4
On mentions in. Byzantine sources, the dialect,
theories, and bibliography: Caratzas,, ' Tzacones and
Symeonidis, TaAxcaveg. Their own theories, the first
proposing the provenance from "5LdLxovcc" and the
other giving the word the meaning of "mountaineer",
have not been considered satisfactory. Cf. Weithmann,
Slavische Bev8lkerung, 101-02.
 138

Chronicle of Monemvasia and repeated in later sources

1
has been rejected as being false etymology. The

derivation from the Slav word "zakon" rqeaning law

has also been rejected, the main argument against it

being that the tsaconian dialect is a Greek dialect

and consequently the Tsaconians could not have been

Slavs. One has to note that the word emerged when

Monemvasia's territory was surrounded by the Slavs and

the possibility of a Slav origin of the word should

not be rejected. It could have been used, however, to

designate the Greeks, a fact which is confi rmed by

2
all sources, stating that the Tzacones were Greeks.

The Slavs could have used the word as a technical term

an equivalent, possibly, of the word "foederati", which

is not far from the meaning of "zakon". This would

explain the double meaning of the word as, on the

one hand, the soldiers, guardians of passages, and

on the other, the inhabitants of the federate city-state

3
of Monemvasia. Tzacones in its first meaning was

"Caratzas,
Tzacones, 15-22, Symeonidis, TodwAiveg,
147-48. Cf. Meletios, recwyqS24q IToLXcLLdL-K(xUv6q 1728).
-(Venice,
2
S. A. Pagoulatos, Ot TodLxwvcS xaC T6 ncpt -rfic
KTCaecoC Tflg MOVCUj3aU6CX9 XPOVLx6v (-Athens, 1947), pp.
51-52; S. Caratzas, "Hacw QLXoTE6XCI. LOL Al dLTE6XCIIOL OL
OUCaVTLVOC rICXOnO"VVACFLOL;, " 'ETCLCTT. 'Ener. (DLX. EX.
Haven. ftcycy., 17 (1978), 126-28.
3
zakon: v6uog, 456cmtojuj, OecyL6g, vojio0ccrCcL, lex.
K. Meyer, Altkirchensl'avisch-gri'echi: sches Wbrterbuch
(GlUckstadt-Hamburg, 1935); F. miklosich, " Lexi Pa-
'l, aeosl'ovenico-Graeco-Latinum (Vienna, 1862-65). C-f-.
[cLx6vL: cuvOeLcL, 8,Dtjio (from the Slav zakonu) : E.
Kriaras, ACELx6 TflQ MEGaLG3VLXflQ 6njI(b8OUQ ^fPCLj1UCLTCCCLQ
(Thessaloniki, 1980).
 139

later adopted as official by the imperial administra-

1
tion as has happened with other military terms. As

for the second meaning, its resemblance with Lacones

must have led to the explanation that it was a local

corruption of this word.

After the 10th century the references to Monemva-

sia in the sources become evenmore rare. Alexios Ko-

mnenos is said in two later sources to have issued a

for 2
chrysobull Monemvasia at some unknown date. In

the chrysobull of the same emperor, which granted

trading privileges to the Venetians in various cities

of the Empire Monemvasia is not mentioned and its

name is also omitted from all the subsequent chryso-

bulls on the same subject. The importance of Monemva-

sia, strategically if not commercially, during this-

period is undeniable and the omission is rather

strange, but it could be explained by the special

status of Monemvasia and its ancient privileges. The

same explanation could be given for all the subsequent

omissions of the name of Monemvasia from the treaties

Y
with Venice. Furthermore it is possible that the

1
Cf. "Zakonik", the charters and privileges of Greek-/
cities, confirmed in 1349 by St. Dasan: Nicol, 1,261-1453:
265; gradski zakon, meaning the particular urban statutes.
df cities: Bratianu, Privileges, 115; cakonstvo meaning mi-
litia: C. Amantos, rXCOCYCFLX6L ME:XCTftCLTCL (Athens, 1964) 384.
Similarly the word 6poGyyoC has been adopted -by
the admi-
nistration, Ahrweiler, Mer, 278, n-3.
2
Ps. Phrantzes, Grecu, 538; Medvedev, VV, 34, p. 227.
 140

chrysobull for Monemvasia was issued by Alexios I to

safeguard the privileges of Monemvasia against those

1
granted to the Venetians.

During the 12th century a series of naval opera-

tions took place around the rock of Monemvasia and

2
cape Malea. To the great admiration of Nicetas Cho-

niates, in his description of the campaign of Roger

II of Sicily against various ports of the Byzantine

Empire in 1147, the inhabitants of Monemvasia had the

determination to defend their right to decide on their

future and were able to confront successfully the at-

tack, while the other cities, some of them very im-

portant, like Corinth, Thebes and Kerkyra, were not

able to resist the Normans.

He attacked Monemvasia fostering hopes that

he could grasp this citadel too without
bloodshed like Kerkyra three days earlier.
But he'encountered with men who conduct .
their affairs prudently and who are not ig-
notant of the love of freedom and he was bea-
tenas if he had attacked a bulwark which

I
DF)lger, ' Regesten, no., 1288., *no datq. He considers
it to be a forg-ery-. No biblipgraph y. The chrysobull for
Monemvasia could, consequently, be dated near that of
Venice, issued in 1082, D81ger, no. 1081.
2
Anna Comnena, Bonn, 11,122-23; Ahrweiler, Mer,
194-95. Edrisi mentions Monemvasia inhis description,
A. Jaubert, -G6ographie'd` Edri'si (Paris, 1836-40), 11,
124-25; K. Miller, ' Die Wel: tkarte *des' Tdri'si von Jahr
'1154 n. Chr. (Stuttgart, 1928), map no. V; M. S. Kordo-
sis, '"H nepLypapA Tfic 'AvCLTOXLXflQ nCXOnOVVAC7OU dLn6
T6v "Apc$a TTCPLnynTA Edrisi, " Acts of the 2nd Int. Con.
of Pel., Studies (Athens, 1981-2), 11,261-68. Cf. Van
der Vin, Travel'Iers, 152.
 141

cannot be moved and, stern foremost, he re-

treats 1
without success.

Later, in the spring of 1149 a naval battle took

place off the shore of Monemvasia, and the king of

2
France was almost taken prisoner by the Byzantines.

In another sea battle, however, which was undertaken

on the initiative of the strategos Constantine Angelos,

stationed in Monemvasia with part of the Byzantine

3
fleet, it was the Norman fleet that won. Members

of the important family of Zontostephani,, who parti-:

cipated in the naval operations in the area, could be

the founders of the monastery of "Kontostephanos",

which is known to have existed not far from Monemva-

sia. It may have been erected at a place overlooking

the waters where*a battle was won to celebrate the

victory and could be identified with the 12th centu-

4
ry church situated at Geroumana.

I (CFHB, 11/1),
Nicetas Choniates, ed. Van Dieten
1,73.
2
Kinnamos, Bonn, III, 878a, '98-100; -Ahrweiler,
Mer, 247.
3 120-21; Mer, 252,
Kinnamos, Bonn, Iff, Ahrweiler,
on the date, which is not clear; F. Chalandon, ' Lesco-
mnane (Paris, 1912), p. 348.
4 '"H
Below pp. 279-81; 408 A. K. Orlandos, IIcLv-
.
TdLvaaccL TflQ MovellDcLaCac, " ABME, 1 (1935),
-139-151.
 142

Monemvasiotes are found in Thessaloniki during

the Norman attack of 1185 taking an active part in the

1
defence of the city. Merchant ships f rom Monemvasia

seem frequently to visit the port of Piraeus, as the

metropolitan of Athens Michael Choniates observes in

2
one of his letters. At the same period Michael's

brother Nicetas writes about a famous icon from Mo-

nemvasia, the icon of4Elkomenos, which emperor Isaac

11
II Angelos wanted so desperately in order to decorate

the church he was embellishing in Anaplos and had to

3
(Jj, use treachery to obtain The icon of'Elkomenos

does not seem to have been an isolated work of art in

the town. An important architectural monument, the

octagonal church of Hodhighitria or- Saint Sophia, as it

is called today, was built on the rock overlooking the

sea in the. middle of the 12th century. The Constanti-

Mentioned in the long petition to the Patriarch

,1
NE, 12 (1915)r 288-89. Cf. Eustathius, Bonn, 445, who
Feintions a military corps from the Peloponnese under
the command of certain Ioannis Mavrozomis. J. Herrin,
"Realities of Byzantine Provincial Goverment: Hellas
and Peloponnesos, 1180-1205, " DOP, 29 (1975), 281 and
n. 151 refers to another Mavr7o-zomis, who was under
the command of Andronikos Kontostephanos with the na-
val forces in Euboea.
2 "AxOIILVdLTOU
S. P. Lampros, MLXaX TOO XCOVLdL-rOU
TdL awC6ueva (Athens, 1879-80), letter no. n6', p. 136-
37.
3 442, Schreiner,
Nicetas Choniates, Van Dieten,
Kleinchroniken no. 41/3,1,319,11,178; Bees, "0 "EX-

U6116VOr. XPLO-r6C;, 207-50.

 143

nopolitan origin of its style, to which is also re-

lated the church of Geroumana, shows thAt Monemvasia

maintained all manner of contacts with the capital,

as well as with other places, and was an important

1
centre of the time.

1
G. Millet, ' 'L'Aco'le' qrg-cque dans' I'Archtitecture
B zantine (Paris, 1916, rpt. London, 1974), pF. -116-17,
124-2T, -160-63,189,247,252; H. Kalligas, "The Church
of Haghia Sophia at Monemvasia: its date and dedication, "
AXAE, nep. A!, 9 (1977-79) 217-21; Orlandos, IIcLvcL-rdvcLaacL,
142; plans ,
of. Haghia Sophia and other churches of Monem-
vasia in H. Xanalatou-Dergalin-A. Kouloglou-Pervolaraki,
Movel. LOaaC (Athens, 1974), 36-57. Cf. R. Traquair, "La-
conia. l. The Medieval Fortresses, "' BSA, 12 (1915-6),
27-74.
 3.1204 - 1282 The relations with the Franks
.

I. Leon Chamaretos

The leaders of the fourth Crusade drew up, after

the conquest of Constantinople in April 1204, a first

draft of an agreement, which became known as Partitio

Romaniae, according to which they divided the Empire

among themselves. During the ensuing campaigns the

Latin conquerors did not always adhere closely to the

clauses of their original agreement but they continu-

ed to use it as a basis for the distribution of the

lands 1
that they conquered. Among the various pro-
blems concerning the Partitio Romaniae that have been

pointed out long ago is that certain areas of the Em-

pire are curiously not mentioned. This is even more

interesting when one takes into consideration the

fact that, according to all indications offered by

the text itself, official information from the byzan-

tine administration representing the real situation

of the Empire on the eve of the Frankish conquest was

1
Tafel-Thomas, Urkunden, 1,464-488; A. Carile,
Partitio Terrarum Imperii Romanie, " Studi Vefteziani,
7 (1965), 125-305. on the document: N. Oikonomides,
"La d6composition de 1' Empire Byzantin a la veille
de 1204: la "Partitio Romaniaell, "' Reports of'the'15th
International' Byzantine Congre'ss (Athens, 1976T, espe-
ciai-ly -p. 13 n. 29.
 145

used, excluding the possibility of omissions due to

ignorance or neglect.

Among the areas omitted is that of Monemvasia.

As we have seen Monemvasia seems to have enjoyed some

kind of self-government, which seems to be the reason

why it was not mentioned in the chrysobulls of Ale-

xios Komnenos. and his successors. granting commercial

privileges to the Venetians. This too seems to be

the reason for the omission in the Partitio Romaniae,

which apparently omits all areas that were self-go-

verned or had broken away from the central govern-

2
ment. For Monemvasia the omission is usually attri-

buted to completely irrelevant causes or is not men-

tioned at all, because its area is confused with the

3.
area of Lacedaemonia, which, however,, 'is specifically

mentioned in the Partitio Romaniae as imperial

1
Oikonomides, La d6composition, 11-22; D. A. Za-
kythinos, "ME:XdTCLL TEEPC TfjC; 45LOLX71'rLXflr- 8LCLLP&YE: (OQ
XCLC Tfir- tTECLPXLaXfJC 6LCLLP6CYCCOr-tV Trp OUC(YV'rLVr4) XPdreLr"
EEBE, 21 (1951), 179-209.
2 21-22.
oikonomides, La d6composition,
3
Oikonomides, La d6composition, 18; A. Bon, ' La
Mor6e Franque. 'Recherches' Historiques', 'Top o'graphi ues
et Arch6ologiques sur l'a Principaut6 dl*Ac hale (1 nA-
1430) (Bibliothdque des Ecoles Frangaises T Athd nes
et U-e Rome, 213) (Paris, 1969), p. 53; A. Carile,, Per
una storiadell'A% Im ero lati'no di' Constant Inopoli
A --A /"-"I
A A (1'7) 1 4na-00. n MM
-I kI1. U4k-IzUI) kDUJ_Uj --M I ICL 1 1 4. j, 1
j, -7 .7U- .7 .7iW.,

"A neglected authority for the history of the Pelopon-

nese in the early thirteenth century: Demetrios Cho-
matianos, Archbishop of Bulgaria, "*BZ, 70 (1977),
321. Zakythinos, ' EEBE, 21, pp. 186-B-T.
 146

1
lands.

:Among the contemporary sources onl_y two refer to

the south-eastern Peloponnese, Nicetas Choniates and

Geoffroy Villehardouin. Discussing events following

Easter 1206 Nicetas Choniates mentions that the ru-

lers of some areas had declared themselves independ-

ent. Such was the case of Leon Sgouros in Corinth and

Nauplion andof Michael Doucas who had appropriated

Aetolia and the land around Nicopolis and Epidamnos,

while "Leon Chamaretos, who held koile Lacedaemon, was

2
the tyrant of the Lacones" In another passage, which
.
is not found in all manuscripts he refers to later

incidents, most probably of 1209-10, and writes that

at that time Nauplion was held by a certain Gabriel,

a relative of Sgouros, "just like koile Lacedaemon

by a certain Chamaretos, a Lacon", while everything

1
"Provintia Lakedemonie Micra et megali episce-
psis, i. e. parva et magna pertinentia" : Tafel-Thomas,
Urkunden, 1,468. On the term "episkepsis": Oikonomi-
des, La d6composition, 14,17; N. Svoronos, "Recher-
ches sur le cadastre byzantin et la fiscalit6 aux XIe
et XIle sie'cles: le cadastre de Thabes, " in ttudes
sur 11 organisati*on lnt6rieurc, ' la *soc'At6 'elt-Tr-Llcono-
mie de 1' Empire Byzantin (London: Variorum Reprints,
1973), no. fII, pp. 61,62.
2
Nicetas Choniates, Van Dieten, 638: "'0 L6v 'YdLP
Eyoup6c_ Atow K6pLvOov bLeVnc xa Na6nXLov, &Q XaC ell-
npooftv tppOn jioL. - 6U Mx1idpeTog Atwv Tfic xoCXnQ
xp=65v AcLxc8aCjiovoQ T6pcLvvoC v T8v Aax6vwv-ACTcoXCcLv
86 xcLC TdL Tfl, NLuon6XeL nP0C0PLC6ucvcL xaC o"acx np6cyCLCYLV
tQ *EnC6ajivov 6 ML%cLA;L ML60CLTO'l
.
 147

1
else was under Latin rule.

The combination of the information given by Cho-

niates and the Partitio Romaniae with the text of a

lead seal which mentions Chamaretos as "proedros of La-

cedaemonia" led to the consolidation of the view that

the archon Leon Chamaretos, following the example of

Leon Sgouros, had established after the conquest of
Constantinople an independent hegemony out of the im-

lands 2
perial of Lacedaemonia, which he had governed.
Actually from the text of Choniates completely diffe-

rent conclusions should be drawn. Chamaretos is men-

tioned as v5pavvoc of the Lacones, which in the archa-
ic language used by the historian means that he was

the ruler, archon, of the Lacones, the inhabitants of

1
Nicetas Choniates, Van Dieten, 611, inn. "11.30-
35: 11T6 NcLl6TtAA0V TECLPdL TLvoc rcoptAx, XCOLYVTOU TOG
EYOUPOG, XCLTe%6uevov, ricynep xciC h'xoCXn Acxxe6cLCjicov ncL-
PdL XCLIICLP6TOUTLv6Q AdLXWV0Q Td 8*6LXXCL TEdLVTCL ACLTCV0LQ
XCLC TOVQ T06TWV OCC7110% OTEECROUCF01.

2
"Tf. i TEP066POU A6(0)VT0Q TOG XCLjICLPft0U/ TUTT8
CYPPCLYC8L ACLXC8aCjI0VoQ T(16TEOV?) ": K. M. Konstantopoulos,
BuCCLVTLCLXdL MoXuD86ouUct v Ti 'ExDVLx0 N0VLLCYjICLTLXCP
MouqeC4) (Athens, 1917), no. 697, p. 183. Cf. N. A. Bees,
VV, 21 (1914), no. 16, pp. 196-97; V. Laurent, Les-bul-
fe-s m6triques dans la sigillographke byzantine TAKERZE--
nes, 1932), no. 494, p. 176. On Chamaretos, Bon, P61o-
ponn6se, 123 and n. 5,164,172-73,204 and n. 67; D.
Jacoby, "Les archontes grecs et. la f6odalit6 en Mor6e
Franque, "' TM, 2 (1967), 466; Oikonomides, La CL6COMposi-
tion, 18; Ragdalino, Chomatianos, 321; M. S. Kordosis,
'IOTOOLUA XCLC T0n0YP(XTLXd 7T00BXAUCLTCL*'XCLT& TCC TtOXEULXC
OUYUPOOCTE: LC Tfic TEp(bTTIc E:'pL66oU
TT. '-rfic 4DpcLyxo-kpcLTC
N6TLa 'EXXdL6a (1204-1262) (Athens, 1984) , p. 87.
 148

1
the territory of Monemvasia. The use of the word

to'KPOLT6V" has the meaning that he held the valley. of

Lacedaemonia and does not specify how h.e had acquired

it. The second passage by comparing the usurpation

of Nauplion by the relative of Sgouros with the occu-

%lain by
pation of th, of Lacedaemonia a "Lacon"

named Chamaretos, confirms that Chamaretos came from

2
Monemvasia and hints at how the plain was occupied.

Consequently, according to Nicetas Choniates, Leon

Chamaretos was not an official of the imperial admi-

nistration but a local archon, who, as was the case

with some other local archons of this period, managed

after the fall of Constantinople to take under control

3
areas beyond his territory..

1
Cf. Eustathios, Bonn, 417 "eCrc pE CC'ce T15-
pavvoc".
2
Cf. Gregoras, Schopen,, 1,98: "Adwavec- dpTL
6x NcXoTtovvAaou T45 oamXcr, o6c h noLvA
npoaeX06vxcg
CpcLacx yXZaaa
TECLPcLTOE: TCdLxwvcLg
lie-ccov6licLoev" .
3
Oikonomides, La d6composition, 14-22. The title
mentioned in the seal was out of use at this time :
N. Oikonomides,, 'Les 11'stes de pr6s6arfce (Paris, 1972),
p. 299. It was, however, in use as an ecclesiastical
title: S. Salaville, "Le titre eccl6siastique de "pro-
edros" dans les documents byzantins, "' EO, 29 (1930),
429-31. There is however a possibility that the word
was used in its original meaning of a person invested
with a certain office: Salaville, 418. Magdalino, Cho-
matianos, 319 and n. 12. Onthefamily N. A. Bees, Ot
'XqLjidLpc-roL, ' `IqropLx6, v xcLC yEveqXoyLx6v crnlietcou (A-
thens, 1903).
 149

Geoffroy Villehardouin devotes several pages to

the activities of his nephew and namesake, during the

period from 1204 to 1209 in the Peloponnese. He men-

tions that Geoffroy was shipwrecked in 1204 near Modon.

An important archon learned about it and went to meet

him. After informing him about the recent events in

Constantinople he proposed alliance in conquering the

Peloponnese, being certain that this was a feat that

they could manage and offered Ls fide-

guara ntees of
lity. Villehardouin accepted and together they set

out. Soon,, - however, the Greek archon died and his

son, who succeeded him, renounced the agreements, ap-

propriated the common conquests and turned the inhabi-

tants against Villehardouin, who found himself ih'a

very difficult position. He decided to join the Franks,

who were besieging Nauplion and Corinth and with a

few followers, after a dangerous journey on horseback

which lasted *six days Nauplion.

, reached

The narrative of the Frankish historian, despite

his precision, has certain difficulties among which

Geoffroy de Villehardouin, * la Con5ufte'de Con-

stantinople, ed. E. Faral (Paris, 1938-39), 11, pars.
pp. 134-37. .
-326,
 150

the most important is the identificationof the Greek

archon whose name is not mentioned. Nor can one fol-

low the movements of the persons involved due to the

insufficient topographical and chronological infor-

1
mation given. Concerning the identification of the

archon several theories have been proposed. According

to them he was no other 2

one of than Leon Chamaretos.

It is interesting to examine this hypothesis. Leon

Chamaretos was indeed the ruler of an important re-

gion of the Peloponnese and held imperial lands, as

did the archon mentioned by Villehardouin, but he was

hostile to the Latins and was still active in 1206

and, at least, 1209, whereas according to the Fran-

kish historian the archon collaborated with the La-

tins and died during the winter 1204-5. If one accept-

ed, however, that Leon Chamaretos was the son and

1
Bon,, Mor6e, 56-57.
2
N. de Wailly in: G. Villehardouin I
de' Constantinopile (Paris, 1872), 192-93n. 325,- Magdali-
no, Chomatianos, 319. Cf. Kordosis, *1'20,4-1,262,91 and
n. 2, on earlier bibliography; D. M. Nicol, * The Byzanti-
ne Family of Rantakouzenos''(Cafttacuzerius)*, *ca. '1100-
1460 (Washington D. C., 1968), 7, n. 15; J. 'Longnon, L, empire
lati'ri de ConstantknoDle: et Ta DrincIviaut6 de' Morde
(Paris, 1949) p. 72; R. -J. Loenertz, "Aux origines
du Despotat d' tpire et de la principaut6 d' Achaie, "
B, 43 (1973), 379-80.
 151

successor of this archon then there is no contradicti-

on. On the contrary this double identification is

supported by all the details extracted. from the two

sources. The statement of Choniates that Leon Chamare-

tos was the only archon, apart from Sgouros and his

relative, who had hostile feelings against the Latins

precludes the existence of another person who could

be identified I
with the archon' s son.

When, therefore, Geoffroy Villehardouin was ship-

wrecked in autumn 1204 near Modon, the archon of Mo-

nemvasia Chamaretos heard about it and hastened to

meet him and proposed cooperation for the common con-

quest of the Peloponnese. This would be a guarantee

that the Franks would not turn against him. It is

possible that, during the intervening period after

the fall of Constantinople, Chamaretos had already
2
usurped certain imperial lands. If he had not

1
It has been usually assumed that the archon
was based in Messenia, e. g. Magdalino, Chomatianosp
319. The text, howeVermentions: Villehardouin, Faral,
p. 134, "si-1 en mena venz et aventure au port de
Mouton. Et bn 'I qui fu sa nef empirie et parestovoir le
convint sejourner 11 iver el pals. Et uns Griex, qui
mult ere sire del pals, " The "pals " must ref er not
...
to the port of Modon but to Romania mentioned a few
lines earlier.
2
Loenertz, Origines, 379 n. 2, thinks that Ville-
hardouin and his companions were used as mercenaries.
But Chamaretos must have also used his own forces,
since, after the withdrawal of the Franks, he was
able to resist the Latins.
 152

already conquered the plain of Lacedaemonia then this

must have been their first joint target, being situ-

ated between them. Their initial successes were in-

terrupted abruptly by the death of Chamaretos at the

end of 1204 or possibly the beginning of 1205. His

son Leon Chamaretos, who succeededhim as archon of

Monemvasia, did not have the same friendly feelings

towards the Latins. Thinking perhaps that his forces

were strong enough to stop them and retain his indepen-

dence and having quite possibly established contact

with Nicaea and Epiros, he broke with Villehardouin

1
and usurped the common conquests. The danger that the

crusaders faced is underlined with-emphasis in Ville-

2
hardouin's text. Probably Chamaretos maltreated the

Latin forces some of which must have been trapped

3
and perished. This must have led to the decision

to attempt an escape from the hostile territory to-

wards the Frankish forces, which had in the meantime

advanced and were besieging Corinth and Nauplion. En-

circled possibly east of the plain of Sparta, they

1
Loenertz, Origines, 377-78'. Kordosis, ''1'204-
1262,84-90.
2
Villehardouin, Faral, p. 326: "et chevauche
per mult grant peril".
3 Origines,
Kordosis, ''1204-1,262,75 and Loenertz,
380 n. 1, believe that Geoffroy had a number of men
left behind, in Modon. Loenertz does not think that
Villehardouin's companions suffered.
 153

undertook a hard journey most probably over the rough

inclines of mount Parnon. After six whole days, for a

distance that could have otherwise been covered in two*

1
days on horseback, they reached Argolis. Geoffroy

did not accept the favourable propositions by Bonifa-

ce de Montferrat to join him in his campaigns prefering

to return and recapture with the help of Guillaume de

Champlitte the lands that Chamaretos had usurped as

2
well as the rest of the Peloponnese.

Nicetas Choniates describes the subsequent ope-

rations of the two Franks with four only phrases:

%teOCaTa-raL TEp6g "Apyog, TEePLTEaTE-rCLCVE:
L To6c AdLXWVCLr-,,

tc 'AXa -Cav tvftv TEP0006AXEL, x MC06VTIV U6-

T006e TV

-Ctpxc--CCL0 Between the arrival at Argos and the

.3

march through Achaia:,. which ended in Modon, Choniates

uses, concerning the LaCones, a rare verb which could

be understood as an effort to show caution towards
4
them and to avoid them as much as possible.

1
On the duration of the journey, Loenertz, Ori-
gines, 380 n. 1; Kordosis, ''T204-1262,76,94 n. 26.
Both count the journey from Modon to Nauplion. But
since Geoffroy was so determined later to avoid the
Lacones one must assume that he had been forced to
cross their country. The fact that it took the horses
so much longer would indicate paths and roadsto which
they were not used, in the mountains.
2
Villehardouin, Faral, 137-38; Bon, 'Mor6e, 57-
58; Kordosis, * 1'20'4-1'262,66.
3
Nicetas Choniates, Van Dieten, 610.
4
Cf. Kordosis, * 1,204-1*262,72.
 154

The Frankish conquest of the Peloponnese proceed-

ed from the West. Soon the Greeks gathered forces

for the confrontation. In the battle. of Kountoura,

which followed, the Greek forces were led by a certain

Michalis and apparently included contingents from

Lacedaemonia, Veligosti and Nikli, as well as Slavs

from the Tayghetos. In spite of the Greek defeat

the Franks do not seem to have taken up position

east of the Tayghetos and Lacedaemonia remained in

hands I
Greek for a few more years.

The strife between the Franks and the Venetians,

which started in 1206 or 1207 and which retarded the

conquest of the Peloponnese, ended in June 1209 with

the signing of the treaty of Sapienza. The text of

the treaty gives a fairly clear picture of the situa-

2
tion at the time. Among the lands that had not been

conquered yet was the area of Lacedaemonia, which Vil-

lehardouin undertook to conquer and render the quarter

1
Bon, ' Mor6e, 58-64,67-68; Kordosis, ''1204-1262,
65-101. It has been suggested that the leader of th
Greek forces in the battle of Kountoura was the uncle
of despot Ioannis Chamaretos, called Michael: , on
whom see below 3 II; Magdalino, Chomatianos, 319.

2
Bon,, Mor6e, 64-66,69 n. 2.
 155

to the Venetians. He already held, however, a place in

the area, which belonged to him personnally, called

Mola. There seems to be no place with a similar name

other than Molaoi, which, however, is situated very

far from the Frankish positions, very near to Monemva-

sia and it is hard to visualize how Villehardouin

could have got there. Furthermore it would be very dif -

ficult for the Franks to hold this position for a

long time completely cut-off from their main forces.

(Pl. 1) Since in the text. of the agreement names are

often corrupted, one wonders whether under that name

one should not search instead of Molaoi for Nikli,

which was situated near the boundaries of the area of

Lacedaemonia and was held by the Franks in 1209 and

had 2
a catholic bishop.

The conquest of the northern and western Pelopon-

nese seems to. have been completed towards the end of

the decade, but it does not seem to have advanced at

all towards the south-eastern side. It is possible

that other pressing matters distracted Villehardouin

from this task but it is also possible that his arch-

enemy Leon Chamaretos had withdrawn from the scene by

1209-10, and that his successor not having the same

Bon, *Mo'r6e, 69 n. 2.
2
Bon, - Mor6e, 68 and n. 1. The advance towards the
plain of Helo-F -seems to have been acomplished around
1223: Kordosis, ' 1*204'--I'2G2, p. 146.
 156

anti-Latin feelings, sought more friendly relations

'
with the Franks. These allowed for the development

of commercial exchanges with them. In 1214 "jiovejiDd-

OLOQ ON09" is-offered abundantly and is much praised

among the other delicacies of the imperial banquets

2
in Constantinople.

II T4e despot Ioannis Chamaretos

.

The oscillations in the relations between the Mo-

nemvasiotes and the Franks could be explained by the

apparent. existence in Monemvasia of two parties, one

pro-Roman and the other pro-Latin. The peaceful pe-

riod during the second decade of the 13th century

could be attributed to the presence of a pro-Latin

archon who succeeded the pro-Roman Leon Chamaretos,

1
There seems to be no attempt by the Franks
after 1209 to conquer the area east of the Tayghe-
tos. Bon,, Moree, 68,70 and n. 2, believes that La-
cedaemonia was captured a little after 1209, but there
is no evidence for it.
2
it XCLC orvog tu XCOU 6 fi815c XCLC C7T16wwv xaTd T6
CJ'6111ETPOV, 6 tU A9CnG UaC YXUXCCOV TOG lig; LTOG j6
eE EiotctG 6 PCOIICLTLX6C TE XCLC E5nVOUC, XX6 XCLC 6
MOVEll(OLOG CCC TtTIG1I0VAV hllC)V tULPVTO" : A. Heisen-
berg, "Neue Quellen zur Geschichte des lateinischen
Kaisertums ud der Kirchenunion. III. Der Bericht des
Nikolaos Mes7arites ber die politischen und kirchli-
chen Ereignisse des Jahres 1214,11 in* QuelIenund
Studien Geschi, -(London:
cEt-E'e
zur sptbyzantinischeri
Variorw Reprints, 1973), no. III, p. 21.
 157

while the new disturbances at the turn of the decade

could be due to another change of leadership, the

rise in power of Ioannis Chamaretos, who was pro-Ro-

man.

Only one source refers to him, a verdict issued

by the archbishop of Ohrid Demetrios Chomatianos, who

acted as judge for the despots of Epiros, where Cha-

had found 1
maretos refuge after his overthrow.

Ioannis Chamaretos who bore the title of "naveu-

TUX&YTCLTOQ 8E:cm6rTjQt', exposing his case before the

tribunal stated that he was the archon of a sea-side

city of the Peloponnese, which out of patriotism tow-

ards the Roman Empire, he had managed to preserve, to-

gether with its territory, free from the Franks at a

time when all, powerful and weak, had submitted to

2
them. This was in opposition to the plans of his la-

tinophile fellow-citizen George Daemonoiannis, who

tried by intrigues to remove him. First he offered

1
J. B. Pitra, ' Ana, lecta Sacra 'et 'ClassIc' a 'spici-
'legio Sol'esmensi'parata, vol. VI (Rome, 1891), no. 22,
cols. 87-98. Magdalino, Chomatianos, 316-23; D. M. Ni-
col, Refugees, mixed Population and local Patriotism
in Epiros and Western Macedonia after the fourth Cru-
sade, " ' Reports 'of' the '15th Interftatkorial' Byzantine
'Congress (Athens, 1976), pp. 17-19; Kordosis, * 1204-
71262,137-55. The new edition of Chomatianos: G. Prin-
zing, ' Die YEovuwra &LdpopcL de%s Demetrios Chomatenos
( Munster, 1980), has not been available to me.

2
Evidence in the verdict shows that Lacedaemonia
was in the hands of the rran, s And Mani had accepted
their sovereignity. 'Kordosi. s, -.,1,204-1262, -.. 146-48.
 158

cooperation and his daughter as a bride for Ioannis's

I
uncle Michael. Later the proposal was transfered to

Ioannis himself, who accepted in good faith, hoping

that in that way he would be able to draw his future

father-in-law to the pro-Roman party. In fact, howe-

ver, this wedding was part of the plans to oust him.

First his wife tried unsuccessfully to poison him and

then she secretly transported all his movable pro-

perty to the Daemonoiannis family house. She also

spied on him and reported to her father on all his

movements and his secret meetings. When they were

discovered new oaths of fidelity were given to the

credulous archon, only to be followed by the second

phase of the plans. Ioannis was kidnaped during the

night from the city port and was tran-sported by ship

to a deserted place, where he was abandoned. From

there he managed to reach the court of Theodore Dou-

cas in Epiros. Ioannis Chamaretos's report ends with

the petition for a divorce from the daughter of Dae-

2
monoiannis.

Theodore Doucas, in spite of the respect that

he showed for his peer Chamaretos, does not seem to

have been moved by his sufferings. He asked to contact

1
Magdalino, Chomatianos, 319.
2
The description of his sufferings suggests that
Ioannis Chamaretos was young and inexperienced.
 159

before the verdict the protopansebastohypertatos Ge-

orge Daemonoiannis, who was apparently a relative of

his and knew of his plans to liberate the Peloponnese.

He wrote a letter dated from December 1222 and en-

1
trusted it to his bondsman Manuel Stases. Apparently

the Franks had blockaded from land and sea the city

of Chamaretos and the letter reached Daemonoiannis's

hands with difficulty and only with the help of an

archon in the Mani, who seems to have been in good

relations with the Franks. - The contempt expressed

for Theodore Doucas and Chamaretos'in Daemonoiannis's

response, given inside the church of Saint George to

the priest who delivered the letter, together with

other evidence convinced the court of his bad faith

and the despot was granted his divorce. Chamaretos,

however, does not-seem to have managed to return to

2
his city and his fate after these events is unknown.

Even though the name of the city, which was the

object of the dispute between Daemonoiannis and Cha-

maretos is not mentioned in the minutes of the tribu-

nal,, there cannot be much doubt that it was Monemvasia.

1 318.
on the date: Magdalino, Chomatianos,
2 be the fami-
There seem to no other members of
ly in the area subsequently. Bees, XaII&PE'COL, 5-15,
mentions. a few names, none before the Turkish occupa-
tion. 0ne comes from Monemvasia and the rest from Mys-
tras, various villages of the Tayghetos, Karytaena
and Gortynia.
 160

To begin with, no other city or area of the Pelopon-

nese remained completely free from Latin rule during

1
this period. It is established that the family of
2
Daemonoiannis came from Monemvasia. It is mentioned

that Chamaretos and Daemonoiannis were fellow-citi-

zens. The topographical indications concerning the ci-

ty of Daemonoiannis, the daily movements of his daugh-

ter between her father's house and her husband's,

the existence of a port as well as of a connection

by land, which-excludes Kythera,, suggest that this

was Monemvasia. The main reason for the rejection

of this identification so far has been the assumption

that the Chamaretoi had connections with Lacedaemo-

nia and not with Monemvasia, that, therefore, Ioan-

nis could not have been archon in Monemvasia. But it

has been shown that two archons of Monemvasia belong-

ed to the family of Chamaretoi and consequently this

family too had ties with Monemvasia. Consequently it

would be absurd to situate the events of this account

of antagonism between the two families of the Monemva-

sia aristocracy away from their natural surroundings

1
Bon, * Morge, 70; Kordosis,, 1,204-1,262,146-49.
2
Zakythinos, ' Despotat, 11,. 117; A. Laiou-Thoma-
dakis, "'EIITEOPOL XCLC VCLUTLROC -rfl(; MovejiOaaCac GT6 13o-
14o atdwa, " Lectures by Monemvasiotikos Omilos, Monem-
vasia, July 1979, pp. 16-17 and n. 45-50; * Prosopagra-
phi'sches Lexikon 'der Palai'61*o'ge'ri *Z'e1t, ed7s-. E. Trapp-
R. Walther-H. -V. Beyer (Vienna, 1976ft) nos. 5033,
6221-6224,90355.
 161

and to search for areas and cities with which neither

1
family had any connection. The fact that on the rock

of Monemvasia no church dedicated to Saint George sur-

vives is not a serious argument against this identi-

2
fication. Many churches have vanished or changed de-

dication through the centuries in the lower town of

3
Monemvasia. Furthermore in the vast ruined area of

the upper town, where-most probably Daemonoiannis's

residence was, no Greeks were allowed to remain during

the Turkish occupation and all churches have vanish-

ed. The only surviving church is Hodhighitria, which

was transformed into a mosque and has subsequently

beenre-dedicated to Saint 4
Sophia.

1
Magdalino, Chomatianos, 322; Kordosis, 1204-
'1*262t 142-44.
2
Magdalino, Chomatianos, 322; Kordosis-,, 1204-
1,262,142-43.
3
H. A. Kalligas, '"H tXXX7jCYLCLGrLR 6LPXLUE:X'rO'VLXA
CYTA MoveliOcLaCcL xcLTdL TAv B"EveToxpcLTCcL xcLC T6 XCLOOXL-
x6 TECLPr; 'AyCag "A'vvcLg, " 'E-A-KXTjcyCeC cr-rAv 'EX-
XXXCFL Tfjr-
XdL8OL I-LE-EdL-rAv 'AXwun (Athens, 1979) esp. 254-55 n. 3;
,
K. Dokos, "'H 6V HeXOTLOVVACYPtXXXnCFLaCFTLXA TECPLOUCCCL
xCLTdL TAv TEepCobov Tfic B"EveToxpaTCag, " BNJB, 21
(1971-74), 137-39 and 22 (1977-84), 328-29. According
to Andrd Georges'Guillet (1& GuilletiA-re), Lacdd6mone
ancienne et nouvelle, (Paris, 1676), 584, the cathedral
of Monemvasia was dedicated to Saint'George.
4 (Tradi-
A. G. Kalligas-H. A. Kalligas, Monemvasia
tional Architecture, IV) (Athens, 1986), pp. 12,14,
15; H. Kalligas, Haghia Sophia, 220-21.
 162

There is an important difference between the pre-

vious Chamaretoi and Ioannis, in the title of despot

which the latter held. It is not known how, when and

by which emperor it was conferred on him, considering

that itwas not the usual title used by the archons of

Monemvasia, in contrast to other semi-independent he-

gemonies. There was only one Roman Emperor before

1222, Theodo re I Lascaris in Nicaea, from whom this

title could emanate, and the particular relations con-

necting him with the archon of Monemvasia, which. are-

known, 2
not were apparently trong.

On the contrary the relations between loannis

Chamaretos and Theodore Doucas do not seem to have

1
ThePetition to the Patriarch mentions the title
of "rex", above pp. 120-21, as the. -usual title until the
conquest by the Franks. on the title of despot : Magda-
lino, Chomatianos, 32-21; R. Guilland, ' Recherches, II,
2-15 esp. p. 14; Br6hier, 'InstitutIons, 121-22; J. Dar-
rouzts, "Ekthesis Nea. Ma-n-uel des pittakia du XIVe si-
ecle, " REB, 27 (1969), 56-57; Kordosis, ''1204-1'262,
147-48. The study of B. Ferjanci(4-, ' Despotiu Vizantiji
i jusnoslovenskim zemlama (Belgrade-, 1960) has not
been available to me., A. Failler, "Les Insignes et la
signature du Despote, "'REB, 40 (1982),. 171-86.
2 320-21--. It is difficult
Magdalino, Chomatianos,
to accept that IoLnnis, who seems to have been rather
young, could have got his title twenty years earlier
from the last Emperor of Constantinople, particularly -
since the two earlier Chamaretoi, who held the same
office, dia not have. it.
 163

been very close. The fact that Chamaretos sought refuge

at his court should be attributed to the circumstances

of his escape, which could have favoured his dire-

ction towards Epiros rather than Nicaea. This would

be the case if the kidnappers had conducted him tow-

ards areas under Latin rule, on the western side of

the Peloponnese, as far as possible from the areas

held by the Greeks. In any case at this particular

moment the situation in Nicaea was rather hostile for

the friends of Theodore I Lascaris, following his

1
death at the beginning of 1222

There seems, on the contrary, to have been some

connection, as we have seen, between Doucas and Dae-

monoiannis, who, however, seems to have been double-

crossing*him, coming into contact with the Latins.

But. he does not seem to have managed, sUcceedto

2
Ioannis Chamaretos as archon of Monemvasia.

1
ostrogorsky, ' History, 434-35.
2
Magdalino, Chomatianos, 317-20.. Daemonoian-
-*If
nis had become archon one would expect Theodore Doucas
to mention it in his letter. and the Franks not to
have blockaded all the area. Laurent, ' Bulles m6triques,
210-11, has published the seal of a George Eudaimonoi-
annis who had a similar title and who, he thinks, could
be identified with the person involved in the verdict.
 III The surrender of Monemvasia to the Franks
.

According to the Chronicle of the Morea, as soon

as Geoffroy Il Villehardouin became Prince of Achaia,

he expressed his intention to complete the conquest

of the Peloponnese by taking Monemvasia, Corjnth, Ar-

1
gos and Nauplion. It is strange that the Chronicle

should mention 'these towns as still being

Greek, because they had already been conquered by the

Franks. When Geoffroy succeeded his father, towards

the end of the third decade of the 13th century, Monem-

0 vasia was the only Greek territory in the Peloponnese,

and was an ally to the emperor of Nicaea and a threat

2
to the Franks. Despite his intention it was not Geof-

froy II who managed to conquer Monemvasia. but his bro-

3
ther William, who succeeded him in 1246.

I
Bon, ' Mor6e, 75-76; * The ChronIcIe of Morea, ed.
J. Schmitt (To-ndon, 1904, T-pt. Groningen, 19-677-)-,
- vv.
2626-2644, p. 176.
2
Bon, ' Mor6e, 69-70,72. The Petition to the Pa-
triarch also mentions Corinth as not having been ca-
ptured by the Franks before William II became Prince
of Achala :' NE 12,0915), 287-88. On the contacts
with Nicaea: 7-XTM, vv. 2767-2769, p. 184-86; NE, 12
(1915), 289; Rordosis, ''1*204-1'262,1830 and 1-90 n. 8.
3
Bon, ' Morde, 72.
 165

The Chronicle of Morea, which is the only source

being used concerning the siege of Monemvasia by the

Franks recounts that when William became Prince of

Achalia he observed that the best ports of the Pelo-

ponnese were held by the Romans, who were in contact

1
with Nicaea and received supplies from there. Star-

ting his preparations to conquer them he came to an

agreement with Venice, which offered him four galleys

in exchange for the ports of Modon and Coron. In order

to gather land forces he came to an agreement with

the Dukes of Athens and Naxos, the three archons of

Euboea and archons from other islands. The operations,

it continues, started with the siege of Corinth,

which soon surrendered. Then followed the siege of

Nauplion, which was blockaded from the sea by the

four galleys and capitulated the following summer.

1.
XTM, vv. 2763-2978, pp. 184-98; ' Livre de la
Conqueste2le Ia Princ6e, de la Morge, ed. J. Longnon
TParis, 1911), pp. 67-85; ' Libro de Ios' Fecho%s 'et 'con-
quistas-del principado de la Morea, ed. A. Morel-Fa-
tio (Geneva, 1885, rpt. OsnabrUcF, 71968), p. 48; "Cr. o-
naca di Morea, " ed,.. K. Hopf, Chroniques Gr6co-Roma-
nes inedites'ou peu *connues (Berlin, 1873, rpt. A- -
thens, 1961), pp. 435-36. An account, with some dif-
ferences, is also given in Ps. BL13XCOV 'I-
-Dorotheos,
CFTOPLx6V TECPLXOV 5LOL(p6pouc xaC 6E6xouc CCFTOPCCLQ(Ve-
nice, 1761), pp. 474-75. His account was; probably based
on a. different version of the Chronicle: S. Stanitsas,
"T6 'XpovLx6 "cob 1570' xaC ot TEcLpcLXXa-y6Q 'rou: Td XpovL-
xdL. Tob Teu8o-AcapoUou xat MavouAX McLXaEoG, " HcXonovya-
MaxdL 16 (1986) 593-633.
,
 166

After a respite during the winter, the following

spring, the Prince gathered at Nikli his allies for

the siege of Monemvasia. They were joined by the

count of Cephalonia and other chiefs. -Villehardouin

installed his forces and the siege started. The block-

ade was completed by the four Venetian galleys. The

inhabitants of the city took the matter lightly, con-

sidering that their castle was impregnable and their

provisions suffigient for a long siege. Their haughti-

hess infuriated the Prince, who vowed not to leave

before he took the city. He pitched three tr6buchets

to strike ceaselessly the lower city, "car sus la ro-

1
che il ne pooit avenir". In contrast, though, to

Lacedaemonia where this procedure led to the surren-

der of the town after five days only, here it took

"three 2
years and more" only then, exhausted from

hunger, did the Monerwasiotes decide to surrender -and

submitted certain conditions. The Prince accepted

their surrender and offered them certain privileges

with an official document that bore his seal. Then

followed the solemn offer of the city-keys by the

1
Livre de 1'a Conqueste, p. 72. From this point
there is a lacuna in this version up to the surrender.
2 &pyaacrvv 6xeV
XTM, v. 6930, p. 196: '"Ev "ro&ry
-rperr_ XpNoug ydLp xaC nX6ov".
 1 167

representatives of the three most important families

of Monemvasia, of Mamonas, Daemonoiannis and Sophia-

nos, to whom the Prince gave presents and fiefs. After

the installation of a garrison and of supplies the

Prince proceeded to conquer the surrounding areas of

Vatica and Tsaconia, which both surrendered without

resistance.

Most historians accept the events concerning

Monemvasia as presented by the Chronicle, rejecting

the I
parts on Corinth and Nauplion. However, the pro-
blems posed by this source, the omissions, the ana-

chronisms, the bias against the Greeks, which all

surface-when it is compared to other sourcest should

have imposed at least some reservations, which

would justify taking into consideration the Petition,

of the metropolitan of Monemvasia to the Patriarch,

which refers to the same events, but which, curious-

ly, is not used, probably because it does not comply

2
with the Chronicle of Morea. It is true that the in-

f ormation f ound. in the Petition is bewilderingly di. f f er-

ent in several points from the generally accepted

1
Longnon, ' L" 'empi're,. 17-18; Bon, 'Mor6e, 72-73;
Kordosis,, *1204-1262,181-88 and esp. 190 n. 11.
2
Longnon, Bon and Kordosis do not even mention
it. Nor does W. Miller, "Monemvasia during the Fran-
kish period (1204-1540), " Es'says on'the Latin Orient
(.Cambridge, 1921) 232-33.
,
 1 168

views, as we have seen concerning the foundation of

Monemvasia. But the Petition offers generally many gua-

rantees of credibility, as has already been pointed

I
out.

The events leading to the surrender of Monemvasia

as presented in the Petition are apparently based on

2
Villehardouin's official documents. The narrative

which is very concise, without the picturesque details

of the Chronicle, strangely also begins with the siege

and conquest of Corinth, by the Franks, following which

the Prince surrounded Monemvasia with land forces and
3
with a large fleet. He soon discovered that only a
long blockade and hunger and thirst could curb the

resistance. The siege lasted seven years and brought

to despair the Monemvasiotes, who decided to surren-

der. It was the. only time that the free city of Monemva-

sia was subjected to a foreign rule and a large number

of the inhabitants who were "federates" to the Roman

1
Cf. Zakythinos, ' De'spotat, I, 18.
2
NE, 12 (.1915)
291,11.3-9: "'0. -y&p cLXcox6c t-
:FPCYXLt ,
RE: r'VOQ 013-CW MITCL T45 DCLCLXCU XCLC TOCC PWjiCLCOLQ
Tcpocy4wetwTo, 6aTe xaC DCLCFLA. LXOI3 TIUXEVV &ELd)j1a'rOQ- XCLC
69 JIVY6AOU 801LECFTCROU 6LECCL-V TeTLjIfjGOaL XCIC TEOXXfi(;
X7JQ (PLAOTLjiCaQ TtCLP(ITXOXCL0C7CLL DCLCYLXLXfjQ XCLaCbr. IEXOIIE: V
LCY-COPL&V
-roiD-ro xat dLn6 -v6v dLn6 -c6v txeCvou ypau-
XCLC
'IypdUjxLTcL"
II&TCOV TU)V eCU6TL xcLC vGv cywCoji&vwv". on as
official documents: N. Oikonomides, "La Chancellerie
Imperiale de Byzance du 13e au 15e si6cle, " REB, 43
(1985) 192-93.
,
3.
NE, 12(1915), 287-90.
 169

Emperor, led by their archon who bore the title of

"rex", prefered to emigrate rather than to submit.

They took their ships and joined the Emperor in Asia

Minor, who offered them the city of Pegai on the

coast of the Hellespont to settle. Those who stayed

behind, among them the bishop, were like captives

and, fearful, were obliged to collaborate with the

Franks.

The important differences in the information gi-

ven by each source must be relevant with the effort

of each chronicler to present the events under a more

favourable light for his side. in the Chronicle the

blockade from the sea is achieved with very small for-

ces. The period of the siege is indefinite, something

longer than three years. The dissidents are not men-

tioned nor their massive emigration. The existence of

a ruler, who, Werned -the city and emigrated, fails to

be mentioned. Instead the three pro-Latin archons are

praised and receive presents and fiefs from the Prin-

ce, to whose magnanimity t he granting of privileges

is attributed. In the Petition the existence of a pro-

Latin party is omitted as well as the privileges gran-

ted to those who remained in Monemvasia, who are por-

trayed as destitute and forced to offer their services

to the Latins.
 170

Evidently only a critical combination of the in-

formation found in the two sources can give a more

complete picture of the siege of Monemvasia. The

Chronicle gives the information that the Venetians

offered William four ships in exchange for Modon and

Coron. This undoubtedly is an anachronism since both

these ports had already been under Venetian occupation

1
for more than thirty years. Neither can it be believ-

ed that the blockade of Monemvasia could have been

staged with four ships only, however powerful, con-

sidering that the Monemvasiotes had a large number of

ships of their own. The need for a large fleet menti-

oned in the Petition must be closer to reality. The

Franks could have used the fleet they possessed at

2
the time, which, curiously, the Chronicle omits.

Concerning Villehardouin's military forces the

details given by the Chronicle could be accepted. It

is strange, however, that the baron of Gheraki is not

1
Bon, Mor6e, 66-67.
2
Prince William joined the Crusade of Saint
Louis in 1249 with 24 ships of his own: Marino Sanudo,
Torsello, "Istoria del Regno di Romania, " in Chroniques
'Gr6co-Romaftes, 102: "... il Principe Guglielmo venne
le sue Galere' e Navili a Nicosia... " On the number
of ships cf. the siege of 1689: it started with 12
ships, but they were not adequate and more had to be
added: Kevin Andrews, Castles 'of the Morea (Gennadeion
Monographs, IV) (Princeton, 1953), 192
 171

mentioned among them, even though Gheraki, situated in

the area of Monemvasia, is mentioned elsewhere in

the Chronicle as one of the fiefs given to the ba-

rons of Morea earlier. It is possible that this infor-

mation is also an anachronism and that Gheraki had

I
not been taken when the siege started.

The detail of the placement of the tr6buchets

outside the city mentioned by the Greek and the French

version, which is later repea. ted by pseudo-Dorotheos,

who transforms the stone-throwing machines into bom-

bards, must be attributed to the imagination of the

Chronicle's poet, who must not have had a direct

knowledge of the peculiar topography of Monemvasia.

Even if William had managed to move. troops and siege-

machines onto the rock, it would be practically im-

possible for his forces to avoid the constant counter-

attacks by the Greek forces, which were positioned

much higher than they on the battlements of the upper

2
city and citdel.

The two sources differ widely on the information

about the length of the siege. According to the Chro-

nicle it lasted something more than three years and

1
Bon, ' Mor6e, 112-13.
2
Cf. 'Andrews, 'Castles 'of the Morea, 192-96, on
the difficulties the Venetians had during the siege
of Monemvasia of 1689-90 to move troops and canons
on the rock.
 172

started in the spring following the capitulation of

Corinth and Nauplion, a year after William became

Prince of Achala, i. e. in March 1247 at the earliest.

Consequently it cannot have ended before autumn 1250.

According to the Petition it lasted seven years. Consequent-

ly even if it started in the summer of 1246 the city could not

have surrendered before. autumn 1252, even if seven periods of

hostilities during the summer are counted. As we have

seen there is an established view, based on arbitrary

alteration of the incidents recited in the Chronicle,

that Monemvasia surrendered to he Franks in the summer

of 1248, that is to say two years and a few months

or three periods of hostilities counting from the

1
summer of 1240 when William became Prince. Further

proof for this dating is supposed to be offered by

the fact that the Chronicle mentions that after the

surrender of Monemvasia the Prince spent the winter

in Lacedaemonia, and there is proof that William II

stayed there in February 1249, before joining in the

spring Saint Louis and his Crusade, from which he

tt_k
2
returned in spring 1250. However from only the fact

that Villehardouin was in Lacedaemonia in the winter

_-V%
1248-49 it is not prove that Monemvasia had already

surrendered. The long siege did not impose on the

1
Bon, * Mcir6e, 72.
2 217-19; Bon, ' Mo-r6e, 73.
Longnon, ' L'* 'eMpdre,
 1 173

Prince his constant presence and it must be consider-

ed certain that William moved as much as he could

and could have spent some winters in Lacedaemonia,

1
which was dear to him.

Another point which is hard to explain if the

capitulation of Monemvasia is placed in 1248 is Wil-

liam's withdrawal from the Crusade of Saint Louis and

his hasty return to the Peloponnese in spring 1250.2

If, however, Monemvasia was still besieged his move

can be explained as a consequence to certain informa-

tion about the evolution of the siege. Another impor-

tant factor causing many doubts concerning the acce-

pted date of the surrender of Monemvasia is the cer-

tainty that up to 1249 no Latin bishop had been elect-

ed in its See and according to all indications the

first one, Eudes or Oddo of Verdun, was elected in

August 1253.3 Usually, however, the appointment of a

Latin bishop followed soon after a new conquest. From

1 in Fe-
William sent a letter from Lacedaem6nia
bruary 1249, in which, however, one would have expe-
cted to find a hint on the capture of Monemvasia, if
it had been recent: J. A. C. Buchon, * Recherches'et ina-
t6riaux 'pour 'servir a 1" hi's to'ire' de_17a_domination
frangaise aux XIIe, XIVe et XVe'sidcles (Paris, lb40),
I, p. 159.
2 218-19.
LongnonL"empire,
Archivio Segreto Vaticano, Reg. 23, no. 1 32, - fol.
14 v3 E. Berger, ed., ' Le*s' Regi'stres* d"Ibno"cent 'IV (Bi-
bliothaque des tcoles Franqaises d'Athenes et de Kome)
(Paris, 1884-97), 1, no. 052, p. 396; Miller, Monemva-
sia, 233; Bon, ' Mor6e, 100 n. 1.
 1 174

this point of view the surrender of Monemvasia should

be placed not in 1248 but at the earliest in autumn

1252 or in summer 1253, a date which agrees with the

information in the Petition. This dating does not con-

tradict the Chronicle of Morea, since it is not

stated that William started the siege as soon as he

succeeded his brother. Furthermore it could be accepted

that when-William returned from the East he tighten-

ed the blockade of Monemvasia and this was taken as

the beginning of the siege by the author of the Chro-

nicle in calculating the length of three years and mo-

re until the capitulation, of the city.

Concerning the agreement for the surrender we

must accept that, in spite of the omission by both

the Petition and the Chronicle of the facts that do

not flatter their respective side, it comprised two

sections, one concerning those who wanted to leave

and another concerning those who wanted to stay. The

emigration of the Monemvasiotes with their ships to

Pegai, where their presence is certain a little later,

based on a local source, should be accepted, -, -.It. is

not known. -whethdr or not their-, decision-to leave

followed negotiations-involving the Eiperor- in Ni-r-

caea.

1
Ahrweiler, Mer, 360 n. 3, holds, without evi-
dence, that the emigration took place after 1262, cf.
P.. Schreiner,. "Ein Prostagma Andonikos' III. fUr die
Monembasioten in Pegai, "''JOB, 27 (1978), 205, n. 10.
 175

The section concerning those who wanted to stay,

granted them according to the Chronicle several pri-

vileges, which the author of the Petition omits, even

though he had at his disposition William's documents.

The author of the Chronicle must have also used these

same documents because he states the privileges Willi-

am granted the Monemvasiotes. They were related to

.
their inherited property, the exemption from corv6es

and burdens, with the exception of paid services with

their ships, the recognition of immunity. If the kom-

merkion, which is mentioned as "Vrd-UCLO" in Pseudo-

Dorotheos is also added, these concessions are the

same as the ones found in the two chrysobulls granted

to the city of Monemvasia by the first Palaeologoi.

They are a proof that William Villehardouin accepted

and renewed certain older privileges of self-govern-

ment. Significantly Pseudo-Dorotheos mentions the

issue of a chrysobull by the Prince. Further proof

is the fact that Will. iam did not build any fortresses

to control the area as he did in the rest of Laconia,

with the exception of one mentioned in the Aragonese

1-
XTM, vv. 2937-2940, p. 196; Ps. Dorotheos, p-
475. On this source above p. 156 n. 1. on datia or
dazzi as equivalent to kommerkion: F. Thiriet, La Ro-
manke Ven'itienne au rnoyeri 'age (Paris, 1959), pp. 229-
32. on tyxouddL-ro-L, incosati: Longnon-Toppina, . 'Le R6-
.
girie des Terres, 264-65. H. Kinga, "ACLX0U6L"j-T-11-14,
proposes the derivation of this word from "allodium"
an area, the inhabitants of which, according to feudal
law, "erunt liberi". Cf - the case of Thessaloniki: Ville-
hardouin, Faral, 88-89; Tivcev, Byzantinobulgarica, I, 178-9.
 176

version of the Chronicle, and did not give any fiefs

to his barons in the region of Monemvasia, with the

exception of Gheraki. Gheraki, however, was certainly

in Frankish hands before the conquest of Monemvasia

and the area north of it where the castle of Estella

was built, might have been also-captured before the

I
fall of Monemvasia, during the siege.

IV-. Monemvasia under the Franks

Information on the Frankish rule n Monemvasia

is scarce and it is not known whether the privileges

granted were real or only nominal, if, that is to say,

the Monemvasiotes were as the Petition to the Patri-

arch indicates, subjugated in a way to the Franks.

Anyway the same source narrates the hardships of the

orthodox bishop who was soon forced to abandon the

2
city and his flock.

According to the Chronicle of Morea, when empe-

ror Baldwin II left hastily Constantinople in 1261,

he. stopped with his ship,, on his way to the West, in

Monemvasia. Prince William came there to greet him.

Since at the time when Baldwin lef tf or the West William was

1.
Libr*o* de' los' Fechos, p. 49. On Gheraki, above
pp. 17 0
2.
VE, 12 (1915), 289-90.
 177

prisoner of the Byzantines and when he was freed Mo-

nemvasia had already been surrendered to the Greeks,

this incident must either be considered unfounded or

is another anachronism. The text mentions that he

honoured Baldwin as was proper for a king. The

growth of Prince William's might have, however, excit-

ed his own ambition and vanity and according to Sanu-

do, he wanted to behave like a king and wherever he

went he had a following of several hundreds of hor-

2
ses. The Chronicle mentions elsewhere that since.

Prince William gained Monemvasia and broadened his do-

minions he did not have any one to oppose him in the

I
world.

William could certainly not imagine the conse-

quences of his participation in the campaign of his

1.. .
XTM, vv. 1296-1 338, pp. 88-90. Longnon, * Lj]2r
227-28.
2
Sanudo, ChronIques Gr6co-Romaftes, 102: 'Ila Cor-
te sua pareva maggior d1una Corte dTun gran R6. Sem-
pre seguiva la sua Corte de 700 in 1000 Cavalli".
3
XTM, vv. 3142-3144, p. 210: -
TAT6TOU YdP 9XP8LOCV 6 nPCYXLTEcLc ruxLdLvtoc
tTcXdTuve A 6LTeVTCcL
-r6 udLuTpov Tflc movoDcLmdg, /-rou -
TOO
06H CCXC YdLP VdL LdLXC-VCLL j1d6LVOP(A)TEOV i6-ouou
 178

father-in-law Michael 11 of Epiros against the empe-

1A
ror of Nicaea. detail on the army he assembled

for the expedition in spring 1259 contained in the

French version of the Chronicle of Morea is worth

some attention. Prince William, it is said, gathered

after the winter "all his men from the Morea and as
2
far as Monemvasia". Even though this could mean that

he gathered troops from the garrisons of Monemvasia,

among others, the testimony of Akropolites proves

that the men from Monemvasia were not Latins. The hi-

storian reports that, among the great number of troops

assembled, many were Franks but many also were natives

of the Peloponneseand that most of them came from

the race of Lacones. This verifies the Petition say-

ing that those who stayed in Monemvasia were forced

3
to collaborate with the Franks.

The account s of the ensuing crucial battle held

in Pelagonia in 1259, which was to be decisive for

the future of the Byzantine Empire, are not all in

accord. All agree, however, that sebastocrator loan-

nis, brother of the Emperor, in command of the Nicaean

1
Bon, ' Mor6e, 121-22.
2.
Livre de'la Conqueste, p. 98: llsi amassa toute
sa gent de la Mor6e, et jusques a Malvesie". Cf. XTM,
vv. 3618-3633, p.. 240.
3
Akropolites, Heisenberg, 1,168. In the Bonn
edition, pp. 179-80, the word AcLx6vwv has been cor-
rected to AcLTCvwv.
 1 179

army, had concentrated his efforts in breaking the al-

ready loose coherence of his opponents' army, that

his efforts were successful and that the Romans in

the Latin army changed camp before the battle and we-

re united with those of the sebastocrator, leaving the

Prince alone to face them. As a result the Prince

and a considerable number of his barons were taken

1
captive. It is not clear from the account of the

sources if, among the forces that changed camp, the

Greek troops from the Peloponnese were included. It

is very unlikely, however, that they have re-

should
mained with theTranks since the number of William's

companions in the battle is reported to have been

2
very small.

The situation in the Peloponnese after the bat-

le of Pelagonia seems quite confused. The captivity

of William and his more able barons formed a vacuum

of authority and weakened the Franks. During the Prin-

ce's captivity a rebellion of the inhabitants of the

Peloponnese is reported which may have been instigated

D. -J. Geanakoplos, "Greco-latin Relations on

the Eve of the Byzantine Restoration. The Battle of
Pelagonia, "-DOP, 7 C1953), 118-35; D. M. Nicol, "The
Date of the Battle of Pelagonia, " BZ, 49 (1956), 68-
71.
2
Gregoras, Schopen, 1,75; Aropolites, Heisen-
berg, p. 170.
 180

by Michael Palaeologos in his effort to exploit every

1
possibility offered by his victory.

Among the poor evidence for the presence of the

Franks in Monemvasia one might cite a name given in

a Greek document, the chrysobull confirming the pos-

sessions of the metropolis of Monemvasia issued in

the beginning of the 14th century. The metropolitan

is given, among others, the houses, situated in the

city of Monemvasia, which once belonged to a certain

"'Apflr. ", a name which should be seen as a deformation

of"Henrill, whose properties, after the recovery of Mo-

nemvasia were left vacant., He must have been impor-

tant, since he had more than one houses,.. possibly an

official, the governor, or a commander of the garri-

2
son.

V. The recovery by the Greeks

William stayed more than two years in prison.

The agreement with the Emperor for his liberation was

not easy to achieve, since he was expecting castles

and lands as ransom whereas the Prince offered only

money. The sources are complementary concerning the

1
Sanudo, Chroniques Gr6cci-Romanes, 107.
2
Miklosich-MUller V, 164 : I-cd &vT6Q TflQ mo-
VC115CLOCaC6CMATLa C"LCtX6 nOTC 6 'Apft". Cf. XTM, v. 994,
p. 624: "'ApCc- vT '*A'vTouXo".
 181

details of the agreement. The Prince of Achala accept-

ed the Emperor's suzerainity and undertook to hand

over certain castles to the Greeks. Monemvasia, MaIna

and Mystras were to be handed over, whereas there is

an uncertainty about the inclusion of Gherakj and of

1
the region of Kinsterna. After the formalities for

the acceptance of the agreements by the Frankish ba-

rons and in their absence by their wives, and the

exchange of hostages and guarantees, William reached

again the Morea, before May 1262. The castles had al-

ready been delivered to the Emperor's envoys by Geof-

froy de Bruyeres, 2
lord of Karytaena.

The details of the events that followed, known

mainly from the Chronicle of Morea, must be consider-

ed distorted up to a certain degree. The dates pre-

sent the greatest difficulties. The situation for

the Greeks must have been tight since they were re-

stricted to the castles which they had received with-

out any hinterland and met difficulties in their move-

ments overland. Both sides must have considered the

situation transient and sought for opportunities to

Pachymeres, 1,188; Zaky'thinos, Despotat,

1-20,317-19; Bon, ' Ior6e, 120-25.

Bony Mor6e, 125.

 182

end the precarious peace. It cannot be excluded that

William's attitude, after the release of his oaths by

the Pope was provocative but the reaction of the

Greeks might have also been rash. The Emperor was in-

formed on the situation and troops were sent to the

Peloponnese under -the sebastocrator Constantine, the

1
parakoimomenos Macrenos and Alexios Phil6s.

Following the byzantine campaigns, in spite of

certain setbacks a large area of the south-eastern

Peloponnese, which included Tsaconia, Helos, Tayghetos

and the Mani, was soon recovered. The situation seems

to have quietened slightly. in 1267-8. A one year truce

was agreed with the Franks and an agreement was signed

2
with the Venetians. This may have been the period

when the civil and ecclesiastical administration of

the recovered province was organized. This dating is

1-XTM, Pachymeres, 1,
vv. 4515-5583, pp. 299-302;
204-209; Sanudo, Hopf, * Chrorii*qtfes GrA*=-Romarces, 116-
118; D. Zakythinos, ' Despotat, 1, Bon,, Mor6e, 129
4-135.; Ahrweiler, * Mer, 351-56; Schreiner, ' Kleinchro-
niken, 11,201-02. Manuel Philas dedicated an. epi-
gramm to the sebastocrator who was about to leave for
Monemvasia: E. Miller. ed., 'Manuel Phil6s, * Carmina
(Paris, 1855-57), 1, no. 234, p. 123.
2 Ahrweiler, ' Mer,
Zakythinos, ''Despotat, 1,44;
349.
 183

confirmed by the information in the Petition to the

Patriarch that the ecclesiastical authorities were

established in Lacedaemonia and Monemvasia at the

time when Joseph was Patriarch, i. e. in 1267 at the

I
earliest.

Thi s was a suitable moment. f or. --is suing, as the Chro-

nicle of Morea claims, various chrysobulls concerning

2
the inhabitants of Laconia. Among them could be the one

issued by Michael VIII to safeguard the privileges of

the city of Monemvasia, unless it had beefi issued

even earlier, upon the delivery of the castle by the

Franks. Of this document only a fragment has been pre-

served incorporated in the prooimion of the chrysobull

of Andronikos II. The efforts of Michael VIII are

stressed to free Monemvasia and to lead the city to its

former prosperity, after the period of misery under

the foreign yoke. The privileges granted are exkous-

seia and eleutheria, exemption from death duties and

from the kommerkion for transactions within the city

of Monemvasia. These are the same privileges that

1.
'NE, 12 (1915), 291.
2
XTM, vv. 4571-4580, p. 302. on the chrysobull
of Monemvasia D61ger, ' Regesten, no. 1897, dated 15.
VIII. 1261.
 1 184

Villehardouin granted to the Monemvasiotes and go

back probably to an older period, the period of pros-

perity of Monemvasia, which the chrysobull recalls.

The privileges will be examined later in detail but

it is worthwhile mentioning here that by granting ex-

kousseia, immunity, the Emperor. acknowledged the exi-

stence of self-government and this must. be the-reason

why the officials of the central administration in

charge of the Peloponnese did not settle in Monem-

vasia but in Mystras, which was to become the capi-

2
tal of the Byzantine province.

The Chronicle of Morea mentions a certain Kan-

takouzenos, who held the office of "xcpcL?,A" of' Monem-

vasia. There-should be no doubt,. that. by this word the

governor is meant but it is not known how he was ap-

pointed, if he had'been an archon locally elected

in the place of "rex" or if he had been imposed by
3
the Emperor.

For the byzantine naval operations Michael Palae-

ologos secured the cooperation of the troops from

the area of Monemvasia, the Tzacones, who were special-

ly trained for naval operations. They were offered

1
Miklosich-MiAller, V. 154-rI55.
2 4 1.
Oh-the privileg! Bs, below-chapter
3 12, 11-14.
Nicol, * Kafttakouzenos, ho. pp,
 185

attractive terms by the Emperor and settled in large num-

1
bers in Constantinople immediately after its liberation.

The Tzacones participated in the very first operations

under Alexios Philanthropenos against many islands and

the coasts of Laconia, during which many noteworthy suc-

cesses were achieved. The exact date is not known but

most probably it was before the agreement with Villehar-

douin in 1262, because otherwise all the sources would

2
underline the violation of the clauseof non-agression.

Michael Palaeologos secured as well the use of the

port of Monemvasia for the needs of his operations, the

transport of troops and as a base for the fleet. Since

1263, if not earlier, the port was used as a base for the
Yyzantine Cv
fleet, but also for the enoese. one
allied of

the first operations*staged-from there, the battle of

Sette Pozzi Malvasia, 3 Yeno-
or of wa-s-.
-not"successful. The

ese ships had set sail from Monemvasia for Constantinople.

on their way they met, of f Spetsai, the Venetian forces which

1
Gregoras, Schopen, 1,98; Pachymeres, Bonn, I,
309; Zakythinos, Despotat, 11,14-19,382-83; D. --J. Gea-
nakoplos, Emperor Michael' Pa'l'aeologu's* 'and the West. ' T258-
1282 (Cambridge-Mass., 1959), 126; Ahrweiler, Mer, 337,
351-60.
2
Ahrweiler, 'Mer, 357-59. The author dates it
af ter the campaign of sebastocrator Constantine and Makrenos.
3 di
L. Belgrano-C. Imperiale, eds. * Annall: enovesi
Caffaro (Fonti per la Storia d'Italia, XI-XIV)(Genoa-Rome,
1890: '1-929), IVF 51-52; Martin da Canal, "Cronaca Veneta, "
Archivio Storico Italiano, 8(1845), 488-92; C. Manfroni,
Storia della Marina Italiana dall: trattatci di. Ninfeo alla
caduta di Constantinopoli, I (Lii-g-horn, 1902), 9-11.
 186

1
routed them and they had to return to Monemvasia to recover.

In Monemvasia as well as in Anaea, another base

of the byzantine fleet, Monemvasiotes are mentioned who,

with their ships, usually small, acted as officials of

the fleet and are referred to as "homiqA imperatoris".

Several of them, among whom members of the families of

Daemonoiannis and Mamonas, are known to have partici pated

in piratical attacks. Information on these attacks is

found in the "Decisiones PiratIcae", which refer to

acts of piracy against Venetians in the years between

1269 and 1277. Among the roughly two hundred incidents

about one tenth are attacks by Monemvasiotes. Some took

place in the eastern Aegean and were based on Anaea,

possibly Pegai and another Monemvasiot colony Herakleia.

The rest took place in the south-western Aegean, based

2
on Monemvasia.

Piracy was often practiced in parallel with com-

mercial activities and even though there is not much

information on the achievements'in commerce of the Mo-

nemvasiots at this period, it must be assumed that they

3
were constantly growing.

Ahrweiler, * Mer, 346-47. Bone' Mor6e, 134 and n. 2.

On the port of Monemvasia above pp. 123 25.
2
Tafel-Thomas, " UrkuxIden,. 'IIj, 159-281; -G. Morgan,
"The Venetian claims commission of 1278, "' BZ, 69 (19761,
412-38; Laiou, "EliTEoPOLt 2-8.
3
Laiou, EjvtopOL, 9-10.
 4.1282-1380, A Century of Prosperity

Privileges granted by Andronikos II

Death found the emperor Michael VIII in Thrace

in December 1282, after 21 years on the throne of By-

zantium, years which he consumed in constant efforts

to recover the Empire and to repel the external*-. thre&t.

His manipulations did not have long lastifigxesulf-s

and, whereas they succeeded in averting the danger

from the West, they left the eastern frontiers of his

shrunken Empire defenceless andvulnerable; and they

1
created serious internal troubles. His last politi-

cal success, a few months before his death, was thwar-

ting in March 1282 the crusade which was being prepar-

ed in collaboration with Pope Martin IV by the King

2
of Sicily and Venice to recapture Byzantium. In the

aftermath he found himself at war with the Venetians,

in contrast to their other two allies. This was unim-

portant from the point of view of military operations

but had important economic repercussions by causing

the suspension of the commercial treatises signed be-

tween the Byzantine Emperor and the Venetians, to the

1
Gregoras, Schopen, 1,153;. Pachymeres, -Bonn, --I,
530-32; D. M. Nicol, 'The Last Centuriesof Byzantium.
T26*T-1A53 (London, 1972), pp. 93-96; A. E. Laiou,. Con-
'and the Latins. ' The Foreiqn policy of Tn-
stantinopl*e
Tr-onicus 11,,, 1282-1-328 (CamEridge Mass., 1912), pp. 11-13..
2
Nicol, ' T26T-1453,72-75; S. Runciman, ' The 'S-i-c-i'li-
ail Vespers (Cambridge, 1958, rpt. 1982), pp. 214-27.
 188

1
benefit mainly of the Genoese and Byzantine merchants.

At that time the Venetians held the two large

ports of the western Peloponnese, Modon and Coron,

which they used for transporting local goods and as

ports-of-call on the routes to Crete and the East.

The other important ports of the Morea Pylos, Cla-

rentza, Patras, Corinth and Nauplion were control-

led by the Franks. Monemvasia was the only important

byzantine, port on the whole southern and eastern Pe-

loponnese. Through Monemvasia Mystras, the capital

of Byzantine Morea, was connected to Constantinople

and officials and troops were transported. Monemvasia

2
was. equally important for Byzantine trade. The skills

of the Monemvasiotes at sea, which had become tradi-

tional over the centuries were applied gradually to

commerce. After the restriction of the commercial en-

terprises of the Venetians, which started in 1282 and

lasted up to the signing of the new treaty of 1285

1
Laiou, ' Andronicus, 57-58.
2
Zakythinos, ' Despo*tat, 11,147-80,392-93; Bon,
Mor6e, 158-59,321-25,414-17,449-59,470-71,473-78,
T-95-2-93,602-09,670-73,676-77. Cf. F. Balducci Pego-
lotti, ' La prati*ca dellac mercatura, ed. A. Evans
(Cambridge Mass., 1936). pp 116-19P 1451 153.
 189

between the latter and emperor Andronikos II, the Mo-

nemvasiotes were presented with a chance to widen

1
their field of activities.

Shortly before, in August 1284, the first chryso-

bull of Andronikos for Monemvasia was issued. It is

possible that, in view of the approaching regulation

of the differences between the Venetians and Byzanti-

um, the Monemvasiotes hastened to secure their privi-

leges. Another possible reason, which might have prom-

pted the issue of the chrysobull at this time, was

the imminent disbanding of the byzantine fleet, the

crews of which were mostly Tzaconians from Monemvasia

and the region around it. The safequard of their com-

mercial privileges would also safeguard a positive

outlet to the activities of the mariners, who would

otherwise remain jobless and might turn to piracy, as

by 2
was pointed out contemporary historians.

The chrysobull of August 1284 is the shortest of

the four issued by Andronikos for Monemvasia. The

praises for the "citizens" are still reserved compared

1
Laioul Andronicus, 56-62.
2
Ahrweiler, Mer, 374-81; Laiou, ' Andronizus,
74-76.
 190

to those in later chrysobulls where they reach exag-

I
geration.

In the short prooimion it is stated that Monem-

vasia did not manage to avoid the detrimental conse-

quences of time and declined once removed from the

Roman rule and placed under Latin yoke. The inhabi-

tants, however-, who were not used to idleness, led

their city after its release from the Latins to its

former prosperity. And the prooimion concludes, "ibn6

P(OLCLCOLQ
CL16OLQXCLC Tfj TO&CCO-V6LPXt -CeXCtV (bQ TEP(BTIV tTl-

eu-ruxAoCLV-CeQ".

If this phrase is interpreted "the Monemvasiotes

returned under the suzerainty of' the Romans again"

then it could have ended with the word'66OLd. -a'nd'-the

addition of 'xcLC. -ut 'ro, 6,rwv dLpxf.1 -reXerv (bc TEp6nv tneu-ru-

xAcrcLv-rcc'. would have been unnecessary. But actually

this phrase should not be considered superfluous be-

cause it adds something different and essential to

D61ger. -Regesten, no, 2102.. From ms. Escor.

E-I-12 of the 16th century; first'-. edition: E. Miller,
Catalogue des manuscrits 4irecs di2 Ia hiblioth6que de
Tr E-scurial (Paris,, 1848), 59. On the document: Peter
Schreiner, "Hapa-rilpAceLC 8Ld Td npov6%La Tfic MovejiDcL-
cyCag, " Acts of the '2nd'Int. Con! a. of' Pelop. 'St. ( A-
thens, 1981-82), pp. 160-61. References in the text
are from Miklosich-MUller, V, 154-55: Prooolmion, 154,
11.1-18; extract from the document by Michael VIII,
154,11.18-20 and 155,11.1-4; grants by Andronikos
11,155,11.4-14.
 191

the meaning of the prooimion, that when the Monemva-

siotes returned under the suzerainty of the Romans

they were placed under the same terms as before the

Frankish conquest. That is to say a certain relation-

ship is implied, that existed before the conquest of

the city by Villehardouin. This return to the previous

terms is expressed as a particular favour to the Mo-

nemvasiotes by the word tTECUTUx=LvTeg. The whole

meaning of the phrase will become clearer after the

detailed examination of the prLvileges and the compa-

rison between those granted by Michael and Andronikos.

The proimion is followed by the enumeration of

privileges granted to the Monemvasiotes by the Empe-

ror's father, Michael VIII, "among innumerable fa-

vours". He had granted three sets of privileges. First

complete "exkousseia" and "eleutheria", second,, exem-

ption of all property which came from inheritance

from any tax or other obligation and thirdcomplete

exemption from the payment of kommerkion for any com-

mercial transactions which took place in the city of

Monemvasia.

Andronikos then stresses his goodwill towards

the "oiketores", the inhabitants of Monemvasia, who

asked for the renewal of their privileges and he re-

counts them. There are again three sets: "exkousseia"

 192

and "anenochlesia", second the exemption of their in-

herited property from any duties, with the explanation

that this is valid only for property that up to that

time had the privilege of eleutheria and finally exem-

ption from payment of kommerkion for the commercial

transactions in the city of Monemvasia.

The first set of privileges is divided into two

parts. In the first part both emperors grant complete

exkousseia. This privilege, which could be complete

or partial, should be considered as the equivalent of

immunity and concerned mainly exemption from economic

obligations. The meaning, however, of exkousseia

was much broader, the economic exemptions being only

one aspect of the privilege. Through exkousseia the

beneficiaries, cities, monasteries. or individuals,

could reach a state of autonomy from the central

1
authority. Concerning the immunity of cities its

1
G. Ostrogorski, "Pour 1' histoire de ll=nuni-
t6 A 'Byzance, " 'E, 28 (1958), 165-254, esp. 241; H.
Antoniadis-Bibicou, ' Re'cherches'sutles Douanes-A By-
zance. L'"octava", -le "kommerkion" et'les, commerciai-
res (Paris, 1963), pp. 145-47; Longnon-Topping, Ee
Hirne des' Terres, 264-65.
 193

particular meaning has not been studied in detail.

There are many indications that the granting of this

privilege was combined with the granting of autonomy

or actually meant autonomy. As a recognition of

autonomy one could interpret the confirmation of the

preexisting exkousseia by the chrysobull which Andro-

nikos II granted to the city of Ioannina in 1319:

".... the city of Ioannina is preserved in every eleu-

theria and exkousseia according to their previous cu-

2
stom... ". Here Andronikos reconfirmed a preexisting

condition, just as, in the case of Monemvasia, Michael

had done earlier and this is recorded in the prooimion

of the chrysobull. of 1284 for Monemvasia, where the

return to the preexisting status is mentioned.

Consequently we must adsume that Michael VIII,

by aknowledging the existence for the city of-Monem. -

vasia of exkousseia and reconfirming it for the fu-

ture, reintroduced after its liberation from Latin

rule-the old privilege of municipal autonomy in

1
Ostrogorski, *'Immunit6,235 and n. 5; Kazhdan,. '-
'Vi'lle', without.. special reference on exkousseia; Bra-
tianu, Privil_Iges, 101-36; Antoniadis-Bibicou, Douanes,
45-47, who disagrees with the view that exkousseia was
more than a fiscal exemption. Cf. Laiou, ' Andronicus, 192.
2
Miklosich-MUller, V, 77-84, D. M. Nicol, The De-
spotate, 'of Erd: ros' '1'267--1'479'. * A *contribution tO Fhe hi-
story of Greece'in the Middle Ages Lcambridge, -
199-47-,
p. 83-86,239. Exkousseia is granted to Ioannina toge-
ther with exemption fromkommerkion, as in the case of
Monemvasia. in any case Ioannina enjoyed only partial
immunity. Cf. Laiou, '*Andronicus, 208-09.
 194

whatever f orm it had acquired af ter an evolution

of several centuries.

Apart from exkousseia in the first set of privi-

leges "eleutheria" was granted by Michael, while And-

ronikos granted "anenochlesia". Eleutheria, clearly

an economic privilege, exemption from taxes, is equi-

valent to anenochlesia, non liability to taxes paya-

ble to government officials. These two privileges

could be considered identical, as well as the whole

1
first set of privilages.

The second set of privileges granted by the two

emperors concerns property acquired by inheritance

but it is expressed slightly differently by each of

them. Michael is presented exempting the Monemvasio-

tes from any tax (.-rVoc)or other obligation (DdLpoQ1

.
Andronikos adds a condition, that the benefit applies

only to property which. is already subject to this e-

xemption. It is a limitation of the privileges gran-

ted by Michael, since it did not allow for property

which would be acquired by Monemvasiotes after the

2
issue'of the chrysobull to be b'
s "c t to them.

1
Kazhdan, Ville, 79; F. Do'*lger, ' Beitrage -z'ur
Ge*schi'chte der'byz'anti'ntscheft Finarizverwaltung (Lei-
pzig-Berlin, 1927), 128; ZaRythinos, * Despotat, 11,183.
G. Ostrogorski Pour 1' histoire de laf dodali: t6 byzantine
(Brussels, '1954), 107,125,171.
2
Schreiner, IIpov6jim, 161; Ostrogorski, Fdodalit6,311.
4
 195

It is indeed possible that Andronikos sought to

limit these privileges not only because the financial

situation of the Monemvasiotes had improved a lot but

for another reason too. The Monemvasiotes had already

shown tendencies to expand further from the limits of

their territory. These tendencies had been manifested

already during the Frankish conquest of the Pelopon-

nese with the seizure of imperial lands by Leon Cha-

maretos.. Later the Monemvasiotes, who took part with

Michael's fleet in the conquest of certain islands,

must have raised claims on some of them, since Sala-

mis is mentioned paying acrostichon to them in 1319.

One gets the impression that, with the privile-

ges Michael granted, he sanctioned the possession by

the Monemvasiotes of lands that did not belong to

-
them originally and were not situated within the ter-

ritory of Monemvasia and thus regulated the boundaries

with the imperial possessions. Because 'the.. Monemvasi-

otes still participated in military operations and

1
R. Predelli, ' T Uibri: Commemori'al'i 'della 'republi-
ca di Venezia'rege'sti, '(1293-1787), 1 (Venice, 1876),
no. 179, p. 207. It is possible that Coulouri was mis-
read for Kythera, which would be more likely to belong
to the territory of Monemvasia. Another mistake in
the same volume, no. 185, p. 42, where Delos is cited
instead of Cervi. Cf. A. Rubib y Lluch, ' Diplomatari: de
l'Orient Catal& (Barcelona, 1947), pp. 13-14. On acrosti-
chon: Longnon-Topping, *Le R6gime des Terres, 268-69.
 196

there was danger that they might want to expand fur-

ther, Andronikos may have decided to limit their

rights so that they would not raise claims to lands

other than those already under their possession and

which were subject to immunity.

The third set of privileges is identically re-

peated by both emperors. It concerns the complete

exemption of all the inhabitants of Monemvasia'from

the tax called the kommerkion, for any transactions

which took place in their city. There is evidence,

however, found in an argyroboullon issued in 1450 by

despot Demetrios Palaeologos, which we will examine

later, that in the mid-15th century the kommerkion

was collected in Monemvasia by the city authorities.

This document allows the use of the kommerki'onl' which

"dLTt6 TTaXaLC-Lr_CYUVnOCtCLQ R(Xe volift" was collected in

the--city of Monemvasia, for the construction the

of

walls of the city. Since all previous documents exem-

pted the inhabitants from the obligation to this

pay

tax, it would be reasonable to assume that the argy-

roboullon, which merely regulated the use of the mo-

ney collected, presupposed the constant collection of

kommerkion, not, however, by the central governmment.

1
Miklos ich-MUller, V. 170-71; A. E. Laiou-Thoma-
dakis, "The Byzantine Economy in the Mediterranean
Trade System; Thirteenth-Fifteenth Centuries, " DOPr
34-35 (1980-81), 34-35 and 208; Antoniadis-Bibicou,
Douanes, 146,148; Nicol, *Despotate'II 226. On
ko=erkion: ,
Antoniadis-Bibicou, 104-113,145-52 and
passim, Laiou, ' Androriicus, 257 n. 57.
 197

This view is reinforced by the fact that although

Monemvasia had been continuously since its foundation

an important port, no seals of officials of the kom-

merkion have ever been found. This lack, which has

been considered accidental, is impressive, since they

are found in abundance in other ports of the Empire.

It could be due to the fact that the tax was collected

by the city authorities and not by special officials

of the central government. Reintroduced by Michael

VIII, after the liberation of the city from the Franks,

the exemption from the kommerkion constitutes most

probably a reinforcement of an older privilege, which

was a survival of Roman and Late Roman institutions

directly connected with the existence of municipal

1
autonomy in cities.

The conclusion from the examination of the first

chrysobull that 'Andronikos II issued for Monemvasia

is that in it he merely repeated almost identically

but slightly restricted the privileges., which his fa-

ther had granted to this city twenty years earlier.

1
On the seals: Ahrweiler, ' Mer, 101,165-66,270;
Antoniadis-Bibicou, * Douanes, 185-Z-91,, who cites the
example of Mylassa, where the customs duties, the por-
torium, were collected by the city authorities, ex-
pressing doubts, however, about the survival of muni-
cipal autonomy. In-Chaldea, which also enjoyed some
kind of autonomy, names of kommerkiarii are mentioned:
Bryer-Winfield, Pontos, 301.
 198

Having confirmed these privileges at a time when

the conditions were favourable the Monemvasiotes were

able to widen their field of activities. Merchants

traveled with their- ships in large numbers throughout

the Aegean and the, Black Sea and were found in most

of the important ports of the Eastern Mediterranean.

The city developed into a centre of transactions and

of accumulation of goods, a centre much larger than

before, of economic-'and other activities. During.

the reign of Andronikos Monemvasia was established

1
as perhaps the most prosperous city of Byzantium.

The increase in local production must have had an in-

vigorating effect on the wider area of Monemvasia

and also on the urban centre, where the commercial

activities were concentrated, while new inhabitants

2
were attracted and goods and wealth were accumulated.

Laiou, OEjtTTopOL,, 5-7,10-12; Laiou, ' DOP 34-35,

182,185,190,195,217; N. Oikonomides, HomRe-s d'af-
faires Gre'cs'et Latins'a Constantinopl'ejXIIIe-XVe
siZcles) (Montreal-Paris, 1979), pp. 87-88. on Byzan-
tine merchants in general: A. Laiou-Thomadakis, "The
Greek merchant of the Palaeologan period: a collecti-
ve portrait, " HAA, 57 (1982), 96-132.
2
As will be seen below, wheat and wine seem to
have been the main products Monemvasiot merchants handl-
ed. The impressive growth of the city could be attested
archeologically, cf. Kalligas, * MonemvasIa, 25. There
are also hints in the sources e. g. the chrysobull of
1301- St. Binon, "Whistoire et la l6gende de deux
F
chrysobulles d'Andronic II en faveur de Monemvasie. Ma-
caire ou Phrantz6s, " EO,. 37 (19381, p. 306,1.19-20:
IlRac nxfiaoc j1dxLOTa 07-all-rc5pCOV".
 199

The wealth that was amassed made the city attra-

ctive to pirates. The Catalan admiral Roger de Lluria

raided Monemvasia.. in 1292, among a series of attacks

and raids, which he carried out against Byzantine ci-

ties, starting from Lemnos and ending in Kerkyra. He

claimed that the attacks were meant as a revenge a-

gainst the Emperor of the Romans for an old debt of

his to the king of Aragon. In the narration of his

feats the-description is limited to the impressive

loot he carried from each city. For Monemvasia some

details are given. How de Lluria using a clever stra-

tagem managed to capture the bishop and to seize the

riches that the terrified inhabitants, abandoned un-

I
protected in their flight.

The great development of the city on the thresh-

old of the 14th century but also the favour of the

Emperor, which became legendary in local tradition,

1
Bartolomeo de Neocastro, PUS, XIII, 133-34,
with interesting details on the city of Monemvasia,
mentioning the lighthouse with houses around it, the
draw-bridge on: the causeway and the city-walls; Nicola-
us Specialis, RIS, X, 959; Giacopo d1oria, ' Annal: L
Genovesi V, 146; Muntaner, ed., J. A. C. Buchon,
,
Chroniques 6trangE)*res'rel'atiVes' aux'ex p6ditions'fran-
qaises pendant 'le XITIe si'83le (Paris, 1*841), 330; Sa-
nudo, Chroniques Gr6co-Romanes, 133; Laiou, OEjinOPOL,
10-11; Laiou, Andronicus, 46-47; Zakythinos, ' Despotat,
1,89-90; Miller, Monemvasia, 235-36; Calogeras, BE:VC-
TCcL, 58-59, mentions a local tradition connected with
de Lluria's attack and the ruins in the northern tip
of the rock, called "AeLtIuvft"
.
 200

is illustrated by a series of documents, which An-

dronikos II dedicated to the ecclesiastical See of

Monemvasia. The first had been already issued in 1291-

92, and was dedicated to the elevation of Monemva-

sia from the rank of a simple bishopric, under the

I
metropolitan of Corinth, to a metropolis. In June

1301 a luxurious chrysobull was produced giving the

See the coveted rank of the historic metropolis of

Side and other p3ivileges. Another chrysobull follo-

:
wed confirming the possession by the metropolis of

a rich property.

The long prooimion of the chrysobull of June

1301 is impressive, covering almost half the length

of the document. It does not start, as one would

have expected with praises to the church and the pre-

late who received the extraordinary honours that the

chrysobull granted. It is dedicated by the Emperor

to the "renowned city", `-r6 TTCPLCbVUj1O-Vdo-ru", and

constitutes an encomium to Monemvasia, its inhabi-

tants, their achievements at sea and their activities

2
which emanated from the sea.

1
Below, chapter 6V on manuscripts, editions and
bibliography.
2
Binon* E0,37, pp. 306,11.14-16,18-32,23-
29. Cf. Pachmeres, Bonn, 11,504: "T8V... MOVEjIDCLCYL(O-""'
T13V XCXT6 OdLX(XCFCFCLV 80UXeUT&5v"
.
 201

Whereas the name is f ai rly new... it provokes

countless and prolonged praises from-every-
where ... Because, apart from the rest, the
city is adorned by favourable situation
and for safety a fortified position and a
a great number of inhabitants and great
wealth and a noble administration and every
lavishness of crafts by all and (is) extre-
mely proficient in commerce -and f urthermore
well situated for sailing the sea to any pla-
ce anywhere.. A."'large number of the inhabi-; -.
(is) -
tants sea-worthy and working at-sea,
and has vigour and an active and practical
spirit; and what is indeed best of all is
theiractive* and wholly unshakable good-
-.
will towards the-Empire and their relation
and concern towards the race (CftoQ), un-
changed by times and circumstances, good or
bad, which has been tried many times in the
past, guaranteeing the unmovable and con-.
stant faithfulness...

.. The text emphasizes the active and constant sup-

port that the Monemvasiotes offered to the Empire-and

the guarantees for their unchanging attitude in the

future. During the last years of the 13th century By-

zantium was being threatened from every where. one

of the most serious threats was presented by the war

between the Genoese and the Venetians, which developed

into an open clash between Venice and Byzantium. Their

old allies forsook the Byzantines signing a treaty

of eternal peace with the Genoese. The Venetians found

themselves with their fleet destroyed but the Byzan-

tines were in a still worse condition, since their own

fleet had been disbanded and their ships were rotting

in the Golden Horn.

 202

In the meantime the Emperor had gone to Thessa-

loniki since the beginning of spring 1299, for the wed-

ding of his five-year old'daughter Simonis to the King

of Serbia Milutin. Andronikos remained far from the

Capital for more than a year. The existing sources

give no information about his movements and activities

after his daughter's wedding and until his return to

Constantinople, with the exception of his attempt to

regain Demetrias in Thessaly. Some time after his re-

turn to the Capital, in 1302, a ten year truce was

1
signed with the Venetians ending their dispute. Cu-

riously the sources mention the existence of a fleet

on both the Byzantine and Venetian sides. For the Ve-

netian it could be maintained that some ships had

escaped from the destruction of the fleet during the

war with the Genoese,. but it is not easy to understand

where the Byzantines found their ships, since the sour-

2
ces unanimously attest the disbanding of the fleet.

One possible explanation for their existence could be

the use of an existing independent force, as was the

case earlier in the time of Michael VIII and later with

1
Pachymeres, Bonn, 11,. 276-86,291-98; Gregoras,
Schopen, 1,202-04; Laiou, 'Androilicus, 96-112; Nicol,
1261-1453,118-19,126-27; -dstrogorski, * History, 489-
91.
2
Laiou, Androfticus, 108-10; cf. F. Thiriet, ' Ddli-
. la Roma-
b6ratlons' 'des* Assembldes Wftitierines c6ncerriant
nie, I-(. PariS, 1966), nos. 10, -. 1-3-16,28,50,62,72-,
T3-.
 203

the Catalan force. At the end of the 13th century it

looks as if Monemvasia was in a possession of such a

force. The praises in the chrysobull of June 1301, so

different from the formal phraseology of the document

of 1284, seem to have been provoked by the substantial

assistance of the Monemvasiotes-'toward-s the emperor

during the difficult period of the strife with the Ve-

netians, in exchange for various privileges. '

Concerning the activities of Andronikos during

these years, particularly betweenhis stay in Thessalo-

niki for the marriage of his daughter and his return

to Constantinople, there is some information in a 16th

century synaxarion containing a mass offered to the

miraculous icon of "Panaghia Monemvasiotissa". Accord-

ing to the synaxarion the Emperor himself had offered

this icon to the citizens of Monemvasia,. after a tour

-
to the Peloponnese in the year 1300, "to visit his peo-

ples there". During his tour he made many "benefactions",

particularly to the citizens of Monemvasia who insist-

ed that he should prolong his stay in their city. To con-

sole them, he sent from Constantinople a precious and

miraculous icon of the Hodhighitria, which took the name

1
of Monemvasiotissa.

N. Katrames' OL-XOXOYLXdL '*AvdLXEi, (,rcx 9R ZC06VaOu

(Z ante 18 8 0) 18 8; N. A. Bee s, lIcLvcLy CcL fi MOV CDCLCY L 6';
, , -" -
TLCCFCL," 'E(pnjicp1C Tlp(oZ 20, IX, 1942, who be'lieves that
,
it refers to an exile of Andronikos, but produces no e-
vidence. C.f - MovEjtOcLaecL, 67-68 on the exile
-Calogeras,
and 23-25*ozi the icon, qhich. had been transfered to the
Ionian islands.
 2 04

The information about the visit of Andronikos to

the Peloponnese in 1300 is not referred to in any other

source. But there is no reason why it should be reje-

cted. On the contrary there are some indications sup-

porting the evidence that a tour in the Peloponnese

and a visit to Monemvasia did take place; the attempt

to regain Demetriast which might indicate a move to-

I
wards the SoUth; the signing of a peace treaty in
2
1299 with the Franks and the exchange of
prisoners;
3
the exchange of prisoners with the Venetians; possi-
4
bly an administrative reorganization of the Morea;

the ecclesiastical reorganization which followed the

5
return to Constantinople; finally the impressive

grants to Monemvasia. Most probably all these actions

are related with a visit by the Emperor to the most

promising province of the Empire, which gave him the

opportunity to perceive personally- the-. local -needs

and possibilities.

I
Laiou, ' Andronikos, 99.

Bon,, Mor6e, 173.

3
Laiou, * Andronikos, 109.
4
Zakythinos, -Despotat,, 1,69,329; Nicol,, * Xacnta-
kouz'enos, 27-30.
5
J. Darrouz6s, * Les" 'Mgeste5 des' Actes 'dil 'Patri: ar-
cat 'de' C'onstan'tinople, 1, fasc. V, nos. 1576.,. 1678;.
-
J. Darrouzas, ' Notitia'e Episcojatuum Ec*dles, iae' Constan-
tinopolitanae (Paris, 19Bl)., pp. 17 183. Cf. Ps. Do-
rotheos, 400
.
 205

It is possible therefore that between Easter 1299

and Spring 1300, Andronikos II visited Monemvasia

and that he came to an agreement with the Monemvasio-

I
tes for naval assistance. The Monemvasiotes would

offer their ships in exchange for "benefactions" as

the synaxarion of Panaghla Monemvasiotissa calls them,

which Andronikos would grant. We might assume that

these were not limited to the church of Monemvasia

only, stated in the known documents, and the donation

of a precious icon, stated in the synaxarion, but ex-

tended to the city as well.

it looks indeed as if a further document to the

city of Monemvasia had been issued during Andronikos's

absence from the capital between 1299 and 1300, by

his son Michael IX, who was co-Emperor since 1294 and

had remained in Constantinople. Michael is mentioned

along with his father and his grandfather as having

granted documents to the city of Monemvasia,: in a later

chrysobull of 1336.2 The existence of an imperial docu-

ment preceding-the chrysobull of 1336, following that

of 1284, is proved by the comparison of the two sets

of privileges. Those enumerated by the 1336 bull as pre-

existing do not coincide with those granted in 1284.

I 1300,
Andronikos must have been back by April
when-he issued a prostagma for Monemvasia, below 6 IV.
2 4
On the chrysobull of 1336 below IT.
 206

The privileges mentioned in 1336 are more numerous and

extensive. The differences must be due to the docu-

ment issued by Michael IX. It has been stated alrea-

dy that the privileges granted in 1284 were exkousseia

and eleutheria, exemption under certain conditions

from death duties and exemption from the kommerkion

for all transactions in the city of Monemvasia. But

as stated in the chrysobull of 1336, the privileges

that existed before its issue were, apart from ex-
kousseia and eleutheria, exemption from the kommer-
kion in the whole Empire, except Constantinople and
the ports of Thrace, Selymbria, Herakleia, Raidestos

and Kallipolis, where a mere 2% was levied. These were,

precisely, the privileges granted by Michael IX to
1
the Monemvasiotes.

We may as. sume. that, in exchange, the Monemvasio-

tes undertook the obligation to supply ships and men ac-
cordingto the-Empire's needs and to intervene in the

name of the Emperor, if necessary'. To this cause -

could be attributed their attack against the Venetian

ship which carried orders for the occupation of the

1:
Between 1294 and 1299 Michael hardly issued
any document, cf. DZ51ger, 'Regesten, hos 2613-2615.
The first of these entries concerns letters, while
the other two are of uncertain date and could belong
to the years after 1305. The exemption from kommerki-
on in the whole-of-the-Empire was perhaps granted
for the first time to a Byzantine city with this docu-
ment: Antoniadis-Bibicou, Douanes, 46.
 207

1
island of Cos. Also the fact that, when n 1303 the

naval cooperation between Andronikos and the Catalans

was agreed, the latter's first move was to go to Monem-

vasia, where they were welcomed and received the Empe-

2
ror's orders and remained stationed for a short time.

Another incident may be relevant. In September 1304

one of the Catalan admirals, Berenguer d'Entenga, offer-

ed to pay the Venetians for the supplies he had taken

from a Venetian ship in Monemvasia if they followed

him there, where it is possible that a pay-office for

3
the navy was also installed.

Some years later, possibly in 1314, one more chry-

sobull was issued for the metropolis of Monemvasia by

Andronikos. In another chapter we shall examine in de-

tail the problems concerning its dating and authenti-

city and all the literature about it and the famous

forgers from Monemvasia. The chrysobull has a rare

characteristic. It repeats almost identically, with

certain differences the text of the chrysobull of

I
Thiriet, ' Assembl6es, 1, no, 73,, 98-99; Laiou,
oElinoPOL 8. Cf. the mention of "Greek" fleets in 1318
r
refering to 1302, Laiou, ' Adrorficus, 276.
-
2.
The Chroni'cl'e of Muntaner, trans. Lady Goode-
nough TH-a-Ti-yut society: London, 1921), 11,486 : Se-
ptember1303, "... they landed in Monemvasia and there
they found those who showed them great honour... And
they found there an order to go straight to Constanti-
nople... " Anaea, due to the advance-of the Turks was
not then used as a base: Laiou, **Androriicus, 91-92.
3
Rubic) y Lluch; D. O. C.,. no. 12, pp. 13-14.
 208

June 1301. There are some differences in the bisho-

prics* under the See and some privileges are given in

addition to those given in 1301.1 At the end of the

document a long paragraph containing the "TEcpLo8Lx6Q"

or 11ncpLypacpLx6r_ -r6noc", the "circumscribing outline",

has been added. It is a description of the area subor-

dinate to the metropolis of Monemvasia, except for

the regions of the bishoprics of Kythera and Zemena.

The limits contain a huge part of the Peloponnese, a

quarter of the peninsula. The plain of Sparta is care-

fully excluded. Large areas that previously. were under

2
the See of Patras are incorporated. (Pl. 14-18)

During this time and some years later, when An-

dronikos Asen was governor of the Morea, the Byzan-

tines attacked the Latin possessions and recaptured

many of them, possibly Zemena among them, which must

have been in Byzantine hands from before 1328 and is

counted among Greek possessions in the above mentioned

3
chrysobull. Andronikos Asen must not have been far

from Androusa either, since lands in the region of

1
The so-called "false chrysobull of 1293" : Dblger,
no. 2238; Binonr-EO, 37, pp. 306-11.; On the
document below chapter 6 VI.
2
On the circumscription below, 4 111.

'NE, 12 (19151,309.
 209

Androusa were granted in 1312 to the monastery of

I
Brontocheion at Mystras.

Apparently, as the limits of the area held by the

Byzantines extended, the greedy Monemvasiotes kept

asking for more grants for their help and the Emperor

gave in. One of the reasons, consequently, for the is-

suing of the chrysobull of 1314 might have been to

secure a large area by the addition of the circumscri7

ption, which extended the jurisdiction of Monemvasia

over it. This should be considered as-a reward for

various contributions of the Monemvasiotes, like the

subsidy of the much poorer metropolis of Lacedaemonia

with the revenues of one of the bishoprics of Monemva-

2
sia. Later, in 1324, the assistance of Monemvasia to

the Patriarch of Constantinople was extremely generous,

though not rewarded this time by a chrysobull: Monemva-

sia paid 800 hyperpyra or one fourth of the total of

3208 hyperpyra, collected by the 33 metropolitan Sees

3
of the Empire. (Pl. 25)

1
Zakythinos, '. Despotat, 11,196-297.
2 1626,1627.. Cf.
Rdgestes-du` Patrarc'at, nos.
on the participationof Monemvasiotes in campaigns a-
gainst the Latins, a letter of Gregory of Cyprus menti-
oned by. V. Laurent, "La chronologie des Patriarches de
Constantinople au XIIIe siA-cle C1208-1309), '*'REB, 27
(.1969), 224 n. 65.
3.
R6gestes_dU Patri'arcat, no. 2119.
 210

The spectacular economic development of Monemva-

sia during the reign of Andronikos II is even more

impressive compared to the powerlessness and decay

of the rest of the Empire. The dynamism of Monemvasia

illustrates the possibilities offered by the sea trade

during this period. The Monemvasiotes continuously

amassed more and more privileges but they also conti-

nuously increased their activites. A growing interest

.in economic history has unveiled new material from the

deeds ofthe Italian notaries and has also led to a re-

assessmentof published sources. important recent stu-

dies reveal an underestimated aspect of Byzantine eco-

nomic life, the existence of a developed Byzantine tra-

de between the 13th and the 15th centuries and the im-
I
portant part the Monemvasiotes played in it. if for

the 13th century the image is somewhat distorted, be-

cause their activities are mixed with acts of piracy,

2
their presence as far as the Black Sea is remarkable.

Oikonomides, ' Hommes d'affalres, 87-92,121,124;

-
Laiou, '*DOP, 34-35, pp. 190,206-09.

.2 Laiou, "EliTtopoL, 5-7,. 12-13; Laiou, DOP, 34-35,

p. 190; M. Balard, GE)nes etlloutre-mer. T: Les actes
Caffa de Lamberto di*Sambuceto. 128-1290 (Paris-
Hague,, 1973), nos. 438,529; G. Bertolotto, NuovA serie
di documentl 'sulle 'rel: az'i'oni: 'di* Genova 'col: l: 'Ii-nT)ero
bizantino ( Atti della $ociet& Ligure di Storia Pa-
tria, 28) (Genova, 1896), pp. 511-50 esp. 522-24;
Morgan, Venetian claims comission, 411-38.
 211

In the 14th century they are attested in a wide area

in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea, owning or charter-

ring ships, undertaking long journeys, attacking in-'

discriminately both Genoese and Venetians and falling

I
victims themselves to the violence of the Italians.

in co=ercal activities it s not only the Mo-

b
nemvasiotes still resident in Monemvasia who were in-

volved but also those who had'emigrated, particularly

those who had settled in Pegai in Asia Minor after

the Frankish conquest of Monemvasia, and those in

Constantinople. It is interesting to examine the case

of the Monemvasiotes of Pegai. They had emigrated to

Pegai at circa 1253, as we saw, in considerable num-

bers under their archon. There they remained as an

independent group, which was not assimilated by the

local inhabitants, and developed commercial activities

similar to those of the inhabitants of their "metro-

polis". Andronikos II had also granted privileges to

them, with a prostagma and a chrysobull. The date

that these documents were issued is unknown because

only a mention has survived in a later document where

,

1
G. M. Thomas-R. Predelli, Diplomatarium Veneto-Le-
vaninum, I (Venice, 1880), nos. 73-79,88,12b-27;
.
Bertolotto, 511,526,532; G. Giomo, Lettere segrete
del Collegio, 'rectius Minor Consiglio ( Venice, 1910)
nos. 390,. 395; Laiou, 'E: iER-opoL, 9-12,15-17; Laiou, The
Greek merchant, 100,102-03,113-14; Oikonomides,
Hommes d'affaires, 87-88.
 212

the privileges granted by Andronikos II are stated.

These were exemption from kommerkion in all cities of

the empire except Constantinople and certain cities in

Thrace, where the Monemvasiotes of Pegai had the obli-

gation to pay 2%. It is evident that these grants are

similar to those which Michael IX had granted to the

Monemvasiotes of Monemvasia with the lost document is-

sued in 1299-1300. One could suppose that-the Monemva-

siotes of Pegal, trading as those of Monemvasia, hur-

ried to demand similar exemptions when Michaelits docu-

I
ment was issued.

II . The Chrysobull in the Chronicon Maius

In the text of the Chronicon Maius a chrysobull

has been incorporated by the author,, Macarios Melisse-

nos, who calls-it "privilege of the "TEoXLrUa" of the

Monemvasiotes" and attributes it to Andronikos the

Young. This chrysobull has been the object of long'

dispute concerning its authenticity. The reason was

that, whereas it is attributed to Andronikos III, the

signature under it is that used by Andronikos II and

it bears the date 1316, before Andronikos III was

I
Mentioned in the prostagma issued by Andronikos
III for the Monemvasiotes of Pegai in 1328: Schreiner,
Prostagma, 207. On the Monemvasjotes of Herakleia: 'EX-
XTIVLX 1932), 125 n. 2; Laiou, 'EliTtopoL, 14.
,2(.
 213

I
associated to the throne.

The decisive view for the prevailing opinion

concerning the authenticity of the chrysobull was that

of Franz D51ger, who had originally accepted it as ge-

nuine along with other documents about which he later

changed his mind, attributing it to Andronikos III

and dating it in 1336. Later, however, he attributed

it to Andronikos 11, expressing doubts as to its au-

thenticity. Thus the chrysobull was condemned to be

considered a forgery since, apart from D81ger's doubts,

it is stated in the text that the Emperor who issued

it granted for the first time privileges to'Monemva-

sia, which is incompatible with the fact that Androni-

kos II had already issued before-1316 at least four

2
such documents.

The final blow against its authenticity was the

discovery by Peter Schreiner of the prostagma for the

Monemvasiotes of Pegai, issued in 1328 by Andronikos

III. Apparently the documents issued for them by

Andronikos II had not been sufficient, some port

1
Dblger, ' Regesten, no. 2383; Ps. Phrantzes, Grecu,
538-42.
2
D61ger, ' Rege'sten, no. 2383; F.,. Dblger, - Facs'imi-
. 19317, -no. '
Ies bXzanti'ni-schen Kaiserurkuriden (Munich,
34; Dblger, BZ, 34 (1934), 126; Miller, Monemvasia, 235;
Zakythinos, * b7espotat, 1,83-84,333.
 214

authorities refusing to accept the exemptions. Conse-

quently in 1328, immediately after his accession, they

asked from Andronikos III for a new document, which

would enforce their rights. As a matter of fact they

asked for each one of the taxes from which they were

exempted to be stated separately. The new Emperor is-

sued indeed a prostagma in August 1328 in accordance

with their petition. This document is precious not

only because it reveals their activities, which ma-

tched those of the Monemvasiotes of Monemvasia, but

also because it allows the comparison of their privi-

leges to those of the inhabitants of Monemvasia as

they are expressed in the chrysobull incorporated in

the Chronicon Maius. For, however, the im-

-Sdhreiner,,
pressive similarity of 'parts of' the two texts is

the conclusive proof against the genuineness of the

chrysobull for Monemvasia. He considers that it is a

fabrication of the author of the Chronicon Maius, Ma-

carios Melissenos, who used the text of the prostagma

of 1328 as a model to fabricate the forged document.

Schreiner goes even-further expressing doubts about

the authenticity of all documents with imperial pri-

I
vileges concerning Monemvasia.

1
Schreiner-, Prostagma, 215 and passim. In the
same article, pp. 214-25 hd-presentsa ndvi*edition of
the "false" chrysobull. with'a'Germari translation and
commentary.
 215

It is beyond doubt that the chrysobull incorpo-

rated in the Chronicon Maius poses many difficult

questions. The view, however, that it is a forgery,

particularly using the prostagma for Pegai as a model,

I
is unconvincing.

A first general remark about the chrysobull in

the Chronicon Mai. us is that it has all the characteri-

stics of an official copy of a chrysobull of the time

of Andronikos III, with the exception of-the signa-

ture. The word logos appears three times within the

text in the sequence of X6Yov, Myou, Myoc; at the

end there is the formal phrase "&v- xat -r6 ft6"re-

pov etc " as in the chrysobulls. The date at the end

of the document is not written out in full but in nu-

merals and. is followed by th6phrase, which proves that

2
it was an official copy, as in all official copies.

As in the chrysobulls by Andronikos III there is no

I
Schreiner's views have not been universally
accepted and many scholars consider the document as
based on an authentic chrysobull, e. g. Oikonomides,
Hommes-d"affaires, 88; Laiou ''DOP 34-35, pp. 206-
I 49-7 1
07. Cf. Ostrogorski,, * History, n. 3.
2
F. DF)lger-J. Karayannopoulos, * BuCcLvrrvA ALTcXo)-
jLcL"rLx (BuC(xv-rtvd KtClteva xcLC MeXt-roLt, 4) (Thessa-
loniki, 1972), pp.. 117,132r 243-46,255-58; D61ger,
BZ, 34 C1934), 126 on the imperial documents in
Teneral: .
N. Oikonomides, Chancellerie, 167-95.
 216

1
prooimion. There is only one inconsistency: it bears

a signature, that of Andronikos 11, whereas being a

copy of a chrysobullos logos, it should have no signa-

2
ture at all.

Consequently considerng the fomal characteri-

stics there would be no reason to consider the chry-

sobull as forged because it is absolutely compatible

with copies of other chrysoboulloi logoi of Androni; --

kos III, if only it could have been proven that the

signature of Andronikos 11 has been added later and

does not belong to the original document.

Supposing that the text in the Chronicon Majus

was transcribed from a genuine official copy of-a

chrysobull of Andronikos 111, to which the imperial

signature was added later, we will proceed to its

analysis, as regards to its contents, by dividing it

into sections and examining, them separately, compar! -

ing them with the respective sections of the prostag-
3
ma for the Monemvasiotes of Pegai.

I
As, indeed, most documents after Andronikos II:
Dblger-Karayannopoulos, 130.
2
D61ger-Karayannopoulos, 255.
3
References for the prostagma are from Schreiner,
Prostagma. His edition of the chrysobull presents cer-
tain differences from Ps. Phrantzes, Grecu, 538-42,
which will be used for reference here.
 217

I. CHR 538,35-40

The chrysobull begins with the reference to pre-

existing privileges. They had been granted by the

deceased Emperors, the father, the grandfather

and the great-grandfather of the Emperor issuing

the document to the Monemvasiotes of Monemvasia

and also to those f rom Pegai who were settled in

I
Constantinople or elsewhere.

PRO 1-3

The prostagma mentions as the only Emperor who

had granted privileges to the Monemvasiotes of

Pegai Andronikos II.

II. CHR 538,40-42 and 540,1-4

According to these privileges the Monemvasiotes

were totally exempted from payment of kommerkion

in the whole Empire, except Constantinople and

certain cities of Thrace, Selymbria, Herakleia,

Raidestos, Kallioupolis, where they had the ob-

ligation of paying 2%.

PRO 3-9

The privileges mentioned in the prostagma are

I
At this point the doc-ument by Michael IX is
mentioned, the existence of which is confirmed. by the
comparison of tho respective privileges between ear-
lier. and later documents. -It is-interesting to note
that the dhrysobull refers to the Monemvasiotes from
Pegai and not, as*the prostagma, of-Pegai. This is a
subtlety, -which 'could only make sense at-its time
and which escaped Sphreiner and makes-the assumption
of forgery improbable.
 218

I
identical.

III. CHR 540,4-7

The Monemvasiotes asked the Emperor, who always

has the intention to show his beneficence towards

those who apply to him, to renew their old pri-

vileges.

PRO 9-10

On the other hand the Monemvasiotes of Pegai in

1328 had asked for something completely different.

An explanatory document which would enumerate

2
all the taxes from which they were exempted.

IV. CHR 540,7-30

The Emperor enumerates his own, new, grants which,

- he states., with emphasis, concern the Monemvasio--t

tes of Monemvasia as well as the Monemvasiotes

from Pegaiwherever they may have settled, either

in Constantinople or elsewhere: according to

what they have been granted by previous imperial

documents, to continue to enjoy either exkousseia

or defendeusis, Regardless of who enjoyed exkous-

seia and who did not, the Emperor granted all Mo-

nemvasiotes indiscriminately the privilege to pay

I
Laiou, DOP (34-35), p. 207 Cf. Pegolotti, ' La
. 6 il
Ipractica de la mercatura, 42 : "in Rudistio T(i-
gliore grano di Romania".
2
TdLQ-TOLa6TaQ. &CCLLTCFELg -xat b6cyeL XCL-r*6Vojja
.
6 LCLXallDdLVOV-ro(;"
 219

to the kommerkion of Constantinople for import as

well as for export a 1% tax on the following

products: wheat and wine, whatever the place of

origin was, skins. or hides, textiles, linseed,

woollen fabrics, livestock or any other article.

Furthermore they were not to be disturbed by any

official during their transactions concerning

all these products. He finally exempted them

from the obligation to pay a whole series of par-

ticular duties, which are- the following: xc4vtcL-

3 4
V LOT Lx6v r1 jICCFLT Lx6v j2 CUYCU:YTLA6v, ILE:TPTITLx6v,
8
'LCTPLCLTLx6v ,5 TtCLXLCLTi. x6v ,6Y OJICLPLCLTLx 6v r7 644V L OV,

1
Schreiner, Prostagma, 208 n. 19,. 218-. -n. 30.

2
Only mentioned *.in the chrysobull and the prostag-
"
ma, Scrheiner, Prostagma, 208 n. 19.
3
Schreiner, Prostagma, 218 n. 30.
4
Schreiner, Prostagma, 208 n, 19.
5
Schreiner, Prostagma, 218 n. 30.
6
Schreiner, Prostagma, 218 n. 30 and Antoniadis-
Bibicou, Douaftes, 137.
7
Only mentioned in the chrysobull, Schreiner,
Prostagma, 218 n. 30. Zakythinos, * Despotat, 11,243
and n. 4.
8
Schreiner, Prostagma,. 208 n. 19.
 220

3
CYXCLXLCLT LX 6V ,1 LYXLCLT LX6V ,2 8FX(ITC(M, &LEUTLXA
4 5
TF-TP(IIIOLPCL, Eux-Xupov, 6PELVA Tfig tvLdL809 G
6
TLG ctc CLIGT0eg nEpc CLiGTAV Tt(icag Cyx;CLG, ucLaTpo-
7 8 9 10
X-rLaL'(I, liCLTEPYORTLaCCL, llcLyc Lp Cct, dLv-r CVCLUXOV,
12 13
eEwTtpcLcr 4(1,11 )toa-gLCLTLU6v, XCLT1nLCL-rtx6v, JITIVUCL-
14 15 16
T LX6V , tPYCLC-rnPLaU6V, JIET(IELCL-rLX6V, Tta C-

I
Sdhreiner, Prostagma, 208 n. 19.
2
Schreiner, Prostagma, 219 n. 31.
3
H. F. -Schmid, "Byzantinisches Zehntwesen, "' JOBG,
6 (1957), 45-110; Schreiner, Prostagma, 208 n. 1-9-.
4
Schreiner, Prostagma, 208 n. 21,219 n. 31.
5
Schreiner, Prostagma, 219, n. 32; E. Schilbach,
Byzantinische Metrologie (Munich, 1970), p. 156.
6
This mention makes no sense and it cannot be
understood if it represents a duty or it is. -mispla. -,-
ced.
7
S. Trojanos, "KctarponTtatcL. Einige Bemerkungen
ber die finanziellen Grundlagen des Festungsbaues im
byzantinischen Reich, " BuCctv-rLvd 1 (1969), 39-57;
Schreiner, Prostagmap 208-09 n. 21.
8
Antoniadis-Bibicou, ' Douanes, 13,173; Schreiner,
Prostagma, 219. n-. 33.
9
Schreiner, Prostagma, 208-09 n. 21.
10
Schreiner, Prostagma, 208-09 n. 21.
11 Pro-
Antoniadis-Bibicou, *Douanes, 36; Schreiner,
stagma, 219 n. 33. only men ioned in the chrysobull.
12 208-09 21.
Schreiner, Prostagma, 219 n. 33, cf. n.
13
Schreiner, Prostagma, 220 n. 34.
14 Schreiner, Pro-
Antoniadis-Bibicou, 'Douanes, 136,
stagma, 220 n. 34.
15
Schreiner, Prostagma, 220 n. 34.
16
Schreiner, Prostagma, 220 n. 34.
 221

1
TrIaLC- TOO nCLVCOU TOO tv TCp p6pcp nwXouiAvou, He-

(PdLXCXLOV TOO OLTCLPCOU TOO ECC(InOT(IX0dVTOQ &TECLLTEt-

2
cracm napdL T&5V XCLPCL13CCOV. They were also exempted

from any other similar tax, whether existing or

which might be introduced in the future. Of the

taxes mentioned some are not known from any other

source. Most are closely connected to the commer-

cial and marine activities of the Monemvasiotes,

like the metriatikon, a tax on wine and olive oil

or the alieutike tetramoiria and the katergokti-

sia connected with fishing and ship-building. This

section of the chrysobull closes with the state-

ment that the Monemvasiotes are exempted from

taxes which may not. -.have been mentioned in this

document or may be imposed in the future.

PRO 11-26

The prostagma shows many differences. The most

important is the lack of any mention of the im-

munity, the exkousseia, among their privileges.

What it does mention is defendeusis, exemption
from kommerkion and possibly other taxes, which
is not identical to exkousseia. * Another very

important difference is that it simply reitera-

1
Only mentioned in the chrysobull: Schreiner, Pro-
stagma, 220 n. 34, who cannot understand its meaning.
He thinks it might be a tax on textiles. one wonders
if it is not connected with naval activities like the
4TTCLLTnCYLQ T8v dLpjievoTt6vu)'v: Ahrweiler Textile
production was in decline in the Morea7a-t this period:
Laiou, ' DOP, 34-35, p. 187.
2 35. Only
Schreiner, Prostagma, 221 n. mentioned
in the chrysobull.
 222

tes the older privileges without granting any new

exemptions: 2% in Constantinople and the ports

of Thrace. The products transported by the Monem-

vasiotes of Pegai were the same as those trans-

ported by those of Monemvasia. A series of 13

taxes are mentioned as compared to the 28 mention-

1
ed in the chrysobull. Finally there is no men-
2
tion of future exemptions.

V. CHR 540,31-34

The exemption from the kommerkion covered also

those who dealt with the Monemvasiotes, whether

they bought from or sold to them their products,

produce or livestock, whether in Constantinople

or elsewhere in the Empire, due to the privilege

of defendeusis which Monemvasiotes had.

PRO 23-26

At this point, which is common to both documents,

we find an explanation of the privilege of defen-

deusis. One can imagine how spectacularly this

privilege gave the Monemvasiotes the possibility

-1 The f oll-owing are not mentioned in the prostag-

ma: CUYaCTLx6v, ILETPLaTLx6v, naXLaTLx6v, YOjIaPLCLTLx6v,
DLYXLCLTLx6v, dL%LCUTLUA TCTP(XILOLPCcL, 6pELvA etc, noLTep-
YOXTLOCa, tEwnpaula, XOCILLCLTLx6v, xcLnTjXLaTLx6v, 11TIvucL-
TLx6vr tPyaaT-npLax6v, IICTaEL(xTLx6v, dLnaCTncrLc TOO na-
vCou etc, XCPdLXaLOV TOO aLTCLPCOU. The chrysob ull omits
the following: *
and possibly
1108LCLTLx6v, TeTpajioLpCa
6PLXA (6PE: LvA? ) and XOPj. ILCLTLX6*V (.XOCnILCLrLx6, v? )

2
At this point the comments by Schreiner, Prostag-
ma, 212 n. 36 are rather arbitrary.
 223

to augment their transactions. Their tax-free pro-

ducts must have been in great demand in the mar-

'
ket.

VI. CHR 540,34-39

When the Monemvasiotes transported by ship mer-

chandise from the Black Sea or from the Aegean

or from the Gulfs around Constantinople, wheat

or wine or anything else, they were allowed to

settle their economic obligations in Constanti-

2
nople as defined above.

PRO 26-31

This section is also found in the prostagma. This

arrangement may have been provided by both docu-

ments in order to avoid friction with the offi-

cials concerning the privileges and exemptions

of the Monemvasiotes. On the other hand it divert-

ed directly *into the imperial coffers large a-

mounts of money.

VII. CHR 540,39-41

The Monemvasiotes who owned ships were exempted

from tetramoiria and similar taxes, thanks to

1
On all the taxes mentioned in the chrysobull;
Zakythinos, Despotat, 11,243. Cf. Antoniadis-Bibicou,
Douanes, 135-37.

Oikonomides,, Hommes* d'affai: res, 87-91.

.i2
 224

the privilege of exkousseia that they enjoyed.

From the text it is not clear whether exkousseia

enjoyed by the ship-owners was part of the general

privilege of exkousseia granted to Monemvasia

or whether it was a separate privilege granted

to the ship-owners. In any case this section is

another proof of how important the Emperor con-

sidered the naval cooperation with the Monemva-

1
siotes.

PRO 31-32

The prostagma simply refers to the anenochlesia

of the ship-owners but not the exkousseia. This

should be considered another indication that the

immunity concerned only the Monemvasiotes of

Monemvasia.

VIII. CHR 540,41'-44 and 542,1-3

When transporting either merchandise from the

West to the East and vice versa or livestock and

other merchandise from Bulgaria to the ports of

Sozopolis, Agathopolis, Midia and other cities

of the Empire, they are not to be disturbed by

the governors-, the kephalai, of the towns or

by the officials for any demand of kommerkion,

diavatikon'or poriatikon. These ports of'

G. Rouillard, "Les taxes maritimes et commerci-

ales d'apr6s les actes de Patmos et de Lavraj, " M61anges
'Charles Diehl, I (Paris, 1930), pp... 277-80; Schreiner, Pro-
stagma, 210; Ostrogorski, Irnmunite, 208.
 225

Bulgaria had been recovered in 1331 by the Byzan-

tines and presumably legal arrangement was necessa-

1
ry concerning trading in the area.

PRO 32-35

The context of the prostagma differs at this

point. The Monemvasiotes of Pegai were totally

exempted from paying the kommerkion in the ports

of Thrace only when they were in transit and did

not carry out any transactions. It does not men-

tion at all the three ports of Bulgaria.

IX. CHR 542,3-9

For all commercial transactions carried out where-

soever, whether in the East or the West whether

in the islands or the mainland, whether in the

towns or the fairs or anywhere else and whether

the merchandise is produce or anything else, as

well as in the fairs of the Peloponnese, in all

her cities and towns, the Monemvasiotes should

remain undisturbed from any demands for taxes

and particularly from any demand for kommerkion

1
The conuna after 8Le'vepyo6vTcav hould be correct-
ed to a full stop, to allow the text have its full mean-
ing. This copying mii3take of Macarios Melissenos was
not corrected either by Grecu or by Schreiner. On 6La-
D=Lx6v and TEopLaTLx6v: Antoniadis-Bibicou, ' Douanes,
123,134; Schreiner, Prostagma, 211 n. 39 and 40;
Rouillard, Taxes, 284. The geographical consistency
in this section points against the forgery, cf. D61ger-
Karayannopoulos, ' 263.
 226

poriatikon.

PRO 35-40

The prostagma does not mention the Peloponnese.

Evidently the Monemvasiotes of Pegai did not

trade in the vicinity of their. native city, where-

as the Peloponnese was very important for the mer-

2
chants operating from Monemvasia.

X. CHR 542,10-18

Consequently the officials of the kommerkion in

Constantinople as well as the various ports,, ci-

ties and towns of the Empire, should observe this

anenochlesia and defendeusis of the Monemvasiotes.

Similarly they, who have the administration-6f

lands, domains and fortresses by imperial order,

whether these belong to the Empress or the son

of the Emperor or tc relatives or other archons

or archontopouloi, should make no demand for ma-

3
geireia'or opsonion or any other obligation.

1
Here the full stop after T6TcoLC should be chan-
ged to comma.
2
On the areas of activity of the Monemvasiotes:
Laiou, "ElinopoL, 12-13; Oikonomides, ' Hommesd'affakres,
86-91; Schreiner, Prostagma, 212-14.
3
On ports, audAaL: Antoniadis-Bibicou, '. Douanes,
135; Schreiner, Prostagma, 209; Zakythinos, -Despotat,
11,237; Ahrweiler, L'escale; Rouillard. Taxes, 282-
83. on archontopouloi, Thiriet, * R=aftie, 293-94. On
ViayeLpeCa and 6qj6vLov: Schreiner, Prostagma, 208; Za-
kythinos, ' Despotat, 11,237.
 227

PRO 40-48

In the prostagma there is a similar section,

which however does not mention wife and son of

the Emperor but his mother and uncles and cou-

sins.

XI. CHR 542,18-24

Those who in the future will hold the relevant

posts in Constantinople are ordered not to make

any demand from the Monemvasiotes for either

epereia, mageireia or opsonion nor to include

them among the other inhabitants of the city

for the koinofeleis synkroteseis. Furthermore

their cases will be brought before the sekreton

of the Emperor and not the city authorities.

PRO 48-55

In the prostagma, this section is almost identi-

cal word for word. The privileged position of all

Monemvasiotes regardless of origin remained unal-

tered.

XII. CHR 542,24-28

The descendants too of the Monemvasiotes were to

benefit from the privileges granted by the chryso-

bull for as long as their rac e existed. The

I
On 6nApeux: Rouillard, Taxes, 284; zakythinos,
Despotat, 11,236-37. On uoLvo)(peXcUQ ouyxpoTAcycLQ:
Schreiner, Prostagna, 212. On axpeTov: Schreiner, Pro-
stagma, 212-13.
 228

prostagma makes no such provision.

XIII. CHR 542,28-35

The chrysobull closes with the usual formalities

and the date. In separate paragraphs follow the

Emperor's signature and a sentence stating that

this is an official copy of the document.

PRO 55-63

The prostagma too closes with corresponding for-

malities which are elaborate and perhaps hard to

understand, omitting of course, the Emperor's

1
signature.

The analysis of the chrysobull and its comparison

to the prostagma revealed some similarities but many

important differences. One important difference con-

cerns the kind of privileges mentioned. The privileges

enjoyed by the inhabitants of Monemvasia were not identi-

cal with those enjoyed by the Monemvasiotes of Pegai.

The most important privilege of the Monemvasiotes of

Monemvasia, the exkousseia, is not granted to the

Monemvasiotes of Pegai. Indeed the chrysobull distin-

guishes between those whq enjoy and those who do not

enjoy it Section IV. Exkousseia is also mentioned

I
on this clause of undoubted authenticity: Schrei-
ner, Prostagma, 212-14; On the differences between chry-
sobull and prostagmal Oikonomides,. Chancellerie, 190-
193.
 229

for the ship-owners from Monemvasia, a privilege which

the ship-owners from Pegai did not enjoy : Section VII

In another point the chrysobull abolishes the kommerkion

in the cities of Thrace and lowers it in Constantino-

ple , whereas the prostagma simply renews previous pri-

vileges : Section IV Furthermore there is a referen-

.
ce to trade with Bulgaria and the Peloponnese, which

the prostagma omits Section VIII A series of taxes

.
from which the Monemvasiotes are exempted by the chry-.

sobull are not mentioned in the prostagma: Section IV

Finally the chrysobull twice provides that the Monemva-

siotes will enjoy their exemptions in the future, in

perpetuity, whereas the prostagma makes no such assu-

rance : Sections IV and XII..

The two documents also show many marked differen-

ces concerning-their respective chronology, showing

that they are se parated by an interval of some years

during which many things have changed, the Emperor's

family status, the situation in Asia Minor with the

capture of Pegai by the VLrks and its desertion by

the Monemvasiote community and the occupation of cer-

tain ports of Bulgaria by the Byzantines.

It has been shown that the differences between-

the chrysobull and the prostagma are substantial. Let

us now examine the problems arising from their simi-

larities. The fact that a byzantine document has

 230

common sections with another is not necessarily an

argument against its authenticity. If it were so, few

byzantine documents would remain beyond suspicion. On

the contrary it is quite common for imperial documents

to repeat and incorporate in their text parts of earli-

er relevant documents. This is the case with the chry-

sobull of 1284 for Monemvasia, which incorporates part

the text the-chrysobull 1
of of of Michael VIII. it

seems improbable that the chrysobull and the prostagma

are directly connected. Rather, the:. similarities'between

the two could be due to the fact that both have incor-

porated parts of a common earlier document. Concerning

the chrysobull the prototype could not have been the

chrysobull of 1284, which granted limited privileges,

but could have been the lost document granted by Michael

IX, which, as we saw, stated in detail the numerous

privileges and exemptions. For the prostagma of 1328

the previous documents concerning Pegai may have been

used but, since they were not very detailed, as the pro-
stagma states, it is quite possible that the lost docu-

ment of Michael IX for Monemvasia formed the basis

of the minute enumeration of privileges. This would

mean that the common prototype for both the chrysobull

and the prostagma was the lost document of Michael IX.

1
There are innumerable documents of this kind. A
few examples are mentioned at random such as Do"lger, 'Re-
gesten, no. 1992 of 1272 renewing privileges by JustiE-J-
an Eni--d Basil II for the church of Ohrid; D81ger, zege-
sten, no. 2031 of 1277 for Hilandar, renewing privileges
by Alexios IIII and Nemanja; nos. 1810,1850,2058,2130,
2803, for Kroai. Cf. Oikonomides, Chancellerie, 175.
 231

We will examine now if the historical informati-

on given by the qhrysobull can help its dating and

whether the issuing of a chrysobull by Andronikos III

for the Monemvasiotes is justified by the historical

situation at this date. The indications offered, with

the exception of the date and signature are:

-The Emperor issuing the chrysoboullos logos grants

privileges to Monemvasia for the first time. Consequent7

ly it can not be Andronikos II.

-It is stated in the bull that the privileges had

been granted by the father, the grandfather and the

great-grandfather of the Emperor, none of whom are

still alive. So the Emperor must be Andronikos III

and the document must date after.. 13. February 1332... -,

2
when his grandfather died. '

-Monemvasiotes of Pejai are never mentioned as inha-

biting Pegai but as having emigrated to Constantino-

ple or elsewhere, which means that they must have a-

bandoned Pegai. Consequently the document must be

dated after the capture of Pegai. -.by-Ahe'. Turks which

is placed in the decade 1330-1340.3

I
Usually his older documents'are mentioned by the
issuing emperor, e. g. in the chrysobull of June 1301
Andronikos II mentions his prostagma of April 1300
(TEpo0ecmCcrcLcra) : Binon, EO, 37 (1938), 308,1.101-
2
On the date of death of Andronikos II: Papado-
pulos 'Versuch, 35; Schreiner, *Kl: einchroniken, II,
227. On the death of Michael IX: Papadopoulos, ' Ver-
such, 37; Schreiner, * Kleirichroniken, II, 227. On the
Te-ath of Michael VIII above P. 109.
3
Schreiner, Prostagma, 204.
 232

-The Byzantines hav( recaptured some ports of Bulgaria.

Consequently the document must have been issued after

spring 1331.1

-The Emperor's mother has died, since she is not men-

tioned in the chrysobull as in the prostagma, of-1328.

Maria-Rita of Armenia died in 1333.2

-The Emperor has married and has a son. John was born

on 18 June 1332.3

-The prostagma mentions lands belonging to relatives

of the Emperor, which are omitted in the phrysobull,

Possibly this is because they were situated in Asia

Minor most of which had been occupied by the Turks

after 1330.4

So we see that all the historical evidence given

by the chrysobull shows a marked consistency and leads

to the dating of the document in the years between

1
Occupied by Andronikos II in 1331, reconquered
by the Bulgars in 1344: -'REB, 22 (1964), 228; Nicol,
1261-1453,180; Schreiner, Prostagma, 222. on Androni-
kos III and the Bulgars: U. V. Bosch, Andronikos'III
Palaiologos'. Versuch einer-Darstellung der byzantischen
Geschichte in den Jahren 1321-1341 ( Amsterdam, 1965)
pp. 53-82.
2
Papadopoulos, ' Versuch, 36,43.
3
Schreiner, Kleinchroniken, II, 242.
4
Schreiner, Prostagma, 204; Nicol, '*1261-1453,
175-76.
 233

1333 and 1341, when Andronikos III died.

Before examining if the circumstances justified

the issuing of a new chrysobull for the Monemvasiotes,

it is 'thwhile to repeatthat the

wo exceptional privi-
(
leges granted to them by Andronikos II between 1299

and 1301 seem to have been prompted not only by the

initiative of the. Monemvasiotes themselves and the

Emperor's goodwill, but also by important political

reasons like the effort to limit the activities of

the two Italian naval cities. *During the reign of An-

dronikos III, in the years 1335-1336 the relations

between Byzantium and the Genoese were severely dis-

turbed after the capture of Lesbos by Benedetto Zac-

caria and one could connect the new grants to the Mo-
2
nemvasiotes with these dif f iculties.

So far the contents of the chrysobull show abso-

lute consistency and are in perfect harmony with the

historical context of the year 1336, proposed initial-

ly by D81ger, with the exception of the date and signa-

ture as quoted in the Chronicon Maius. For the date

1 is chronolo-
The death of Maria-Rita of Armenia
gically the last indication offered by the contents of
the chrysobull.
2 'Kleinchro-
Nicol,, 1261-IA53,179-80; Schreiner,
niken, 11,246-47.
 234

D61ger has already observed that by substituting the

letter x with VL, a common mistake in the text of Maca-

rios Melissenos, and with a slight correction of the

indictio, from LE to 6, the date becomes November

6825 indictio 5, which corresponds to November 1336,

a perfectly acceptable date during the reign of Andro-

nikos 111.1

The factor which more than any other makes the au-

thenticity of the chrysobull questionable is the exi-.

stence of the full signature of Andronikos II, in the

form used before 1316. If, -however, as. we. supposed,

the document described was a. genuine official copy

of a chrysobull, and it has all the necessary chara-

cteristics of one, then it should not have had any

signature at all. The document indeed concerned seve-

ral separate groups, at least two communities, in Mo-

nemvasia and Constantinople, and merchants scattered

in various ports of the Empire, and presumably several

official copies must have been issued for them

1
DO-1ger BZ, 34 (1934), 127. The it instead of I.L
appears again 1-n the text of the chrysobull in tuDoXA
instead of tjloXA:, -Grecu, 540,1.16.
2
Cf. Schreiner, Prostagma, 213-14.
 235

Consequently it is quite possible that in Monemvasia

there was one such copy bearing no signature, and not

the original, which would have borne it. When Macarios

Melissenos was compiling his material for the Chronicon

Maius, he found in the Archives of Monemvasia the three

chrysobulls of Andronikos II, which all bore his full

signature and this one document, which was known in

his time as emanating from Andronikos the Young, as he

mentions, which bore no signature at all. Perhaps Maca-

rios hoped to add to the prestige of the document if he

completed it with the imperial signature. But in Mo-

nemvasia no other document of Andronikos III existed.

In his simplicity Macarios Melissenos may have believ-

ed that Andronikos the Young used the same signature

as his homonymous grandfather and copied at the end

of the chrysobull the full signatur e of Andronikos II,

causing a tremendous confusion-in our time. This,,

however, apart from copying mistakes and misreadings

seems to be the only intervention of the author of

2
the Chronicon Maius with the text.

1
One chrysobull of 1284, one of June 1301, one
of 1301 or 1302 and one of, probably, 1314. For the last
three see below chapter 6V and VI.
2
Schreiner, Prostagma, 217-55, lists the corrupti-
ons. One should note, however, in the same spirit as
Schreiner, that certain forms used in the prostagma
are not totally correct as he interprets them, e. g.
1.23 the 86 which he changed to o686, or the omissi-
on of eCQ in 1.14, or the otTe in 1.41 One should not
for that reason conclude that the prostagma was a for-
gery. It is not by chance that D61ger with his expe-
rience had originally accepted the authenticity of_the
chrysobull.
 236

The fabrication of a chrysoboullos logos based on

the prostagma for Pegai presupposes extraordinary know-

ledge and abilities by far surpassing those of a 16th

century provincial metropolitan as was Macarios of Monem-

vasia. On the contrary one perceives the tortuous ef-

fort of a half literate prelate to read a. text, which

had been written two centuries earlier. Technical terms

posed particular difficulties: the term exkousseia, im-

munity, is read excusia, authority, thus making sense

to him.. He also had difficulties understanding the

syntax of the document, as in section IV,, where the

text is almost incomprehensible, or in sections VIII

and IX, where he mixes up full stop with comma. 'These

are characteristics that can be observed in the whole

1
of his work, the Chronicon Maius.

His evident ignorance makes it even more diffi-

cult to believe that he had the information and the

/ knowledge on the imperial chancellery, which would al-

low him to adhere with consistency to all the intricate

rules for the issuing of. a chrysobOullos logos and to

manage to fabricate an official copy of a chrysobull

using a prostagma, which is a completely different type

I
He writes NeTdPLCL instead of TaCvapov: Grecu,
198; cruvnOdLareLC instead of cyujiD(iaeLQ, Grecu, 198; tv-
tjmpoaftv for Clinpoo0ev, Grecu, 190; 6lip6TepoL xaC ot
4 dLbeXpoC, Grecu, 268. The form gEoucyt(i for tExoucy-
acta is also found in the text of a truce between Mi-
chael VIII and the Venetians in 1265, Tafel-Thomas,
Urkunden, 111,72.
 237

of document. It would be easier to believe such a

forgery if the forger repeated more or less intact

the text of the prostagma for Pegai. But this is not

the case. The chrysobull introduces historical facts

like the conquest of Pegai and legal and fiscal terms,.

like seventeen specific duties, most of which were re-

lated to the activities of the Monemvasiotes in the

14th century and which must have been forgotten by

the last quarter of the 16th It is difficult to

.2
understand how Macario. s Melissenos would "grant" new

privileges, which he does not even comprehend and

cannot even write correctly; or that he would reduce

the kommerkion by 1%; or that he knew about the archon-

topouloi, not mentioned in the prostagma; or about

the Bulgarian ports, which stayed in Byzantine hands

for 13 years 3
only. Such intricate knowledge of hi-

story is incompatible with his evident illiteracy

which led to the flagrant mistake of using the signa-

ture of Andronikos II and a date corresponding to

his reign under a document which he wanted to present

as having been issued by Andronikos III.

1
D81ger-Karayannopoulos, 222,26,233-46; Ojkono
mides, Chancellerie, 190-94.
2
Cf. in 1460 for Monemvasia: "portu et navali-
bus quondam ornata", Pii Secundi, -Commentarii (Frank-
furt, 1614), p. 103 and, for the beginning of the 16th
century, Sathas ' Documents1nddits, IV, 224-35..
3
on the ports of Bulgaria there is a certain con
fusion in the sources: 'REB, 22 (196411 235-37.
 238

It is hard to believe that Macarios Melissenos

was in a position to stage the process of issuing a do-

cument granting privileges with perfect historical

and documental consistency and that he could collect,

connect and assess such material, which apparently

1
the shrunken Monemvasia of his time, did not possess..

When even imperial documents of uncontested authenti-

city present many-peculiarities, which often fool spe-

cialists in diplomatic history, it is unneccessary to

attribute to the pen of Macarios Melissenos the con-.

struction of the chrysobull of 1336'for Monemvasia,

which as a matter of fact, does not, according to the

preceding analysis, contain any particular irregulari-

2
ties.

The arguments on the motives' of the forgery by

Macarios Melissenos of the last editor of the chry-

sobull, Peter Schreiner, are not very convincing. As

a rule, Macarios is convicted of having forged Monem-

vasia's documents to secure the subordination of the

bishopric of Androusa under his metropolitan See. Be-

cause of the lack of any reference to ecclesiastical

I
After the Turkish occupation of 1540, Monemva
sia does not seem to have had any literary or artistic
activityk cf-. a letter from Monemva$ia to Gabriel Se-
viras, a contemporary of Macarios: E. Brouskari, 8TIOcLu-
pCcrjicL-rcL, 18 (1981) , 307-24.
2
E. g. documents with miniatures have been con
sidered suspicious: J. P. Alexander, 'B, 15 (1940-41),
172.
 239

matters and especially to Androusa, Schreiner maintains

that the document was forged for the glorification of

the past of Monemvasia, so that the metropolitan could

1
gain more benefits for the city. But it is doubtful

whether such aims could be achieved with the chryso-

bull of 1336. Nowhere in the text is there any word

of praise for the inhabitants, the city or the church

as in other chrysobulls for Monemvasia. It is diffi-

cult to understand how Monemvasia is. glorified through

the terrible tangle of incomprehensible terms into

which Monemvasiotes of Pegai and Constantinople are

also thrown, neither is it more likely that the metro-

politan See gains much from the reference to unknown

duties or to journeys along the various sea ways and

through the straits-to the ports of Thrace and Bulga-

ria. None of the privileges granted by the bull brought

any benefit to the Metropolis of Monemvasia, either

at the time of its issue or 250 later, when Macarios

Melissenos compiled his book.

On the contrary Macarios Melissenos is acquitted

of having forged the chrysobull of 1336 on the account

.
of the existence of another source, which confirms

the privileges granted by the chrysobull. Another

.-

1
Schreiner, Prostagma, passim and esp. 215,11.
8-13. Another example of how feeble the arguments are
is the fact that the date of the chrysobull could not
have been copied from the documents existing in Monem-
vasia, which were originals and did not have the date
in numerals as it appears in the text.
 240

document concerning Monemvasia, later than the chryso-

bull, the argyroboullos horismos granted towards the

end of the 14th century by the Despot Theodore I, con-

firms the privilege of total exemption from the kom-

merkion as well as the-complete exemption from taxes

at the fairs of the Peloponnese, which it recognizes

1
as preexisting. As we have seen, these privileges had

been granted through the documents of Andronikos III

and the one mentioned in it of Michael IX. Without

these two documents the Monemvasiotes would have re-

mained at the end of the 14th century merely exempted

from the kommerkion in their city. The uncontestable

existence of the privileges granted by the chrysoboyl-

0 los logos of Andronikos III of 1336 in the Peloponner

se leaves no doubt that it was issued without the

help of Macarios Melissenos, as well as the document

of Michael IX, which is mentioned in it, while neither

the importance of the prostagma for Pegai nor the

implications of the forgery for Monemvasia would justi-

fy the fabrication of a false chrysobull.

The imperial grants to the city of Monemvasia

reached their climax with this chysobull of Androni-

kos III, issued five years before his death. Relieved

from all taxes throughout the Empire and with only a

1
Miklosich-MUllero, V, *171-72.
 241

minimum of obligations in the capital the Monemvasio-

tes, along with their compatriotes who had settled el-

sewhere, traveled mainly by sea, with their ships to

all the corners of the Empire, starting from Con-

stantinople and the region around to the Black Sea

,
and Bulgaria, the ports of Thrace, various islands

and the Peloponnese, where they traveled by land

also, supplying the cities and the fairs. They trans-

ported foodstuffs, mainly wheat and wine, livestock,

1
skins, textiles. The quality of wine, called by

Choumnos, "ACA)PLU00 6X TflQ tV 1TCXOTtOVVACCP

MOV6jIDCLUCCLQ"

must have been superior and the demand great and the

Venetians at about this time started producing it al-

so in. Crete, in the area of Malvesin. They transport-

2
ed vines from Monemvasia as the documents mention.

The Monemvas iotes do not seem however, *to have been

,

Laiou, OEIvEoPOL, lit 14-15,17-18; Laiou, ''DOP,

34-35, pp. 205-08; Oikonomides, ' Homme's' d'aafai'res, 44-
46,87-88.
2
J. F..-;, Boissonade, - Aftecdo*ta: Nova (Paris, 1844, -
rpt. Hildesheim, 1962), p. 212. The existing in forma-
tion on the wine of Monemvasia has not been so far
systematically collected and studied. The lack of men-
tions before the 13th century could be due to the: fact
that it was one of the so-called -
xcx(aXujidvcL TEpot6vT(x,
which it was not permitted to export: Antoniadis-Bibi-
cou, Douanes, 50-51,103-04. Some information in: B. D.
Krimb`a-s-_,__"_r_00_ orvo(; xcLt (Xt TC0LXLXCCLL&LTEtXOU MCLX0CLCCCL, "
*ETELCTTTjJI0VLXTPL(XX0'VTaTEEVT(XETTjPC9N. KPTITLXOO (Athens,
1944), 112-44; Zakythinosp Despotat,. Ij, 249-50; Miller,
Monemvasia, 240,244-45. On7the production of Malvasia
in Crete: B. Imhaus, "Ench6res des fiefs et vignobles
de la Republique V6nitienne en Cr6te au XIVe si6cle, "
EEBE, 41 (1974), 195-210. On Malvesin: N. Platon, llnepC
Tv 6votacrCCLV TfiQ tncLpXCcLg M(jXceCL, " KPTITLI(d XP0'VLXdj
6 (1952), 156-58, cf. 158 n. 6, where a possible deri-
vation of the name from the Monemvasiotes is examined.
 242

handling in their commerce manufacturing products or '

luxury goods.

These activities, which brought affluence to Mo-

nemvasia, now at its peak, transformed the city into

a commercial power comparable to the Italian cities.

The wealth of the city tempted again another well

known pirate, Umur Beg, who tried twice in 1335 to

raid Monemvasia. The local authorities prefered to

pay him off, the poet of DUstUrname says they offered

him a tribute, meeting him at a distance from the ci-

ty to prevent him from coming closer, which might have

2
tempted him anew.

III.... Monemvasia dnd the Kantakouzenoi

The death of Andronikos III was followed by a

great upheaval in the political and ecclesiastical

1
Laiou, Andronicus, 5,257; Oikonomid6s, Hommes
d'affaires, 88.
2
1. Melikoff-Sayar, Le Destand'Umur Pasha. (DU-
stUrn"ame-i-Enveri) (Paris, 1954), 71-78,102-03, MT,
; P. Lemerle, LIEmirat dlAydin, ' Byzance'et'l"Occi-
dent. Recherches sur "La geste d'Umur Pasha" (Paris,
1957), 83-84,88. The view of V. Laurent, Synodikon,
149, that the Turks actually conquered Monemvasia
is not justified by the information contained in this
source. Cf. R. Cessi-M. Brunetti, Le de'liberaZzIoni
del Consiglio dei'Rogati '(Senato)'ITerie Mixtorum, II,
Libri XV-XVI (Venice, 1961), nos. 221,232,258,283,
on the danger from the raids of the Turks in the Ae-
gean.
 243

1
life of the Empire. Even though-the events took place

very far from Monemvasia, the city was affected for

various reasons. One important reason was the interest

of the capital in this rich and active city, particu-

larly after the Eastern provinces had been definitely

lost to the Turks. Increasing numbers of Monemvasio-

tes settled in Constantinople augmenting the extent

of their trade. Some Monemvasiotes made large fortunes

out of this trade and a few, as we will see, through

their wealth acquired authority in the administrdtion

and the church. -

The existing sources concerning Monemvasia dur-

ing the civil war and the reign of John VI Kantakou-

zenos are mainly ecclesiastical. only scant informa-

tion about the city and its inhabitants can be derived

from 2 however, is
these texts. One of them, abundant-

ly informative about the monemvasiotes and their acti-

vities during the period immediately after the death

of Andronikos III, the civil war and the controversy

between the followers and the opponents of Gregory

Palamas. This is the "Life of Isidore", who was ele-

cted but never ordained Metropolitan of Monemvasia

and later, during the reign of Kantakouzenos became

1
Nicol, ' 1'261*-1453,191-216.
2
E. g. ' PG, 148, col. 1031-1034, n. 49; cf. J. Me-
yendorf f' *Ir; t-roduction a 1" ftude de Gr6goi: re Pal: amas
(Patristica Sorbonensa, 3) (Paris, 1959), 90.
 244

1
Patriarch of Constantinople. Isidore was never ordain-

ed because he refused to renounce Palamism. Even so as

"bnoLA(pLoc" of Monemvasia he managed his See from Con-

stantinople up to 1344, when another metropolitan was

2
appointed.

The biographer of Isidore apparently knew the Mo-

nemvasiotes of Constantinople quite well. He talks

about them as a racethat had always been closely con-

nected to the sea. They were engaged in sea-trade and

only a few still kept their traditional occupation as

ofcYTp(iT6c tV 3
tO%, O"TtXOL:,&CLXdLTTLOQ". They had bad man-
,
ners, they were coarse and used a vulgar language. Li-

ke true sailors they were-always prone to quarrels and

4
stabbings.

Isidore, thanks to his office, came in touch with

all sorts of Monemvasiotes. These were Monemvasiotes

1
A.
Papadopoulos-Kerameus, ''Z'i'ti*j'a dVuh vselenskih
patriahov XIV v. (St. Petersbourg, 1905), 52-149; new
edition by D. G. Tsamis, OLXoUou KwvcrT(ivTLvoun6XscDc Tob
KoxxCvou 4AyL0X0YLX& OEpya. A' 8E0GCLX0VLXEVC "AYLOL
(MvTpov BuCaVTLVCOV rEPEPV@V BuCCLVTLVOC
4) CThessaloniki,
eCCFCTCLXOV
1985), LX SEC
Euyypcupe%, pp. 327-423
2
On Isidore's carreer Meyendorff, Palamas, 105-06,
109-15 and below chapter 6 VII.
3
Gregoras, Schopen, 1,98; Papadopoulos-Kerameus,
Zitija, 88-89; Laiou, "EjinopoL, 15-16; Laiou, * DOP, 34-35,
p. 207; Laiou, Greek merchant, 113-14; A. Laiou-Thoma-
dakis, "Saints and Society in the Late Byzantine Empire, "
in Charani's Studies: 'Essays'in: Honorof PeterCharanis
(N. Brunswick-New Jersey, 1980), 104-05.
4 88-89.
Papadopoulos-Kerameus, Zitija,
 245

from Monemvasia visiting the capital, who brought him

in touch with his See and also part of his revenues,

asking for his blessing and even, in times, for his

miraculous intervention. An oil merchant dedicated

to him his first consignment of oil, which he had

brought to Constantinople and which, when blessed by

Isidore, became miraculous. Another came from Monemva-

sia to ask for his blessing against his childlessness

1
and indeed he begat a child shortly. after. Some of

the visiting Monemvasiotes were merchants moving free-

ly about by sea, whereas others were friends and rela-

tives of those. already settled in the capital, who had

2
come to see them.

Among the Monemvasiotes permanently settled in

Constantinople some, according tc> the "Life of Isi-

dore", had emigrated and "changed their country" a

long time before. These could be the Tzacones, who had

been brought over by Michael VIII and, even after 80

3A
years, retained memories of their former home.

case which is particularly interesting is that of the

Monemvasiot merchant Nicolaos, permanently settled in

Constantinople. His family name is not known, but he

1
Papadopoulos-Kerameus, ' Z*itija, 89-93,103-04.
2 89,91,103.
Papadopoulos-Kerameus, 'Z'itij
-
3 89.
Papadopoulos-Kerameus,, Ziti, ja,
 246

must have come from an important family. He cannot

have been very old, because he was persuaded by Isi-

dore, whose close friend he was, to marry after an un-

settled life. He was very wealthy, but it does not be-

come clear from the text whether this wealth was acquir-

ed in Monemvasia or in Constantinople, where it appears

that he had settled a short time before. He was a sin-

cere supporter and friend of Kantakouzenos, for whose

cause he risked his fortune, which was saved from the

fury of the crowd thanks to Isidore's timely inter-

vention. Connected to Kantakouzenos and Isidore, -Nico-

laos must have been a Palamite, as indeed the majori-

ty of his compatriots seem to have been, since they

1
supported their Palamite Metropolitan. Nicolaos may

be identified with the "otxeVoQ" of the Emperor called

Nicolaos, who appears in ecclesiastical documents dur-

ing the patriarchate-of Isidore undertaking missions

2 is be-
as an imperial envoy. Nicolaos a special case

cause of his friendship with the Emperor and the Pa-

triarch. It was for this reason that some scattered

information about him found its way into the sources.

But he was certainly not an isolated case.

Apart from the imperial and ecclesiastical docu-

ments, the books of the notaries of the Italian cities

1
P.apadopoulos-Kerameus,, 'Zi'tl*3a, * PLPI no. 29395.
,
2
Miklosich-MUller, 1,284-85.
 247

shed some light on the activities of Byzantine mer-

1
chants. After the end of the civil war, various

reasons led Emperor John VI Kantakouzenos to reduce

the kommerkion generally for them in the Empire to

2
2%, putting them on a par with the Latin merchants..

It would be useful to examine if this measure had

any effect on the activities of the Monemvasiotes, who

do not seem to have received any new privileges for

3
their city and their trade from Kantakouzenos. From

the fact that the Monemvasiotes never appear as his

adversaries but on the contrary seem to have been

.
his supporters, we must assume that none of the measu-

res he took, not even lowering the taxation for all

merchants, nor the additional taxes on wine and wheat,

acted contrary to their interests. The privileges ema-

nating from the chrysobull of 1336, full exemption

from the kommerki on throughout the, Empire, except Con-

stantinople, where they paid 1%, full exemption from

any duty on other goods that they traded in, mainly

wheat and wine, and particularly exemption from all

future taxes, placed the Monemvasiotes in a more fa-

vourable position than all other Byzantine merchants.

1 87-88 n. 150-
Oikonomides, Hommes d': affaires,
152 and passim; Laiou7, DOP 34-35, pp. 206-28,217,219
and passim.
2
Except for the Venetians and the Genoese: Oiko-
nomides, Hommes d'affaires, 46; Laiou, DOP, 34-35, pp.
34-35,194; Antoniadis-Bibicou, DOuanes, 102.

3 32 (1971), 223-31.
Medvedev, VV,
 248

Because the chrysobull stipulated the exemption from

the payment of taxes for producers who sold to the

Monemvasiotes, even the wine producers of the area

cannot have felt the consequences of the new taxation.

John VI Kantakouzenos respected the privileges

granted to the Monemvasiotes by all the previous Em-

perors, as he himself asserts in the chrysobull he

2
issued for the metropplitan See of Monemvasia. The

document which will be examined in detail in the re-

levant chapter, regulates certain differences between

the metropolitans of Monemvasia and Lacedaemonia con-

cerning the boundaries of their respective regions and

reasserts the uncontested possession of certain areas

and settlements near the border by the metropolitan

of Monemvasia. At the end the privileges granted earli-

er are repeated with the addition of an important new

one, the "-r6noc" of the Patriarch of Jerusalem. As we

will see the chrysobull must have been issued in Octo-

ber 1348 or 1349.3

A-very interesting element in this chrysobull.

is the account of a series of four documents with

1
Oikonomides, 'Homeg d'affaires, 46-48.
2 (1971),
Medvedev, ' VV, 32 221-28.
3
See below chapter 6 VII.
 249

privileges concerning Monemvasia issued by the deceased

emperors Matthaios, a corruption of Maurice, Constantine Po-

ghonatos, Alexios Komnenos and Andronikos Palaeologos. They

'
seem to follow a precise chronological order. In the

text John VI states that he intends to respect these

documents and the question is why did he choose out

of the series of imperial documents on Monemvasia

these particular four. Since John's chrysobull con-

tains the description of the limits of the region

which was under the jurisdiction of the metropolis,

the answer perhaps can be found in the text explain-

ing that the four-older chrysobulls described, deli-

mited and encircled the coastal villages and towns

that Monemvasia had under-its jurisdiction. Furthermore

in two other occasions it is mentioned that these

chrysobulls defined the possessions of Monemvasia.

It is clear that Kantakouzenos was not interested in

documents which did not contain the description of

the territory under the jurisdiction of Monemvasia,

like the chrysobulls of 1284 and 1301, but in those

like the chrysobull of 1314, which contains the descri-

ption of the region, and the older documents must have

1 The bearing the name of Matthaios

only emperor
the son of John VI, was still alive at the time of the
issue of the chrysobull. As a monastic name it has been
used only by Manuel Komnenos, but it seems unlikely
to have him mentioned before Poghonatos and his own
grandfather.
 250

contained precisely that, i. e. references on the ter-

ritory of Monemvasia and its boundaries, which possi-

bly the older chrysobulls defined. ('21.1-2)

At about the time of issue of the chrysobull, on Octo-

ber 1349, the Emperor's son, Despot Manuel Kantakouze-

nos, arrived in the Peloponnese as a ruler of the By-

1
zantine possessions and settled in Mystras. His fa-

ther in his Memoirs emphasizes the opposition of the

local archons to Manuel's efforts for administrative

and military reforms. No mention is made of the atti-

tude shown by the archons and the citizens of Monemva-

sia towards'Manuel, but it is quite possible that it

was favourable. Manuel's administration does not seem

to have been at variance with the interests of the Mo-

nemvasiotes, while their economic prosperity not only

helped the economy of the whole of the Peloponnese but

could also set the example for the reorganization of

the rich and promising but always restless province.

It is quite possible that the Monemvasiotes with

their long tradition and experience at sea contribut-

ed to the organization of the Peloponnesian fleet that

Manuel tried to set up. It was this enterprise of his

that started the uprising of the archons of the

.

1
Cantacuzene, Bonn, 111,85; Schreiner, * Kleinchro-
niken, 1,243,111 275-76; Nicol, * Kantakouzenos, no. 22,
p. 123.
 251

1
Peloponnese against him, instigated by Lampoudios.

Despite the lack of information we must assume that

the Monemvasiotes had every reason to support Manuells,

plans rather than participating in the uprising. The-

re is another indirect proof that the Monemvasiotes

did not take part in the revolution, that the oppo-

nents of the Despot seem to have been unwarlike, where-

as the sources emphasize the Monemvasiotes' competence

2
in military art.

After the resignation of John VI Kantakouzenos,

John V Palaeologos sent to the Peloponnese the bro-

thers Asen to relieve Manuel of his office, in 1355.

The extent of the conflicts that followed is not quite

known. John-Kantakouzenos. 7mentions in his Memoirs

that, when he himself ceased to be an Emperor,.; the

archons of the Peloponnese, even though they had made

their submission to Despot Manuel, took courage and

thought that the time had come to rise against him.

In the meantime the new emperor had sent the two sons

of Isaak Asen as governonrs of the Peloponnese and

they came into conflict with the despot. The Pelopon-. 7

nesian archons together with the brothers Asen were

thus united against him. The single exception was a

I
Cantacuzene, Bonn, 111,86-88; Zakythinos; Dwspo-
tat, 1,98-99.
2 88-89;
Cantanuzene, III, Zakythinosy Despotat, I,
99-100.
 252

was impregnable thanks to its strength both natural

and man-made. And he using their force only subdued

them all anew and with the force of the weapons he

1
enslaved them".

It is hard to think of any town which should

meet such a description other than Monemvasia.

It could offer Manuel, who seems to have been without

even his personal guard, the garrison, which it had

always sustained. It had the impressive natural de-

fense to be considered impregnable and the fortifi-

cations which must have been equally impressive. My"

stras, the other of the two cities proposed by histo-

rians for identification with the city where Manuel

took refuge, lacked certainly the natural defense as

well as a local garrison which is specifically men-

tioned 2
by Kantakouzenos.

The support given by the Monemvasiotes to the Kan-

takouzenoi may explain the burial in Monemvasia of a

Kantakouzenos who had been Emperor as a text of the 16th

century informs us : "... gnati poli Cantacozini evasi-

lepsan, que apo quinous tous vasilef ehi enan thamenon

is ton goulan tis Monovasias is tin Odiitrian eclisian

Omorfi% one wonders if it refers to John VI who died

3
in the More a.

1
Cantacuzene, 111,88-89.
2
-, - ..:
Za)cythinos, Despotat, 1,99-100.
3 4789, "-'REB, 9
V. Laurent, "Le Vaticanus Latinus
(1951), 70-71; Nicol, Kantakouzenos, no. 22, p. '57-, n. 139.
 5.1380-1460. The Peloponnese under the Palaeologoi

I. Palaeologos-Mamonas

In the Funeral oration which Emperor Manuel II

composed in memory of his brother Theodore, it is

stated that, when Manuel Kantakuzenos, the ruler

of the Peloponnese, died childless, he was succeeded

by his brother Matthaios "an exceedingly kind man, of

1
higher rank and older than his deceased brother".

There is no hint anywhere in the text either that Mat-

thaios's rule displeased the imperial family or was

against their wishes or that it was meant to be a tem. -

porary appointment pending the arrival of the actual

successor, Theodore Palaeologos and it is possible

f
that even before, the death of his brother Matthaios

had taken part in governing the Peloponnese, after

he settled there with his family in 1361.2

1
Manuel II PalaO-ologus, "Funeral' Oration, ed.
J. Chrysostomides, CFHB XXVI (Thessaloniki, -1985),
114-15,11.13-15; ed. S. P. Lampros, HaXcLLoX6yCLCL XCLC
IICXOnOVVnCFLaRdL, 111,37. On the. death of Manuel Kanta-
kouzenos: Schreiner, 'Yleinchroniken, 1,243,11,323;
Nicol, Kantakouzenos, 119,127; Zakythinos, Despotat, I,
112,114,445.

2
Nicol, Kantakouzenosr 91jJ18-19; -Zakythinos, De-
1,339, R. -J. Loenertz, "Pour 11histoire du T-65-
potat,
loponn8se au XIVe si6cle (1382-1404), "'Byzantina et .
Franco-Graeca, I (Rome, 1970), 230, rhrysostomides,
Funeral Oration, 15-16,114 n. 35,, believe the arrangement
temporary. Cf. Rubio y Liuch, ' D. O. C., no. 379,
was only
p. 460.
 254

Several lines in the Epitaphios are dedicated to

one of the two sons of Matthaios, who had followed

him to the Morea; his father had ceded him "fortresses"

and he, having an army and in alliance with Latins

and Turks, rebelled against his father, who found

1
himself in a difficult position. At this point, how-

ever, the Emperor, perhaps considering the events ve-

ry well known and very unpleasant, omits the sequel,

as do all contemporary*sources, and we must assume

that a damnatio memoriae was imposed concerning this

person and that that is the reason for the lacuna in

the information on the events in the*Peloponnese fol-

lowing the. death of Manuel Kantakouzenos up to the

-

arrival of Theodore Palaeologos who succeeded Matthai-

os. This must be the reason also why the name of the
2
rebel is omitted.

Funeral'Oration, 114-15,11.15-17,116-17,11.
17-24; L amp ros, Epitaphios, 37,39. On Matthaios's
sons: Nicoll Kantakouzenos, 118,121-22,157-60.
2
is omitted
It in the Epitaphios and in other
sources that refer to the rebellion, e. g. Demetrius
C.ydones, Correspondance, ed. R. -J. Loenertz, II (Stu-
di e Testi, 208) (Vatican City, 1960), no. 241, pp.
144-45; "Res Gestae Theodori loann. f. Palaeologi.
Titulus metricus A. D. 1389, " ed. R. . Loenertz,
,
EEBE, 25 (1955), 207-10, The damnatio memoriae might
also explain certain difficulties in tracing the ge-
nealogy of the Kantakouzenoi after Matthaios's sons:
cf. D. M. Nicol, "The Byzantine Family-of Kantakouzw-
nos. Some addenda et corrigenda, " DOP, 27 (1973), 312-
313.
 255

John, the elder of Matthaios's two sons, held

the title of despot even before their departure from

Constantinople in 1361 and therefore, being more qua-

lified to claim the rule of the Peloponnese, could lo-

1
gically be identified as the rebel. This opinion is

supported by the existence-of his portrait in a con-

temporary icon, originally belonging to a-monastery

of the area of Tzaconia, in which John is pictured at

the age he must have been at the time of Manuel Kanta-

kouzenos's death, bearing. thegarments of a despot-ru-

2
ler of an independent area. The region which the re-

bel had been given by his father to rule, before he

claimed the rule of the whole of the Byzantine Pelopon-

nese is hard to identify, the origin, however, of the

icon from Tzaconia indicates the eastern Peloponnese.

Since the rebel's forces included a local army,

1
brother
His was a sebastocrator. Nicol, ' EaLnta-
kouzenos, 118. G. T. Dennis, The'reigri*of Manuel II..
Palaeologus in Thess'aloriica, ' 1382-1387 Corientalia
Christiana Analecta 159) (Rome, 1960T, 116 n. 40
and Chrysostimides, *Funeral' Oration, 114 n. 37, ac-
cept the identificatIon -the of rebel with Despot John.
Zakythinos, Despotat, 1,117-18, following Hopf,
Geschichte, 11,13; Laurent, Vaticanus Latinus, 85,
prefer Sebastocrator Demetrios. Nicol, ' Kantakouzenos,
157-60, thinks there is not enough evidence for either
view.
2 "L'effige
G. Gerola, del Despota Giovanni Can-
tacuzeno, " B, 6( 1931), 379-87; M. Theocharis, "IIcLvcx-
yCcx h 'Ap-r6-xwcy-rd, La Beata Vergine delle Grazie, "
'ApXaLOXOYLU *E mispCc. (1953-54), 253-54. Cf. Ps. Ko-
dinos,, ' Trait6 des offIces, ed. J. Verpeaux (Paris,
1966), 507,333.
 256

which could have been composed of Tzacones and since

Tzaconia was Monemvasia's territory the region could

1
have been Monemvasia. The relations of the Monemva-

siotes with the Kantakouzenoi, as we have seen, were

excellent and consequently it is possible that they

might have accepted a Kantakouzenos as their governor.

It is unclear, however, when could Matthaios have

ceded Monemvasia to his son and, if the cession happen-

ed before Matthaios succeeded his brother in Mystrds,

on what authority.

The task of the reconciliation of 'the rebel with

his father was undertaken by the elderly ex-Emperor

and grandfather of the rebel John Kantakouzenost who

set out for the Peloponnese as soon as the situation

in the capital allowed, when, that is, he was releas-

ed from jail along with other members of the imperial

family, who had fallen victims of the antagonism be-

tween the Venetians and the Genoese and the upheaval

2
caused by Andronikos IV. The ex-Emperor's journey to

the Peloponnese is mentioned in a letter that Demetrios

1
Funeral Orati: on,. 117, 1.21 "Trov 9TtLXCOPCG)V" is,
.
however, given a more general sense and is not relat-
ed to the army in the translation; Lampros, Epitaphi-
os, 39.
2
Funer al Oration, 16,111 11.14-16; Loenert: z,
pour 1'hitoire, , 231-32; Nicol, 'Kantakouzenos, 91-92;
Nicol, ' 1261-1453,289-93.
 257

Kydones addressed to Matthaios Kantakouzenos. He ex-

presses the wish for a rapid improvement of the situ-

ation there, "cxmXtwc vLtv TtcL-rp6g eCaTj-youiitvou rdL U-

1
OVTCL, OCLCYLXtQ)Qbt utoO aulmovoiDvrorg". As has already
2
been pointed out, Kydones uses a parallel which would

require the second part of the phrase to refer to a

son of Matthaios bearing a royal title. Consequently,,

because Matthaios had no such son, it has been accept-

ed that the reference. concerndd Theodore Palaeologos,

who finally succeeded Matthaios. If he was not the "king

son" he was a "king's son". However, the identification

with Theodore, apart from not fitting properly in*. Ky-

dones's parallel, is out of context with the rest of

the letter. On the contrary the title that the elder

son of Matthaios bore allowedhim to be addressed as

3
,,OcLOtXe6C,,. on this assumption several other points

of the letter,. which remained obscure if they concern-

ed Theodore, are clarified, since they refer to the rebel

4
and the efforts to reconvert him.

Kydones, Correspondance, II, no. 241, p. 145,

11.42-43.
2
Loenertz, Pour 11histoire, 233.
3
Ps. Kodinos, Verpeaux, 307.
4
In the same, letter, "O"c TEapdL at 6poLli6v a6 jiv
h8ovfig LILTEXAceL (pcLveCC, cx6T6g 66 xaX6v cyd 8ECL OCCLTV
TEp6c o'v Tv dpeTv 6TZL6CCECTCLL", P. 145,11.43-45,
there was no need for Theodore to offer guarantees
for his virtue. Also "hjiepoU11d'vwV 116v CYOU R6KX(p 'uUbv
TEOXCIICG)V S6VO06VT(OV 66 T&5v oCxUcov". establishes a re-
lation between the rebels and the relatives which ma-.
kes sense if it refers to Despot Johnr p. 144,11.22-
23. The ambiguity, however, in Kydones's letter deldom,
allows for identifications: Loenertz, Pour l' hi-
safe
toire, 234 n. 4.
 258

Despot Theodore, as Manuel recalls in the Epita-

phios, had set out from the Capital for the Pelopon-

nese, without army, provisions or money, relying for

I
support on his grandfather and uncle. When, however,

the ship brought him there, the situation he was faced

with was extremely difficult, since his grandfather

had died and the rebels were constantly gaining

2
ground. Theodore is first mentioned as Despot of

Mystras in March 1384, in a decision of the Venetian

Senate allowing the castellan of Coron Pietro Grimani

to accept the donation by the Despot of nothing less

than the "terra di Malvasia". The precise reasons which

led to the choice of this particular region to be of-

3
fered to Grimani are not clear. It ig a fact that the

castellan of Coron. was a person, trusted by the Palaeo! -

logoi. He had helped them earlier, when they were in

difficulties and still had the means and perhaps the

Funeral Oratlon, 112-13,11.5-15; Lampros, E-

pitaphios, 35.
2-
Schreiner, Kleinchroniken, 1,69-70,11,325-
26; Nicol, ' Kantakouzenos, 91-92; Loenertz, Pour 11hi-
stoire, 233 The date of Theodore's arrival, as accept-
ed, is base on the identification in Kydones' s let,
ter mentioned above.
3 38, fol. 107v ; F...
ASV, Senato, Misti, -'-Thiriet,
R6aestes des d6lib6rationsdu'S6natde Venise'concer-
nant la Romanie (Paris, 1958-61), 1, no. 668; Gerola,
L, ' effige, 385 n. 2; Dennis, The reign, 117 n. 45. U-
sually the facts of 1384 are confused with those of
1391-94.
 259

1
will to do it again. The fact that Theodore offered

Monemvasia to Grimani and the disagreement in the

dates given for his arrival by the sources, i. e. va-

rious Short Chronicles, causes many doubts whether

Theodore managed to reach Mystras as early as it is

2
generally accepted. Most probably he tried to dis-

embark in Monemvasia, which was on the side of Despot

John and the rebels and failed. Instead he found re-

fuge in Coron, where Grimani the old friend of the

Palaeologoi was castellan. In gratitude towards him

and at the same time in order to punish the rebellious

city, he ceded it to Grimani and the Senate allowed

him to accept the offer. There is no information con-

cerning the consequences of these decisions; it is

only certain that Monemvasia was not occupied by the

3
Venetians.

It is usually accepted that the resistance of Mo-

nemvasia against Theodore was instigated by the archon

Following orders from Venice, however, and not

on his own initiative. on Grimani,. C,.. Maltezou, "0 Oc-
cni6c -roG tV KWVOTCLVTLvoun6XEL Beve-rolu ]3cL*CXou (1,268-.
1453) (Athens, 1970),, 118.
2
I. e. 1382: Schreiner, Kleinchroniken, I, 233t
11,324-25; Loenertz, Pour 1'histoire, 230-34; Chryso-
stomides, ' Funeral Oration, 16,113 n. 33.
3 in any source
It does not appear as: being under
Venetian rule.
 260

Mamonas. This opinion is not based on any evidence

and the known facts are not enough to support the hy-

pothesis that Mamonas was already in power when Theo-

dore arrived in the Peloponnese and that he joined

the rebels at that time, in consequence of which Monem-

vasia was offered toGrimani. Mamonas is mentioned in

the sources as having ruled Monemvasia, but it is not

defined precisely when he assumed the rule, which was

withdrawn from him by Theodore shortly before 1394.1

Chalkokondyles, *Who mentions him in relation to the

events of 1394, does not give any information except

his Monemvasiot surname but the Chronicon Maius goes
into more detail. It mentions that his name was Paul,
that his father had ruled Monemvasia since many years

and that he succeeded him "on the orders of the Empe-

ror". Furthermore that he considered Monemvasia as his

fief because of the long period during which his famii-

ly had 2
ruled over the city. At another point in the

Chronicon Maius there is an indirect reference to an

archon of Monemvasia called Mamonas and the authentic

text of Sphrantzes is almost identically repeated. In

this extract Sphrantzes referring to the death of his

sister and her husband Gregory Palaeologos Mamonas,

This view is based on Hopf, *Geschichte, 11,56,

and it is not based on any evidence: zakythinos, ' Despo-
tat,. Dennis The reign, 118., Loenertz, Pour V
-I,. -125;. ..
histoire,, 292.. and. Chrysostomides, Funeral Oration, 142-43
n. 69 leave room for certain d6-ubts.
2
Chalkokondyles, Darkb, 1,74-75; ps. phrantzes, Gre-
Grecu, 248.
 261

defines the latter as the son of the "megas dux" and

'
sometime lord of Monemvasia and the surroundings.

In the Chronicon Maius, as usual, the two references

are not correlated. There is no doubt, however, '-that

they concern the same person and at the point where

the text has Paul one should suspect one of the fre-

quent corruptions and read the word Palaeologos.

In the Epitaphios Manuel recalls that "certain noble-

men who... were against us ... were related to us by

blood; they had enjoyed no small honours, and they

had taken an oath of their own free will but they

...
took offence, without having been wronged in any way
2
whatsoever... 11 Even if one supports that this menti-

on applies to more than one "noblemen", it is certain

that it, concerns also Palaeologos-Mamonas, who appa-

rently owed his honours and offices to Manuel and The-

odore personnally. Consequently it would seem unlikely

that Mamonas was in office before March 1384. When The-

odore arrived in the Peloponnese Despot John must. have

1
Sphrantzes, Grecu, 6; Ps. Phrantzes, Grecu, 198.
On begas duxInot much is known during this period.
Possibly it was only an honorary title: Ps. Kodinos,
Verpeaux, 167; Ahrweiler, 'Mer, does not refer to it at
this late period. Cf. Zakythinos, Despotat, 11,98 n. 6,
106; Brehier, Institutions, 340-42. on the family : A.
Meliarakis, OCX0'Y&VCLCL MCLLCO'Vd (Athens, 1902) ; PLP, nos.
16574-16579'. -

r c (lv8per-..
C:'Vel: r
rL V:. xaW, hlL6)v tdLXCMCLV
IIPOC"JXO'VTE: C CTMV hllrVXCLO*OLZjla*ET5 TEeTt6vOacrL nap'hliav...
-rLUfic datXaucrav 075 OULUPdg! .. 6PROUC 6)(OUGCOUC TECLP6-
CYXOV... TEPOaXeXP06XaaLV A6LXnll6VOL jln6'6TLOOV" Funeral
oration, 125 11-24-27,127 1-1. Cf. pp. 124-11-6.
 262

still been alive and Monemvasia on his side. The

threat of its cession to the Venetians must have dri-

ven the Monemvasiotes to attempt for their part a re-

conciliation with the imperial family and consequently

the cession. was dropped. At this time, after March

1384 a person of common acceptance, as Palaeologos-

Mamonas was, assumed, with the support of Despot Theo-

dore Palaeolbgos and theImperial family, whose rela-

tive he was, the rule of Monemvasia. The Chronicon

Maius mentions him as the successor of his father,

but it is possible that the name of Despot John, if

indeed he had assumed the rule of'MoneravasIa, is missing

on account of the damnatio memoriae. The oaths, of al-

legiance'. of. -.Mamonas, as Manuel recites, were soon for-

gotten and, following the example of other archons of

the Peloponnese, he joined in the rebellion against

Theodore. The situation for him was continuously dete-

riorating, since-as the Latin archbishop of Argos re-

ported one year-later, all the Despot's "barons" were

1
in rebellion against him.

By July 1391 Theodore had managed to gain some

control and must have had hopes that the whole of the Pe
2
loponnese would soon be pacified. His intense
-

I
Rubib y Lluchy D. O. C., no. 574, p. 612,11.
117-18, Chrysostomides; Funeral Oratim, 17-18.
2
Loenertz, Pour 1'histoire, 236-40.
 263

diplomatic activity must have outwitted the archon of

Monemvasia Mamonas and led to the latter's overthrow.

Mamonas later complained that Theodore had used "insult,

I
dishonesty and shame" to seize the power from him.

On the other hand the civil war which had been going

on for ten years had no doubt exhausted the population

and brought heavy economic repercussions, which the

Monemvasiotes had absolutely no reason to want to per-

petuate. The dating by a recently published Short Chro-

nicle of an argyroboullon issued by Theodore in the

year 1391-2 shows that the negotiations must have led

to an agreement by that date and in confirmation the

Despot issued the document, in which he renewed all the

old privileges, offering furthermore pardon to those

who supported the rebels by givng them the chance of

2
an amnesty.

The text of Theodore's argyroboullos horismos has

survived in a later copy. it is written in a simple,

almost common language, very different from the

3
scholarly style of the older documents. It has no

1
Ps. Phrantzes, Grecu, 198,11.11-13. Cf. Chal-
kokondyles, Dark8,75,11.3-5.
2
Schreiner, Kleinchroniken, I, no. 32/28, p.
233,11,346-48; ScHreiner, npov6liLcL, 161-64.
3r
From ms Kutlumus 220, fols. 191V-193 First
.
edition: S. P. Lampros, "Moveji0aaLwTLxd,, " Ilapvagg6Q,
7 (1883), 473-76. Aeferences in the text are from
Miklosich-MUller, V, 171-74.
 264

prooimion and starts by citing the beneficiaries,

who are all Monemvasiotes, those wanting to return to

Monemvasia and those already there and furthermore

anybody else wanting to come to the city and settle,

whoever he might be and wherever he might come from.

The privileges granted are, complete eleutheria

and akatadoulosia for their persons, their land and

their belongings and complete exemption. from the pay-

ment of komme: kion in Monemvasia as well as in any ci-

ty or kastron under the rule of the Despot. Further-

more exemption from any tax during the fairs held ye-

arly in the cities and kastra in the domain of the

despot, exemption from any other tax existing at the

time of the documentis issue or which would be levied

in the future. Neither the kephale nor the archon or

any other official has the right to impose corv6es or

any other burden such as mageireia or opsonion, nor to

seize any products like meat, wine or fish, but can

only buy them at current prices. Furthermore their

succeeding heirs will be free to inherit without re-

striction all their belongings, present or future,

movable or real. Finally they are exempted from the

kritikon, while the establishment of a sekreton in

2
the city will try all cases.

I
Miklosich-MUller, V, 171, ll.. 1-5,
2
Miklosich-MUller, V, 171,11.5-11,172,11.1-12.
 265

After citing the exemptions the Despot continues

referring again to the rights of settlement in Monemva-

sia. Those wanting to leave have the permission to

go anywhere else and sell or exchange their belongings

and in general to do anything they want. If someone :

from somewhere else wants to come and settle in Monem-

vasia, whatever his condition, even if he is a serf,

he can decide concerning his property anything he

wants, whether to sell, to donate, to exchange or to

keep, whatever it may be, without obligation of tax or

duty. And they too are eleutheroi and akatadoulotoi,
inviolable, like I
the afore mentioned. The privilege

of unrestricted settlement in Monemvasia does not

cover the inhabitants of the region of the following

places: Vatica, Tzaconia, Molaoi, Esopos, Helos, Hie-

rakion, Apideai, Serafon, Tzitzina, Rheon, Prastos,

Kastanitza, Haghios Leonidas. The inhabitants of the-

se regions must first ask the Despot who will decide

2
on each case individually. (Pl. 2)

The document ends with a. provision allowing that

those who have comitted an offence may find refuge

in Monemvasia, no one having the right to stop them

1
Miklosich-Milller, V, 172,11.12-24.
2
Miklosich-MUller,, V, 172,11.24-29; the con-
tents are repeated p. 172,11.29-35, p. 173.11.1-32.
 266

or prosecute them unless they have been concerned with

treasonable acts against the Despot, the region where

he rules or his army. But even in these cases they

can avoid prosecution if they can produce a document

in their favour issued either by the Despot or the

1
Metropolitan or the Despot's confessor.

The last document granting privileges to the

city of Monemvasia to be issued before this argyro-

boullon was the chrysobull of 1336 by Andronikos III,

which granted the city the maximum of privileges that

it had ever enjoyed. The comparison of the two docu-

leads 2
ments to several remarks. The argyroboullon

which does not mention any other older privileges,

by granting eleutheria and akatadoulosial. renews two

of the oldest privileges of the. Monemvasiotes, eleu-

theria and exkousseia, akatadoulosia being equivalent

3
to the latter. Futhermore it grants total exemption
4
from the kommerkion as did the chrysobull of 1336.

The tax exemptions that follow are completely in line

with those the chrysobull provided for the whole of

5A
the Peloponnese. special reminder is addressed to

I
Miklosich-MUller, V. 173,11.32-33,174,11.
1-7.
2
Above, pp. 217-29,
3
Above, 192-95. On akatadoulosia, Zakythinos,
Despotat, 11,183.
4
Above, *217-222.

5 Above, 226-27.
 267

the authorities of the city, the kephale, the archon

and the other officials not to impose any duty. In

the 1336 document there is a similar provision for-the

1
state officials. In the horismos the exemption of

the property of the Monemvasiotes from death duties

is 2
which not mentioned in the chrysobull reappears.

Concerning justice. the horismos provides for the exem-

ption of the inhabitants from the relevant tax, the

kritikon, and for the establishment of a sekreton in

the city, which would try all cases concerning Monem-

vasia . Thus another privilege of Monemvasia is attest-

ed, a certain judicial independence. This privilege

may have already existed in a different form as is

shown by the .
exis tence in the chrysobull of a clause

providing that the cases of the Monemvasiotes were -

not to be judged by the authorities of Constantinople

but by the imperial sekreton. Possiblyr as in the case

of the kommerkion, the kritikon was being collected

by the 3
city authorities.

In the chrysobull one does not find the detailed

clauses concerning the effort to attract new inhabi-

tants to the city, which is clearly evident from the Vc--)

1
Above, 229.
2
it war, mentioned in the chrysobull of 1284:
above, 192-93.
3 194-95.
Above,
 268

first eve .n paragraph of the argyroboullon. Even if

it is not easy to evaluate from the contemporary

sources the nature and extent of the confusion during

the civil war, the*agonized efforts to attract inha-

bitants demonstrate the devastation and decay. The

horismos concerns the inhabitants of Monemvasia, but

according to it those too who had left the city and

were interested in coming back,, as well as anybody

else of whatever origin interested in settling there

are considered inhabitants. It is impressive that

they could have even been serfs. So urgent was the

need for a quick revival of the city that the right

of settlement was given under certain condi tions even

to persons accused of involvement in acts of treason.

However this clause must have had an appeasing effect

by limiting the attempts for revenge as also the clau-

1
se on complete freedom to depart.

Restrictions in the free migration to the city

of Monemvasia were imposed on one category only, the inha-

bitants of the series of settlements enumerated in de-

tail in the argyroboullon. For them the Despot himself

would examine each case separately and give the ne-

cessary permission. This perplexing measure has caused

2
many strange theories. If, however, one traced on

1
Schreiner, lIpov6lLL(X, 163.
2
Schreiner, Ilpov6llLCL, *
-163.
 269

the map this series of settlements the position of which,

with the exception of mysterious Tzaconia, is known

he would observe that they f ormed a continuous chain,

which apparently delimites the territory of Monemvasia.

(pl. 2) It is known that most of these towns were de-,

fended by castles. So it must have been security rea-

sons at a time when the Turkish threat was nearing

that imposed the exemption of the inhabitants of the-

se particular "kastra" from moving freely to the city

of Monemvasia. In this manner an adequate number of

men fit for the garrisons could be secured. Otherwise

there was a danger that they, lured by the safety of

the rock and the favourable provisions for the

settle-
2
ment on it, would abandon the frontiers unguarded.
If, as we have supposed, the limits of the territory

of Monemvasia had advanced towards the western coast

of the Peloponnese during the 14th century it seems

that af ter the end of the upheaval caused by the re-
bellion of John Kantakouzenos, they had shrank to

their older position.

1
The name of Tzaconia here-seeds to indicate a
town, a "kastron" and not the region with the same
name. Caratzas, 'Tzacones, 123,349-53, proposes the
identification with Castel Ranpan, which was situat-
ed between Vatica and Asopos.
2
The events that followed showed thateither they
were not efficiently guarded or they capitulated to*. "-,
the Turks following instructions by the Despot.
 270

The strategic importance of these kastra was soon

to be proved. After his overthrow Palaeologos-Mamonas

fled to the dreaded Sultan of the Turks Bajezid. In

his court the new conspiracy started brewing; it in-

cluded other participants, most probably among them

the vicar of the Navarrese Pierre de Saint Superan

and the cousin of Despot Theodore, John son of Andro-

1
nikos IV, pretender to the imperial throne. They

"goaded each other-to evil acts", recalls Manuel in

2
the Epitaphios, and finally, at the end of 1393,

convinced Bajezid to cross from Asia Minor to Macedo-

nia and summon Theodore to his camp in Serres. He,

knowing Bajezid's dark intentions and the danger of

being murdered so that the Sultan could take his ci-
ties, thought nevertheless that he had to go. In

Serres he found his brother Manuel and other Christi-

an rulers, gathered by Bajezid who had in mind to

kill themall tc? gether? The conspirators were also
there, inciting the Sultan against them, particularly

1
Loenertz, Pour 1"histoire, 242-44.
2,
TEcLp6Euvov 6LXXAXouQ- np6c; -vdL naxdL": Funeral' Ora-
'tion, 133,11.1-3.
3
Funeral Oration, 133, l.. 13-, -. 137,1.15.
 271

John VIII against Manuel.. and Mamonas against Theodore.

Mamonas accused Theodore of having seized Monemvasia

"by force and with offence and dishonour and shame

...
chased him thither" Theodore found himself prison-
.2
er of Bajezid, who threatened to kill him demanding

from him his most important cities, and he was forced

3
to cede Monemvasia and its surrounding territory.

It is certain. --that the surrender of Monemvasia had

not taken place up to March 1394. Shortly before the

Monemvasiotes appealedto the Venetian authorities of

Euboea seeking to surrender their city to Venice.

This action apparently was an initiative of the citi-

zens of Moneivasia. It is not known whether the Turks

were still on their way or had already reached the

city demanding its surrender. The fact is that, despi-

te the original consent of the bailo of Negroponte,

the Senate, terrified by the Turkish threat, declined

"tenutam et possessionem" of Monemvasia and the city

was occupied by the Turks, a "vain ransom", according

4
to the Epitaphios-

I
Loenertz, Pour 1.1histoire, 243-44.
2
Ps. Phrantzes, Grecu, 198,11.12-13.
3-
Funer*al'Oration, 143,11.13-17,145,11.1-2,
142,146.
4
ASV, Senato, Misti, 42, fol. 155,5,111,1394;
Thiriet, R6gestes, 1, no,. 844, pp. 200; Loenertz,
Pour V histoire 240-45; Chrysostomides, * Funeral: Ora-
,
tion, 142-43. n. 69; p. 143,11.15-17:. "MovelloacrCa -y6,o
n6n CCXTITZTO X15-UPOV. IldL-rCLLO'V 8o0E: VcycL Ttp6Q TO% TC6PLE TEo-
XLXVCOLC 0 00"r (5XCYOLC; 015TE: E)6VCL11L-V 8X(yL)CyL-V"
(pai6XTyV
.
 272

There are many questions concerning the surrender

the details of which are unknowrLV? hy didthe garrisons sta-

tioned on the frontier towns not offer a resistance

to the Turks.. as, had been Theodore's intention; why

did the city which could withstand a long siege sur-

render; if there were perhaps local feuds; - if Mamonas

had followers. who--: helped him and the Turks and if

did he really return toresume the government. Finally

if the surrender has not perhaps been part of a plan

contrived by Theodore who may have thought that if the

city was occupied without bloodshed the recovery would

be easier.

The adventures of Monemvasia lasted only a few

months. Theodore escaped and reached the Peloponnese

in order to organize his resistance. He must have

found cooperation'from the inhabitants of the region

of Monemvasia-and it as fairly
recovered easily
thanks to the speed with which the despot acted. By

July 1394 only the city of Monemvasia was still in

Turkish hands. To press the surrender Theodore asked

Venice for help. This time the Turkish threat had di-

minished and the Serenissima did not refuse. The Ve-

netian galleys were ordered to blockade Monemvasia

and the capitulation was achieved "with a profit",

as Manuel quotep, becausp the Byzantines captured

 273

1
quite a few Turkish soldiers.

After the fall of Mamonas the family of Eudaemo-

noiannis rose in power and in the second decade of

the 15th century Nicolaos Eudaemonoiannis is mention-

ed as the richest and most powerful man in the Pelo-

ponnese. This fact leaves no doubts about his excel--!

lent relations with the Despot and points to his pos-

sible involvement in Mamonas's overthrow, whom he

might have succeeded as archon of Monemvasia.. *.His

wealth is an indication that the commercial activity

continued perhaps in spite of the intervening con-

fusion. 2

11 The careers of Photios.. And of Eudaemonoiannis

..

During the last years of the 14th century Theodo-

re started negotiating for the sale of Byzantine lands,

Corinth in 1397 and later in 1399 the. whole of the

Byzantine possessions in the Peloponnese, with the ex-

ception of Monemvasia, in the area of which he had

ASV, Senato, Misti, 43, fol. 18,24. VII. 1394;

Thiriet, 'R6gestes, I, no.,. 858, p. 203; ' Funeral Ora
tion, 152-53,1.16,158-59,1.18; Loenertz, Pour 11
histoire, 246-47,249-51.
2 has been
It assumed, whout evidence, that
Hosios Leontios of Monemvasia belonged to the family
of Palaeologos-Mamonas: Av. Papadopoulos, '0 "AyLoC
AE;6, v'rLOC 1TCLX(XLoX6yog McLWvft, (1377-1452) 'H jlov TcL-
.
ELcLpXC3, v ACYLCLXECCLQ (1620-1940) ( Thessaloniki, 1940)
,
17,22-26. Cf. * PLP nos. 928 and 7296.
 274

1
settled. The negotiations culminated in the agreement

with the Knights of Saint John, to which the inhabi-

tants of Mystras reacted violently obliging the De-

spot to annul it. Theodore remained in Monemvasia

even after the Turkish danger had been averted and

Byzantine Morea bought back at least up to 1404.2

In January 1400 Emperor Manuel, leaving the run-

ning of the Empire to his nephew John VII, started
his long journey to the West. The Empress their
with
children remained in the Peloponnese during the Empe-

ror's absence, in Theodore's care. In the event of a

Turkish advance the Venetians had them
guaranteed
safe conduct to Venetian 3
territory, Since Mystras
had already been sold to the Knights Saint John,
of
the empress settled in the area Monemvasia
of where

Chrys0sto .mides, 'Funeraloration, 20-21,166

n. 93,168 n. . 98,172 n. 103,176 n. 107,177 n. 108;
Loenertz, Pour 11histoire, 254-60; C. Maltezou, "Ot t-
CYTOPLXdQ TICPLTEtTCLCQ Tfig KopCvOou crTdL TtXn ToG IA' at-
8VCL. ll E6141CLUTa, 3 (1973)t 1-26; J. Chrysostomides,
"Corinth 1394-97: Some new facts, " BuCCLVTLVdL,. 7 (1975)
83-110.

2
Loenertz, Pour Phistoire, 261-64; Chrysosto-
mides, ' Fun_eral Oration, 22-24,182 n. 110 and 111.
Concerning Vatica, which is mentioned as having been
occupied by the Knights of Saint John, one sh ould pro-
bably be '
identified
read Vassilopotamo, which could with
Skala, Leake, "Travels, I, 196.
3
Schreiner, * Xleirichroniken, 1,184,285,11,
365; J. W. Barker, Manuel: II'Paleol'ogus'(1391-1,425)
A study in late Byzantine Statesmanship (New Brunswick-
New Jersey, 1979), 167-71; CRrysostomides, Funeral
oration, 162 n. 88,165 n. 90 and 91.
 275

1
Theodore was.

During Manuel's absence three of his children,

his son Constantine and two daughters, died in Laco-

nia and Theodore issued an argyroboullon to provide

that, under the care of the Metropolitan of Monemva-

sia Akakios, masses would be held in their memory

twice weekly. After his return to the capital in

1405 Manuel issued a chrysobull, by way of thanks to

the metropolis of Monemvasia, granting to it the "cho-

2
ra" of Helikovounon with its tower and all its region.
Helikovounon has been identified with present day Da--

phni, in the plain of Sparta, not very far from My-

3
stras. However, apart from the fact that Daphni was

called Lykovounon and not Helikovounon, it ts certain

that the Empress would not settle in the--. area of

1
ASV, Senato, Misti, 46, fol. 83V 14. V. 1403;
,
Thiriet, R6gestes, II, no. 1114, p. 39; H. Noiret,
Documents ing-d-Fits pour se'rvi'r, a*llhistoire*de'la'domi-
nation v6nitienne 'en Cr&te de 1380a*1485 -aris,
FP. 1892),
1-4-5.
2
Sphrantzes, Grecu, 4 11,18-20; P. Schreiner,
"Chronologische Untersuchungen zur Familie Kaiser Ma-
nuels II, " BZ, 63 (1970), 290-93. The arguments of Bar-
ker, Manuel 11,475,494-96, are not clear. The docu-
ment exists in a 16th century copy in ms Esc. Gr. E-I-12.
First edition by Miller, ' Escurial, pp. 65-66. D81ger,
Regesten, no. 3307. *Refe es from Miklosich-MUller,
V, 168-70.
3
Bees, '0 qMx6tcvoc XpLcrr6r_,, 234 n. 4. Lykovounon
is found in the chrysobull of 1314 in the limits of
the territory of Monemvasia with the plain of Sparta:
Miklosich-MUller, V, 160 1.4.
 276

of Sparta, which was under constant threat, but in a

safer district such as the area of Monemvasia, effe-

ctively guarded by its ring of castles along the fron-

tiers. The identification with Helika on the western

side of the-peninsula of Laconik6 proposed by the

first editor of Manuel's chrysobull, would be more

reasonable to accept, since most of the settlements

in conservative eastern Laconia have not changed either

1,
name nor place. Nearby stands the luxurious five

domed church of Geroumana, katholikon of an important

monastery-This 12th century monument could, as was.

already mentioned, be identified with the "imperial

and patriarchal monastery" dedicated to Archangel Mi-

chael, called "of Kontostephanos", which is known to

have existed in the area of Helikovounon and to have

been a dependency of the metropolis of Monemvasia,

and it may well be that the three royal children were

buried in this same monastery.

In the area where the Empress had settled we

might also seek the centre of some interesting intel-

lectual activities. At the end of the 14th century

1
Miller, ' Es*curi: al, 65. Recently the identifica"
tion of the town of Helikovounon with the site of Ge-
roumana and of the tower with a remote watch-tower
some kilometres away has been proposed: H. Dori, 'Tx5p-
yoQ uC=TLv6v xp6vcav" in 'I*EpeuvcL cyrAv 'EnCbaupo AL-
jvjpd, " rIAE- (1982) , 382-86. The chrysobull states clear-
ly, however that the tower was inside the town: Miklo-
sich- MUller, V, 169,11.10-11 and 24-25 and consequen-
tly Helikovounon cannot be identified with Geroumana.
 277

it is mentioned that at a monastery in the region of

Monemvasia there was an important school run by "Aka-

kios the Elderly", where, among other subjects, fo-

reign languages including the Slavonic were taught. It

is tempting to identify the monastery of Kontostepha-

nos which depended upon Akakios then metropolitan of

Monemvasia with the centre of these activities. The

importance of this activity was proved by a number

of prominent personalities in the early 15th century

1
who were educated in Monemvasia.

Photios, who became metropolitan of Russia was

educated in Monemvasia in the school which functioned

under the auspices of Akakios, where he learned the

slavonic languages. His precise date of birth is un-

known but must be placed before 1378.2 in 1408 he

was promoted to the particularly important and rich

1 *Tachiaos,
A. -E. "The Testament of Photius Mo-
nembasiotes, Metropolitan of Russia (1408-1431); Byzan-
tine Ideology in the XVth century Muscovy, "]yrtl'lome-
thodianum 8-9 (1984-85), 105; N. Sabatin, "W-rLoc,, "
,
XHE; M. Theocharis, ""0 jin-upoTEoXt-rng PwaCcig Ow-
-rLor_ xcLC 6 XEVrOUP'YVx6g cydxxog -rou, " Lectures by Mo-
nemvasiotikos Homilos, Monemvasia, August 1984.
2
XHE; H. Beyer manuscript notes for"Photius"
,
to appear in PLP, kindly offered before publishing.
He must have been, older than 30 years when he was
ordained a bishop. -R6gestes du Patriarcat, no. 3282.
 278

metropolitan See of "Kiev and all Russia". He was or-

dained in September of the same year and arrived in

Russia the following year. He remained in office un-

til 1433. In Russia Photios showed a remarkable acti-

vity for which he was proclaimed a saint of the Russi-

an Church. With great zest he worked for its unity.

He also played an important political role which is

reflected in his efforts to reconcile. the various con-

tenders for the hegemony of Russia and to increase

the influence of Byzantium. in a letter addressed to

him from Monemvasia, Isidore expresses the esteem and

admiration that he and his colleagues felt for his a-

chievements, noting among other things that he helped

the ruler of Russia with his courage at a moment of

great need. The letter could refer to the journey Pho-

tios made from Kiev to Moscow, where he arrived on

,
the 22 March 1410 to take care of the repairs. neces-

sary after the d amage the Metropolis had suffered. Pt

that time he also carried out talks with the ruler of

Jili during
Russia Vats which he arranged the marriage

of co--Emperor John VIII with Vassili's daughter

1
Anna.

1
Tachiaos, Photius, 88-91,96p 104-05,107;
W. Regel, -Analecta -
XHE; ' Beyer; M. Theocharis; Byzanti-
norussica (St. Petersbourg, 1891), pp. XLIX-L, 69-
71; Schreiner, Chronologische Untersuchungen, 294. Cf.
V. Laurent, "Le Tris6piscopat du Patriarche Matthieu
ler, " REB, 30(1972), 57.
 279

Photios also displayed important social activity

in the rather primitive Russian society. It was thanks

to his efforts that marriage whithin the church was

I
established in Russia. Widely cultured, himself a

writer of religious works, he showed great interest

in enriching the Metropolis with various literary

works. Some of the manuscripts he presented to Moscow

2
and Kiev still survive. To him belonged also two im-

portant treasures of the Russian Chrurch, his two li-

turgical sakkoi. The one, embroidered in gold, is a

masterpielce of Byzantine craftsmanship. It was ebroider-

ed in the Capital and presented to the Metropolis of

Russia by the young imperial couple whose marriage

3
Photios had arranged.

Photios made generous contributions to the Patri-

archate of Constantinople as well as to other founda-

4
tions in the Capital. Isidore's laudatory words ,

1,
XHE; M. Theocharis.
2
Vat. Gr-.. 394; Vat. Gr. 717; Ms. 284 in the col--
lection of the National Historical Museum, Moscow and
riM 284: Mercati, '*Isi'doro, 65 n. 3; B. L. Fonkid, "Gre-
ceskaja rukopis mitropolita Fotija, "' Drevnerus'skoe"is-
kusstvo. Rukopi'snaja kniga (Moscow, I-9-7-2T-, 189-95; Be-
yer.
3
M. Theocharis. Apparently the text of the Creed
which is embroidered in the sakkos was used to correct
the text used by the Russian Church 250 years later.
4
Tachiaos, Photius, 89 and n. 59.
 280

judging from contemporary Russian sources, are not mere

flattery. "... one praised your self-esteem, another

your mildness, another your leniency and the harmony

of your character, still another your seriousness

1
and the shrewdness of your sagacity... "

The comments Isidore made about Photios could

apply to another Monem,vasiot, who already has been

mentioned, Nicolaos Eudaemonoiannis. He too had friend-

ly relations with Isidore,, a letter of whose to him

still exists. Even though he handled ecclesiastical

matters also, his main activities were political. He

too had an excellent education, knew foreign langua-

ges and was, up to his death in 1423, a most competent

diplomat in the service of Emperor Manuel and his son,
Despot Theodore 11,2

His date of birth is unknown. He is first menti-

oned in 1406-07, when he dedicated to a church in the

3
region an Epitaphios embroidered possibly in Mystras.

1
Regel, 69,11.22-25. In spite of the fact
that Photios never held the See of Monemvasia its
Synodikon includes him among the prelates enumerat-
ed: Laurent, Synodikon, 132,. 11.11-15.
2
A. W. Ziegler, "Die restlichen vier unver6ffent-
lichten Briefe Isidors von Kiev, "'*OCP, 18 (1952) 139-
40.
3
Pauline Johnstone, ' The Byzantine Tradition*in
Church Embroidery (London, 71,77,121.
 281

The inscription which gives the date mentions a wife

and children of his. It has been accepted that it was

dedicated on the occasion of the assumption of the

rule of the Peloponnese by the young Despot Theodore

II. However the mournful image of the Epitaphios with

the troparion of Good Friday surrounding it would ra-

ther point to the possibility of it having been dedi-

cated on a more sad occasion, as-was the death of The-

odore I in June 1407.1

Theodore I was succeeded after his death by his

nephew and namesake, Manuel's son. Born in the last

years of the 14th century he was still a boy at the

time and even-though he-had already spent a few years

in the Peloponnese, it was obviously impossible for

him to rule single-handed, particularly as he had to

face the constant revolts of the local archons. The

Emperor hastened to the Peloponnese in order to sol-

d-ify his son's rule in November 1407.2 During his stay

1
The troparion of Good Friday runs along the bor-
der ending with the inscription "AbiaLr- -roO 8o6Xou -roO
ecoU NLxoXdLou ToG EO5cLLjiovoZcodLvvou 64m xat ouILDUp xaC
T8v T6%vcov aftoG &ItAv. NEToug ="':
Johnstone, Embroidery, (London, 1967), 121-22 and pictu-
re 99. Schreiner, Kleinchroniken, 1,246,11,387; Chry-
sostomides, Funeral Oration, 25 n. 55,230 n. 154.
2 'trIC. tQ MCLVOUAX 4IG)dVVTjV
(Isidore) VTj'YUPL'K6c E: 'RCLC
,
11CLXaLoX6youc, " nqXqLLoX6yeLcL xaC I1CXOnOVVTjaLaXdL, III,
164-65; Chrysostomides, ' Funeral'oration 30 n. 10,
,
31,244 n. 161.
 282

he entrusted-an experienced person with the guidance

of the young Despot. The person who undertook this

duty up to Manuel's following visit to. the Peloponne-

1
se in 1415 is not mentioned by the sources. In the

satire, however, "Descent to Hades", written by Maza-

ris in 1414-15, the hero is urged to find his luck

in the Peloponnese by securing the favours and prote-

ction of the mightiest and most influential and rich-

est person in the Peloponnese, none else than Eudaemo-

noiannis. "Besides all other blessings (e65aLj1OVCCLL)

...
of that land, you will get acquainted with that most

competent and profoundly gentle man, appropriately

called Eudaimon. He is powerfulhe is rich, he controls

many interests and he has an authority which none of

the dignitaries in the court of the Imperial Prince

can rival When you have met this eminent person,

stick to him and carry out his commands as you would

the Emperor's Keep telling him this story,. that wi-
...
thin a short time he is going to be the richest, the

noblest, the most celebrated of all the inhabitants

2
of that country... "

I
Zakythinos, ' Despotat, 1,166,348; Barker,, Ma-
nuel 11,276 n. 133. Cf. V. Laurent, ed. Les "M6mol'i-.-
res" du Grand Eccl6siarche*, deConstantinople Sylvestre
Syropoulos sur le concile de Florence (1438-1439)
(Concilium Florentinum. Documenta et Scriptores, B IX)
(Rome, 1971), p. 105 n. 8 and 9.
2
Mazaris, ' Journey to Hades 'or Interviews with
deadmeri about certain officials of the Imperial Court,
eds., J. N. Barry, M. J. Share, A. Smithies, L. G. We-
sterink (Buffalo, 1975) pp. 8,9,11.13-24. Cf. E. Trapp,
"Zur Identifizierung der Personnen in der Hades
des Mazaris, " JOB, 18 (1969), 97.
 283

Mazaris's satire does not leave much doubt as to

who ruled in 1414 along with the young Despot and

gives two aspects, ofthe character of Eudaemonoiannis.

He was "most competent" and "gentle man" but on the

other hand he was vain and prone to flattery. An im-

portant and rather surpising piece of, information

concerning him is'found in the subscription of a ma-

nuscript which belonged to him. The scribe notes in

1415-16 that the book was written at the expense and

with the care of the most glorious and beloved "crult-

ncvOep6Q" of the Emperor, kyr Nicolaos Eudaemonoian-

1
nis. According to this information his ambitions

were fulfilled in the best possible way with his close

relationship to the Emperor. If it was really so, the

wedding of-one-of-hi's children to one of the Emperor. 's

must have taken, place after 1414, otherwise Mazaris

would not have failed to hint at it, and before 1416,

when the note on the manuscript was written. It is no-

teworthy that during his mission in Constance. in

1416, Eudaemonoiannis is called "brother to the

I
G. de Andr6s, ' Catalogo de los' Codices' 'griego5 de
la: Real'Biblioteca de el Escorial, III (Madrid, 1967),
p. 26, ms T. 11.5 fol. 266v : "'EypdLpil T6 TicLp6v DL-
,
f3XCOV 5LdL CTUV6POVtflQ/ Rde btLjlCXCCCLQ TOO 6V5OEOTdLTOU XCLC
TtcpLTto0ATou/ oulinevOepob TOO &yeou TOO Da0LX&bQ XUPOG
NLROXdLOU/ TOO E66cLLtOVOLW(dLVV)OU? XeLPC 86 ETCQaVOU
TOO/ EUVCL6nVOO XCLC dPXOVTOQ T65V ROVTCLXCWV TflQ &YLWTdLTnQ/
TOO 8(. e)oO jieydATIC: 4Ex-KXTjcYta(cLQ) xcLC 8olicaTexou Acme6aL/
ljo-COLQ- tV ETEL aT7N'KTj' M... " Cf. G. Mercatj, ' No-
.
tizie di Procoro 'e Demetrlo Cidone, ' ManueleCaleca e
Teodoro Meliteniota edaltriappunti (Studi e Testi, 56)
(-Vatican City, 1931)-, 478-80, esp. 479 n.. 3.
 284

'
Emperor". In any case if he was so powerful, energetic

and wealthy Manuel would have every reason 'to f avour

such a relationship with him, but it is difficult to

define it more precisely. Three children of Eudaemo-

noiannis are mentioned in the sources, although he

may have had more, a daughter married to the son of

Paul Asan, father-in-law of Despot Demetrios Palaeo-

logos, and two sons, Andronikos and George, who later

was granted the office of mesazon, when Constantine

Palaeologos became despot 2

of the Peloponnese. Of the

marriages of his sons nothing is known, but as has

been. noted, the daughters of Manuel had died very young
before 1405. Another known daughter of his, illegitimate,

had 3
been married to the Genoese Hilario Doria.

To seek the link in the marriage of an unknown

daughter of Eudaemonoiannis to one of the Emperor's

1 *Loenertz,
R. -J. "Les Dominicains Byzantins
Th6odore et Antoine Chrysobergds et les n6gotiations
pour l'Union des ]Cglises Grecque et Latine de 1415 a
1430, " Byzantina 'et Franco'-Graeca, 11,95 n. 2.
2
Sathas, Doiz:uments 'In6dits, 1,117-18; Z_akythi-
nos, Depotat, 1,195,228; Thiriet, ' R6gestes, IIi'noi
1833, p. 193; Loenertz, Les Dominicains, 98; Historia
politica et patriarchica-Constantinopoleos, Bonn, 33; -;
PLP, nos. 6221,6223.
3
Barker, Manuel '11,158,474-75; Schreiner, Chro-
nologische UntersuchU-ng-en, 290-93.
 285

sons would mean to exclude John the eldest, who was

married at the time to Anna of Russia. Theodore mar-

1
ried at the age of 25 Cleopa Malatesta. Despite the

silence of the sources it is possible that this mar-

riage was not the first and that another marriage to

a daughter of Eudaemonoiannis had preceded it. The

fact that around 1415 Eudaemonoiannis had such close

relationship with the Despot and was so influential

would support such a view. in this case Eudaemonoian-

nis's daughter must have died before 1417, when the

2
marriage to Cleopa was arranged. It has been suggest-

ed that Eudaemonoiannis is called a cyujinevaep6g in

the manuscript because he was in loco parentis to

Cleopa Malatesta and Sophie of Montferrat, when he

accompanied them to Byzantium. But the arrangement

of the marriages took place a few years after the ma-

3
nuscript was written. The only other of the Emperor'

s sons who could have married a daughter of Eudaemono-

iannis is Andronikos, who in 1415 was around 15. it

is known that he was married and had a son who is

I
Zakythinos, Despotat, 1,188-89,351-52; Nicol,
1261-1453,346.
2
It could have been a betrothal, the actual mar-
riage not having taken place. Cf. A. Laiou, 11"0 OE:olj, 6r.
TflQ jivnaTeCaQ aT6 UxaTo -cpt-ro atd), =, " 'ApLpo= =6
Ntuo EDopC)vo, I (Rethymnon, 1986), p,.. 284.
3
Mazaris, eds. Barry etc, 101. Cf. Mercati, ' No-
tizie, 478-80, Loenertz, Les Dominicains, 95. The mar-
riage was arranged in 1417 and the manuscript was
written in 1415, when at least Anna of Russia was still
alive.
 286

mentioned in 1423 but nowhere is his wife men-

.
1
tioned.

In August 1415 after the death of Manuel Chry-

soloras Nicolaos Eudaemonoiannis departed heading the

Greek delegation to Constance. Possibly it was not

2
his first visit there. On his way, in February 1416,

he discussed in Venice the question of the defence

of the Isthmus, where the fortification works under

the personal supervision of the Emperor, had just

been completed. In Venice Nicolaos also-offered to me-

diate on behalf of the Emperor for peace with the
3
Hungarians. The Greek delegation reached Constance

on the 25th of March 1416. An eye-witness noted the

presence of an emissary of the Emperor of Greece, "a

brother 4
of hi s,,. Eudaemonoiannis was accompanied by

his son Andronikos. He did not stay in Constance only,

but together with another inperial delegate, Manuel

1
J. Tsaras, "La fin d'Andronic Paldologue der-
nierdespote de Thessalonique, " RESEE, 3 (1965), 431.
2
Loenertz, Syropoulos, 104-105; Dlger, Regesten,
3345; Loenerts, Les Dominicains, 94-100.
3
Thiriet, R6gestes, II, no. 1599, p. 140, Do"l-
ger, Regesten, nos. 3354,3355.
4
Loenertz, Les Dominicains, 95 n. 2.
 287

Philanthropenos, visited several European countries

and met various rulers in an effort to arouse their

interest in the growing Turkish threat and to form

and consolidate friendships and alliances. Some of

these journeys apparently took place while the Coun-

cil was still in progress, for it was long drawn out

'
and the Greek delegation grew impatient. In a letter

writt6n to Eudaemonoiannis'during this mission Isidore

follows his wanderings in Western Europe, from Venice

to Constance and thence to Paris, for talks with the

king of France afterwards to Britain and finally

.,
to Spain. This letter must have been written after

the summer 1416 and before 1417 when Pope Martin was

enthroned, because there is no reference to the honour

shown to Nicolaos by the audience granted to him soon

2
after Pope Martin's accession.

After Constance, in 1417, Eudaeomonoannis re-

turned to Byzantium bearing the various documents ad-

dressed to the Emperor, h$. s sons and the Patriarch is-

sued by the Pope, concerning the possibility of mar-

riage berween the Emperor's sons and Latin prIncesses

and the raising of funds for the defence of the

'Laurent.,
Syropoulos, 104-107; Loenertz, Les
Dominicains, passim. One has to note that there is
a confusion between Eudaemonoiannis and Philanthro-
penos in the article: 98-99; Barker, ' Manuel**11,315,
324-25.
2
Ziegler, ' OCP, 18, pp. 139-40; Laurent, *. EyE2Eou-
Ios, 104-06; Loenertz, Les Domnicains, 101; V. Lau-
rent, "Les Prdliminaires du Concile de Florence, REB
20 (1962),, 10-12.
 288

1
Isthmus. But he returned to the West again, continu-

ing-the diplomatic representation of the Emperor in

Europe. Passing'through Venice he took the opportuni-

ty to look into a personal affair. He made arrangements

to get the permission to transport 400 planks from Cre-

te to Monemvasia for the needs of a church that he

was building there. The permission was granted to him

on April 2,1419.2

The following year he returned to Byzantium accom-

panying Sophie of Montferrat and Cleopa Malatesta and

settled finally in the Peloponnese. Perhaps he was

building the church in his native town preparing to

3
settle there. in any case he did not stop offering
his services to the Despot and the Emperor, whom he

represented during the talks with the Venetians in

February 1422. on July 22 of the same year DolfIn

Venier, delegate'from Venice to the Peloponnese, pro-

posed in his'report that they should entice Eudaemo-

noiannis and, his sons with f ief s in the areas held

1
Laurent, ''Syropoul: os, 106-111; Loenertz, Les
Dominicains, 102-04; Laurent, Les Pr6liminaires, 12-
15; Barker, ' Manuel'II, 315,325.
2
ASV,:. Senato,. Misti,, 52, fol. 162; Thiriet, * R6-
gestes, no. 1733, p. 174; Iorga, * Notes'et Extraits, I,
290.
3
Zakythinosy Despotat, I, 189,351-52; Barker,
Manuel 11,327; Nicol" 1261A453,346.
 289

by the Venetians, with which apparently the family

1
had ties. The fact that his sons are also mention-

ed in the report, while at the same time another de-

legate, Ioannis Bladynteros, is active in the West,

is an indication that Eudaemonoiannis, probably tir-

ed from his endless journeys or sick, had limited

his activities. For twelve years he had traveled

constantly to advance the interests of the Empire.

He must have been quite old by then. He died presu-

mably in the Peloponnese, on November 1,1423.2

It must be noted that Eudaemonoiannis was liked

by everybody, proof of his extraordinary talents in

diplomacy. Apparently he combined energy, business

acumen and wide education with. a lovable personality.

"Oh, how much weariness you have filled us with being

away for so long. When, best of men, will we see a-

gain that golden head, full of... wisdom", writes I-

3
sidore with affection at the beginning of his journeys.

1
ASV, Senato, Secreti, 8, fol. 41V ; Thiriet,
R6gestes, no,. 1833, p. 193, Sathas, ' Documents-In6dits,
1,117-18; Jorga, ' Notes' et Extraits, 1,317; above,
p. 222, n. 2.
2
Mercati, * Noti'zie, 478 and n. 4,479.
3
Ziegler,, OCP, 18, p. 139,11.1-3.
 III Isidore's collection of letters
.

The important events related to Monemvasia, dur-

ing the early decades of the 15th century, are reflect-

ed in Isidore the monk's letters and other writings.

Isidore was an important personage, active, profound-

ly educated and with many talents. In contrast, how-

ever, to Eudaemonoiannis who seems to have had only

friends hisambiguous and contradictory tempe: rament

1
brought him many enemies.

The exact date of his birth is not known, but

can be placed safely in the years around 1390. It is

certain that he came from the Peloponnese and that

he had a special attachmentland constant interest--in

2
Monemvasia. However, the sources are persistently

silent concerning his origin and this silence has led

to various widely differing opinions on it, as e. g.

that he came from Thessaloniki or that he was of

Slav descent. This silence seems very strange regard-

ing a person whose activities during half a century

1 Latin,
His enemies were from the Greekthe as
well as the Russian side. and the contrast with Bessa-
rion who had a similar career is striking.
2 Russiae, Ser-
Isidorus Arch. Kiovensis et totius
mones Inter Concilium Florentinura'conscriptit eds. G.
Hofmann-E. Candal (Rome, 1971), p. V; PLP, no.
8300, where most of the vast bibliography is collect-
ed; J. Gill, Personalities of the Council of Florence.
nd other Essays (Wford, 1964), 65; Mercati, Tsidoro,
12.
 291

covered an area from Crete and the Peloponnese to Rus-

sia, and from Constantinople to Rome, who mixed and

corresponded with the important people of his time in

Byzantium and the West and about whom much has been
1
written. We do not even know his name before he was

ordained. The absence of even the slightest hint con-

cerning his descent is striking. It gives rise to

the suspicion that the silence might have been imposed,

that perhaps the: e was some family-tiewhich should

not be known that the real reason he was obliged to

become a monk at such an early age was the fear that

h1, 7 hifgh-_ descent might kindle ambitions leading to

further civil wars. This couldfurthermbirb;, ha.ve been

the. -reason why- Manuel took care and supervised Isi-

dore for 2
so closely some years.

It is certain'that when Manuel arrived in Con-

stantinople from the Peloponnese in June 1403, after

his journey to the West, Isidore had either travelled

1.
PG, 159, col. 943; P. Pierling, * La Russie et
le Sai'n7t--Si6ge, I (Paris, 1896), 7,94; Regel, XLI;
Mercati, ''Isidoro, 12 n. 2.
2
It is tempting to speculate on a possible i-
dentification of Isidore with one of the mysterious
bastard sons of Theodore I, whose traces cannot be
found anywhere: Chalkokondyles, Varkb, 1,194;
ASV, Senato, Misti, 44, fol. 133 ; Thiriet, R6gestes,
II, no. 972, p. 224; Zakythinos, 'Despotat, 1-, 165.
 292

with him or had preceded him there. In the capital

and not in Monemvasia like Photios and Eudaemonoiannis,

Isidore, who had much talent and unusual intelligence,

had the chance to receive an education equivalent to

his abilities, which nourished his love of literature,

particularly the Greek classics and science, especial-

1
ly astronomy. He started early transcribing and de-

votedly collecting manuscripts and exchanging them

with his friends, the intellectuals with whom he shar-

ed in Constantinople the tutoring of illustrious tea-

chers like John Chrysoloras. It must hav'e. been there

that he was taught the principles of systematic re-

search which later helped him in his polemic, both the-

ological and general. In the reports that he wrote on

behalf of the metropolitan of Monemvasia the methodic-

al collection of his evidence from original documents

without any mistake or intervention is impressive. Lat-

er he collected and transcribed in an admirable way

the 2
Minutes from various Oecumenical Councils.

In Constantinople Isidore cooperated with Empe-

ror Manuel, copying the Epitaphios, both the draft

I
Gill, ' PersonalIties, 65; Pierling, 7-8; Merca-
ti, * Tsidoro, passim. Cf. D. Pingree ed., * Alb=asaris
de ievolutionibusnativitatum (Bibliotheca Teubneria-
na: Leipzig, 1968), X-XI.
2
Mercati, ''Isi'doro, 8-10; Binon, *Eo, 37, pp. 287-
88; Otto Kresten, Eihe Sa=luftgr 'Von KonzIlakterf aus
dem Besitze 'des'Kardinals Tsidors von Kiev (Vienna,,
1976), 109-10, -with an interesting comparison of Isi-
dore and Bessarion.
 293

and the final version and must have shared his emo-

tion during the composition of the work. Shortly

before the second anniversary of the death of Theodore,

Isidore, already a monk, arrived in the Peloponnese

carrying the text of the Epitaphios to be read. during

the commemorative ceremony in Mystras, following which

he settled in Laconia, apparently according to plan.

A collection of works by Isidore, fourteen letters

and four benedictions, written during the first de-

cade after he settled in the Peloponnese, is contain-

ed in the Greek Manuscript 914 in the Vatican Libra-

ry. The letters written with ease and economy without

superfluous rhetoric, are often charming; they show

a particularly fine sense of humour and throw some

light on several aspects of his personality and acti-
2
vities. They are compiled in chronological order and
from their contents it can be deduced that they were

written between autumn 1409 and roughly 1417. The first

six letters were all composed between autumn 1409 and

the winter of 1410. The first two are addressed to

Guarino of Verona, the third to Neophytos of Medeia,

the fourth to Ignatios Chortasmenos, the fifth to the

Emperor and finally the sixth to the metropolitan of

1
Chrysostomides, Funeral Oration, 29-34,37;
Mercati, 'Isidoro, 102.
2
Mercati, I'sidoro, 12-14,19-25. and passim.
 294

1
Russia Photios.

In his letter to Neophytos, one of his friends

with whom he studied together in Constantinople, along

with Guarino and Ignatios, he complains that when Ne-

ophytos was seeing him off on the ship to the Pelopon-

nese he had given promises to write often and did not

keep them. His longing for the times when they were

all together and the same stereotyped complaints a-

bout the infrequency of their letters he expresses to

2
his -other friends also.

The letter to the Emperor-As written at the same

time as the one to Chortasmenos, in which it is men-

3
tioned. It must be assumed that it was written in

autumn 1409, shortly after the commemorative mass in

Theodore's memory. Isidore excuses himself for his

delay in writing saying that the duty was too exacting,

particularly after the admiration expressed by everybo-

dy for the author of the Funeral Oration and so "his

want of art of letters and the fact that he could, not

at the moment express himself deprived himof his im-

...
4
petus". He starts his description from the arrival

1
Regel, 59-71.
2 "Isidore de Kiev
Regel, 59-61; V. Laurent, et
la Metropole de Monembasie, ""REB 17 (1959), 151-157.
3
. Regel, 65-69. Mention of the same letter in the
letter to Chortasmenos: Regel, 64,11.27-28.

4 Regel, 65,11.6-7.
 295

of the ship that brought him from Constantinople to

the port of the "Vitylaioi". The town of Oitylon was

further inland. Isidore observes with amazement the

uncivilized customs of the inhabitants. Influenced

by Homer he expected to find a Greek population and

instead he found Slavs. He takes the chance to praise

the Emperor's pacifying campaign in the area a year

before. He considers it a wonder that after Manuel's

efforts the Maniots were persuaded to abandon some

of their roughest habits, the killings and the muti-

1
lations. From Oitylon Isidore went to Mystras where

he arrived before June 24,1409, anniversary of the

Despot's death. The "wing of fame", he writes, *had

flown ahead of him and everybody was waiting impatient-

ly for his arrival, to see the famous book which con-

tained the text of the Oration. They had to wait though

until the day of the ceremony to hear the contents.

For the occasion everybody came to the gathering, the

Despot, the Metropolitan, the archons, the clergy,

the "demos". It was decided that the reading of the

Oration should precede the mass and the "bearer" was

asked to read the Epitaphios of the Emperor for his

brother. Isidore had his Objections because, as he

writes, he considered it more proper for someone else

to do the reading, without explaining whom he meant

or why. He obeyed anyway when he was ordered by the

Despot.. and statted reading up to the middle, from

1
Regel, 65,11.22-31,66,11.1-26.
 296

where "that good man Gazes" carried on. Isidore in

his description carefully hides how much he was moved,

as well as the emotion caused to the audience and

only mentions Gazes's who started reading quietly and

steadily and gradually got carried away, followed by

the audience who started seeing the Despot saving the

Peloponnesians from the barbaric domination, while

"they shed many tears". The description of the cere-

mony ends here and the letter closes with praises to

-1
the Emperor.

Shortly after this extraordinary event "just as

autumn succeeded summertime", i. e. in September 1409,

Isidore fell ill, victim of the plague that harassed

2
the Peloponnese until the following summer. . His ill-

ness is described to his friend Guarino of Verona,

from whom he had. been expecting impatiently two let--!

terst which he had just received. In reply he also

wrote two letters. He complains, as with his other cor-

respondents, about the infrequency of their letters.

In his first letter he relates with remarkable care

all the cities through which Guarino went on his way

back to Italy, when he left Constantinople in 1407.

one could say that a certain envy can be discerned

1
Regel, 66,11.27-32,67,11.1-30. Mercati,
Isidoro, 102-03; Chrysostomides, "Furieral Orat: t,on, 29,
232 n. 155.
2
Schreiner, * KleInchrorifken, 11,394-95.
 297

for his friend's visit to, these wonderful cities, whi-

le he was confined in the Peloponnese. His great in-

terest in books, not only to study but also to collect

and transcribe, is evident in both letters. He sends

Guarino some Greek manuscripts and planned for another

despatch in spring 1.410. He was expecting some books

from him in Latin and particularly his favourite horo-

1
scopes and the delay prompted the second letter. His

love for astronomy is not an isolated case, on the con-

trary it seems to have been very much in vogue'among

certain circles. Mazaris, for example, in his satire

mentions a certain person who "could not ease himself

without consulting the astrolabe,. .,, --2

1.

Isidore shared his interest for astronomy with

Ioannis Ignatios Chortasmenos, later metropolitan of

Selymbria, to whom one letter is addressed also writ-

ten at the same period as the previous ones, in autumn
1409. In it, along with his usual complaints for the

scarcity of letters, he gives some details on his

settlement in Laconia and his constant travels within

the area. "And now in Epidauros, now in Sparta,. ano-

ther time from one town to another like runners we

1
Regel, 58-61,61-62. R. Sabbadini, Guarino Vero-
nese e' il suo epistolario*edito *e*inedito TSalerno,
1885), p. 55-.
2 &TE6m-rov dveu 6LqLy'v6oe(zg dLa-cpoXdLDou
-coiO xcL6 e%
I.LA dacepxo1i6vou", Mazaris, eds. Barry, etc, p. 38,11.
,
19-20, identified with Matthaibs Chrysokephalos7, pp.
109-10.1 :1
 298

1
were obliged to run".

The last letter in this group is the one addres-

sed to metropolitan Photios, which has already been

mentioned, containing the flattering words for his

attempts to pacify his diocese. It could have been

written in 1410. As in other letters Isidore complains

about the letters that he does not receive from Pho-

tics, with whom he had been together in Constantinople

between*, 1407 and 1408 and mo.st probably bef ore. that.
2
in Monemvasia.

Time passed and Isidore occupied himself with -

various duties and came in contact with people living

in Laconia. His interests began gradually to be satis-

fied, while at the same time he overcame his nostalgia
for Constantinople and the circle of his friends

there.

In the manuscript after the group of the six

first letters comes a group of four 'Wx6r-", followed

by the remaining eight letters. The last of the four

c6X6C is a "C6XA 6TCLDCL*VAPCLOQ CCQ TAV TE6%LV MO'VCIIDCLCC-

cLvol, in other words a kind of blessing which the newly

1
Regel, 64 and 11.20-21. On Chortasmenos: H. Hun-
ger, ' Johannes Chor. tasmenos, (ca:., 1370-ca:. * 1,436/37) (Wie-
ner Byzantinische Studien, Vii ) (Vienna, 1969), esp.
13-19.
2
Regel, 69-71.
 299

appointed bishop used to deliver before the city gates

1
"when he first meant to enter". Shortly after 1410

a new metropolitan of Monemvasia was elected, Cyril

2
whom the Synodicon of Monemvasia highly praises.

Isidore who did not hold any office at the time pre-

pared the texts that Cyril needed during his years

of service and accompanied him on his journeys. The

blessing mustbe one of the first texts that Isidore

composed for Cyril, immediately after his election.

The other three, which are addressed to the Emperors

and the Despot, must have been commissioned at the

same time to be delivered with the first before the

city gates. From the text of the blessings it can be

deduced that the election of Cyril took place around

1411.3 He must have arrived in his diocese soon and
delivered then the first addresses prepared for him

by Isidore. For his flock he wished that they remained

inaccessible to the barbarians, showing the anxiety
for 4
the nearing Turkish threat.

I
Mercati,, Isidoro, 10 n. 1.
2
Below, 6 VIII.
3
A. W. Ziegler, "Unveri5ffentlichte Gebete Isidors
von Kijev, " OCP, 21 (1955), 327-334.
4
Nicol, 1*261-1453,341-42.
 300

In the Vaticanus Graecus 914 after the blessings

follow eight letters. The first is addressed to some

person in Patras, the next two and probably the third

as well, to Despot Theodore II, the next to Nicolaos

Eudaemonoiannis, the following to Theodore again. The

last two to a certain sakellarios Michael (or Michael

1
Sakellarios) and possibly to Theodore II again.

The first letter contains the only known hint of

the existence of a relative of Isidore's. The letter

mentions that he lived in Patras and had sent him

from there letters, brought by Kavakes. This time

Isidore receives the complaints that he has not an-

swered, overlooking friendship and kinship and behav-

ing haughtily. He excuses himself saying that it is

not his fault but of those entrusted with bearing the

letters and announces that he intends to go there in

the following January. A person coming from Monemva-

sia who might have been-connected to Isidore and his

circle is Joachim, metropolitan of Patras at the be-

ginning of the 15th century, known for the care he

took to trasnport the relics of H6sios Leontios of

1 "Vier
A. W. Ziegler, bisher nicht verffentlichte
griechische Briefe Isidors von Kijev, " BZ, 44 (1951),
570-77; A. W. Ziegler, "Die restlichen vier unverffent-
lichten Briefe Isidors von Kijev "' OCP, 18 (1952)p 135-
42; D. A. Zakythinos, "McLvouAX B" lictXcLLoX6yoG xaC 6
uctp8tvXLoG *IaC8wpoG tv neXoTiovvAa4), " Mgl'ange'g Merlier
(Athens, 1955), 111,45-69.
 301

1
Monemvasia. However, Patras still belonged to the

Franks and the orthodox metropolitan was not instal-

led in the city, which had a Latin archbishop, and

possibly the person to whom the letter is addressed

2
was not a clergyman. The letter could have been writ-

ten in 1414. The intention of the Emperor Manuel to

come to the Peloponnese was already known and Isidore

just like other prominent Peloponnesians might have

planned to meet the Emperor in Corinth and to combine

a visit to Patras. But it is not known whether his

journey 3
to Northern Peloponnese was realized.

In the two letters addressed to the Despot, Isi-

dore, encouraged by his closeness to him, mediates

with persistence for the relief of the inhabitants

of the town of Helikovounon from an extraordinary

tax. They did not-have herds of sheep or swine or o-

ther cattle, he Writes, their only agricultural occu-

pation was wine growing and their produce. had been de-
4
stroyed. It is known that after Manuel's visit'to the

Ziegler, BZ, 44, pp. 574-75. On Joachin! PLP, no.

8370 ; Schreiner, no. 9/47 , 1,98; 11,382-83.
2
Zakythinos, ' Despotat, 11,288-89.
3
Zakythinos, Despotat,, 1,. 167-75,34950.
4
Ziegler, BZ, 44, pp. 575-76; Zakythinos, * M61an-
ges Merlier, 10-TIF and BZ, 44, p.. 576;, Mdlanges Merlier,
11-12.
 302

Peloponnese in 1415-16 a tax was levied, the phloriati-

kon, for the defense of the Isthmus, which caused ma-

ny reactions even the rebellion of some Peloponnesian

1
archons during the construction. It has been assumed

that it is from this tax that Isidore tries to relieve

the. Helikovounites and his interest arose from the

fact that their town had been ceded to the metropoli-

tan of Monemvasia in whose service Isidore was then.

He himself resided in the monastery of Kontostephanos

nearby and had even composed a mass for the Archangel

to 2
Michael whom the monastery was dedicated. one of
.
the letters is accompanied by a leather purse contain-
ing Indian perfumes with instructions for their use.
This present, which was obviously to cajole the Despotr

reveals another side of Isidore's personality, his

love for the luxurious and the exotic, which appears

in several of his notes found in codices of his li-
3
brary.

The following letter must also have been address-

ed'to the Despot. The style is rather angry, because

1
Mazaris, eds. Barry etc, XXVI-XXVIII; Barker,
Manuel 11,317 and n. 31; Zakythinos, Despotat, 170-71,
11-, 238-40, identifies it with the "floriatikon".
2
on the monastery above pp. 79,214. On Isidore's
relation and visits: Mercati, ''Is'i'doro, 22,30-31,56.
3
Mercatil''Isi'doro, e. g. 33 and passim.
 303

apparently despite hisappeals the tax was still being

demanded. "Why do you try to change the order of

1
things? ", he writes. This letter may have brought

some result since, after the following letter address-

ed to Eudaemonoiannis towards the end of 1416, Isidore

wrote again to the Despot. This time the tone has

changed, the letter is pleasant and charming. It is

accompanied by a present, a hare caught by the monks

(of Kontostephanos? ) as he was stealing lettuce from

the garden. He is*still alive and, writes Isidore, the

Despot will render justice. Perhaps the hare was to

thank the Despot for the fulfilment of the entreaties

2
on behalf of the Helikovounites.

Isidore's next letter is also pleasant. It is

addressed to a certain Michael, a sakellarios, who was

tutor in literature and music to a friend's son called
Sofos and. -_is full.. of the obvious pun on the words for

learning 3
wisdom and Sofos.

It is not certain to whom the last letter is ad-

dress'ed co-ruler of the addressee, bringing messa-
.A
ges to the Emperor, is mentioned in it. It could be

1
Ziegler, I! Z, 44 p. 577; Zakythinos, - M61'anges.
Merlier, 12.
2
Ziegler OCP, 18,pp. 140-41; cf. Mercati, '*17si-
ietfer-to
aoro, The Eudaieidonoiannis": Ziegler, OCP,,
-22.139-40; Zakythinos, merl'ier, 8-9.
-M61ange
3
Ziegler, ' QCP, 18, pp. 141-42; cf. Mercati, -*rsi-
doro, 22.
 304

addressed to Theodore, in which case the co-ruler would

be Eudaemonoiannis, who brought on his return from

the West in 1417 various cormunications to Manuel II.

For some years after 1417 Isidore's activities are

not known. Apparently he divided his time between Mo-

nemvasia, where he helped Cyril face his duties, the

monastery of Kontostephanos, where he studied and

copied manuscripts, and Mystras which he often fre-

2A
quented. small scrap of information, which proves

his visits to Mystras, is a note of unknown date; he

Ole,
,I ("
owes 34 floria to the abbot of the monastery of Zo'*0-

dhotes, the imperial monastery of Mystras, known today

as Haghia Sophia, and 27 florla to the goldsmith Io-

annis Eugenikos. Apparently he must have paid the mo-

3
ney back because he has crossed out the entries.

IV Pro-unionists and anti-unionists in Laconia

.

In 1416 co-Emperor John VIII was in Lemnos and,

while everybody was expecting him to-return to Con-

stantinople he made a sudden and somewhat puzzling

1 142.
Ziegler, *OCP, 18, p.
2
Mercati, Isidoro, passim.
3 52 n. 1.
Mercati, -Isidoro,
 305

journey to the Peloponnese. During his stay there he

arranged for the transport to Lemnos of the pretender

to the Turkish rule Mustapha, who was being held by

the Emperor in Monemvasia. It is not clear what the

reason was for this move. After traveling through

the Peloponnese, John arrived at the port of Kenchre-

I
ai from where he sailed for Constantinople. The Pane-

gyric, written by Isidore in honour of Manuel II and

John VIII, states that the co-Emperor cooperated in

the Peloponnese with his brother Theodore on various

matters. But the Despot did not share his imperial

brother's ideas for the Union of the Churches and a-

round him was formed a circle, which was against the

Union, whereas a circle of literati, among them Isi-

dore, was created around the philosopher Plethon,

whose ideas influenced most of them. Some of them

later led the efforts for the Union of Churches after

being promoted to important posts in the civil and ec-

2
clesiastical administration.

An important dispute during this period, which

started from ecclesiastical matters, could be consider-

ed as an expression of the differences-between the

1 116-21,171; Anonymous,
(Isidore), TI(xvnyupLx6c,
"*Eyx(bjiLov etg MavouX xcLC 'lo)dLvvTlv H'lICLXCLLoX6youc, "
lTCLXCLLoX6y6LCLXCLt l7CXOTtO'VVTjCTLCLXdL,111,214; Sphrantzes,
Grecu, 12, Doucas, Bonn, 147-48; Nicol, **1*26T---:1453,347-
48,353,369.
2
(Isidore), HavilyupLit6g, 174; C. 11. Woodhouse,
George Gemistos Plethoft. ' The-last ofthe Hellends. -.
70-xford, 1986), 32-38,100-101., 128-29.
 306

two groups. The question arose in 1418-19, when a

new bishop was ordained for the See of Maina, who

under the protection of the Metropolitans of Lacedae-

monia, Corinth and Patras, displayed for seven years

an attitude so markedly def iant that it caused re-

actions from the inhabitants and the clergy and even

from his relatives, who appealed to the Patriarch and

the Emperor himself. The Metropolitan of Monemvasia,

in whose jurisdiction Maina was, also made addresses

to the Patriarch, but everything was of no avail. The

Patriarch, instead of reprimanding the culprit, re-

buked the Metropolitan of Monemvasia, who was obliged
to go to the capital and elucidate the situationto him

.and a report was qritten by Isidore on this occasion, zif ter

his punishment the bishop of Maina tried to enforce

the Synodical decision of 1397 and transfer his See

to the jurisdicti. on of Corinth. A second report was

written by Isidore in 1427-28, on behalf of the Me-

tropolitan of Monemvasia where all the events are ex-

1
posed.

The ecclesiastical controversy, which in the mean-

time had grown, might have been one of the reasons for

another visit of John VIII to the Peloponnese after

his marriage with Maria Komnene of Trebizond in

.

1
Lanpros, NE 12 (1915), 257-318; Zakythinos,
Despotat, II, 27T--75,292-93; below, ch. 6 VIII.
 307

September 1427. On the other hand some difficulties

had arisen with the Latin neighbours, as well as a-

mong the Palaeologoi themselves. During the last part

of his journey to the Peloponnese, to the Isthmus

and the wall of Hexamilion, which had been destroyed

by the Turks in 1423, the Emperor was accompanied by

Isidore, who may have followed him afterwards to the

1
Capital, along with metropolitan Cyril.

In Constantinople the Metropolitan and Isidore

aimed once more at averting the threat of the subordi-

nation of Maina to Corinth. Most probably with the

Emperor's aid the Metropolitan of Monemvasia was justi-

fied and the dispute ended. A sigillion from the Patri-

arch and a chrysobull by the Emperor issued in 1428-29

2
confirmed all previous privileges. There is an inte-

resting note in the codex containing the autograph

drafts for his two. reports, where Isidore lists his

belongings, which he left behind at "XCL-rCLCP6Y(LOV)",

locked and sealed in a small chest. one could identi-

fy Na-racpx5y(Lov)" with a ruined fort in Western Laco-

nik6, near present day Daemonia, in the area where the

1 1,200-07; Nicol, *1,261-

Zakythinos, Desgotat,
364-65; Zakythinos, M61anclas' Merl: ier, 14-20.

Below, ch. 6 VIII.

 308

the monastery of Kontostephanos and Helikovounon were,

called KcLTcp6yYL, although it is possible that Isidore

I
meant just a hiding place.

Isidore set out for the return journey alone on

15 September 1429. This journey was adventurous. When

the ship was off the shore of the Peloponnese, not

far from Melos, a storm broke out and it got carried

away to the western side of the peninsula. They came

in sight of Modon but the Sicilian merchants on board

refused to agree to go nearer, fearing a pirate ship,

which the admiral in the Hellespont had cautioned them

against and which was stationed there attacking all

ships that approached. After quarrels and taking into

consideration the night and the weather, with Isido-

re's consent, they continued on the way to Sicily.

They reached Syracuse on the 25th of September. Isi-

dore kept detailed notes with catalogues of the impor-

tant cities. The unexpected detour does not seem to

have displeased 2
him.

After his return to the Peloponnese at the end

of 1429 Isidore addressed a letter to Emneror John VIII.

1
Mercati; Isidoro, 40. Cf. n. 1, where he propo-
ses the identification with a place in Mani. Waterhouse-
Hope Simpson, Prehistoric Laconia, 11,140.
2 13,58-59,103,151-54.
Mercati, Isidoro,
 309

The familiarity with which he writes is impressive.

Of course he had proven his abilities during the ser-

vice of Cyril and must have been considered among the

close assistants of ithe Emperor. The letter must have

been written before the Turkish raid at Hexamili in

I
srping 1431, about which no hint is made. At appro-

ximately the same time, more precisely after August

1430 and before spring 1431, Isidore wrote another

long letter, in which he explains an old Delphic ora-

cle concerning the Isthmus. The letter is addressed

to the "PLXOXOYG)TdLTn 6eCM0L'V65'V". -This person has been

identified with Cleopa Malatesta, who had great inte-

rest in literature. However, the wife of a despot did

not bear the title of despoina but of basilissa and-7

Cleopa was called basilissa by the literati of Mystras

in funeral 2
their orations after her death. On the

other hand despoina was the title of the Emperor's

wife and we must assume that the letter was addressed

to the Empress Maria of Trebizond. This may be an in-
dication that the newly wed Maria had followed her

husband on his Journey to the Peloponnese in 1427-28

1
Mercati, Isidoro, 26-27,103; Zakythinos, ' M6-
langes Merlier, 14-16.
2 34-36; Zakythinos,
Mercati, 'I'sidoro, * Me'l'anges
Merlier, 16-19; IlaXaLoMysLa KcLC TTEXOTEO'VVnCFLaXdL. IV,
54-160; Ps. Kod inos, Verpeaux, 307.
 310

and that during their visit to Corinth accompanied

by the learned Isidore she got interested in the

oracle. It is also possible that more discussions on

this topic followed in Constantinople and this letter

was a sequel to them. It is furthermore possible that

it was written together with the letter to the Emperor.

In any case these two letters are the last evidence

of Isidore's stay in the Peloponnese. Chronologically

the next information concerning him is in March 1433,

by which time he had already left the Morea and set--!.

tled in the monastery of Saint Demetrios in Constanti-

nople. The first important mission outside the boun-

daries of Byzantium was entrusted to Isidore in Octo-

ber of the same year, when he was appointed one of

the three members of the Byzantine delegation at the

Council of Basel. This was the starting point for his

1
new career which lasted thirty years,

In Laconia in the meantime, in 1433, the basilis-

sa Cleopa Malatesta, who had been very dear to the

circle of intellectualsat Mystras, died. A number of

monodies were written in her praise, one of them by

Bessarion, who had apparently followed his tutor

1
Mercati, *Tsidoro, 103 and passim. For his acti-
vities after 1433: Hofmann-Candal, -'I'si'dorus, V-VI, -
Gill,, ' Personalities, 76-78.
 311

Dositheos, formerly of Trebizond to the Peloponnese

when in 1430-31 he was ordained metropolitan of Mo-

1 had
nemvasia. Another person as we shall see,
.-vho ,
ties with Monemvasia, makes his first appearance
2
with a monody in memory of the basilissa, Cheilas.

The port of Monemvasia saw in 1437 some unusual

activity. Ciriaco Pizzicoli arrived there from Kythe-

ra. He was interested solely in Epidaurus Limera ,

"quam antiquissimam civitatem veteres Monembasiam di-

cunt", to which, however, he dedicated in 12 July

1437 only a few words and a drawing of the city-walls,

3 (pl-11)
without mentioning any of the inscriptions.

At the end of the same year the emperor and the delega-

tion to the Council for the Union of Churches set out

for Italy through Modon and possibly also Monemvasia.

Among the members of the delegation was the metropoli-

4
tan of Monemvasia Dositheos. Isidore, who in the mean-

time had been ordained metropolitan of Kiev, travelled

1
Lampros? CLLoX6-yE:'L(% *KCLC-17E:XOTEO'V'J7jCFLCX'KdL,
IICX>, IV,
Lb*, L', 54-160; Gudrun Schmalzbauer, "Eine bisher
unedierte Monodie auf Kleope Palaiologina von Demetri-
os Pepagomenos, "'JOB, 20 (1971), 223-43; Laurent, 'Eo,
32, pp. 152-54.
2
I1CLXCLLoX6yCLCL 'ACLI 1IEXOTEOVVTjCTLMK IV, LCFTI-LC4,144-52.
3
P. E. W. Bodnar, 'Cyr*i'a: cug of Ancona'and Athens,
(Collection Latomus XLIII) (Brussels, 1960),. p. 47.
4
Fl. Evangelatou-Notara, ""H ME:Od)vTi, a-ccLOji6(; a-rdL
TCLEC8LCL OUCCLVTLV8V cLbToxpcLT6pcov c7TA A6crn, " 11eXoTEovvTj-
OLaXdL, 16 (1986) 97-107; Laurent, ' Syropoillos, 201-209.
,
 312

independently through central Europe to Italy to sup-

1
port the Union.

After the Union had been proclaimed at Florence,

great confusion followed the return of John VIII from

2
Italy to the Capital in 1440 and feelings ran high.

Concerning these problems Isidore wrote a report to

the Pope in 1443, when, after many adventures he re-

turned to Italy and joined the Papal court. He propo-

sed, among other measures that a legate should be

sent to the Peloponnese, who could exercise pressure

on the Despots to accept the Union, while the Patri-

arch Gregory III was visiting there. The legate could

then proceed to Constantinople to continue his ef-

3
forts. Isidore himself undertook the mission and

arrived in the Peloponnese at the beginning of 1445.

His short visite however, does not seem to have

brought any sig nificant results. It is unknown if he

visited Monemvasia. In the summer of 1445 he was

back 4
again in Rome.

1
J. Krajcar, "Metropolitan Isidore's journey to
the Council of Florence. Some remarks, " OCP, 38 (1972),
367-80.
2
Nicol, ''1261-1453,376-78.
3
Hofmann-Candall Isidorus, 93-94.
4
Hofmann-Candall Isidorus, V.
 313

Amid the disputes the latent Turkish threat re-

emerged. Constantine Palaeologos, who was in the Pe-

loponnese, provided for the immediate repairs of the

1
walls of Hexamilion. The Monemvasiotes decided to

carrv out fortification works in order to improve

their defences. They asked Despot Theodore II to is-

sue a horismos which would provide for the gathering

of the necessary funds. It was issued in December

1442.2

The horismos begins without a prooimion by menti-

oning that the Monemvasiotes asked the Despot to re-

store a measure which had formerly existed concerning

the disposal of the proceeds from the aviotikion, ac-

3
cruing from those who died heirless and intestate.

It continues by 'regulations for the inheritance of 'those

who die, with or without will, but leaving close rela-

tives as heirs, and then of those who die without close

relatives. In this last case only two thirds of the

1
Zakythinos, ' De' otat 1,226. One should mention
an argyroboullon of doubtful genuinness, issued by despot
Constantine Palaeologos for Demetrios Mamonas Gregoras, gran-
ting a house in-Helos and a tower in Priniko, preserved in a
late copy: Miklosich-IlUller,. III, 258; bleli. arakes, 38-40.
2 V_ r
From ms Kutlumus 220, fols. 190 191 First e-
. , .
dition by Lampros, TIapygau6c, 7 (1883), 472-73. Referen-
ces in the text from Miklosich-Muller, V, 174-75.
3
Miklosich-MUller, V, 174,11.1-9.
 314

estate canbe bequeathed to the distant relatives or

can be disposed of in other lawful ways. The remaining

one third, it is decreed, will be collected for the

kastron. In the event of the absence of even distant

relatives the whole of the deceased's estate will be

1
disposed of-for the benefit of the kastron.

Special tax collectors are provided for to super-

vise the collect. ion of funds and their use solely

for rebuilding, fortification-and security of the ka-

stron of Monemvasia, with the knowledge of the kepha-

le of Monemvasia, to render account to him and be

controled by him. They should not, however, allow

the proceeds to be used for any other purpose and no

amount should be diverted to the vestiarion of the

Despot and neither the kephale nor anybody else has

2
the right to receive any amount from these funds.

Furthermore it is stipulated that the fines which are

imposed in Monemvasia according to the "old custom and

order", which was still in force, should also be col-

lected by the same tax collectors to be used for the

kastron. The collectors are obliged to render account

3
for these funds also to the kephale of Monemvasia.

1 174,11
Miklos ich-Mill ler, V, 9-14,175,11.1-2.

Miklosich-Muller, V, 175,2-9.
3 175,9-14.
Miklosich-MUller, V,
 315

Just like the older documents of the emperors and

despots concerning the city of Monemvasia, this horis-

mos renewed the force of preexisting privileges, in

this case the waiving by the state of certain taxes

in favour of Monemvasia. It is, however, the first

time that this is stated so clearly. Previously it had

only been mentioned that the i. nhabitants were exem-

pted from the taxation due to the imperial treasury

and apparently the taxes continued to be collected

1
for use by the city. The aviotikion, mentioned in the

horismos could be identified with the death duties

from which the Monemvasiotes were exempted by earlier

documents and, as has been mentioned,. were still'being

2 fines
collected by the city authorities. The various

are mentioned for the first time in a document grant-

ing privileges to Monemvasia. it is clear from the

text of the horismos that this was a preexisting pri-

vilege. As a matter of fact the use of fines for the

kastronis mentioned, shortly before, in a contract be-

tween the Metropolitan of Monemvasia and some peasants

I
Above, ch. 6,1-11.
2 M. A. Tourtoglou,
Schreiner, llpov6jimr 163-64
"T6 ""ADLCOTCHLOV". EuLoo%A etc -c6 BuCCLV-rL-v6v KX-npovo-
lLLx6-v ACXCLLO-V, """--'VL*OV", ' Festschrift 'fur P. J. Zepos,
I (Athens, 1973T-, 632-45, esp. 636; E. Vranoussi,
"Notes sur quelques institutions du P61oponnese by-
zantin, " ttudes*balkaniques, 14 IV (1978), 81-88.
 316

renting church lands in 1426. The contract, a taboul-

larikon gramma, stipulates that "if either of the two

parties is found a violator, it is liable to be fined...

1
for the God-protected kastron 10 hyperpera". We must

assume that this older custom was reinforced by the ho-

rismos of 1440, which regulated the use of the money

collected for the fortification works. (pl. 9-10)

This brief document proves the extent of the works

which were being undertaken in Monemvasia, the rebuild-

ing of the fortifications which had been destroyed. (etc

dLvdLx-vnaLv) new constructions (eta 6Xi3pwaLv) and f inal-

, 0,
ly the completion of existing works for-more security
(eCQ 6Z(PdAeLaV). 2
Obviously the great economic flouri-

shing in the 14th century, brought'a great increase in

population, which in turn caused the spreading of

the settlement-far beyond the older fortifications.

Large tracts of the lower town, which lacked natural

defences, must have remained at that time exposed to

raids, which were becoming more difficult to repel,

due to the invention of gun-powder and the evolution

1 dLTc6
"Et 66 TLQ dLDE:-rTI-rAg cpaveCn -r8v 813o tepi2v,
6QcCXEL Na CnULOG-ML... nP6c; -r6 Oeoppo6pnTov xdaTpov
bnpnupa Una": S. P. Lampros, "TcLOouXXcLpvK6v -yp(jjjjja To(3
IA *aC6voQ, " AIEE, 5 (1900) , 160. The mistake in he cal-
culationof the date in Lampros's edition, i. e. 1326 in-
stead of 1426, is due to the copyist of the ms. Par. Gr.
3067. (Pl. 10) The original, from Vat. Gr. 1904, (Pl. 9) is
signed by the taboullarios, Demetrios Manicaltes, on whom
PLP , no. 16634. Cf. Mercati, * Isidoro, 55-56.
2
Miklosich-MUller, V, 175,, 11.4,11-12.
 317

of military techniques. These same causes led the Vene-

tians to undertake such extensive works on the fortifi-

cations of Nauplion and Modon at this period, that

both were effectively protected up to the end of the

1
17th century.

Eight years after Theodore's horismos the works

had not yet been completed and a new document was

issued for supplementary funds in 1450 by the new

despot 2
of Mystras, Demetrios Palaeologos. Like

the previous horismos it is very brief and it stipu-

lates the following. According to old custom and

right there is liability for kommerkion in Monemvasia

which is still paid by everybody. The inhabitants

of Monemvasia asked that the kommerkion should be

spent for the walls of. their kastron, along with the

proceeds from"the aviotikion and whatever other duties

had been defined for the same purpose. The Despot jud-

ged their demand to be reasonable and ordered that the

kommerkion should be spent along with aviotikion and

other funds on the building of the walls. ' The

G. Gerola, "Le Fortificazioni di Napoli di Ro-

mania, "* Annuario 'dellac Regi'a 'Scuola Archeologica di
Atene, 13-14 (1930-31), 347-410; Andrews, ' Castles of
the Morea, 60,64,94 -100.
2
From ms Esc. Gr. E. 1.12, fols. 71V-74r First
.
published by Miller, * Es'curial, 60-61. References in
the text are from Miklosich-MUller, V, 170-71, where
the date given-is not correct.
 (1
8

collectors of the aviotikion should demand the levying

of the kommerkion, which should be used, with the

consent of the kephale, for the walls. The kephale

should be kept informed concerning these matters and

the collectors should face no interference and no ob-

stacle either from the kephale or from anyone else,

concerning the improvement of the most useful city,

which is Monemvasia.

An important question arises from the analysis

0
of this document. All previous grants for the city

of Monemvasia, with the exception of the horismos

of 1442, mention the exemption of the inhabitants of

Monemvasia from the payment of kommerkion, whereas the

present document states clearly that the kommerkion

was collected from everybody and that this was*accord-

ing to old custom and right. There is no discrepancy
here, however. The*-abolition of the. kommerkion, refer-

red to, concerned the imperial treasury while the ci-

ty authorities continued collecting it, as had been

done for centuries, perhaps since the foundation of

1
the city. For this reason the argyroboullon mentions

that the city authorities, i. e. the kephale, should not

object to the use of the kommerkion for the fortifi-

cations, which would diminish the city's revenues. If

the kommerkion had not been collected by the city,

1 *164,
Schreiner, rIpov6jiL(x, believes that it
was reinstated with an intermediate document. On xoL-
crTpoxTLoCcL: Trojanos, BUCCLVTLVdL, 1 (1969) 39-57.
. ,
 319

but either was being collected by the central authori-

ties or was not being collected at all, the kephale

would have had no reason to object, something that

the argyroboullon tries to anticipate, but on the

contrary ought to have been quite satisfied with the

additional funds for the fortifications. The survival

from the Late Roman period of the right that self-go-

verned cities enjoyed, to collect the customs duties,

is another proof of the antiquity of Monemvasia's

privileges.

It is clearly stated again in the argyroboullon

of 1450 that the undertaking did not concern repairs

only, but the construction of new walls as well, which

explains the slowness with which the works proceeded

and the high cost., If it were only for minor repairs

or small scale new constructions, eight years would

have been long enough for their-completion. On the

contrary, it is possible that the construction of the

new city-walls had not been completed before 1460,

when the Morea fell to the Turks.

Both argyroboulla which have been examined name

the person governing Monemvasia at the time as "ke-

phale", while his immediate superior was the despot of

Mystras, but it is not clear what place Monemvasia

held in the general administrative structure of the

 320

Peloponnese. It is known that in 1446 Despot Constan-

tine Palaeologos proceded to an administrative reform.

He divided the Peloponnese into three provinces, which

each had an important town as a capital and a governor,

the kephale. In the northeast the capital was Corinth

and kephale John Palaeologos Kantakouzenos, in the

northwest the capital was Patras and kephale Alexios

Lascaris and in the south the capital was Mystras and

kephale George Sphrantzes. Mystras ceased to be the

sole capital of the Byzantine government in the Pelo-

ponnese under the immediate and exclusive supervision

of the despot. Apparently the three cities were equal

and the government was coordinated by the "mesazon",

none other than George, the son of Nicolaos Eudaemono-

1
iannis. Monemvasia, again, is not mentioned among
this administrative system. We should attribute'this

omission to the fact that Monemvasia; by no means in-

significant, still enjoyed, to some extent at leastp

the old privileges of local autonomy, under the juris-

diction of the despot in Mystras. A proof of this is

that some years later the inhabitants of Monemvasia

in accordance with their authorities denied the Despot

the right to cede the city and its territory to the

Turks.

Sphrantzes, Grecu, 68-70; Ps. Phrantzes, Grecu,

342; Zakythinos, . Despotat, 1,227-29,355. on the title
and office of keptiale: Zakythinos, "De'sriotat, 11,65-71;
Lj. Maksimovid, Vi'z'anti'jska 'provi'riz'ijska uprava *u -doba
Palaeologa (Belgrade, 1972), 71-100.
 321

The two documents issued by the despots of Mystras

in 1442 and 1450 concerning the rebuilding of the

walls of Monemvasia: repeatedly mention the kephale of

Monemvasia. One must assume that he was the governor

in the same style as the three other kephalaiin the

Peloponnese. A person living in Laconia who bore the

title of kephale is Nicephoros "prince" Cheilas. He

was a correspondent of John Eugenicos, who in a letter

written about 1447 calls him "modest and most friendly

kephale" and urges him to `write laconically, if it so

please you, you the honour of the Lacones'l., Since this

was the name used to designate the inhabitants of the

region of Monemvasia, Cheilas must have been their go-

1
vernor. We have noted already that he wrote a monody
for the death of Cleopa Malatesta in 1433, but it is

unknown whether he .held his, office at that time. He is

last mentioned in 1452,2 The documents of the despots

must refer to Cheilas when they mention the kephale

of Monemvasia. Cheilas was an enemy of the Union of

Churches and this could explain the absence of Metropo-

litan Dositheos from Monemvasia after the Council of

Florence. In all probability he must have been responsi-

P_ Rpl_
ble for preventing the Metropolitan to reach his See.
-

1
I. K. Voyatzides, "Ot HpCyxLneg XeLXdbeg Tfig
Aaxe8atLovog, " NE, 19 (1926) 192-209 who believes
, .
that Cheilas was kephale at Mystras.
2 310-1 11 JRLXaLo*
Above, ; Voyatzides 204-05,207;
,
X(5yE:La_XCLC rrEA.OTEOVVnCrLCLXdL,1,166-67 IV, 389.
,
 322

In the turbulence following the fall of Constan-

tinople Monemvasia and her governors are not mentioned

at all in the sources, with the exception of the so-

journ of Despot Demetrios, during Mehmed's invasion

of the Peloponnese in 1456.1 When the Despot surren-

dered to the Sultan he had already returned, in May

1460, to Mystras, while his wife and daughter still

2
remained in Monemvasia. The narration of the Chroni-

con Maius describing the surrender of the two women

to Mehmed, following that of Demetrios, is possibly

based on local tradition. It is related that noble-

men; both Turks and Christians, were sent to Monem-

vasia as representatives to ask for the surrender of

the wife of Demetrios and his daughter, the wife of

the Sultan, who had been left there "on account of

the castle being strong and impregnable" and also

for the surrender of the castle. The women emerged

and surrendered of their own free will. But the sur-

render of the castle was rejected by the citizens

and their governor Manuel Palaeologos. "Because we

have no authority to hold (6PICCLv) and to dispose of

(XCLPCCELV), what has been built by God", they answer-

ed to the representatives of the Despot and the Sultan

and chased away the soldiers who had come with the

1
Zakythinos, Despotat, 1,258,268.
2
Zakythinos, Despotat, 1.260,268.
 323

representatives to take over and garrison the castle.

Apparently Mehmed, who had already conquered large

parts of the Peloponnese, admired their wisdom and did

1
not attempt to besiege Monemvasia.

Under the circumstances the Monemvasiotes consider-

ed that they ceased to be under the rule of Despot

Demetrios and ceded Monemvasia to Thomas Palaeologos.

The cession must be placed after May 1460, when Deme-_

trios surrendered to the Turks - and before July of the

same year, when Thomas left the Peloponnese for Ker-

2
kyra. However, the difficulties faced by Monemvasia

isolated in(Turkish-occupied Peloponnese,. soon became

insurmountable. It was impossible to survive without

aid from a great power. This time the Monemvasiotes

did not turn to the Venetians, as they had done in 13 9 4,

but they decided to send a delegation to Siena, which

appeared in September 1460 before Pope Pius 11 and

explained that they took this step urged by Giannino

of Cremona, commander of the military detachment,

which was sent to free the Peloponnese from the Turks,

in accordance with the decisions of the Synod of

1
Ps. Phrantzes, Grecu, 536; cf. Kritoboulos of
Imbros, Grecu ed., 253-57.
2
Zakythinos, Despotat, 1,274; Schreiner, ' Xlein-
chroniken, 1,274,11,496-97.
 324

1
Mantua. Pope Pius himself relates these events in

his commentaries.

Ambassadors from Monemvasia came to the Pope

to surrender themselves and their city. This
is a city of the Peloponnese situated in the
eastern part of the peninsula on a lofty moun-
tain. It-is protected on all sides by a single
approach. It once possessed a harbor and ship-
yards. Some think it is the ancient Sparta,
the strength and stay of Greece. The ambassa-
dors were given public audience and spoke as
follows: "Have regard to us Pope Pius. Un-
less you stretch out your hand, we are the
prey of the Turks. Demetrius Palaeologus was
our lord. He went over to the Turks and stro-
ve to'bring 'us under their power. We detect-
ed'arid thwarted his schemes. We broke into
the citadel, sent his wife t. o her husband,
and closed the entrance against the Turks.
We approached Thomas, Demetrius's brother,
and begged him to receive and defend the ci-
ty which was his now that his brother had
deserted to the enemy. Thomas answered that
he was not strong enough to protect us and
urged us to adopt either you or someone else
as our lord. In a council called to discuss
these matters we voted unanimously to throw
ourselves on your mercy and to hand over the
people and the state to you. Receive then
the suppliant, succor the wretched, and do
not despise our city, which is the most con-
venient base for operations in Greece.. -If,
you decide to send a fleet to the East, it
will find with us a harbor and the safest
of refuges. if you abandon us we are forced
to submit to the Turkish yoke, an event which
will assuredly be a disgrace to you and a ca-
lamity to Christendom". The Pope was so moved
that he wept as he reflected on the uncertain-
ty of earthly things. For the state which
was once the mistress of Greece, which had
invaded Asia and the East with powerful .
fleets and subsued a large part of the world,

" K. M. Setton, ' The Papacy and 'the LeVant J1204-

1571) (American Philosophical Society II) (Philadelphia,
1978T, 11,211 n. 43,223-25; K. M. Setton, "The Catala: ns
and Florentines in Greece; " vol. III. in K. M. Setton
ed., A History of the Crusades. (Wisconsin-London, 1975),
225-2T -

E. S. Piccolomini, *Thd dommehta: ri'es*6f'Pi: lis-II, 321.

 325

was at last brought so low that it could not

stand unless it sought lords in the West
and surrendered and entrusted itself to
those whose ability and power it had once
despised.

Giannone, who we have said above had

been sent from Mantua to the Peloponnese,
accompanied the embassy. He had much to
say about Monemvasia and declared it to be
place with natural fortification that if it
were defended by even a small garrison, it
would be impregnable. He implored Pius not
to let slip so favorable an opportunity to
recover Greece. The Pope assented and bid-
dingthe envoys to swear allegiance to him,
he rece-ived the surrender of Monemvasia in
his own name and-that of the Church of Rome.
He then dispatched a prefect to administer
justice and replenish the city's grain sup-
ply, which was utterly exhausted.

The Pope issued a bull by which he ratified all

the older imperial privileges and appointed Gentile

de Marcolfi, soon to be replaced by Francis of Saint

Anatolia, as governor of the city and the, Portuguese

soldier Lope. de Valdaro as "capitaneus civitate Monoba-

sie". Some authors mention that before the Monemvasio-

tes offered their city to-. the Pope-they had invited a

well known corsair Lupo de Bertagna to assume the rule

of the city. But it looks as if the similarity of the

two names has led to some confusion. In all probabili-

ty Manuel Palaeologos, who was kephale before 1460,

continued to hold the office during the period Monemva-

sia remained under the sovereignIty of the Pope and it

was he who arranged for the Venetians to get hold of

Monemvasia. It is certain that this did not happen

 326

before September 1463.1 A full understanding of these

phases of Monemvasia's history would need extensive

and specialized research in the relevant collections

of sources in order to establish a well documented

sequence the. events that followed the audience

-Qf
2
which Pope Pius Il describes with emotion.

The bull of'the Pope: Archivio gegreto Vaticanol

Miscellanea, Arm. IX, tom. 15, Lett. MeN, fols. 154r_
155v. Cf. Od. Raynaldus, ' Anriale*s' EccIesIAs'ti*ci, XIX
(Coloniae Agrippin-ai-n-, 169-3-T, p. 120.,. Setton, ' Papacy,
224-25; Setton, - Cru'sades, 27, -- Schreiner, ' Kfjinchroni-
ken, 11,505-06.
2
Setton,, Papacy, 225 n. 89 believes that the Ve-
netians took hold of Monemvasa in 1461_1'as'ea on an
answer to a petition of Thomas Palaeologos of the
Venetian Senate. But nowhere is there in the document
any evidence that Monemvasia was Venetian: Sime Ljubid,
Listine (Monumenta spectantia Historiarum Slavorum meri-
dionalium, vol 22) (Zagreb, 1891), 222-24 (Sen. Segr.
Reg. 21, fols. 103 v Cf. A. Guglielmotti,,, S,toria
-104).
de'll'a: Marina PontifItia, I-X (Rome, 1886-89), 11,310-
14; B. Krekid, "Monemvasie sous la protection papale, "
(in Serbian with French summary)' ZRVI, 6(1960), 129-
35; R. Lopez, "Il principio della guerra veneto-turca
nel 1463, "'Archilvio Veneto, 5th ser. 15(1934), 27,111;
P. SchreineFr, -Kleinchroniken, II, 505-06.
 6. The ecclesiastical history of Monemvasia

I. The Synodicon of Monemvasia

The early ecclesiastical history of Monemvasia

is obscure. Among the scant information that exists,

the Synodicon of Monemvasia would have been a valu-

able source, but unfortunately part of this document

is considered by modern historians not to be genuine.

Three parts can be distinguished in the Synodicon.

First a continuous enumeration of metropolitans of

Monemvasia which ends with the statement that this

"had been (already) written in July 1397(? )" (11-1-9).

1 * J-; Gouillard
Laurent,. Synodicon, 131,13339; '
" Le Synodikon de 110rthodoxie, 6dition et commentai-
re, " TM, 2 (19.67), 281-83. The text is reproduced from
Laurent, Synodicon, 131-32:
1 AmLLavob, BaaLXeCox), Ko)voT(xvTevou, MxTgp6pou, Ad--
OVTOQ X(XC ELCYCFLVCOU,BcLaLXCCou xciC'*Io)crA(p. MLXaAX
XCLC XPLaTop6pou, Mxnp6pou, Fecopy4ou, HavToXOv-
Toc ncLC 'AXeEdv8pou, Kocrlid xaC KcjvcrrcLvTlvou, E)e-
5 o(pdLvouQ, nftpou, *IcAvvou, NLuATa, rewpyeoQ, NLXO-
XdLob -x(xC. 'I(j)6vvou 6pao66Ecov UTITponoXvr6v Mo-
TCov
VCjlDCLCyeCLQ' (xt(, )VCCL h UvAlln.
'Hv tv CTEL CT-TAC' 8TCL CV5. C'
yeypajiji6vov To"
UTIv CC Ou;k C4).
10 8EO(PdVOUQ TOO &YLCOTdLTOU dLPXLCTtLcyx6TEOU MOVCjl5CLaeCLQ
TOO 611oxoynToo, (ItcoveCL h JIVAlln-
n6wou, ricL6xou, recopycou, KcovaTavTCvou, MxATa,

XpLcy-ro(p6pou', *Icodwou, BCLCrLXECOUxcLe NLxoXdLou

TUN &PXLEPWV MOVCIIDCLCYCCLCr h
CLEG)VICL JIVAlln!
15 *AVaCFTCLCFCOU, EdcL, NL-KoXdLou, KwvaTavTCvou, AcL-
IlLaVOO XCLC 'AvacyTCLCCOU TaV &YLC0TdLTC0V dLPXLCP6(OV
MovevtDcLaCac, cLt(zvCa jivjinr
'Apaevtou xat KcavaTcLvTCvou T6v &yLcoTdLTcav dLpXtcp&)v
h jwftn!
MovellaCLUCaQ, (XCCOVCL
20 8cob(bpou xaC 'AyaaoxXfi T6V &YLC0TdLTWV 6UOXOYnT6V

XCLC hYOU116VO)V TOO T13V MO'VE: IIDCLCFLCA)'rC)v,, CLCCOVCCL h

LVAIIII -
 328

The second part starts with the commemoration of Saint

Theophanes followed by three lists of %PXLCPeVQ" Of

Monemvasia without further definition as to their

NLXOXdLOU TOO &'YL(OTdLTOUdLPXLCULax6nou MOVEVLDaGCCLQ,

Ca 1xv 11TI-
ac co-V
25 EO(PPOVCOU TOO &YL(OTdLTOU dLPXLETELc; x6TtOU MOVEIIDCLaC-
CLQ, CLCCOVCCLh llvftTl-
dLPXLeTtLcyx6nou
, I(AAVVOU TOO &YLCOTdLTOU mov6ILDcLaCag,
CL (,)V CCL
C livftTl -//
'ICLX6)00U TOO &YL(OTdLTOU dLPXLETELcyx6TEou MOVSjIDCLCCCLQ,
30 atowea h LVAJITJ
ACOPO'HOU TOO &YLG)TdLTOU dLPXLeTUcyx6TtOU MOVCjICLCYCCLQ,
acwvccL h 11VAILTI -
*ICOC76(p -ACLC "I(C)Gft TUSV &'YLCO-rdLTWV dLPXLr:, TELCX6TECOV MO-
VEILDCLOCCLQ, accovea h VLVAIIII-
35 repcLacuou TOO &YLCOTdLTOU dLPXLETLLaK6TEOU *AV8PLaVOU-
n6XEcoc, atcavla h livAlin-
*ICLX(bOU TOO &'YLWT&TOU-JInTPOTEOMTOU 86CGCLXOVCXTIQ
TOGMOVE: jIDCLCrL6TOUf CLC(O'VCCL JIV11TIO
' ARCLR I Ou -mO V
11CMCLPq T XA Ee L (CVOU&VOU &^y L G)TdLTOU
40 XCLC dLOL6CllOU dLPXLETELcyx6Ttou MovcvLDcLcrCcLg, atcovta
livMITI -,
KupMou Too &V IICL'KCLPCq Tfl. X4ECL YEVOVLVOU &YLCO-
TdTOQ RCLI &OLUjiOQ dLPXLSTtLcx6Ttou MOVSjjDCLCYeCLQ, TOO
X6yOLQ XCLC 9PYOLQ T6 tCLUTOO TCOCILVLOV XCLMOC XCLC 6-
45 CFCCOC Ca6VOVTOQ 6TECLUEACYCLVTOC -
XCLC TdL IYLCYTCL TAV
CLUTOO 6X)iX7jCYlCLV XCLt 6V TEdCFL TOVQ dL^(CLaOVQ
15LCLX(iVL-
4JCLVTOQ Cp'(OLC, CLtG)VCCL h JIVAIlTl*
.$
(DCOTCOU TOO 6V JIOLXOLPIq Tt MEEL YEVOIltVOU &YL(OT&TOU
XCLC dLOL8CVtOU dLPXLCTZLcx6TCOU Pcocyear_, Too TAv RCL04h-
-
50 JAC *rCL6T"nV E-'XXXTICrCCLV )iCLC n6voLc oNcCoLc cLOEA-
(JCLVTOQ 6C *6VfjV XCLC I'EOXXOT: Q tEPOUC dLVCL06j1aaL ReXOCYIITI-
x6Toc Too movsjiDcxcYL6Tou (XCG)VeCL h JIVAUn'
,
AOCYLUOU TOO 6V UCLRCLP6q Tfl. XEEL YEVOIltVOU C%JL-COTd-'
TOU XCLC dLOL6CllOU &PXLETELcrx6TCOU MOVE: jIDCLO`dCLQ, TOO
55 X6yOLQ XCLI 9PYOLQ T6 tCLUTOG TCOCIIVLOV X(XXC)Q XCLI 6-
CYC(. CID6VCLVTOC RCLC Td jltyL(7TCL 6TECLUECKXVTOQ TAV t-
A)r-
CLUTOO 6XXXnO`CCLV XCLC TtOXXOVQ tEPOVQ dLVCLftICLCYL XCXOCF-
wnx6Toc XCLC tV TLELCYL TOVQ dLYCLDOVQ XCLe aeCLP6CYTOLQ 6L-
CLXdLIIQJCLVTOC 9PYOLQr CLt(OVCCL 11VAIITI*
60 ZeTETejIDPCq) L. CV8. TEP(bTnQ TOO CTOUQ.
ICT7AECL*
&'YL(A)TdLTOU
.4 IWGA(PTOO 6V IICLXCLPCq Tfl. XEE: L -YE:VO]16VOU
6OL8CUOU dLPXL6TELcyx6TEou Movcuaaatac, (cLC(ovCcL
XCLC
IIVAIITI) -
KupMou Too tV IICLXCLPCqL Tfl, XAESL YeVOVL6VOU &YLCOTdL-
65 TOU dLPXLCTLLcyR6TEOU MOVeliDOLUCCLQ, CLCCOVCCLh JIVAlln,
 329

status, ending with the mention of two abbots of an

establishment of the Monemvasiotes which is not men-

tioned (11.10-22). The last part is a list of more

or less known names of metropolitans from the end of

the 13th 1
till after the middle of the 15th century.
Usually in the Synodica the sequence of names is more

or less chronological and it would be reasonable to

expect that the first series would correspond to pre-

lates who occupied the See of Monemvasia in the earli-

er centuries and the second to names of bishops befo-

re the 14th century, Indeed the last names in the

first series andthe first names in the second corre-

spond to names of prelates known from other sources

to have occupied the See of Monemvasia between the

middle of the 9th till the 11th century, which is in

2
accordance with their place in'the Synodicon,

The first series of names contained in the Syno-

dicon of Monemvasia is found in all the Synodica of
the Palaeologan period and in the first edition of
1522, as. well as all the subsequent, of -.the Triodion

I
First edition in Pasini, ' Ccdi'c'e*s*.*.'. bibl'iothec*ae
'. Taurinensis (1749), pp. 421-26. Edition and commen-
.
tary, Laurent, Synodicon: text, 131-32; commentary,.
133-61. Gouillard, Synodikon: First part: no. XII kSe-
des metropolitana ignota)p. 118; second and third parts
no. XI, p. 117. Two additional names are contained in
the first part: rC(bPjLOQ, between the 4th and the 5th
and Atcav between the 20th and the 21st.
2 *IwdvvnC,
Hftpog, NLxATcLQ, recbpyLoc and 'I(Av-
vnQ of the first list and MLOXog and NLX6XCLOQ Of the
second.
 330

1
but without attribution to any See. Based on this

fact, which is difficult to explain, Laurent, editor

of the Synodicon of Monemvasia, developed a series

of argumentsagainst its attribution to the See of

Monemvasia, maintaining that it was forged, which

was subsequently accepted by all who dealt with the

subject. His main point is that since the same list

is reproduced by the Palaeologan Synodica and the Tri-

odion and there the prelates are explicitely. mention-

ed as metropolitans, it could not belong to Monemva-

sia's See, which was a bishopric up to the 13th cen-

tury and there is no room in the third part of the

for
Synodicon inserting 23 additional names. He at-

tributes the introduction of this "parasite" list to

an effort of the Monemvasiotes to establish the trip-

le order of bishops, archbishops and metropolitanst

which is the reasonable sequence in the evolution of

an episcopal See.

Sinc. e, as was mentioned, the first series contains

names of known prelates of Monemvasia in their correct

chronological sequence and presents no differeneces.

from that found in the Palaelogoan Synodica, and this

1 29,33f 36,282-83.
Gouillard, Synodikon, Also
p. 118 on the variations with the list in the Synodi-
con of Monemvasia. Cf. Laurent, Synodicon, 137-39.
2
Laurent, Synodicon, 135-37.
 331

is a sign of authenticity, it would be useful to exa-

1
mine the arguments against it. Laurent supports that

as long as it is accepted that the first part is not

a forgery the questions of how the list was incorpo-

rated in the Palaeologan Synodica and the Triodion

and of why the name of the See is not reproduced, will

2
remain without answer. The fact, however, that the

list is found in the Synodica and the Triodion does

not form an argument against its attribution to Mo-

nemvasia. A list of Patras is also found in the first

and all the subsequent editions of the Triodion but

this is 3
not considered to be a forgery. Furthermore,

the incorporation of the list in the Palaeologan

.

1
On the Synodicon of the Palaeologan period and
the importance of the incorporated list: Gouillard,
Synodikon, 21-36, esp. 30.
2
Laurent, Synodicon, 136-37.
3
On the first edition of the Triodion in Venice
by the printers da Sabio and the care of Giraldo and
Kounadis, in 1522: Alphonse Raes, "Les livres litur-
giques grecs publies a Venise, 11-M61'arige's E., 'Ti*sserand,
III (Studi e Testi, 233) (Vatican City, 1964), 209-
222. He mentions the untrustworthiness of the scribe
Palaeocopas, pointing, however, to the fact that the-
re were more than one persons, at the time, with the
same name. In any case the scribe of the Triodion , who
died before 1522 could not have been the homonymous for-
ger who was active until after the middle of the 16th
century, cf. OCP, 28 (1962), 288-99. On the editions
of the Triodi-on also: E. Legrand, ' Biblio5raphie* Hell6-
(Paris, 1903), 111,273 no. 242 (rept. -I-99-62,
,
61, no. 240); Gouillard, Synodikon, 36 and n.
196.
On Palaeocapas, Ch. Patrinelis, "EXXTjvec_ xcA)6Lxo_
YPdLPOL T@V XP6V(OV Tft 'AvcxyevvAcrecoQ, "'_EMA, 8-9 (1958-
59), 101-02. Mr. An. Pardos, who has made a resaerch
on the family of Palaeocapas, has kindly informed me
that there are at least four persons bearing the name
of Constanine Palaeocapas, who were active during the
16th century.
 332

Synodica could be accidental, it could have been a-

dopted as a model for a modification of the Synodicon

by the Patriarchal Synod and the copyist could have

neglected its elimination f rom the f inal text. This

would explain both the omission of the name of the

See from the original list and the perpetuation of

1
the list in all subsequent reproductions.

In reality the acceptance that the first part of

the Synodicon of Monemvasia is a forgery does not pro-

vide answers to any of the questions posed by the edi-

tor of the Synodicon. The hypothesis that the list has

been joined to the other parts of the Synodicon of

Monemvasia to produce bishops-archbishops-metropoli-

tans cannot stand. because this sequence does not fi-

-nally occur. One finds instead metropolitans-&pxLe-

Petc-archbishops.

The fact that Monemvasiar as the sources indi-

cate, was raised to the status of a metropolis In the

late 13th century forms the strongest argument against

the acceptance of the first part of the Synodicon as

genuine. Two sources, however, which apparently ignor-

ed the first part of the Synodicon, indicate that

1
As suggested by Gouillard, Synodikon, 282, who
does not apply it, however, for the Synodicon of Monem-
vasia, pp. 29-30. Cf. the case of the model of a pitta,
kion using the name of the metropolitan of Monemvasia:
Darrouzesr' R6gestes' du Patriwrcat, no. 2041.
 333

Mon vasia held the rank of a metropolis before the

10th century, the Petitions to the Patriarch and the

1
Chronicon Maius. The Petitions contain more than

one reference. In the shorter it is said about Maina:

"in addition you deprived me of the bishopric, which

the church under my jurisdiction possesses for almost

500 years according to chrysobulls and sigillia and

2
synodical decisions". In the longer it is explain-

ed concerning-Monemvasia in connection with the local

saint Theophanes, who lived in the 9th century that

"at this time (Monemvasia) was a metropolis, as one

can learn accurately from the inscriptions on the

icons of this saint and his troparia and idiomela

which are sang and no less from the history of his

life" In other parts of the same report the depen-

.3
dence of Maina from Monemvasia already in the 9th

century and other hints, which suggest that Monemvasia

had been 4
a metropolis, are repeatedly mentioned.

1
Lampros,, ' NE, 12 (1915), 257-318, passim; Ps.
Phrantzes, Grecu, 538. Both could have strengthened
their arguments by using the first list of the Syno-
dicon, had they known it.
2 Av
'1&peVXe(; -mat -c-6v &c4axontjv gxoucya vgjie-caL
xaT'tii6 txxXTIaCa axcb6v TxevT(xxoaIoua xp6vouc 6Ld
Te XpuaoDo6XX(A)v nat aLYLXXCG)V Rat TCPdLEE:W'V CYUV08LXC)V". *
NE, 12 (1915), 271,11.29-31,271,1.1.
3, V 6CYTL
MnTp6noXLQ TnVLRCLOTa ROL06C TOGTO Ila-
OCUV AXPLOnQ dLTE6Te T6v 6TEL7PCL06V T8V TE
ctx6vwv -roG
&YCOU T008C Rat TC)V dL8OU6VCOV C8Lojj6Xcav
TponapCcov xat
TTov 6*&Tt6
CLOTOG, oOx Tfic ToO DIou tueNou auyypa-,:
(pfic_" : NE, 12 (1915), 279,11.18-21.
4.
NE, 12 (1915), 275t 277,278,282.
 334

The passage in the Chronicon Maius, which has

been already cited, states that Emperor Maurice rais-

ed Monemvasia to the rank of a metropolis and granted

other privileges concerning the freedom of the city,

with a chrysobull issued in the year 6101, indictio

1
11, which is the year 592-3, during Maurice's reign.

Since Macarios Melissenos, who was metropolitan of Mo-

nemvasia in the 16th century, has been identified with

the compilator of the Chronicon Maius and forger of

the Chronicon of Sphrantzes, the information contain-

ed in his compilation as well as any document of Mo-

nemvasia, which presented difficulties were believed

2
to be fabrications of Macarlos. Consequently his

statement on the chrysobull of Maurice was not taken

into consideration, as also the hints contained in

the Petitions,. particularly since they have never

been systematically commented.

There seems to be no reason to discredit the

statement of the Chronicon Maius, which is not

1
Ps. Phrantzes, Grecu, 538; above pp. 44-45.
2 '"Autour
Dlger, ' Re'gesten no. 92; R. -J. Loenertz ,
du Chronicon Maius attribu Gebrges Phrantz6s, "' Bvzantina
et Franco-Graeca (Studi e Testi, 118) (Rorr.e, 1970), 3-, 44;
literarischer -,
F. Dlger, "Ein und diplomatischer Fill-
scher des 16. Jahrhunderts: Metropolit Makarias von
Monembasia, " Byzantini*s*che Di'pl'omatik (Ettal, 1956),
225-44; Binon, * EO, 37, pp 292-304; Schreiner Prostagma,
214-25; Medvedev, -VV 32 (1971), pp. 229-30; e. a.
 335

contradicted by any other sources. one would, however,

have expected the See to become an archbishopric, as

1
was then more common. In the 6th century the Pelo-

ponnese depended ecclesiastically from Rome and apart

from the predominance of the See of Corinth over the

others, not very much is known about the organization

of ecclesiastical affairs in the peninsula. Monemva-

sia could have remained in that status until at least

the 9th century as is deduced from the Petitions.

A series of 23 prelates could have occupied its See

as mentioned in the Synodicon of Monemvasia. --

11 The first list of the Synodicon

.

First in the series of the 23 names of metropoli-

tans in the Synodicon of Monemvasia'is the name of
Damianos. He must have been the energetic bJshop, who
took the initiative and succeeded in raising the epi-
scopal See and could hardly be the same as the one

who participated in the migration of the Lacedaemoni-

ans about forty years earlier. Nothing is known of

him and of the 16 metropolitans, whose names follow

1
Bon, ' P61oponn4se, 103-05. There are indications
that some other Sees in Greece were not simple bisho
prics, e. g. Athens, see below.
 336

in the list. Among them one would have expected to

find that of Theodosios, "of the city of the Lacedae-

monians", who was present at the 6th Oecumenical Coun-

cil held in Constantinople in 680-1 and who, as has

been maintained, should be identified with the prelate

from Monemvasia. In the minutes of the Oecumenical

Council his signature is found among those of a group

of bishops from cities in Greece. One should note the

prominent position given to the prelate from Athens.

The sources,.. which claim that Athens was a metropolis

in the late 8th century, have also been considered
2
as forged.

The omission of the name of Theodosios from the

Synodicon could be accidental, as often happened, or

a corruption may have occured and his name might be

one of those listed near Leo's who due to*his place

in the list must have occupied the See at about the
3
date of the 6th Council.

1
Mansi, XI, 612,624,645,667; Riedinger, Pra-
senzl*i'sten, 7-8,14-23; Lilie, Thrakien, 43.
2
V. Laurent,. "L'6rection de la m6tropole d' A-
thanes et le statut 6ccl6siastique de l'Illyricum au
VIIIe s., " ttudes Byzantines, 1 (1943), 68-71.
3 (ca.
Between Damianos (591-2) and Ioannis 905),
the last name, on whom see below, the interval is
414 years. Divided by 23, the number of metropolitans,
it gives an average of 18 years of office, which points
to the fifth name, Leo.
 337

The first name of a metropolitan known from other

sources is the 18th, Peter, who was present at the

7th Oecumenical Council of Nicaea in 787. In the lists

of presence and of signatures Peter is found among

the group of Sees from Greece, as in the previous

1
Council. The editor of the lists from Nicaea has no-

ticed their: privileged place among the metropolitans

present. He attributes it to the fact that they had

been recently incorporated in the hierarchy of the Pa-

triarchate of Constantinople and their exact position

was not yet established. if, however, Athens and Mo-

nemvasia being still under the jurisdiction of Rome,

held the rank of a metropolis, then there is nothing

peculiar in their position at a relatively high place

2
in the lists.

Some information on Peterr who was worshipped as

a local saint in' the area of Monemvasia, and his per-

formance during the Council of Nicaea is offered in

the "Life of Saint Theophanes", another local saint of

1
Mansi, XIII, 392 B; 'NE, 12 (1915). J. Dar-
Uu--Concile -279;
rQuz6s, "Listes 6pi-scopales de Ilic6e (787), "
REB, 33--(1.975), 65-,. *67; Laurent-, Synodicon, 143.

2
Darrouz6s, Nic6e, 22-26. Cf. p. 14, on the
signatures of all theprelates, who signed as bishops,
whether they were metropolitans or not.
 338

I
Monemvasia.
Holy Peter, having firmly established and
secured these and having displayed himself
as an advocate of the Council before all,
and having blocked the mouths of the heretics
by oral and written arguments and offered
the Council irrefutable authority he surpris-
ed and moved emperors and prelates and was
glorified and praised by them for his ex-
tremely brave opposition against the impious.

Peter was strongly iconophile and so was his successor

Theophanes, who according to the fragment of his "Li-

fe" had been the companion of the future Patriarch

Methodi s when he travell&d to Rome, for help from

the Pope for the restoration of the holy icons.

-
The Synodicon, however, mentions Ioannis after Peter

and two letters of Theodore Stoudites mention as the

companion of Methodi s Ioannis"of Monemvasia. Far from

suspecting another forgery one could identify the two

and assume that one was the clerical and the other the

monastic name of the same person, since it is not un-

common that In local tradition the clerical name is

replaced by the monastic and in some Synodica both

the clerical and the monastic name of some bishops

are mentioned. The separate praises to Theophanes

must have been added in the second part of the Synodi-

con at a time when the clerical name of Ioannis had

1.
VE, 12 (1915), 279,11.22-27. An icon of him
existed7ln Gheraki, C. Zesiou, "*ETEL'YPCLCPCLC AcL-KwvLxfjr., "
BuCcLv-rQ;, 1 (1909), 144, no. 98, which so far I have
not been able to discover, and a church, according to
local traditionr was dedicated to his memory in the
lower city of Monemvasia, identified with the mosque:
Calogeras, MOvejiDcLcrIcL. 27; Xanalatou-Kouloglou, 14,58-59.
 339

been forgotten in local tradition and was believed mis-

1
sing from the list.

According to the fragment of his "Life", this

metropolitan was ordained by his predecessor Peter

before his death, which was not common practice., The

fragment is too short for a full understanding of

the procedure but it cannot be rejected altogether

since Monemvasia depended still from Rome and the

circumstances due to Iconoclasm and the ensuing per-

2
secutions were exceptional. Ioannis- Theophanes, an

archbishop according to the Petition, went to Rome,

around 815 and stayed there until 817-8, with Metho-

dios who was still an abbot. The two men succeeded

in provoking the Pope's intervention with the Emperor

on-the case of the icons, although the sources pro-

3 (Pl. 12)
vide no details on their activities there.

1
Gouillard, Synodikon, 273,275; cf. V. Grumel,
R6gestes' da Patriarcat, 11, no. 520, p. 106'.
2
NE, 12 (1915), 279; cf. E. Hermann, "Appunti
sul diill-tto metropolitico nella chiesa bizantina, "
-, OCP, 13 (1947), 524-28.
3
A. Mai, ' Nova: Patrum B'ibll: citheca, (Rome, 1852f f)
VIII, nos. 192,193; PG, 99, col. 1209; J. Pargoire,
"Saint M6thode de Co7n-stantinople avant 821 "* EO, 6
,
(1903), 126-31; C. Van der Vorst, "Les relations de
Saint Theodore Studite avec Rome, " An. Boll. 32 (1913),
,
439-47, esp. 445-46. C. Zesiou, BuCavTCS, p. 120,
places in the ruined monastery called "Askitaria", in
the outskirts of Monemvasia, the tomb of Saint Theo-
dore of Kythera. Since Saint Theodore's tomb is in
Kythera it is possible that it is meant Theophanes.
Cf. Kalligas, *EPELTE(DjItVOL vaoC, 35-36. Two Venetian
lists of churches of the 17th c. mention one dedicat-
ed to the ""A LOL E)cLL)jjcLToupyoe TflQ MovqjiOcLaCcLQ-II: Dokos,
BNJB, 2j, pp. 117-39; 22; pp. 328-29.
 340

The next metropolitan listed in the Synodicon,

Nicetas, is known from another source to have occupi-

ed the throne of Monemvasia during the reign of Empe-

rors Leo and Alexander, who reigned between 886 and

912. Between the stay of loannis in Rome and these

dates there is a gap of at least 70 years, which sug-

gests that either a name is missing or that the vacancy

was caused by some other reason, which cannot be speci-

fied. Nicetas has already been mentioned in connecti-

on with the curious story on the relics of a series of

saints from Spain that were deposed in a church of Mo-

nemvasia. Before becoming a metropolitan there, he

held the episcopal throne of Coron. His presence in the

metropolis of Monemvasia should be placed at the be-

ginning rather than at the end of the reign of Leo

and Alexander,. becausd between him and a second Ioannis,

who was the metropolitan in the early 10th centuryl

two 2
other names are listed.

The next metropolitan after Nicetas is George.

A seal of his exists, dated precisely at the end of

the 9th century, a date which conforms with the place
3
in the Synodicon. The following is Nicolaos. A seal

1
Peeters, ' An. ' Bo*11,30 (1911) 304-05.
,
2
Above, 125-29.
3
V. Laurent, * Le* Corpus' 'de*s' *s*ccaux. ' W L'Eqli'se
(Paris, 1963), 431, no. 577: "r-e-wpy-eo-u CnLcm6nou Movo-
Dacreag". Cf. Synodicon, 145,.
 341

of a Nicolaos of Monemvasia does in fact exist but

has been dated to the 11th century; a:nd must therefore

belong to the prelate of this name found in the se-

1
cond part of the Synodicon. The first list of metro-

politans ends with a second Ioannis. This person is

also mentioned in the account of the Arab conquest of

Monemvasia, given by bishop Paul. In the narration a

few details are given concerning Ioannis. He was para-

lyzed on one side of his body when he tried to repaint

the portrait of Saint Cyrus which had been pierced by

the spear of an Arab and from which blood sprang. It

is not known if he remained in office after his para-

lysis or if he abdicated. No other sources refer to

2
the fact.

With Ioannis ends the series of metropolitans.

In the 10th century, indeed, Monemvasia is known to ha-
3
ve been a bishopric, suffragan of Corinth. . The low-

ering of rank of a See did not happen often and there

4
must have been a very serious cause for it. Since

1
Laurent, ''Corpus, 433-34, no. 580. Another seal
of the 10th c. of Athanasios, whose name is not found
in the lists, seems to have belonged to a bishop of
Modon: 432-33, no. 579; cf. Synodicon, 146,
2
Peeters, An. Boll, 25(1906), 237.

Bon, P610ponn6se, 107-13,

4
Some exaples in J. Darrouz6s, "Notes ind-dites
de transferts dpiscopaux, ""REB, 40 (1982), 157-72.
 342

there is no information on the lowering of the metro-

polis of Monemvasia one can only conjecture on a rea-

sonable explanation. It could be attributed to a natural

disaster or an enemy attack which was so destructive

that the town lost its vitality and degraded to. a state

that could not justify the rank of a metropolis. For

Monemvasia there is no mention of any disaster except

for the raid of the Arabs, following which, however,

there are no signs of a decline, on the contrary the

city in the 1 Oth - century sources gives the impressi-

on of being prosperous. Consequently the reason for

the lowering of rank should be sought elsewhere. A

misconduct, or a controversy on the part of the eccle-

siastical authorities of Monemvasia could have been

justified earlier, during Iconoclasm, but not in

the beginnin' 9 of the 10th century. A third possibility

might be more justifiable. The end of the series of

metropolitans of Monemvasia might be due to the reor-

ganization of the hierarchy of the Sees of the Patri-

archate of Constantinople which took place when the

ecclesiastical province of Illyricum, to which Monem-

vasia belonged and which had depended from Rome, came

under the jurisdiction of Constantinople.

The integration of the Sees of Illyricum has been

always linked with the beginnings of Iconoclasm and

dated to the 8th century. The arguments, however, for

this dating are not-very convincing, since the sources

 343

cited refer to the fact indirectly while for an event

of such an importance one would have expected more

1
explicit and categorical information. The Notitiae

Episcopatuum which listed a number of Sees of the Il-

lyricum as part of the jurisdiction of Constantinople,

have been shown by the latest study on the subject

not to have been official lists. The author of the

study maintains that in the late 9th century the ec-?-

clesiastical division of the Sees was still unsettled

and that the entry of the Western provinces into the

hierarchy of Constantinople was gradual and had not

been accomplished before the end of the century. He

concludes that the beginning of the new situation

should be placed in the first decade of the 10th cen-

2
tury.

It is reasonable to accept that the end of the

list of metropolitans and the lowering of rank of

the See of Monemvasia to that of a simple bishopric

is due to the new situation created by the official

integration of the Sees of Illyricum, into the Patri-

archate of Constantinople and to a necessary modifi-

1
M. Anastos, "The transfer of Illyricum, Cala-
bria and Sicily to the jurisdiction of the Patriarcha-
te of Constantinople, "' 'SII*loge Bizantina irl onore' di
Cv S. G. ' Mercati (Rome, 1957), 16-17, slAt-ing Theophanes,
De Boor, 404,408-08,410# where there is no statement
of the fact whatsoever. On the irgdfor a reinterpreta-
tion: Darrouz6s, Nicee, p. 22 and n. 5.

Darrouz6s, ' Notktla: e 'Zpi, s,c,cpa:tuum, 18', 211,32,53-55.

 344

cation of their hierarchy to suit the new situation.

The procedure must have been long and must have rais-

ed controversies and oppositions but also energetic

efforts from prelates and influential inhabitants

of certain Sees to secure a high rank in the new

1
hierarchy. The leader ot the church of Monemvasia,

the semi-paralyzed Ioannis, for whose office a more

acurate dating can thus be established during the

first decade of the 10th century, could not compete

with them and consequently his See was squeezed some-

2
where among the suffragan bishoprics of Corinth.

The second list of the Synodicon

In the second part of the Synodicon of Monemvasia

after the invocation of $aint Theophanes the Homolo-

ghetes follow four lists of names, three of bishops

and one of abbots. They are all unknown from other

sources with the exception of Paul and Nicolaos. Paul

was a native of Monemvasia, "ydvvTju(x xaC Op6jijia".

His relatives in the city are mentioned occasionally

in his narrations, like an uncle of his, who was healed

I
E. g. Patras and in this context many documents
must have been mobilized to produce proofs of the im-
portance of the See, like the so-called Chronicle of
Monemvasia.
2
Darrouz6s, Notitiae Epii*scopatuum, Notitia 7, no.
27, p. 282.
 345

during a dream in the church of Saints Cyrus and Io-

annis, in the tradition of the practices in the shrine

of the two Saints in Aboukir, but also of Asclepios,

1
who had been worshiped in Epidauros Limera.

It is very difficult to establish a biography

for Paul, because information on him is very meagre.

He was already a bishop of Monemvasia before 955 and

2
at that date he is found in Constantinople. He

remained in office after 959.3 His seal was discover-

4
ed among the finds in Corinth. Paul is known mainly

because he is the author of a series of narrations

"for the benefit of the souP, which seem to have en-

joyed a great popularity. Not, only are they found in

a large number of manusripts but they were also trans-

lated in-. Arabic a few decades. after they were written

I. 'Paolo,
Kominis,. 231-248, where the existing bi-
ographical information is collected. The healing: Pee-
ters, ' Ari. Boll. 25, (1906), 233-240. On the cult in Egypt:
Festugi6re, Sainte'Th6cle, 217-56. On survivals of the
cult of Asclepios: Dill_ehaye, *L6gerides, 143-44.
2
Paul was in Constantinople at the date when
Paul of Latros was dying (955): Paolo, 233.
-Kominis,..
3
In one of his narrations he refers to Constan-
tine Porphyrogenitus as already dead. Constantine died
in 959. Peeters, An. 'Boll. 25 (19061,234.
4 432, no. 578: "ML6X(p Vdy
Laurent, Corpus, ee-
Otl tnLcx6Ttcp Mov c )f3cLcCcxc". Laurent, Synodicon, 144-
45.
 346

1A
in the 11th century, and in Latin. number of nar-

rations refer to events which took place in Monemva-

sia and give a vivid picture of life in a byzantine

city of the 10th century, with cutious details of

more general interest, like the case of a Slav slave

2
who converted to Christianity. They display a wide

knowledge of the world and of literature as is clear

from the narrations on the relics of the saints from

Barcelona and on. Pyrros the Hermit and Sergius the

3
"demotes" of Alexandria. Some give valuable topo-

graphical informati on, like the existence of a lower

and. upper city or the name of a spring, probably near

the surface of the sea, called "The brackish water".

Two important monasteries, Hodhighitria in the upper

and the Theotokos which had Catechoumena in the lower

city, seem to have been landmarks of the town. The

"lower" monastery, as it is also called, the ruins

of which could be those of present day KaTnxo6jieva,

should probably be identified with 8eoT6xoQ TflQ ALa-

xovtac mentioned in the "Life of Saint Theodore of

Kythera" who stayed in Monemvasia at aproximatelt.,

1
J. M. Sauget, "Le Paterikon du manuscrit arabe
276 de la Bibliothaque Nationale de Paris, ". Le Mu- .
s6on, 82 (1969), 363-404; G. Graf, -'Ges'chichte der
christl'icheri*arabi'schen Literatur, II (.Studi e Te-
sti, 133) (Vatican City, 1947), 41-42,517-18; Ko-
minis, Paolo, 237-48. Cf. ' BHG no. 1449 with biblio-
graphy of the published miracles.
2
F. Dvornik, ' Les SlaVe's, ' Byzance' 'et Rome' 'au IXe
siecle (Paris, 1926T, 245.

3
Peeters, ' 30 (1911) 296Z-301 ; C. Fal-
,
"Racconto-cTi'-'-P-ao-lodiM<)nembasiasull'EremitaPirro
cetta,
eil "Demota" Sergio, " RSBN, 2-3 (XII-XIII)(1965-6), 189-91
 347

the time of Paul. His life is also a source of infor-

mation on the churches of Monemvasia and the area a-

round. It mentions among others a still extant church

dedicated to the Virgin, in the village of Taireia

or Tairaia a few kilometres south of Monemvasia. Ap-

parently, according to the local tradition Maleas

was a "jiLxp6-v wAyLov 70poc" and a proof of this is

the large number of churches that still survive in

the peninsula most certaily dating from before the

13th century.

Of the names that follow after Paul only one

is known, of Nicolaos, of whom a seal exists, as al. -

ready mentioned. The chronological-indications seem

to suggest that he was a contemporary of Patriarch

Michael Cerularios, during the first half of the 11 th

2
century.

1
Da Costa Louillet, Sainte Marthe, 344-46; BHG
1175; Kalligaz, HaghiA Sophia, 218-20; OJ-konomides, -
"AYL69 Oc66copoc, 271,261-87; V. Kepetzis,, IIAE (1932)
386-89. A list of the-churches tfi the area of Epidau-
ros Limera (Monemvasia) in: Drandak1s, etc. 'I"EpE: uvcL",
TIAE (1983), A', 257-63.1.5 churches. are mentioned, 56
of which are certainly byzantine, while many others
seem to be reconstructions of byzantine churches. Two,
at least, should be added: Kalligas, 'EpELTtCOjA6VOLvaoC, 35-36.
2
"Kx5PLE DOAaEL Trp aCp bo6Xy NLXOXdL(p 6TELaxftp Movo-
0(ictaC": Laurent, Corpus, 433-34, no. 580. Cf. R. Etze-
oglou, 6E:60116V(X YLdL 'CA DUCCLVTL'VA
"WcL *ApX(DLLOXO-YL'KdL
MoveUaaCcLl"' Acts 'of the -Tst Tnt. * Cori. ' of Pel. ' St., II,
(Athens, 1976:: -78), 320, on a church in the lower city
dating from the 11th-12th century.
 348

After 1204 the church of Monemvasia kept in con-

tact with the Patriarch at Nicaea and among the last

names in the list of the Synodicon, one must have su-

rely belonged to the bishop who was witness to the

1
surrender of the city to the Franks. As the Petition

to the Patriarch states, he obeyed the order of the

"ruler" and stayed behind, because he prefered to

share the hardships of his flock than to emigrate.

But he was faced with extreme difficulties, since he

had used all the income of his See during the long

and hard years of the siege and all the subsequent

revenues were ceded to the Catholic bishop. He had'not

been able to continue to live in his See and the con-

querors did not allow for another Greek bishop to

replace him in their dominion. Most probably the Or-

thodox bishop must have died soon and, unless another

was elected in Nicaea and resided there or in one of

the Monemvasiot colonies, the See must have remained

2
vacant. for some years.

As Latin bishop for the See of Monemvasia, which

was one of the suffragans of Corinth, was appointed

in 21 August 1253 Oddo or Eudes de Verdun by Pope

1
Loenertz,,
R. -J. "Lettres de George Bardan&s m6-
tropolite de Corcyre au patriarche oecum&nique Germain
Il (1 226-1227c) EEBE, 33 (1964) 108.
," ,
2
NE, 12 (1915), 290-91.
 349

Innocent IV He must have been the only Latin bishop

.
appointed and less than 10 years later the Latin See
1
disappeared. Innocent's registers record on the

date 15 April 1252 the name of an important Frankish

establishment functioning since several years in the

area of Monemvasia, the Cistercian monastery of De

2
Pirn or de Pirt. The noble woman Marguerite, daught-

er of Narjot de Toucy was given by the Pope permissi-

on to depart from the monastery and get married. The

fact that the monastery was functioning in the area of

Monemvasia means that the area where it was situated

must have been in Frankish hands from at least some

years, before 1250. ' The phonetical resemblance of the

word Pirn with IIPLVtXOQ or IILpvVxoc, where a mona-

stery dedicated to Saint George is mentioned some

years later in the chrysobull issued by Andronikos

II for the possessions of the metropolis of Monemva-

sia , which had a rich property, including a lake,

suggests that the Cistercian monastery must have

been situated in Helos, which had been conquered by

the Franks around 1223 and could, therefore, have

been established there soon after.

1
Archivic, Segreto Vaticano, Reg. 23, no. 132;
R6gistres d'Innocent IV, 111,306, no. 6952; Bon, Mo-
r9e, 100 n. 1; Miller, Monemvasia, 233.
2
Ar. Seg. Vat., Reg. 22, no. 211. The reading'"Pirn"
is not-certain: Berger, Re7gistres d'Innocent IV, I, 40, no.
5647. J. Longnon, Les Toucy en orient (Auxerre, 1958), g-
10, does not mention ' the monastery; Bon, Mor6e, 127-28,
also, and considers Marguerite the sister .
and not the
daughter of Narjot de Toucy.
 IV The Metropolis of Monemvasia
.

In the Chronicle of Monemvasia, the second part

of the Turin-Kutlumus version, i. e. the Short Chroni-

cle of the metropolis of Lacedaemonia is introduced

1.
as follows..

After the submissionof this present land

with the Grace of God and its subordination
to the mighty and holy emperors, first took
the Seether. prelate of the most holy metro-
olis of Monemvasia kyros Gregorios who be-
ing exarch and having the rights over the
whole of the Peloponnese he ordained in
Amykli Nicephoros...

Based on this information historians have accepted

the view that the bishopric of Monemvasia was raised

2
to a metropolis by Michael VIII. This view has never

been contested despite the fact that of the two Noti-

tiae, which have also been taken into consideration and

are believed to be contemporary to Michael VIII, one

mentions, Monemvasia as a bishopric of the metropolis

of Corinth and the other as a metropolis ranking in

the 98th place. Historians have-accepted that the first

Lampros, *TCTopLud McXeTAjictTcL, 103-04.

2 146-47;
Laurent, Synodicon, Binon-, -EO, 37 0938),
277-78; Dblger, * Regesten, 1897a, 1898--Tcf. 2237);
-nos.
Laurent, ' R6gestes du Patri*arcat, IV, no. 1361; Athe-
nagoras Paramythias and Filiaton, 'H MnTp6TEoXLC MO,
veii0acrCac (Athens, 1930), 5; Zakythinos, ' Despiotat,, II,
271-72
 351

reflected a slightly earlier situation, and Gregory

has been
considered to be the first metropolitan of
1 his
Monemvasia. It is strange, however, that name

is not found in the Synodicon. The editor of this

text stresses this surpising gap: "The prelate whose

name is omitted by the Synodicon symbolized the ele-

vation of his See to the highest honour and also in

his compatriots' eyes it was he who had restored Or-

thodoxy in the city". - He believes that he must have

held the See as soon as the city was liberated and

that he had his jurisdiction extended over all the

Greek section of the Peloponnese where he ordained

2
and appointed his subordinates.

The testimony from other sources was believed

to conf irm the raising of the See during Michael's

reign. It might be useful to examine these sources.

A note on a manuscript of the end of the 13th centuryl

mentions that the elevation took place "after our en-

tering Constantinople". There is, however, no further

3
specification of the date. The Synodical decision of

1
Not. 10, Parthey, 125; Not. 13, parthey, 256;
Binon, ' EO, 37 (1938), 278 n. 1,2,3,4.
2 146-47.
Laurent, Synodicon,
3
From ms Vat. Gr. 1455, fol. 233V : Laurent,
EO, 31 (1932), 318 n. 3 and EO, 35 (1936), 115 n. 2;
Tlnon, ' EO, 37 (19 3 8) -
,277.
 352

1397, concerning the dispute between the metropolis

of Corinth and that of Monemvasia was also believed

1
to contain evidence.. It states:

the great chartophylax brought an old regi-

ster, in which, according to the then pre-
vailing custom, the daily synodical acts
were noted, and spreading it out he found
exposed in extent that very first act, by
which the then bishop of Monemvasia was gi-
ven the honour of metropolitan and the afo-
re mentioned bishoprics of Corinth, by'im-
perial decree.
2
Futher on it narrates:

the most holy metropolis of Corinth having

succumbed to siege, the then Emperor... not
only him personally, but also all the fol-
lowing bishops he honoured with the ' offi-
...
ce of metropolitan.

One has to note that these references do not contain

any chronological indication. Another source is the

Petition-to the Patriarch. It mentions vaguely that

the elevation took place when Corinth was captured

and at another point it quotes the extract from the

Synodical act already mentioned. It is obvious that

itconfuses to some extent the acts of Michael with

3
those of Andronikos,

No source attributes explicitly the elevation of

Monemvasia to Michael VIII. As a matter of fact no

1
Miklosich-MUller, 11,288,11.23-29; Binon,
E0,37 (1938), 276.
2 Binon,
Miklosich-MUller, 11,288,11.30-35;
E0,37 (1938),, 276.
3. (1915), 281,289
WE, 12 and passim.
 353

substantial change in the ecclesiastical hierarchy

is mentioned during his reign. The Notitiae Episcopa-

tuum, as has been recently proved, were not official

lists and it is not at all certain that they reflect

the actual situation of the Church at a certain given

time and consequently they cannot form conclusive evi-

dence that Michael VIII raised Monemvasia to a metro-

1
polis.

It has been claimed that Michael's name is mis-

sing from the relevant sources because it was erased

due to the damnatio memoriae which was imposed for

2
his unionist policy. But in the chrysobulls of An-

dronikos 11 and Andronikos III concerning the city

of Monemvasia reference is made to the document gran-

ted by Michael and if Michael had issued a document

concerning the church of Monemvasia one would have

expected it to be mentioned in the later chrysobulls.

3
However, there is no such reference.

1
Cf. Laurent, Synodicon, 147 and n. 2. Darrouz6s,
Notitia'e*Epi. scopatuum, 162-163 on'the li; ts of Michael's
time; 171 on the lack of any, records for possible
changes during Michael's reign; p. 165 and esp. n. 3
on the notices concerning Monemvasia, and 183 and n. 2,
3, on the cof usion created by the vies of Laureqt and Binon.
2
Laurent, Synodicon, 147.
3
Miklosich-Mu"ller, V, 154-55,165-68. Michael
is not mentioned also among-the emperors-having gran-
ted "chrysobulls" for Monemvasia in the chrysobull
of John Kantakouzenos: Medvedev,, VV, 32, pp. 227-
28.
 354

The Chronicon Maius contains a reference that it

was Andronikos II who elevated Monemvasia to a metro-

polis and a similar reference is found in Ps. Dorothe-

os. This was, however, rejected by modern historians.

Despite their denial the chrysobull of Andronikos II,

of June 1301, contains the personal testimony of the

Emperor's that he personally honoured the See of Mo-

nemvasia by raising it to a metropolis. This state-

ment has gone so far unnoticed. In the prooimion, a-

fter long praises for the Metropolitan, for whose sake

the Emperor issued the document, he mentions that the

assets of the city are such that they alone, it is

sure, would have induced him to alter its status (lie-

TCLnOLflCYCLL)and to promote its See to a higher status

and merit and rank; and all this even if something

like that'had not taken place in the past, as was the

case with Monemvasia, or had been thought--that it had

taken place. -At this point Andronikos not only eluci-

dates that the elevation of Monemvasia is due to him

but also that evidence had been presented to him accor-

ding to which Monemvasia had held in the past the ele-

vated position, adding that in any case he had beenm..

determined to raise Monemvasia, to the rank of a metro-

2
lis. Consequently that first act, the imperial decree

I
Ps. Phrantzes, Grecu, 538; Ps. Dorotheos, 400,
403. Laurent, Synodicon, 145-46; Binon, ' EO, 37 (1938)
279. Laurent, Les faux, 155-57.
2
Binon, ' EO, 37 (1938), 308,11.84-90.
 355

which is mentioned in the Synodical act of 1397, must

be attributed to Andronikos II and not to Michael

Vill.

The exact dating of the elevation of Monemvasia

and of the issuing of the first relevant imperial do-

cument is given by the Chronicon Maius, which deli-

vers the date 6800, indictio 5, i. e. 1291-2.1 The

same date is found in a Short Chronicle, which men-

tions that "the (prelate) of Monemvasia became metro-

2
politan in the year 6800 indictio 14". The editor

of the Short Chronicle, who according to the prevai-

ling view attributes the elevation to, Michael. VIII,,

considered that, since the indictio mentioned,, 14,

does not comply with the year 6800 or 1291-2, the

Short Chronicle did not refer to the elevation but to

the date'of Essue of the chrysobull of Andronikos IIF

1301 is indictio- 14, and completed the date to

, which
6809.3 Howeve r, -'the Short Chronicle in its 48 paragra-

phs has as a rule correct dates and only in two other

cases makes use of the indictio in one of them mista-

kenly. Furthermore it speaks clearly about the elevation

1
Ps. Phrantzes, Grecu, 538.
2
Schreiner,, Kleinchroiliken, 1,32/12, p. 230,
11,216.
3
Schreiner, * Kleln'chrorfiken, 11,216.
 356

to a metropolis. Most probably then the date 1291-2

mentioned by both sources should be considered cor-

1
rect.

One of the difficulties for accepting this dating

is the fact that the signature of the metropolitan of

Monemvasia is contained among a series of signatures

of prelates under the "Tomos" of the Synod at Blacher-

nai, dated by its editor in August 1285, which would

2
mean that the elevation had already taken place. it

is, however, certain that many of the signatures were

added later, as the editor himself admits. 'The year

1289, when Patriarch Gregory died, has been so far con-!,.

sidered the limit, even though all manuscripts deliver-

ing a date mention 1291-2.3 The confusion concerning

the dating of the signatures is evident and, until a

special study appears,. it cannot be used as a basis

for dating other. events.

Consequently according to the previous analysis

Andronikos II and not Michael VIII honoured Monemvasia

1
Schreiner,, Kleinchroniken, 1,32, pp.
2
Laurent, Rdgestes'du Patriarcat, IV, no. 1490,
pp. 279-285; Dblg7er-, Regesten, 21097-,-V. Laurent, "Les
signataires du second synode des Blachernes (6t6
1285), " EO,, 26 (1927), 129-141; "Notes .
de
V. Laurent,
chronol6-gie et d'histoire byzantine A la fin du XIIIe
si6cle, " REB, 27 (1969), 217-19
3
Laurent, ''R6gestes, no, 1490; Darrouz6s, ' Noti: tiae
-Episcopatu 165.
,
 357

giving its See the rank of a metropolis. This most

probably took place in the year 1291-2.

The problem, however of metropolitan Gregory,

who is mentioned in the Chronicle of Monemvasia and

who should not have been omitted by the Synodicon, re-

mains. It has already been noted that the second part

of the Chronicle does not concern Monemvasia at all,

particularly not the See of Monemvasia. Itconcerns ex-..

clusively the metropolis of Lacedaemonia and the name

of Monemvasia shows up only, in matters concerning both

1
Lacedaemonia and Monemvasia. The wording in the phra-

se is such that it could refer not to Gregory, metro-

politan of Monemvasia but to Gregory, who, after being

bishop of Monemvasia was called to fill the empty

,-
metropolitan See and was ordained Metropolitan of Lace-
daemonia. The Petition to the Patriarch mentions, giv-.
ing also a chronological indication that prelates were
ordained in both Sees during Patriarch Joseph's office,
i. e. not before 1267, and this must be when the bishop

Gregory became metropolitan of Lacedaemonia and a new

person filled the See of Monemvasia, which remained

2
a bishopric for about three more decades.

1
Above ch. 1 II.
2
Above p. 288; WE, 12 (1915), 290,11.31-32,
291,11.1-3.
 V. The privileges granted by Andronikos II

The text of the imperial decree, i. e. the prostag-

ma, issued by Androhikos II to elevate Monemvasia to

a metropolis has been lost, but incorporated in the

Synodical act of 1397 is the sigillion of the Patri-

arch, which according to the prevailing custom follo-

wed the imperial document and possibly reproduces

parts of it. In the act -reasons are given for the

issuing of the prostagma, which according to it are

the conquest of Corinth by the Latins and the help

the bishop of Monemvasia gave to the refugees who

settled in his area. The elevation was a reward for

his kindness "and in addition the Emperor two bishoprics

f rom the metropolis of Corinth he detached and awarded him

'
furthermore the Synod later ratified. '.
... which

From this point a misunderstanding has sprung,

because it has been assumed that this decree gave Mo-

nemvasia only two bishoprics. However the NaV' which

exists in the text and has the connotation'of further-

more, "in addition", agrees with the later imperial

and patriarchal documents which mention that Monemva-

sia had "previously" (TEOTepov) or "from the begining

1 "Les faux de la diploma tique

V. Laurent, patriar-
un pr6tendu acte synodal en faveur de la m6tropo-
cale:
le de Monembasie, "' REB, 21 (1963), 150; Miklosich-MUl-
ler, 11,2887-9 and esF. - 289,1-8. The facts concerning
the emigration of Corinthians are not known.
 359

(dLpXij0ev) four bishoprics: -, Helos, Maina

-Kythera
1
and Rheon. Kythera and Maina are the two bisho-

prics belonging previously to Corinth, which were giv-

en as a reward, Helos was a suffragan of Patras and

2
Rheon is mentioned for the first time.

The praises for the first metropolitan Nicolaos,

contained in the act, are much more restrained than in

the-later documents, from where it is understood that

the promotion of the See must have been the result of

his personal efforts. ' In the later ty-MbIlLCL some in-

formation exists concerning him. He had been a monk

and must have been highly esteemed by the Emperor and

3
the ecclesiastical circles. Nicolaos had the bad 1 uck

to fall into the hands of the Catalan pirate Roger de

Lluria when the latter sacked Monemvasia in October

1292. For his ransom a large amount had to be paid. '

After his return to Constantinople in 1300, Andro-

nikos II decided to honour Monemvasia even more. To

1
Binon, * EO, 37 (1938), 278, -*IIE, 12 (1915), 288,
mentioning apart from Maina 3 more-bishoprics-; and
280-81, fragment of a lost Synodical decision following
the chrysobull of 1301.
2
oldest mention of a bishop of Kythera in 1110,
cf. J. Darrouzes, "Sur les variations numeriques des 6--
vOches byzantins, " REB, 44 (1986), 40 n. 35.. Maina and
Helos are only mentioned once before, in Not. 7, of the
10th c.: Darrouzes, ' Notitiae Epi'scopatuum, pp. 282,284.
3
Binon, EO, 37 (1938), 307-08,. 11. 84...
31-
 360

this end a whole series of documents was issued. A pro-

stagmain April 1300 followed immediately after by a

Synodical act bearing the same date. Then a chrysobull

in 1301 followed by another Synodical act 6f unknown

date.

The first two documents have survived in a 16th

century copy, in the form of a double document, the

prostagma being incorporated in the Synodical act. The

only date that both bear is April indictio 13.1

The Synodical act introduces the prostagma with a pa-

ragraph where it is related that the Emperor "renovat-

es" the metropolis which is found in the Peloponnese

and has been named after the fact that it has only

one entrance, and it continues by stating the impor-

tance of Monemvasia, for which the Emperor wanted to

achieve the "renovation".. This word reoccurs often

in the documents that follow, reflecting possibly the
2
rearrangementsof the Church which had already'started.

The Emperor's prostagma which follows is quoted word

by word. It repeats several times the words "renovati-

on" and "renovate". The Emperor states that it was his

Gr. 0.111.18, fols. 279 V-

From Ms Scorial.
v1
282 : G. de Andr6s, Catdlogo de los'c6dice's-griegos
de la Real Biblioteca de El Escorial, II (Madrid, 1965),
75. First edition: Laurent, Les faux, 145-49.
2 faux, 145,11.1-18.
Laurent, Les
 361

intention to renovate Monemvasia by honouring the ser-

vant of God, who has furnished the city with "seas of

gifts", as a reward for the benevolence of the inha-

1,
bitants and the city towards the Emperor. Accord-

ing to the prostagma the metropolitan of Monemvasia

becomes exarch of the whole of the Peloponnese and he

is offered the position of a See "which has already

died out and has in a way passed", that of Side, and.

in. f uture will. be 1 Oth in rank The honour, the rank

.2
and the apellation which is conferred on him and his

successors he will enjoy everywhere. - Furthermore to

the four bishoprics which had been bestowed on him

are added Coron, Modon and Zemena. Of those any still

in Latin hands will come under the metropolitan's ju-

risdiction as soon as they are recovered. Then the

metropolitan will be able to ordain bishops, as in his

bishoprics. 3
other After the usual formalities the Pa-

triarch is asked when the document appears. bef ore him

in the Synod to issue a relevant Synodical act confirm-

ing that which the Emperor recommends. The date which,

as is usual with the prostagmata, does not nention

the year, is April indictio 13.4

1
Laurent, Les faux, ll... 19-32, pp. 145-46.
2
As is Side called in the chrysobull of 1301:
Binon, E0,37 (1938), 308,11.103-04;
3
Laurent, Les faux, 11.31-66, pp. 146-47.
4 147.
Laurent, Les faux, 11.67-76, p.
 362

Further on the document states that the Patriarch

presented the case to the Synod, which was composed

1
of nineteen prelates, named individually. Then fol-

lows the act

which repeats in detail the concession
2
of the Emperor. The Patriarch dates it to April, I 3th indi-

ctio, and the document ends with the formal phrases

3
which prove its provenance from an official copy.

The older privileges which were only the raising

to a metropolis and the granting of four bishoprics

are distinguished from the new privileges, the posi-

tion of Side, which is the tenth and the three new

bishoprics. The editor, however, of this double docu-

I
ment has misinterpreted at this'point the text. He

considers that an older document granted Monemvasia

the exarchate over the whole of the Peloponnese and the

position of Side. Furthermore he believes that the

position of Side was 13th in rank and that with the

present document Monemvasia was promoted to the 10th

4
place. In the analysis which he undertakes'despite his

original affirmation that the document poses no pro-

blem he concludes that it is forged. His main

I 147748.
Laurent, Les faux, 11.77-100, pp.
2
11.101-r131, pp. 148-49.
3
11.132-135, P. 149.
4
Laurent, Les faux, 149.
 363

criticism is the incompatibility which he believes to

existbetween the date, April indictio 13, which cor-

responds to 1300 and the list of 19 prelates of the

Synod, which is almost identical with the one contain-

ed in*the Tomos of Blachernai, which as was mentioned,

he dates in 1285, whereas another list, unpublished,

which he dates in 1294 does not reproduce the same

names. Consequently the prostagma-Synodical act must

have been issued between 1285 and 1294, which is much

too long before 1301, when the relevant chrysobull

1
was issued.

There are two other important reasons for which

he thinks that the document is forged. First that the

double document does not belong to any definite cate-

gory of documents, it is a hybrid, and second that

Monemvasia never held the 10th rank, at least not dur-

ing Andronikos's and metropolitan Nicolaos's time,

but 13th. '2 document, however,

the This double is not
3
the only one existing. In any case concerning the

formalities of the issuing of documents, the ecclesia-

stical in particular, there existed not only a certain

1
Laurent,, Les faux, 150-52.
2
Pp. 153-54.
3 do-
On other cased of insertion of an imperial
cument in a Synodical act: J. Darrouz6s, ' Le Registre
du Patriarcat Byzantinau XIVe-si-P-cle (Paris,,. 1971),
153-54.
 364

flexibility but also vagueness, confusion and often

ignorance of the rules, and strangely this is something
1
the editor himself admits. Concerning the position

of Side he arrived at his conclusion by combining the

information from the Tomos of Blachernai and a Notitia

according to which Side was lowered from the 10th to

13th rank. He concludes that the 10th rank was held

by the metropolitan of Philadelphia and not of Monem-

2
vasia.

The confusion concerning the Tomos of Blachernai

was pointed out earlier. As for the Notitiae Episco-

patuum the new edition which: proved that they were not

official catalogues also proved that the position of

the old metropolis did not change however many other
Sees were subsequently given the same position. The

original See continued to hold the same position and

had 3
a priority over the others. There is no reason

consequently to doubt the promotion of Monemvasia di-

rectly to the 10th rank, held by Side, without passing

through the intermediate 13th rank.

Concerning the editor's main reserves on the

date of issue of the two documents one should under-

1
Laurent, Les faux, 153 n. 22; Darrouz6s,, Egi-
stre, passim. Cf. ' Rdgr. ' dif Patr., no. 2012.
2
Laurent, Les faux, 153-54.
3
Darrouz6s, * Notltiae EglscoPatuum, 183-84.
 365

line that they are based again on his uncertain dat-

ing in 1285 of the signatures contained in the Tomos

of Blachernai, whereas he himself admits that its

dated manuscripts bear the date 1291-2, and another

uncertain dating, 1294, of an unpublished list. This

evidence from both cannot be assessed for the time

1
being.

The arguments against the authenticity of the

double document based on postulates which since have

been renounced, should obviously not be taken into

consideration any more. Such is the case with his

opinion on the incompatibility with certain Notitiae.

on the contrary one must underline the similarities

between the imperial prostagma and thechrysobull of

1301. The reproduction of whole parts of the prostagma
in the chrysobull is a proof of authenticity. The op-

posite would have rendered the documents suspect of

2
forgery.

In conclusion the imperial prostagma and the Sy-

nodical act contained in the 16th century copy are

the documents which were issued in April 1300 to

mark a second raising of the See of Monemvasia and the

I
on the Tomos of Blachernai above ch. 6. IV.
2 150.
Laurent, Les faux,
 366

granting of more privileges. Andronikos II offered the

Church of Monemvasia in June 1301 the chrysobull which

followed the prostagma, as expected. The miniature

that it bears, the first to adorn an imperial docu-

ment, as far as it is known, depicts the Emperor of-

fering it to Christ, to whom the church of Monemvasia

1
was dedicated. However, the most striking element of

the document is not the miniature, which confers on it

a particularly luxurious appearance, but the impressi. -7

vely long prooimion. Its length surpasses the length

of the actual text., and is a. praise to the city of Mo-

nemvasia, its inhabitants and its metropolitan Nico-m_

2
laos,

If no such act had been conceived, it states,

then the Emperor invented the "original f5attern" and
"renovated" the. '"famous" city of Monemvasia, as a
first 3
step for the future. Then follows the praise,: Of
the city and the inhabitants which has alraedy been
iV

1
1. Spatharakis, ' The Portrait 'i*ft Byzantine I'11U-
minated Manuscripts (Leiden, 1976) 184- 8 5,.24 6. Byzantine
Museiim' I KcLTdLXoyoc wExx&gcyn yL' CL- Td 6xcLT6 xp6vLcx Tfig XPL-
(YTLCLVLXflC*-APXCLL0X0YLXflC ETCLLPECaC (1884-1984) (Athens,
1984), 45-46.
2
Byzantine Museum ms. 80 (XAE 3570). On the first.
and subsequent editions: Binon, ' EO, 37 (1938), 275, n. 1.
Binon's edition, pp. 306-10 is u7s-ed for reference. D61-
ger ' Regesten, no. 2237. Cf. nos. 2232,2233,2235,
223 on-related documents, but the references are con-
fused and should not be taken into consideration.
3
Binon, ' EO, 37 (1938), 306,11.1-7.
 367

1
analysed. And the prooimion continues stating that

for some time now the church is headed by an excellent

pastor, dedicated to God from an early age and now

very old, who has changed nothing from his original

way of life, has lost nothing of his original power,

he is inexhaustible and has always set an example.

2
Long praises of his character follow.

After the prooimion the Emperor refers to the

prostagma, which he had issued the previous year.

(npoaecmCcrcLcYcL) The Metropolitan asked for a chryso-

.
bull confirming the grants and the Emperor accepted

his petition. As in the prostagma, the chrysobull or-

ders that the metropolitan of Monemvasia and his suc-

cessors will enjoy all the honours of the See of Side

3
everywhere. That he will be exarch of the whole of

the Peloponnese and enjoy the honours common to those

who are exarchs. The bishoprics of Kythera, Helos, Ma-

ine and Rheon have already been confered on blonemva-

sia and their dependence in the future from this See,

is confirmed. Three more are given, Coron, Modon and

Zemena,, which ought to recognize Monemvasia as their

.
metropolis, accept bishops whom the metropolitan might

1
Above ch. 4 1.
2 (1938), 307-08.
Binon,, EO,, 37 11.31-84, pp..
3
Ll. 84-116, p. 308.
 368

ordain and instal,, I/and if some of them still belong to

the Latins all this will be enforced after they have

1
been liberated. After the summary that follows, the

document closes with the formal phrases concerning

the reasons it was issued, the date June, indictio

2
14,6809, i. e. 1301, and the signature.

Another Synodical act followed the chrysobull

of 1301, which. repeats all the privileges. A fragment

of this act which has been incorporated along with

,
a fragment of the chrysobull in the Petition to the

Patriarch, differs in its phrasing from the previous

Synodical act of April 1300.3

The aged and virtuous Nicolaos whose dynamism is

praised in the chrysobull does not seem to have dis-

,
da ined completely the earthly goods, at least those

concerning his metropolis and tried to secure as

best as possible its rights. He asked for another chry-

sobull concerning the property of the metropolis, which

has been preserved in two later copies. In this chry-

sobull again many lines are devoted to praises of the

1
Binon, EO, 37 (1938), 11.116-141, pp. 308-09.
2
Ll. 141-172, pp. 309-10.
3 281,
NE,, 12 (1915), 281,11.10-23: chrysobull,
11.23-3*-, 282,11.1-3: Synodical act of 1301,282,
11.4-6: Synodical act of April 1300.
 369

Metropolitan. They are, however, more abstract and

rhetorical than in the prooimion of the other chryso-

bull, possibly an indication that it has been written

2
by another author. Subsequently the reasons leading

to the issuing of this document are exposed. Follow-

ing the promotion of the See of Monemvasia and the

offer by the Emperor of much substance and property

3
by various relevant decrees and after the metropoli-

tan's insistence, the Emperor decided to issue a spe-

4
cial chrysobull.

The property of the Metropolis is then listed

in. detail. It comprised-several villages; Ganganeas,

5
with serfs, estateslits rights and its use; Pezia-

menoi, also with serfs and estatesits rights and its

use; Philodendron, with serfs and estates, Episkopeia

in the Plain (Kampos) with serfs, the land owned by

6
the church; also in the village `rCav llo?, Mov EevCcov".

the quantity of 25 hyperpera. The monasteriesl of Saint

First edition Miller, ' Escurial, 59-60. Below on

the manuscripts. References in the text from Miklosich-
Willer, V, 161-65.
2
Prooimion, Miklosich-MUller, pp. 161-63,1.11.
3
Unknown from other sources.
4
Miklosich-MUller, 163,11.11-24.
5
Small village near Molaoi with a monastery of
the Theotokos: Drandakis, etc. ITAE(1983)A, 237; Belia,
ETcLTLcrTLxdL, 92-93. -
6 in the plain
It could have-. been-situated of
Molaoi near the Early-Christian ruins Etzeoglou,
*AqxcLLoXoyLx 'E(pniieptc. (1974).
 370

George in Prinikos with serfs, c6ToOpyLcL, a lake and

the whole contribution of acorns, half of which pre-

1
viously went to the civil administration; of Prodro-
2
mos in Zaraphon, with serfs and other rights. The pro-
3
asteion of Leimones or Daimones. Several houses within

the city of Monemvasia which previously belonged to a

4 5
certain Ar6s (Henri? ) The aOTo6pyLa at Nomia with
6
also a separate estate and serfs, at Tareia -Sion,
7 8
Sorakas, Koulendia, Koumaraia, Voulkane, Mese, Dho-

dhaia and Nodhys which comprises*&lso the lake, the

9"
tower and the palaiokastron. The. &ypC8La at Lyra

with serfs and estates, ofMountouson, of Saint Kour-

10
noutos with serfs, of Kamargs with serfs and estates,

1
In the plain of Helos, it could-be the Cicterci-
an monastery of De'Pirn, above, 287. One should also con-
sider the identification with*Saint George near Skala,
in the same area, on which: D.' Hayer, "Saint George pr6s
de Scala, (Laconie), " AXAE, TEep. A', 12 (1984), 265-86.
On the area of Prinikos and the oak: Leake, Travels,
224-26.
2
On Zaraphor. Orlandos', EEBE, 6 (1927), 342-51;
Bon, Morge, 512,661.
3
Possibly Daemonia, in the western Laconik6.
4
Above, ch. 3 IV,
5
To the south of Monemvasia.
6
Above, p. 347.
7
Not to be mixed with Hierax or Zarax a place-name
to the south of Monemvasia. *
8 417-18.
In Messenial'Bon, *Mor6e,
9
To the south of Monemvasia.
10 Recently identified, unpublished.
 371

1
the Ripiai with the nearby land of Kalamion and TC)v

ALxcLaTyipCcov. At Helos, in various places, plots of

land, four watermills erected by the church and a vi-

2a
neyard. At Phota vineyard. The church assumes all

the rights on all-of these, that is to say the land,

vineyards, mills, trees, orchards, and whatever else.

The right to buy the kermes gathered by the serfs

of the monastery of Prinikos and of Zaraphon from the

areas belonging to the church is also cited. Not, how-

ever, from the areas belonging to the civil administra-

tion. According to the chrysobull it is decreed that

all that the Church of Monemvasia has in possession

and use will be exempted from taxes, will be unaliena-

ble and free from epereia and epithesis.

The document has been preserved in two copies.

Their text is identical except for the date of issue.

The oldest copy of the 16th century bears the same as

the chrysobull of 1301, i. e. June, 14th indictio, -

6809. The other, of the 18th century, which mentions

that it has been copied from the original which had

1 de Kalami in Bon, * Morge,

Possibly Val Messenia,
418-22.
2
Today Oo6TLcL, south of Monemvasia.
 372

been transported in 1750 to Constantinople bears the

date May, indictio 15,6810, i. e. 1302.1 Since the

date conicides in the first copy with the other chry-

sobull's, it is possible that it was mistaken by the

copyist, who having several manuscripts to. copy he

added under the copy of one chrysobull the date of ano-

ther. The fact that the two prooimia are so different

in style advocates the view that they were issued at

a different date. One could consequently accept with

certain reserves the date of the second copy, May 1302

for the issue of the chrysobull concerning the proper-

ty of the metropolis of Monemvasia. The Metropolitan

with this property secured substantial income, mainly

agricultural and was able to acquire considerable wealth

for his See.. Itis notworthy that large part of it was

in the fertile regions towards Helos, as the monastery

of Prinikos and the curious Saint Kournoutos, or towards

Messenia like VouAane.

1 r r.
Scor. Gr. E. 1.12 fols. -7372 First publi-
,
shed in Miller, Escurial, 6 -5 Do'lcfer, 'Regqsten no.
x A. a
2236. Ms. F no. 3, -form6rly' fols. in
11-14,
jii
*in 'Le Ingrad: .
the Library of Science's Medvedev, ' VV,
32 (1971), 225; B. Fonkid, "Nikolai Karadza i Lenin-
gradskii sbornik bizantiiskich dokumentob, " VV, 37
(1976), 140-50, pl. 3, fol. 11. He publishei a photo-
graph of the first folio of both the chrysobull of An-
dronikos, pl. 3, and of John VI, pl. 2. on Nicolaos
Karatzas: Ch. Patrinelis, "rIaTpLcLpXLxdL ypdL4jiaT(x xaC
&XXcL 9-y-ypcLTcL cMtcL61ic=L TOO IET*-IH* cLCrjvOQ 9x TOO
4Vp(xxOc (*EOV. BLDX. "EXA.. 1474) " EMA
xcbLjjoQ TOO
12(1962), 141-45.
 0

VI The so-called false chrysobull of 1293

.

Around 1304 Nicolaos is mentioned as managing, apart

from Monemvasia, RaT'6nC80MV, the metropolis of Pa-

1
tras. During the time he was proedros of Patras he

was in the Peloponnese and collaborated with the dy-

namic and ambitious Nicephoros Moschopoulos, metropo-

litan of Crete and proedros Of Lacedaemonia, who was

also in the Peloponnese. Nicephoros depended in a

way on Nicolaos because the revenue from his See was

small and he had been granted the revenues of one

bishoprics 2
of the of Monemvasia, possibly Maina.

The relations between the two men were not always

harmonious. At a certain time they contended for the

bishopric of Amykli, one for Patras and the other for

Lacedaemonia and it was finally accorded to Nicepho-

ros. The chronology of these events is not at all...

3
certain.

Nicolaos's signatuire is found ratif! ing- time

, some

Chronicle of Monemvasia: Lampros, "'lo-roptud Me-

XeTAjuxTcL, 105-06; Laurent, Synodicon,, 148; Binon, *.'EO,
37 C1938), 286.
2
Laurent, R6gestes'du Patri'arcat, no. 1625.
3
Lampros, "TCYtOPL-AA IjF-XE:-rftcx-rcx, 105-06; * R6C du
.f .'
Patriarcat, no. 1521.
 374

before 1315, along with other metropolitans, the copy

of an imperial document. He displays in it his various

privileges: hypertimos, exarch of all the Peloponnese

1
and holding the rank of Side. It has been shown re-

cently that a more precise date could be given to

these signatures, June either 1298 or 1313.2 Since,

however, Nicolaos held the rank of Side as is evident

from his signature, the document is a proof that he was

still alive and in the Capital in June 1313. In this

case it would be the aged Nicolaos the anonymous metro-

politan of Monemvasia who stood up for the Arsenites

in September 1310, even more so since the Monemvasio-

tes are reported to have been followers of Arsenios

3
during all the controversy. Furthermore, one should

accept that the Short N6tice mentioning the depo'sition

of the metropolitan of Monemvasia, accused of simony

before April 1314, by Patriarch Nephon,. must refer to

Nicolaos. The time between June 1313 and April 1314

is too short for the election of a new metropolitan

following Nicolaos's. death and his subsequent deposi-

tion, while the Synodicon of Monemvasia does not men-

tion any successor to Nicolaos other than Sophronios,

after July 1315. The identification of Nicolaos with

I "Un groupe de signatures dpiscopa-

V. Laurent,
les, " Eo, 32 (1933), 319-23.
2 N. Svoronos, D. Papa-
P. Lemerle, A. Guillou,
" Actes-de I; avra, II, (Paris, 1979), 72.
chrysanthou,
3
Laurent, Les, f Lux, 1 5A. -n. 2 7..
 375

Atoumanos,. mentioned in the notice as metropolitan

of Monemvasia, has been rejected because it was believ-

ed that Patriarch Nephon would not have dared such a

1
confrontation with the powerful Metropolitan. But

Nephon, who apparently was himself suspect of simony

and must have had an eye on the rich revenues of Monem-

vasia, must have attempted the confrontation, sihce-he was

finally defeated and deposed in April 1314. on the

other hand Nicolaos, who must either have been of

Turkish descent or have had Atoumanos as a nickname,

must have managed to increase his privileges? A series

of new privileges are granted to the metropolitan of

Monemvasia by one of the most controversial Byzantine

documents, the so-called false chrysobull of 1293.

Since the document has exactly the same prooimion as

that of June 1301 it could hardly concern another me-

tropolitan. Since however, Nicolaos makes no use of

,
the additional privileges in his signature of June 1313,

one must date it later. The authenticity of this docu-

ment has been repeatedly denied, but it is worthwhile

to examine the arguments against it.

1
V. Laurent, "Notes de chronologie etd! histoire
byzantine " REB, 27 (1969), 220-24.

2
Laurent, Notes de chronologie, 224 and n. 65.
 376

The allegedly forged chrysobull, which is usually

called A, was deposited in Monemvasia up to the 19th

century when it was sent to the National Library in

Athens. At about the same time the other chrysobul'l

called B, of June 1301, was also sent to Athens from

Kythera. The similarities between the two documents

are striking and historians soon linked the two. Both

have a miniature with the same subject heading the

text. (Pl. 13,15) The long prooimion is practically

word by word the same and so for the most part are

the privileges granted.

Their differences from the point of view of ap-

pearance are first of all in the handwriting. B is

written in the well known from other 14th century do-

cuments official' script of the imperial secreta-.!

riat whereas A is written in a literary handwriting

which contains many ligatures.. (Pl. 13,16-18) In A

the word Nj5d-roc" is not found in the beginning of

the last line of the text as was usual. (Pl. 18) The

date is different and in A has been read as June, 6th

1
National Library of Athens, ms. EBA 1462. Dbi-
ger, Regesten, no. 2238, cf. Laurent, - Rggestes: 'du Pa-
triarcat, no.. 1560. St. Binon, EO, 37 (1938), 274-
311, with edition of both docuirCe'-n-ts: B: pp. 306-10
and variations of A: pp. 310-11 with the older views
and bibliography.
 377

indictio, 6800, i. e. 1292 or 1293. In B the date is

June 14th indictio, 6809, i. e. 1301. The imperial sig-

nature instead of the usual final cross has in A three

dots. (pl. 18)

From the point of view of contents, to the privi-

leges granted by B the following are added in A. The

Metropolitan becomes the only exarch of all the Pelopon-

nese, he has the right to use the title of "TtcLvcL-yL(b-

TCLTOQ" and to sign using the indictio but only in his

diocese, to wear the "adLuxogg" and hold the "6LDdliTtou

.-
Xov" during the ceremonies and a new bishopric is gi-

ven to him: Androusa. Androusa-is mentioned in the do-

cument as being under Latin rule together with Coron

and Modon, whereas Zemena, which B mentions under Latin

rule has been transferred to the group under Greek ru-

1
le. An extensive description of'the limits of the a-

reas under the jiirisdiction of the metropolitan of Mo-

nemvasia follows in A, starting from the eastern coast

of the Peloponnese, carefully leaving out the region

of the metropolis of Lacedaemonia and reaching Pylos

2
on the western coast.

Due to the impressive similarities it was origi-

nally assumed that they were bothversions of thd same

1 (.1938), 45-52.
Binon, ' EO, 37 p. 310, nos.

Binon, EO, 37 (1938), pp. 310-11, nos. 52-65. Lam-
pros, "Die erst6-Erwahnung von Astros, "' EZ, 2(1893), 73-75.
4
 378

chrysobull, which was dated in 6801, i. e. 1293, which

is a 6th indictio. As a matter of fact B which does

not contain the description of the area of the me-

1
tropolis was considered a copy of A. It was later

maintained that they were two different documents.

But again A was set at an earlier date, in accordance

to its dating in 1293, and the restriction of the

privileges was attributed to the advance of the Franks

2
during the intervening years. The arguments were not

convincing and the following step was to consider A

as forged. For- its f abrication the compilator of

3
the Chronicon Maius Macarios Melissenos was accused.

Around 1570 Macarios, who was then metropolitan

of Monemvasia, came into conflict with the Metropoli-

tan of Christianoupolis, who claimed Androusa and appea

led to the Synod., He took with him there along with o-

ther chrysobulls and documents chrysobull A. They all

mentioned the bishopric of Androusa under the juris-

diction of Monemvasia. The evidence was considered

4
convincing and Macarios was justified. Macarios Me-

1
Binon, EO, 37 (1938), 289-91.
2
A. Heisenberg, ".Aus der'Geschichte'und Literatur
des Palaiologenzeit"(Munich, 1920), 30='3--2,-Binon, ' EO,
. 37 (1938) 291-92.
,
3 37, 292.
Dblger, Makarios, 371-83; Binon, ' EO, p.
4 293-94. The text Miklosich-MUl-
Binon, E0,37, pp.
ler, V, 178 and J. Oudot, ed-. Patriarch atus Constantinopo-
litani II (Rome, 1967), no. 01, pp. 188-95.
acta selecta,
 379

lissenos has become the black sheep of Byzantine docu-

mentary evidence andhis threatening presence casts a

shadow over
almost every document or text connected
1
with Monemvasia.

The factors which prove, according to the histo-

rians, the falsity of A are mainly that the miniature

is a clumsy copy of theminiature in B, that the

script. is of the 16th century by Macarios Melissenos,

that the word xp6Tor_ is not at its proper position and

that the signature is not the authentic signature of

Andronikos II. ' Furthermore, concerning the contents,

that the prooimion is repeated intact, that the privi-

lege to use the adLxxog and the 6LDdL4TEouXov is given,

that Androusa is mentioned as a bishopric of Monemva-

sia and finally that the TEepyypcL(pL-A6r. -ri5nor_ has been

taken from somewhere else

Even though document A Is readily accessible it

is practically unknown having neve r been properly

1,
Even the year of-hiv death hap been contested,
cf. Chassiotis, MEXLCFCMVOC, p. 59 n. 3i65. On Afidrousa
pp. 23-25,59. On his forgeries 171-74.
2
D61ger, Makarios, 373-75, Binon, EO, 37 (1938),
282,285-86,288-90,294-95,297-98.
 380

edited or even photographed, while -these opinions are

1
persistently repeated. The detailed examination and

the photographs taken led to many interesting obser-

2 in
vations. The parchment is 1 .60x0.24 m. three

pieces. (Pl. 14) It has been mounted, probably in, the

19th century, on a cloth, which covers all the back,

obstructing the observation of the xoXXftcLTcL on the

reverse. They do not seem, however, to have had any-

3
thing written on them. Glued to the upper part of

the document are pieces of theIiApivDog, which should

4
have been attached at the bottom. (Pl. 14) The minia-

ture. is badly damaged and in most parts only the-prepa-

ration remains. (Pl. 15)Due. to the damages of the mini-

ature previous editors were given the impression of

crudeness. However, the parts that remain show that

the technique is very close to that of B. (.Pl. 13) A

point to note perhaps is the fact that, while in B

the miniature is painted on a separate piece of par-

chment, in A the piece of parchment is larger and con-

tains some lines of the text also. The older general

1
It has always been published in connexion with
the chrysobull of 1301 and never examined as a separa-
te document.
21 like
would to express my warmest gratitude to
Dr. P. Nicolopoulos, director of the National Library
for giving me permission to photograph and examine the
document and Dr. A. Tselikas for his invaluable help
with its study. I also thank the photographer D. Kalapodas.
3 177-79;
Oikonomides, Chancellerie, Do-lger-Kara-
yannopoulos, 112-16.
4
DO'lger-Karayannopoulos, 121,126,238,245.
 331

reservations concerning the miniatures on imperial docu-

ments, which had also been expressed for B, have lost

their importance after the discovery of a whole series

of documents with miniatures and there does not seem

to be a reason to continue to doubt the authenticity

of A on just the grounds of the miniature.

Concerning the script the first observation

one can make is that it is not forced, it is natural.

It is not an effort to reproduce a script which the

scribe did not usually employ? It definitely belongs

to the 14th and definitely does not belong to the 16th

3.
century. It is also certain thatit does not belong to
.
Macarios Melissenos, of whose handwriting many examples

still exist, including his own transcription of A

(Pl. 19-24)In his transcription there is a marked ef-

fort to imitate the script but the differences are

4
obvious and give'a measure of his clumsiness. As

we have seen the script of A is not the one used by

the imperial chancellery but the one found in ordinary

1
Spatharakis, The Portrait, 246-47. Based on the
assumption of the forgery he does not take the mini-
ature of "1293" into consideration; Alexander,, B, 15.
(1940-41), 170-72'. Cf. Binon, ' EO, 37 (1938), 284-86,
292.
21 for
would like to thank professor A. Kominis
this observation.
3 (Cam-
Cf. N. Wilson, ''Greek 'literary Bookhands
bridge, Mass*1-1973). -
4 Neap. Gr. II. C. 35, fols. r
62 -64 v,
cited as II. C. 36
in the catalogue: S. Cirillo, 'Codi*ces' Graeci MSS. ' Regiae
Bibl'i'othecae Borbonicae, II (Naples, 1832), 25-30. Unpu-
blished.
 382

manuscripts. If A attempted to forge B it would have

attempted to imitate the writing also. The lacunae in

A are not due to the inability of the forger to read

the text he was imitating, as has been maintained, but

to damages to the document itself, possibly by water,

which has caused the ink to fade. In most places the

letters are still faintly visible. The same could be

the reason that the date has faded to the point of

almost complete. disappearance. (21.18) These damag6s e-

xisted already when, around 1570 Macarios Melissenos

made his transcription, obliging him to leave the lacunae

that he did in his text, and in the indictio and the

year. (Pl. 24) The failure to write the word xpdaoc

in its proper position appears in at least two other

documents of the-early 14th century, written in the

literary 1
script,. issued by Michael IX. Consequent-

ly it is not a decisive factor against the authenticity

of the document.

The words by the in red

, which were added emperor

ink, do not differ from those of other documents of

Andronikos 11.2 The usual sequence X6-yov, X6you,, X6-

yog, is wrong and the'f irst is in the genitive instead

I
Dblger, -"zantinische Diplomatik, pl. XIII, chr.
for Hilandar, 1319; F. Dolgery Facsimiles, no. -26i chr.
for Iberon, 1310; Binonj EO, 37 (1938), 294.
2
Cf. Alexander; ROV
 383

1
of the accusative. The error seems unimportant. The

month could either be June or July. The indictio begins

clearly with a6. The accent on the ligature of e,

x, T, n, Q seems to fall between -Kand:. -r. Consequently

the indictio should be read bco8exd-rTIQ and not -rft gx-rng

2
as is usually proposed. The years, apart from 6800

written in black ink had a part added by the emperor in

red. This part, as was explained, is very faint, al-

most invisible, but on no account can it be maintain-

ed that it has been erased. Most probably it has fad-

ed for the same reason as the other lacunae of the

document. (Pl. 18) Furthermore itmust be excluded

that this part of the date was added later because

the imperial signature covers it. The deciphering of

the date is almost impossible. One can discern perhaps

with some certainty the letter e at the beginning and

ax close to it. The final*'ou is fairly clear. The

imperial signature forms a terminus for the dating

of the document. Andronikos II stopped using this type

of signature in 1316. The letters are completely alike

with those of his usual signature. as even the advocates

3
of the chrysobull's spuriousness admit. The three

I 16.
Cf. DO"lger-Karayannopoulos, p. 281-82 pl.
2 (1938), 289,311.
Binon, ' EO, 37
3 37, 295.
Binon, * Eo, p.
 384

dots in the place of 'the cross at the end of the sig-

nature cannot be explained even if it is admited that

the document is forged.

Examining the contents of A one should observe

that the fact... that' the two prooimia are identical,

even though a rare phenomenon, is not a proof against

the authenticity of A. One has to stress again, how-

ever, that it-would be strange that so personal prais-

2
es could concern two different metropolitans.

The impressive privileges gave the metropolitan

an extraordinary prestige. The sakkos, the divambou-

lon used earlier mainly by the Patriarch,, the title

of panaghiotatos, also a privilege of the Patriarch

and the right. to sign by the indictio, as well as the

large area of jurisdiction gave him almost the status
3
of a mini-patriarch.

The inclusion of Androusa among the bishoprics

1.
Photograph of both in Binon, ' EO,, 37, after p. 274.
2
H. Hunger,, Prooimi*on., El'emente'der byzantini-
scheft Kaiseridee in den Arengen der Urkunden (Wiener
Byzantinische Studien, 1) (Vienna-Graz-K8ln, 1964), p. 36.
3
There is more evidence now of the use of sakkos
by some metropolitans, like of Russia, above ch. 5 11.
Cf. Rall6s-Potles, V, 329-30, for Kyzikos.
 385

and the mentioning of Zemena ambng the towns held by

the Greeks must be related to the advance of the

Greeks in the Peloponnese from the beginning of the

14th century. The operations, inwhich centainly the

Monemvasiotes participated, developed towards the

1
western and northern Peloponnese. It is characteristic

that in the concessions to the monasteries of Mystras,

between 1312-13 and 1322 by Andronikos II and Michael

IX, lands in Androusa and Karytaena as well as Kernitza.

2
and Astros are included In-the Petition-to the Pa--

triarch it is mentioned that: Zemena was in Greek hands

for more than 100 years before 1428, i. e. before 1328.

(Pl. 1) so nothing excludes the that Ze-

possibility

mena had already been captured and that the Greek for-

ces hoped to take Androusa soon, although it was destin-

ed to fall only a hundred years later. The subordinati-

on of Androusa to the metropolis of Monemvasia. is usual-

ly denied and the sources mentioning it are considered

forged late, 4
either or after the forgery of Melissenos.

1
Bon, Mor6e, 186-88; Zakythinos, ' Despotat, 1,69,
329.
2
Zakythinos, * Despotat,, II, 297; Bon, Morde, 220-21.
3
NE, 12 (1915), 309.
4
Binon, EO, 37 (1938), 292-93,302.
 386

In the effort to put forward more arguments against

the subordination it has even been claimed that if

Androusa had not been subordinate to Christianoupolis

1
then it cannot have been to Monemvasia either.

In the 14th century it is stated that Christia-

noupolis, which was situated in the area occupied

2
by the Latins did not have any bishopric. Even if it

is supposed that at a certain time Androusa was put

under Christianoupolis, this should cause no surprise. it

was often the case, due to the incompetence of the ec-

clesiastical administration, that a bishopric was gi-

ven to more than one metropolis. One of the many exam-

ples is of Modon and Coron, given to Monemvasia in. the

late 13th century, later to Patras and then again to

'-V' r3
Monemvasia without any intermediate annulation . Also,

as we have already seen, it was not clear to which me-

tropolis Amykli belonged, Lacedaemonia or Patras.

Another argument against the authenticity of A'

is that it has not been taken into account in the two

Petitions to the Patriarch. Indeed, their author who

1
Binon, * EO, 37 (1938), 293 n. l.
2 11,286-88.
Zakythinos, Despotat.,
3 11,279-80.
Zakythinos, ' Despotat,
 387

uses a great number of the documents which were in

the Archives of Monemvasia, document B among others,

does not refer at all to A and the fact that it appe-

ars not to have been available between 1426 and 1428

1
is strange. Its absence, however, could have to do

with the bad state of its conservation. One wonders

whether this should not be attributed to turmoils like

the short occupation of Monemvasia in 1394. by the

Turks, if, that is to say, it was not hidden and then

forgotten in the hiding place, along with another

damaged document, the chrysobull of John Kantakouzenos,

which was also apparently missing when the Petitions

2
were composed.

The examination of the document showed that there

is no reason why Andronikos II should not have issued

after 1301 another chrysobull to honour the old Metropo-

litan once more. Since in 1313 Nicolaos did not use the

privilege of sole exarch for the whole of the Pelopon-

nese, but that of exarch for the whole of the Peloponne-

se, it must have been issued later. If indeed one

1
Binon, EO, 37 (1938), 292.
2
Both or one of the two were, however, available
in 1527 when the Monemvasiotes asked the Venetians to
confirm the boundaries of their territory with Argolis
according to the imperial documents. Sathas, Documents
In6dits, IV, 228-29.
 388

accepted the reading of the indictio as "6w6exdLcrjr_ ", then

the year 1314,6822, is a 12th indictio. The fact

that certain characters in the faded section of the

date correspond to this reading, reinforces this in-

terpretation. Consequently chrysobull A could have

been issued in June or July 1314, and was possibly

issued after-Nephon's deposition as a recompense

for the persecution that Nicolaos had suffered. dur-

ing his Patriarchate. Since for a whole year the See.

of the Patriarch remained vacant no Synodical act

1
relevantto the chrysobull was issued. The impression

that the date delivered by the document was earlier

than that contained in the chrysobull of 1301 was

responsible for the confusion*concerning the conditions

in which both documents were issued and the general adoption of

the view that chrysobull A was a forgery of Macarios

Melissenos.

Laurent, Chronologie, 219-28.

2
A copy (25,2x144,3cra) of A was recently detected
in the Library of the Archaeological Museum of Istanbul,
ms no. 1677, by M. Balivet, whom. I thank for the infor-
mation. It is made on parchment and some space has been
left for the miniature to be added. The scribe has tried
to imitate the imperial script and used red ink in the
relevant words. The script must date in the late 18th
century and could belong to Nicolaos Karatzas. The ma-
nuscript belonged to Vladimir Mirmiroglou, Megas Rhetor
of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, who sold it to
the Library on 7.11.1956.
VII. The successors of Nicolaos and the Palamite controversy

The signature of Sophronios, the next metropolitan

after Nicolaos, as mentioned in the Synodicon, is

found after the ordination of Patriarch John Glykys

in July 1315.1 Nothing is known about Sophronios except

that he was constantly present in the Synod in Constan-

tinople up to 1317-18.2

Ioannis, his successor could have already been

ordained in September 1324 and could have been present

when the aid for the Patriarchate of Constantinople by

the metropolep under its jurisdiction was decided.

The list which appears in the Register of the Patriar-

chate depicts very clearly the situation existing at

the time within the Empire which is reflected in the

affairs of the church also. (Pl. 25) It was decided

that each metropolis should contribute a certain sum

according to its potential. The poorest, Kypsela,

contributes 16 hyperpera and five metropoles follow

offering 24 five offering 36, Patras offers 40, -

,

six Sees 50, Lacedaemonia. 60, Traianoupolis 70, Pro-

konesos 72, seven offer 100, Serres 150, and finally

Her leia, Thessaloniki and Kyzikos 200. Compared to

1
Darrouz6s ' R6gestes'du Patri'arcat, no, 2032.
Miklosich-MUller, I, 3-6; Actes d' EFp--higm6nou, p. 189.
2,
R6gestes du Patriarc'at numbers 2033,203 4,2043,
2044,2048,2049,2052,2056,2061,2062,2063,2073,
2078.
 390

these contributions that of Monemvasia presents a gigan-

tic difference. Monemvasia contributes one third of

the contribution of the

metropoles of the whole By-
1
zantine Empire, 800 hyperpera. It is reasonable to

accept that this burden was not imposed when the See

of Monemvasia was vacant, while the metropolitan in-

volved was-absent. Consequently Ioannis must have

been ordained in 1324 or earlier. His last appearan-

ce in the Synod was in April 1329.2

There is no information concerning the metropo-

lis for some years and in 1341 it is mentioned that

it had been vacant "for quite some time already".

Shortly before summer 1341, at the beginning of the

controversy bearing his name,. the See of Monemvasia

was offered to Gregory Palamas. It was a great honourf

as the., Patriarch Ioannis Calecas stresses, but Pala-

3
mas refused it. It was subsequently offered to*a clo-

se follower of his, Isidore, who accepted and already

before October 1341 was elected metropolitan of Monem-

vasia. However, he was never ordained. Nevertheless

1
R6qestes'dti Ratriarcat, no. 2119; Miklosich-
MUller, 1,126-29, H. Hunger-O. Kresten, * Das Register
d6s Patriarchats Von Konstanti'nopel,, I. 1315-1331 (Vienna,
1981), 502-09. PLP, no. 8618.
2
Rdgestes du Patriarcatt nos. 2135,2149.

3
R6S[estes'du Patriarcat, no.. 2.216;. 'je4n
Meyendorff, Introduc7i-o7n -&Vttude de *Gr6oirq Palaxnas.
(Paris, 1959), 80*, Laurent, Synodic n,
 391

Isidore living in Constantinople, developed his activi-

tiesas if he were full metropolitan. He took part in

the Synod regularly and guided his flock with which

he had close contacts, because many of them visited the

Capital. They even brought him his revenue. As

we have seen, he had close relations with certain

very wealthy Monemvasiote S> close friends of John Kan-

takouzenos The situation remained virtually unchanged

for some years and due to the opposition of the Patri-

arch the ordination of Isidore never took place, on the

contrary in November 1344 he was deposed and anathema-

tized and a new person was elected, Iakovos Koukounaris,

2
for whom nobody had any respect. Strangely for the pro-

palamite Monemvasia Koukounaris is mentioned. -In the Syno-

dicon but not Isidore.

After the -victory of palarnism, Isidore was elect-

ed Patriarch of Constantinople in 1347 and Koukouna-

3
ris was expelled. In the Register of the Patriarchate

there is an entry, shortly after 1348, of an act -don7c7erniifg

1''R6ge'stes
du Patriarcat, nos 2227,2235,2243,
.
Papadopulos-Kerameus, Zitila, 52-149. Cf. Tsamis, OLX6-
Uou, 327-423. - PLP no, 3140.
2
R6gestes du Patri'arcat,. nos. 2250,2256; R. -J. Loe-
"Dix-huit lettres U-eGrdgoire Acindyne analys6es
nertz,
et dat6es, " Byzantina et Franco-Graeca, II (Rome, 1970),
no. 7, pp. 89-92,130-31; Laurent, Synodicon, 149-50;
Tsamis, OLXoUou, 372 n. 203, on'the meaning of a notice
concerning Koukounaris : "-roG 6TzLOeD7lx6-rog Tfic II6XoTxoQ
TECaTaxoQl', Loenertz, 89-92, from the tree Pistacia Tere-
binthus, and the joke concerning Koukounaris's surname.
3 R6g. du Patr. *, nos. 2270,2273; Laurent, Synod., 150.
 392

Monemvasia. The beginning is missing but from the rest

we learn that the Metropolitan of Patras was ready to

out for his See when God held him back and he
set
1
was transfered to Monemvasia. It would, however,

be difficult to identify this Metropolitan whose name

is not mentioned with Metrophanes who had held the

See of Patras for many years, even though he was in

Constantinople at least until 1346. His earlier con-

flict with Isidore would preclude such an honour

being bestowed on him. On the contrary the un-

named metropolitan could have been Dorotheos, who is

2
mentioned after Koukounaris in the Synodicon.

The election of. the metropolitan, as well as the imperial

chrysobull and the patriarchal sigillionwhich f ollowedcould

be the result of. the ef f orts'of'the influential Monerivasiotes

in the Capital, some of whom, like Nicolaos, ' were close

friends of both the Emperor and the Patriarch. The

existence of'a chrysobull by John Kantakouzenos was only

known from its reference in the Synodical decision of

3
1570 concerning Androusa. and a few other sources.

1''R6qestes
dil Patri'arcatyno.. 2297;. Miklosich-
MUller, 1,274-75; Laurent, Synodiconj, 151,. Zakythinos,
Despotat, 11,277.
2 ' nos. 2264,2289,2297;
R6gestes du Patri'arcat,, '
Laurent, Synodicon, 151. PLP, 5929.
3 403;
Miklosich-blUller, V, 176; Ps. Dorotheos D. M.
Nicol, "The Doctor-Philosopher John Comnen of Bucarest
his biographyof the Emperor John 'Kantakuzenos, 11
and
RESEE, 9(1971), 522-23; E. Voordeckers, "La'Vie de Jean Can-
Jean-Hidroth6e Comn6ne, ` LOB, 20(1971), 168;
par
'tacuzdne,
I. Medvedev, ' VV, 36(1974), 145-46.
 393

Its text was recently found. Asigillion by Patriarch

Isidore is mentioned in the Petition to the Patriarch.

Considering that it was related to the subordination

of Maina and Zemena to Monemvasia and since, as we

will see, this subordination was ratified by the chry-

sobull, we must assume that the two documents were

connected and one followed the other, according to

1
the prevailing practice.

The chrysobull has reached us inan 18th century

copy made in Constantinople by the scholar and colle-

2
ctor of documents Nicolaos Karatzas. He noted that

he had copied it from the original in Constantino-

It 3
ple. is unknown how and why it had remained there.

Unfortunately the document has many lacunae which

make its full comprehension difficult. Possibly they

are due to the damaged condition of the original and

since, as was mentioned earlier, this document too is

not mentioned in the Petitions to the Patriarch it is

possible that it had the same luck as the so-called

false chrysobull of Andronikos II.

VE, 12 (1915), 282,11.9-11; ' R6gestegdii Patri-

arcat, F-o. 2298.
2
Medvedev, *VV, 32, pp. 223-231; Fonkid,, VV, 37,
pp. 140-46.
3
Fonki6, ' 37, p., 143,, pl. 2.
 394

The chrysobull begins with a short prooimion con-

cerning the city and its church, echoing the praises

in the documents of Andronikos II, stating that pre-

vious emperors gave Monemvasia a higher rank and a lar-

1
ge property. The section following is not complete.

It is understood that apparently the Emperor had the

intention to make a donation or a dedication to the

metropolis of Monemvasia and this is the Castle of

2
the Archangeloi, at. or near "XoOXaxxot" Further on
..
it is mentioned that this bull ratifies the "ancient"

and later chrysobulls of previous emperors in order

3
to prevent any disputes. Such is the case with the

Metropolitan of Lacedaemonia concerning the small town

of Stena and of Arsakas, which were situated near the

boundaries 4
of the diocese. Sol following the request

of the Metropolitan, the Emperor grants the chrysobull

which stipulates that. the metropolis of Monemvasia

can possess and occupy some possessions, unknown, on

account of another lacuna, possibly Archangeloi, Stena

and Arsakas, with, it continues, the revenue of their

5
serfs. After several more phrases itis repeated that

1
First edition by Medvedev, * VV, 32, pp. 227-28.
Do"lger, Regesten, no. 3029. Proimion, p. 227,11.6-13.
2
Medvedev, ' VV, 32, p. 227,11.13-17.
3
VV, 32, p. 227,11.17-20.
4
VV, 32,, p. 22-7o, 11.20-24.
5
vv, 32, p. 227t 11.24-30.
 395

the possessions of the Metropolis and particularly

Stena and Arsakas are confirmed in eternity according

to the chrysobulls of the deceased emperors Matthaios,

Constantine Poghonatos, Alexios Komnenos, Andronikos

1
Palaeologos. Also it is stated that the metropolitan

is the only exarch in the Peloponnese, in accordance

too with other chrysobulls, and holds the rank of the

Patriarch of Jerusalem, as well as all the other gifts

and all the bishoprics which he held, i. e. Kythera, He-

2
los, Maina, Rheon, Zemena, Coron, Modon and Androusa.

These bishoprics are contained within the circumscripti-

on, which the ErOperor declares unaltered forever. Its

description is practically identical with that given

by the chrysobull of Andronikos 11.3 Further on follow

certain formalities concerning the confirmation of.

the possessions of the metropolis. A stern warning

is addressed to the Metropolitan of Lacedaemonia not
4
to raise any claims against Monemvasia. The document

ends with an incomplete date, October, 9th indictiol

5
68... and the imperial signature.

With this chrysobull somethilng important had been

added to'the possessions of the metropolis of Monerivasia

Medvedev, VV, 32, p. 227,11.30-44.

2.
VV, 32, p. 227,11.44-49.
3. 228,11.55-72.
VV, 32, p. 227,11.49-54, p.
4
VV, 32, p. 228,11.72-86.
5 32, 228,11.86-90.
VV, p.
 396

the castle of Archangeloi with its serfs. It was situ-

1
ated in Messenia, not far from Ithome. The controver-

sy between the two metropolitans, which is settled

with this document, is not mentioned in other sources.

The small town of Stena might well be Socha, mention-

ed in the chrysobull of Andronikos II, which was situ-

2 (-Pl, I)
ated near Arsakas. The two towns are situat-

ed very near Amykli, which was the object of the dis-

pute earlier between Nicolaos and Nicephoros Mpscho-

poulos. It is'al: so known tlat in 1340-41 a similar

dispute had arisen between Neilos of Lacedaemonia and

Metrophanes of Patras. It is possible that Neilos

was still heading Lacedaemonia, and still coveted these

3
parts. This could be the reason for the hurried trans-

fer of the Metropolitan of Patras to Monemvasia, machi-

nated by the strong Monemvasiot lobby in Constantino-.

ple.

Apart from settling these somewhat trivial diffe-

rences, the chrysobull substitutes the privilege of

1 H
Bony Mow6e, 418,427-28, mentioning Sancto Ar-
changieloalli Lacchi". On XOLP6XMXOL and other place-
names contained in the circumscription: P. Velisariou,
H REXOnOVVIOLM
XOLp6XMXOL PH 16 (1985-86), 418-22
, .
2
Binon, EO, 37 (1938), 310,11.59-60. H. A. Orme-
rod, "Laconia. II Topography, "' BSA, 16 (1909-10), 64-71.
3.
R6gestes'du PatriArcat, no, 2202. Zakythinos,
Despotat, 11,286.

I
 397

topos of Side with that of the topos of the Patriarch

of Jerusalem-, bringing the status of Monemvasia even

closer to that of a Patriarch.. This hierarchical po-

sition of Monemvasia, which is mentioned in the

sources, was considered before the discovery of the

'
text of the chrysobull, enigmatic. It has been as-

sumed that use of the topos of Jerusalem was first

made by Dositheos, metropolitan of Monemvasia during

the Council of. Fqrrara-Florence, and that. this person-

al privilege of Dositheos was subsequently used by

2
his succes'sors. The chrysobull proves that they right-

fully used this extraordinary privilege, which had

been granted a hundred years before the Council of

Florence.

The chronological indications offered by the e-

xisting copy are not very helpful. Neither John VI nor

Isidore who issued the, most probably, relevant sigilli-'

on held their office during a 9th indictio. Consequent-

ly it must be a mistake of the transcriber who mis-

read the elaborate EVOSTOL XdECLQ Of the'damaged ori-

ginal. and could not even read the second part of the

date. On the contrary it could be'accepted that his

reading of the month is correct, because the spelling

of October is characteristic.

1 (1938),
Binon,, EO, 37 296.
2
Laurent,, ' 'Syropciill-os*, 254-56.
 398

One could try to date the document on the basis

of the historical events. The sigillion and the chry-

sobull followed the election of a new metropolitan, of

Monemvasia. Consequently they were issued after Sep-

tember 1348. ' Assuming that the two documents were

connected, the chrysobull cannot have been issued

after October 1349, because Isidore died before Octo-

ber 1350.1 Consequently it was issued either in 1348

or in 1349. Even though 1348 seems very close to his

election for the Metropolitan to have had the time to

inform himself on the problems of his new See and the

claims of Lacedaemonia, it is possible that these pro-

blems were known to the influential Monemvasiote

friends of the Emperor and the Patriarch who acted for

his nomination. Consequently the chrysobull of John VI

Kantakouzenos was quite possibly issued in October, in-

dictio 2,6857, i. e. 1348 or the following year, ' indi-

2
ctio 3,6858, i. e. 1349.

The authenticity of the document has been contest-

ed on the basis of the arguments used against the au-

thenticity of the chrysobull of Andronikos II of 1314,

Above, 391-92.
2 1349: V. Laurent, "La Chronologie des Pa-
On 2. xii.
de Constantinople de la premi6re moiti6 du
triarches
(1294-1350), "* REB, 7(1949), 154-55. On
XIVe si6cle
the sigillion, R6g. du Patr., no. 2298.
 399

mainly the inclusion of Andro: usa among the bishoprics

of Monemvasia, and was ascribed to the hand of Macarios

1
Melissenos. The reasons why the arguments against

the authenticity of the chrysobull of 1314 do not

2
stand have already been examined earlier. Consequent-

ly the same arguments do not stand against the authen-

ticity of the chrysobull by John Kantakouzenos. The

argument that the indictio given in the copy does

not correspond to John's reign is not, conclusive, con-

sidering that we only have a copy of the 18th century,

which quite possibly misread a badly damaged original.

On the other hand it is most improbable that Macarios

Melissenos fabricated a document, which granted him

such an important privilege as the topos of the Pa-

triarch of Jerusalem and did not make use of this

privilege at the Synod in 1570, -when, on the contrary,

he asked for the confirmation of the much lower

topos of Side. This gives also another proof of his

illiteracy and his difficulty in understanding the older

3
documents.

1
Medvedev,, VV, 32,229-30; Fonkid,, VV., 37, p.
145.

2
Above, ch. 6 VI.
3
Miklosich-Muller, V, 177.
 VIII Controversies in the Peloponnese
.

It is not known how long the Metropolitan, for

whom the chrysobull of Kantakouzenos was issued,

held the See of Monemvasia nor when he was followed

by his successor, Joseph, according to the Synoditon.

In 1367 the Metropolitan of Monemvasia is mentioned

as residing in his See. A gap in the information fol-

lows until August 1383, when the Metropolitan, whose

name is not given, is mentioned participating in the

3
Synod of Constantinople. Another gap follows, which

might be an indication that metropolitan Joseph at-.

tested in 1386 is still another metropolitan, possibly

4
the second Joseph of the Synodicon. Joseph is found

in February 1389 among the members of the Synod, who

took important decisions concerning the Church of Rus-
5
sia and other subjects. Due to the critical situation
in the Peloponnese, which led to the Turkish occupation

of M6nemvasia in 1394, Joseph, apparently, had to re turn

6
to his See, where he was needed.

1
According to the Synodicon, if. tphLeprevious was
Dorotheos and if he had died by 1367 P no. 9035.
2
Darrouz! s, R6gestes du Patriarcat, no. 2532.
3
Rdgestes du Patriarcat, no, 2756. -
4 PLP, no. 9036.
R6gestesdu Patriarcat, nos, 279 6,2805.
5
R_6g..du, Patr. 2847-9; Sorlin, REB, 43(1985), 253-58.
6. 2928.
R6gestes *du Patrlarc, at, no.
 401

In February 1394 a new metropolitan was appointed

in Corinth, Theognostos, who received also the metro-

of Christianoupolis XaT'tTEC60GLV, just like his

polis
1
predecessor. Theognostos was very close to the P&ti-

arch Antonios and resided in Constantinople and took

2
part in the Synod regularly. In September 1394 Theo-

gnostos received. his first privileges thanks, no doubt,

to his relation with the Patriarch., He became hyper-

timos and exarch for the whole of the Peloponnese

and was given also the Patriarchal exarchate in the Pe-

loponnese, which had been given-in 1354 to the metro-

litans of Monemvasia. He also received the metropo-

3
lis of Kerkyra and the bishopric of Leukas. It is

characteristic of the incompetence of the ecclesiasti-

cal administration that the officials in Constantino-

ple would not find older references and Theognostos

was asked to. find out for himself if the two Sees

had already been given to the metropolis of Ioannina.

Apparently, by the time that part of the Peloponnese

had been recovered from the Franks and a metropolitan

of Corinth was regula3ly appointed residing in the

1. 2949,
R6geste's' du Patriarcat, no.
2. 2959,2965,2967.
R6qe'stes-du Patrliarcat, nos.
The appointment of the metropolitAn'as-an, exarch.
in R6gestes, no. 2354.
3 du Patriarcat,,
R6gestes na -.-2569. -
 402

Capital, it had been forgotten which bishoprics had pre-

viously been under his jurisdiction. In September

1394, after the death of Nerio Acciaiuoli it looked

as if Corinth could at last come into Greek hands

again. The Metropolitan anticipating the liberation

of the city, hastened to his See, and there he tried

to collect information concerning the Church of Corinth

and to reestablish its older possessions. In August

1395 Theognostos returned to Constantinople.

After the death of Joseph, a new metrQpol itanAkakios, was

elected for Monemvasia in January 1397, who is mention-

ed as exarchos of the Peloponnese during. his participa-

2
tion in the Synod. In March or April 1397 Theognostos,

the metropolitan of Corinth, claimed back from Monemva-

sia the bishoprics of Maina and of Zemena. Akakios

professed complete ignorance of the fact that the two

bishoprics had ever belonged to Corinth, said that he

had never set foot on the Peloponnese and that he would

not have accepted the See of Monemvasia if he had known

of these complications. The decision was taken in defi-

ance of all rules, by the Synod comprising only five

metropolitans instead of the minimum of twelve, with

I 3005-9,
R6gestes du Patriarcat, mos.
2 3035. The date,
R6gestes_du Patriarcat, no.
297, should be corrected to 1397. 'PLP no. 477,
 403

three votes in favour of the return, the Metropolitan

of Monemvasia being part of the majority! The Metro-

politan of Corinth wanting to show that he had not

exploited the ignorance of Akakios, whereas he had

admitted the status quo with his predecessor, accept-

ed that the transfer should be put into effect after

1
the death of Akakios.

Akakios the elderly, as he is surnamed, who was

nearly elected Patriarch, had perfect relations with

the imperial family, particularly during their so-

journ in the area of Monemvasia from 1400 to 1403.

He personally was -entrusted with the regular holding

of masses in memory of the children of Manuel II who

had been buried there. To this end Despot Theodore

issued the argyroboullon which was ratified in 1405

with the imperial chrysobull, by which the Metropoli-

tan was granted the town of Helikovounon with its

2
tower and territory. By 1408-09 Akakios had probably
died, since he is not mentioned among the participants
3
of the Synod for the deposition of Macario's of"tAncyra.

"
'R6gestes du Pari*arcat, no . 3044 ;' NE, 12
(1915), 272-318; Laurent, Les faux, 156-58. ' .

2,
R6gestes, no . 3059.
3
V. Laurent, "Le Trisdpiscopat du Patriarche-Ma-
tthieu U! r " REB, 30 (1972), 56 58 the list, of. the
In 1403 he had, however, voted by
participans.
proxy, pp. 38-39, which he could have done again,
had he been alive.
 404

The Synodical decision of 1570 mentions one more

chrysobull by Manuel II for the metropolis of Monemvasia,

1
which assured the possession of Androusa. In the

same way as in the chrysobull of John Kantakouzenos

the reference to Androusa and its possession could

have been indirect and the chrysobull could not have

2
been issued specifically for that matter. The date

of its issue cannot be set without further informa-

tion. It could have been issued after the Emperor's

return from his. journey in Europe. The selling of

Corinth to the Knights of'Saint John, the disappea-

rance of Theognostos, the confusion following the

election of Matthaios of Kyzikos as Patriarch, the

siege of Constantinople by the Turks, and other impor-

tan events. caused the cession of the two bishoprics

to Corinth to be forgotten. It is possible that Nico-

laos Eudaemonolannis had to do with the issuing of

the chrysobull in which case it must date after 1407.

The successor of Akakios, Cyril, to whom the Sy--,,

nodicon dedicates many praises, regularly employed

3
Isidore , who as a monk had settled in Laconia.

1
Miklosich-Muller, V, 176.
2
D61ger, Regesten, no. 3401.
3
It is most improbable that Isidore ever became
metropolitan of Monemvasia as Zakythinos. Manges
-'
Merlier, holds. The arguments against iti: in Laurent,
Isidore, 150-57.
 405

Isidore prepared for Cyril the text with benedictions

which the new Metropolitan, according to custom, deli-

vered upon his entrance in his new See, dedicated to

1
his See, to the Emperor and to the Despot. In the

one dedicated to the Emperor, the Metropolitan prays

Gqd to help him subdue the barbarians, who had surround-

ed and "like dogs" were trying to tear them to pieces.

.
He also refers to John not yet co-emperor and the "new

Augusta", the Russian born Anna, whose wedding to John

2
was apparently still recent. The siege of Constanti-

nople by the Turks lasted for the whole of 1411 up

to March 1412 and the wedding of John took place in

1411. Consequently the benedictions must have been

written late in 1411 or the beginning of 1412. The

election of Cyril must be set a little earlier, befo-

re the siege started, since he was able to leave the

3A
capital. confirmation of the date of election of
Cyril is found in the text of the Petitions to th e

Patriarch written again by Isidore for Cyril. It is

defined that the second Petition has been written 127

years after the issuing of the chrysobull of Androni-

kos II, i. e. 1301+127= 1427 or 1428,. and furthermore

16 years after the election of the Metropolitan, i. e.

Above, pp. 302-03.

2 (1955),
Ziegler, OCP, 21 330,11.16-18,24-30.
3
Nicolp 1261-1453,341-42, Schreiner, Chronolo-
gische Untersuchungen, 294.
 406

1427 or 1428- 16= 1411 or 1412.

The first years of the presence of Cyril in Monem-

vasia were apparently quiet. In 1418-19, however, a

new bishop of Maina was ordained. This bishop was the

cause of a prolonged controversy. His behaviour was

a scandal. He did not reside in his diocese, he con-

sented to various irregular deeds, as anti-canonical

marriages, divorces and ordinatons, he accepted mo.-

ney which he-had no right to from priests and his

flock, he comitted usury. His-provocati, %ebehaviour

brought strong and widespread reactions. But the

bishop was supported by the Metropolitans of Lacedae-

monia.. and. Patras and the Despot. The Metropolitan of

Lacedaemonia allowed him to reside in a monastery in

the area of Lacedaemonia in breach of the rules..

Cyril exposed the case personally to the Patriarch

but to no avail, due to the interference of the sup-

porters of the bishop. He was, furthermore, offended

by the Patriarch who sent him -letters through. the Me-

tropolitan of Corinth and the bishop of Maina. In the-

se letters he was reprimanded instead of the bishop,

of Maina being punished. Interested in safeguarding

the authority of the episcopal office Cyril-sent in

1425-26 a first Petition, composed by Isidore, to

Patriarch. joseph II. Following this severe report and

1. 277,283.
NE, 12 (1915)
,
 407

the pressure of the congregation gathered in Constanti-

1
nople, the bishop of Maina was deposed the same year.

However, this wicked man took his revenge by

causing the enforcement of the Synodical act of 1397

concerning the return to Corinth of the bishoprics

of Maina and Zemena. Apparently Zemena had already

been transferred to Corinth and consequently the de-

cision concekning Zemena did not annoy the Metropoli-

tan of Monemvasia. 0n the contrary the return of Mai-

na to Corinth which was realized during his absence

caused. his vigorous protests and the composition of

the second Petition demanding the suspension of the

2
decision.

Written by Isidore in 1427-28, the Petition con-

tains a large amount of evidence methodically collect-

ed supporting his case. 'The Metropolitan begins by

expressing his bitterness for the way in which this

story was devised, without his being asked to be pre-

sent, in order to defend himself, and all this out.

of personal spite against him. He then refers to the

origins of the case of Maina and zemena their render-

ing to Corinth in 1397 after an anti-canonical session

of the Synod, when only four prelates were present

apart from Monemvasials. He lists in detail the pri-

14

1 (1915),
NE, 12 2*58-72,, 276.
2 (1915) 273-276.
NE#, 12 ,
 408

vileges concerning the See of Monemvasia going six

hundred years back and never omits to underline the

large numbers of those present when the decisions were

taken. Discussing the sigillion of Andronikos II, which

mentions the bishoprics which were taken from Corinth

and given to Monemvasia, he stresses the part where

it is mentioned that Corinth was under Latin occupa-

tion and the Metropolitan of Monemvasia succoured the

refugees from there. The cession of the two bishoprics

was the just reward by the emperor for his good deeds.

He tries, howeverto prove that there was no connection

between the conquest of Corinth by the Franks and the

grant of the bishoprics to Monemvasia, stressing that

during the whole-period of the occupation of Corinth

metropolitans were ordained.,, If these rights existed

earlier metropolitans would have-claimed them.

Knowing the difficulty Isidore must have faced

in checking older references, his evidence is impres-

sive. He uses a large number of sources from imperial

2.1-1
documents to hagiographical texts. . -1,-
1,

After the journey of the Metropolitan followed

by Isidore to Constantinople, this complicated case

was brought to an end. It had, however, resulted in

WE, 12 (1915) 273-318.

,
2 37 (1938), 287 n. 5.
Binon,, 'EO,
 409

the co=pilation of valuable information on Monemvasia.

A chrysobull and a sigillion confirmed the return of
1
MAIna and Zc=ena to the metropolis of Monemvasia.
It has to be noted that the chrysobull by John VIII,

the text of which has not survived, was one of those

used by Macarlos Molisscnos

as evidence of the possesi-
2A
on of Androusa by mon=va3ia. Short Chronicle pres-
erves a si-ary of this document # in which# curiously,
Androus3 in not mentioned among the other bishoprics.

This was considered hastily as a proof that the chryso-

3
bull was forged by nacarios Melissenos. However, the

su.-tary does not o=it only Androusa but two more bishoprics,

which definitely belonged to Monemvasia at that time,,

KythorA and Holos. Those omissions must be attributed
to other reasons, e. g. the carelessness of the author
of the Short Chroniclot and do not prove that Melissenos
tc=porod with the text of the chrysobull.

Cyril does not see= to have returned to klonemva-

sla After his justification In 1428, Death must have

found him In Constantinople and Isidore returned alone

to Laconia. f. ext year, however, he left again first

I 15701
Mentioned in the Synodical decision of
MiklouLch-MUller# V. 176.

D319cro Reqexten# no. 3518.

3 Kleinchro-
Giving the exact date 14 28-29t Schreinert-
ntkcn# no. 32/410 It p. 3261 11, pp. 436-37.
 410

for Constantinoploo then for the Council of Basle

and finally went as a metropolitan to Russia. Apro-uni-
ontutp like Isidore. was elected metropolitan of Monem-
v4sla# DoaLthoos, ex-matropolitan of Trebizond,, the
I
tutor of Dossarion. Do3itheos had been persuaded to

resign frez the See of Trebizond in 1422 in order to

be transfored s=cwhero also, possibly to Monemvasia.
Ito had to wait for several years though and remained
in Constantinople without governing any See up to
1430-31.2 If he had indeed resigned with Monemvasia
in mind then this is another proof not only how impor-
tant Monezvasia. was considered but also how systemati-
cally John VIN tried to promote to important posts
3
friends of the Union. The activities of Dositheos in
honenvaula are not known. Ilia presence in the area
to Indirectly attosted fr= the presence there of
DazaArlon. A sigLIlion of Patriarch Metrophanes Ii
to also mentioned* coinciding with his office, for an
unknown subject$ in which the possession of Androusa
by Isonv=vAnLa was mentioned. Androusa by then was in
4
Crack hands.

1
Laurent# Synodicon, ISS-58. PLP, no. 5642.
2 11.32-35;
Laurent* :SYrO22u'O2"248'v Laurent,
249 n. 2 mInIntarprats the passage believing that he
0 Laurent,
was transfarod to Mon=vasia against his will.
Synodtcont 156-57. -
3 184-85.
Cf. Laurent* SyroMuloss,
4 non, * morde, 285.
Mtkloolch HUIIcr#V#176i
 411

On the other hand several details are known concer-

ningDositheos in connection with the Councilof Florence.

Together with the other participants he set out in

December 1437 from the Peloponnese. It is interesting

to note again that during the Council he made use of

the privilege of the topos of Jerusalem, which had

been granted to him by the chrysobull of John Kantakou-

1
zenos, which has been considered forged.

Dositheos does not seem to have returned from

the Council to his See, where, as in the rest of the

Empire,, the strife between the Unionists and the anti-

Unionists reigned. Perhaps he never returned to Mo-

nemvasia. The Emperor ceded him the monastery of Pro-

2
dromos in the Capital, where he remained as abbot.

It is certain that he had died by September 1450, be-

cause the Synodic6n of Monemvasia at that date includ-

es him among the deceased prelates of the city. '

The following name in the Synodicon, Josephis found

3
in other sources thirty years later, in 1483 in Modon.

1
Laurent, ' Syropoul-os, 164,194,246,248,254-56.
2
. rlqXaLoX6yCLCL XaC rlCXOTEO-VVnCTL(X-Ad,
1,22,178,181-
82. Laurent, Synodicon, 157.

3 m. Manoussacas, "'ApXLEPCVQ McO&vTjj;, Kopc5vrjQ xcxC

MovellocLaCcLQ yi6p(a oTdL 1500, " Ile AoTEov-v-nat,(xxd, 3 (1959)
104-05. PLP, no. 9037.
 412

But the See had not remained vacant. Earlier

in 1460, when Morea was surrendered to the Turks, the

See of Monemvasia was held by a metropolitan who is menti-

oned by the delegation which went in September 1460

to Italy and entrusted Monemvasia to Pope Pius II.

Due to his participation in this movement it must be

considered certain that, like his predecessor, he too

1
wasa pro-Unionist.

The. enthralling sequel of the ecclesiastical hi-

story of Monemvasia belongs to periods which are out-

2
side the scope of this study.

1
Archivio Segreto Vaticano, Miscellanea' Arm.
IX, tom. 15, Lett. MeN, fol. 154 ; Raynaldu's, An-
.nales*Ecclesiastici,. 55.
2
Manoussacas, 'ApxLepc%, 105-47.
 Conclusions

When in September 1460 Pope Pius II received the

ambassadors from Monemvasia and took the city under

his protection, he issued a bull confirming the privi-

leges that had been granted to it by the byzantine Em-

perors, while noting in his "commentaries" that Monem-

vasia had been a naval city and was the continuation

of ancient Sparta.

With these two references of his, Pius touched

on the two most important points in the history of

Monemvasia, i. e. that it was the continuation of Spar-

ta and that it had preserved certain privileges, which

originated in early ages and had been preserved by im-

perial documents. If the move of the inhabitants of

Sparta during-the second haif of the 6th. century can
'be justified by the prevailing, -at the time, condi-

tions within the Empire, it is, however, noteworthy

that the inhabitants of the new city not only did not
forget their descent during the following centuries

but took care to preserve, under completely different

circumstances, the institutions and privileges which

their city had inherited from previous eras, This evo-

lution, which kept Monemvasia outside the byzantine

administration, c-auld explain the lack of references

 414

to the city during many centuries, as is the case with

other self-governed cities. It also explains the issu-

ing of an important number of imperial documents regu-

lating the relations between the city and the central

administration, that is to say, the safeguarding of

the old institutions while adjusting to changing con-

ditions.

The difficulty in comprehending these particular

elements of the history of Monemvasia'and their explana-

tion perplexed the historians and led to the theory of

the forged documents, which, however, instead of ex-

plaining things led to a vicous circle. It was shown,

however, by their analysis, that, 'if the documents are

examined within their context, they present no explana-

tory problems, on the. contrary, they are,,, a"'valuable ma-

terial concerning the history of Monemvasia and the

byzantine administration and its pecularities.

This material the inhabitants of Monemvasia took

great care to preserve in their Archives ever since the

foundation of the city and even after the fall of the

Empire, when the privileges granted by the byzantine

emperors lost all meaning. And even though Pope Pius

II aknowledged them, they were completely ignored by

the ensuing conquerors, however much prestige they

 415

kept giving to Monemvasia. Alongside other documents

of the ecclesiastical See they continued to be guarded

in the city's Archives from where they were recovered

when necessity had it for reference or to be copied,

to be returned to their place afterwards. Such was the

case when controversy arose in 1528 concerning the

boundaries between Monemvasia and Nauplion and the

chrysobull containing the circumscription was shown

to the Venetian authorities.

Such was also the case in 1570 when dispute arose

between Monemvasia and Christianoupolis concerning -

Androusa. Metropolitan Macarios took with him to the

Synod at Constantinople a series of imperial and pa-

triarchal documents, which he used as evidence. It is

known that when he returned they were put. back into the

Archives, while it does not seem that he took any of'

the original documents from there when, later, he left

the Peloponnese for the West. He did, however, copy se-

veral of these documents, as loannis Likinios and others

also did.

The Archives continued up to the mid-seventeenth

century to include an important number of documents.

Then their dispersion becomes more obvious: two origi-

nal chrysobulls are reported to be in Constantinople

and another at Kythera at the middle of the century.

 416

By the time that the new Greek State was founded and

Kapodistrias the first "Governor" visited. Monemvasia,

only one document remained, ironically, the chrysobull

by Andronikos II which confused the historians so much

and slandered the Monemvasiotes. Few years later this

too was sent to Athens and the Archives of the city of

Monemvasia containing the "Imperial Privileges" ceased

to exist.
 APPENDIX

List of the documents of Monemvasia

No. Fmper. IOther I Date IIssuer Kind F ontents References

1 592-93 Maurice Sigillion Privileges Do**lger, 92

3101, (Chrysobull? )for the Ps. Phrant-
Lnd. 11 city and zes, 538;
See VV, 32, p. 227

2 II 80-84 Constan- Sigillion Privileges VV, 32, p. 227

tine Po- (Chrysobuill.? )for the
ghonatos city

3 III a. Alexios
082 Komnenos Chrysobull Privileges DZ51ger. 1288
for the Ps. Phrant-
city and zes, 538;
See VV, 32, p. 227

4 ; a. William Grammata Privileges XTM, vv. 2937-

1252 Villehar- (Chrysobull? ) for/the 2940; Ps. Do-
douin city rotheos, 475

5 IV 1266? Michael Chrysobull Privileges Do*lger, 1897

VIII for the Chrys. 6. V
city MM, V, 154-55

6 v 1284 Androni- Chrysobull Privileges Copy

kug. kos II for the Do*lger, 2102
5792 city MM, V, 154-55
Lnd. 12

7 VI 1291-2 Androni- Prostagma Privileges Ps. Phrantzes,

(6800 kos II for the 538; Kl,. Chr.,
ind. 5) See 32/11-

1291-2 Patr. A- Patr. sigilli- Privileges MM, I1,288-9

thanasi- on for the
os I See
9 vii 1299- Michael Chrysobull Privileges Chrys. 16. XII
1300 IX for the Ps. Phrant-
city zes, 538
10 viii 1300 Androni- Prostagma Privileges Copy
kpril kos II for the REB, 21, pp.
ind. 13 See 144-47
 418
I j j eferences
N4 mper. Other Date Issuer Kind Contents

11 11 1300 Patr. Synodical Privileges Copy

April John XII Act for the REB, 21, pp.
ind. 13 See T-47-49

12 IX 1301 Androni- Chrysobull Privileges Original

June kos . II for the Do**lger2232-5
6809 , See 2237-8
ind. 14 EO, 37, pp.
j06-10

13 iii ? Patr. Synodical Privileges NE, 12, p. 282

John XIII Act for the
See

14 X 1301? Androni- Chrysobull Possesions of Copy

June? kos II See DO**lger 2236
1302? MM, V, 161-65
May? E, 32,225

15 xi 1314? droni- Chrysobull Privileges - Original

July? kas II for the DO"lger, 2238
ind. 12? See EO, 37, pp.
j06-11

16 XII 1336? Androni- Chrysobull Privileges Copy

- Nov.? kos III for the D0'31ger, 2383
city Ps. Phrantzes
538-42

17 iv 1347- Patr. I- Patr, Sigilli- Transfer of Rdg. P,atr. 229

1348 sidore on* Metropolitan MM,1,274-75
Oct. to Monemvasia -

18 XIII 1347? John VI Chrysobull Privileges opy

1348? for the Do"lger, 3029
Oct. See VVt32,221-28
19 v 1347? Patr. I- Patr. Sigilli- Privileges - R6g. Pat . 229
1348? sidore on for the NE, 12, pp.
Oct. See TB-2-3

20 vi 1354-5 Patr. Phi- Patr. Sigilli- Exarchate R6q. Pa'tr. 235

1364? lotheos on KM, II, 328-29
RE, 12, p. 293
21 b 1391-2 Despot Argyroboullos Privileges
horismos for the Copy
Theodore
I V 171-4
city Kl:: C; 32/2
22 vii 1397 Patr. An- Synodical Return of R6g. Patr. 304
arch? thony IV Decision bishoprics MMII, 287-9
April? to Corinth

I
 419
j thed j ind - Fontents eferences
No. Imper. Date Issuer
lonation
23 c before Despot Argyroboullo Chr. 24. XIV
1405 Theodore horismos to the MM, V, 169
I See

24 XIV 1405 Manuel Chrysobull Donation D81ger, 3307

Sept. II to the V, 168-70
6914 See _,
ind. 14

25 XV ? Manuel Chrysobull Privileges Do'lger, 3401

II for the MM, V, 176
See

26 XVI 1428-9 John Chrysobull Privileges Do'*lger, 3518

VIII for the Kl'. Chr. 32/41
See MM, V, 176

27 viij 1428-9 Patr. Jo- Patr, Sigilli- Privileges MM, V, 176

seph 11 on for the
See

28 ix 1440- Patr. Me- Patr. 5igilli- ? MM, V, 176

1443 tropha- on
nes

29 d 1442 Despot rgyroboulloE Privileges Copy

ec. Theodore horismos for the MM, V, 174-5
6951. 11 city
ind. 6

30 e 1450 Despot rgyroboullos Privileges Copy

Febr. Demetri- horismos for the MM, V, 170-1
6958 os city
ind. 13
 ST COPY

AVAILA L

Variable print quality

 4

10

'A

/
Amatfis,

t,

Modo n

M4,

lKa

X) 33 AD
10
km

ThePeoponnese
 os

(a k
-I ) 08
-(

\Vj 0 cp a9hips
Was

c
as

V ,
rat
&QUsa parissi
.

n
v

r'iTk

lierax

n
Sytheion ODASKALEJO

yl I cl Limera
2 AsI (s
PI tr
MONEMVASI
xyli D.
omia

(Phota)
Gemu
(Kortmtep
Ml ina

ELAPKONE
0 va

CAPE MALEA

CAPF IOLE MAROM NE

/-Ol A

C ON YOU It S IE VE it N 04 WEIRES

2. The peninsula of Laconik6

Methone L\-

to so MILES

3. Boundaries between the territory of Sparta and

of the Eleutherolacones (After Chrimes)

 . ItI '. .a Ie, '. 'o ,
2p, .--'. J'A

4 1.

;
, -I
4F

'o
,
Aaz, '
. c r4p, kj zm tj 3Vqi: fy
w ALZ71
i, .
.. - ka,,".. F. 0v po
IA% :
taw

f r, 41,

14
,
'17 -III
-- .z-.

11-S

CLGL4-VV3] ITIA&Coi; c
IV

';
eyjj,
"t
A! M
mix,
IK- ,,
VA ". t- -..,

shze
A, i

ir

6z ",
O.
J.

114jL

4. Ms. Kutlumus 220, fol. 194 r, beginning of

the Chronicle of Monemvasia

 r7 -t. -L, V-1. -- : '
-
. t

?w jj
Ilk-
do

p cr

..

54
7ft 'T-C-,,
"96.1
-%!
m4p 77-, i.! s, -.,
rT%
I

a
-0. ;: p46 - .,* .-,
. 0y.
ow

4
cc
gw
c",
;- CW ;
. 4%. " .,.
_t- -

tw-,-I,
c
IXA5T,
_A1.1
.0
CT,
.
, C.,
O'c 000,1

C;

ell
Tv
V,r
7 ly /*
LIS( I

7% .f., I. I"
11--t
fl
!j cl fr Aj
cIr

__T_ ., f.

r, Short
5. Ms. Kutlumus 220, fol. 189

Chronicle 41,4 a/b.

 LLAJ -
L;
-/c
CO.
"7, f V1,
Aj

la,

do cor-

;
9L

-; o f L*"---* -
'Zo V: is "V140 .

act,
ere-

o wi --Ic -1 - -31 V-I. _. , Ir ...

M_v 4qp
'Ooot
c
'-, -
fof -
p '-. -
'; C 1-P-9 k
I

Vwr wv
Wpm
.

47 y
Cf7
1: %; ITC f kly Vf U

ry

.5 \",.o V.

qt
'Pv' I i VTI 1
14, L
rt 1 'j - f'r, -If
.. I,

5
4:

Kutlumus 220, fol. 196 r'second

Ms. part

of the Chronicle of Monemvasia

 A
,
. It

r7ta
Y.. ai
tA
,,

5.5
."--
''q

am

-MONEAWASIA

ly 1-4-A
"'2 fAl"OIAS

<

7. Monemvasia and Epidauros Limera

(Admiralty Chart, 1838)

8. The port of Hierax (Admiralty Chart, 1838)
 --- --

7, - 7fIL7
-

',. -'. ' Vx

:" T6Ns,

IL
_Olt

wi I

-4 0.1.41

4k-

fn 0
on-, I 4
P4, 4al _v: ToW
0 ')-us
%. -J-Z4
_&f.
j
M A 'ItA 4r Ot
14
dLa lu -47-ml

rJAI
hl'
(nmw

IT op %1.6,0.4. Po M.,

o`rl d6- KO

-&
..... 4 Z" fA .

Iz IL f,, Z. 7-. -
,,,
,I

i. . er ..; - .. .--
." 11 ... --
Vv, ,. -, P. * I%-
I

of
-1 66,

4t

9 Ms. Vatic. Gr. 1904, fol. 116 Original of

the taboullarikon gramma of 1426

 ,2v; Afc

prij-417Ce

I rl
,Y
pov pI ,Irfop -;toZ &414

r4

,.-,)JwTj3., y

kF AA4

94
Yrf, ' '4-

41

Zo47
cv nv,
Ap Y ,,';
X,, (etAL; Vyrs w,, v
P4
, 1A
e W)"A h
, 0'2V
4ex dc
PA) Yll
\A
(

0,)fcfj..,Lpt ff ,,) Lto

71 to4/1
6D
1
k'r
",

4 hL Yf O)Al
*,lp;yo,op, I

Yt
k0 O)l 14 f 0 f ,,? t C7c
It-r-ol
o A;
-7 ,fJ,, rr", Vz
LA Yff -7Co/
Np Cr
"f
6;-7 4L
1,

,y-, IX
. .)f. " q--

4.. 13
'z CI
4-
-L

q
ly
JA 41zlr
VZV4

10. Ms. Paris. Gr. 3067, fol. 195r, copy of the taboull. granuna
 W--y-o-
-LT

STMA

Y-P-"c IIr
it mod-T-6 --I.

Tj

'-I

JC,
0
Ya
E, PIDAVOY, -
PP
0A X'EP0N
_A44>
: rlz--3 C.
- 11
a
-0 VA 12 F3 M;

EZ

44. r~L Its

S

Ms. Barb. Lat. 4424, fol. 29V drawings of

,
Ciriaco of Ancona, including the walls of
Epidauros Limera
 t2
1-j'- W..... ,t,,

X.- ". .. I , ez
lt6t

14 AL -.1 t TV 0"
-
-*I "t f Ivv 1, ,"k. 4'
kH 7-0. k-i; 0 vio. Y.W.'r, itwr Nm ,I, "" C;,s !
---f.
Ov-, 0
V. itq
Ice-, It
-ru
Ave
-
V 17 Ov. O'j(

-,,
-
- '. ..-j7". , *---,
1-1<
;
. -6
,
-" .
%.
Z-11
tP4
te,
. -, -0,..
..... ro -I, -, - -, - '-% it
0 . .., V -- -: .,
-k il 4 C,t V1
4.4
1

iso'
I'- I
W. Z
. ,4..
1
f: k-
Le

.194-
V ,, - wl
P., 6, -t, -*L*1 I
I- Il
9p9;.. ri -,
I.,. .. .-I'. -4- -, %
-7 - .1.. I.! -
ri, 6.
j4j y.
0, ,, S`. -,,
, A. " IF i"' *--Z, *` 'f'j- * - "; ftor, v, f
4. ; xj, .. no cr, 4"F.. A. I' I. .-.
-'- .. tsolwn, w, ,
ly,

-v, '! it & 0- 'r Ve i, e.%4

r sw oj 06CI
/-Y
; f4
JC -; VO
.I
-
Alvalt.,
-e
, V-v .I It -
1, .4

-f*; ', di.v-. .h

b-g fi,
'a ..
*%
,:
-, ,#

TZ ! of
Ij
4,
7Y
T Sib -M

-. -U-OA4AW *ILA z
AA6,1U.
-Isp
1# xf LV
.4. , 4,11 1.1 6--

x r- v 141 L
-.
(-S
F-,. C.
-'.

Cv, Y rf, "'I

-, o'k. - *- ,. -, , -, 'r
- r I-* :-.

--I -, 6,.r7
-,

- -.
-. ;\I,, -
"
-1 s. T
..
4. V
-t;t_ %
4, U4 -k" f E-wom
-4 *r. -
4`77- ION" O. '%- -*1 ,I
P (ITyi
.-f,
v A,.,It
, S.. 4, " ri
I-V
- I. ,P 't . .,
A. I,
tr
-.
.1
t
,4
ty
%MIT
.0701
I. %C-P 1r.
.
01' "-I. --
Prim 1".
t
OL
I ; ,,
L; %= .I -I.,
11
!-'.
MO. ,A-4.,

1. .,
'-Jr I-,ita -V
14;.
I "I.,

?
,., 0.1
,#
Ile

vr*
Z_.
t
;, C

12 Ms. Vat. Gr. 1879, fol. r

. 189 the fragment of the "Life
of Saint Theophanes" from the drafts Of Isidore
 is

--I , I
.
W,
Tt

-in

kkA

oil

. Ilk

ri

13 Miniature in the chrysobull of 1301 (B)

.
14 Chrysobull of 1314 (A)
.
15 Chrysobull A. Miniature
.
 .1

w1i
offs

IOLA"

-t, .r-
- 4* "

/
A
.;:i,

Ir

p"W-I
10-

Y, 4!, itio
_0 17i

I ni Inc. )
16
444,2 ow
01
I AiPKjI

or

IJL,

wy.
OIA.

"C -JL
;. 4&)7
. .3,
I.. ",
;
"0.4,. o
. "i-,,., ,, I,
T.

, .1,
%I-, %,2, - T) 5- -- -A. -,
Ir,(44 -

i A4
1 All.

Kod_

% iIa Aw 4v
. o .11
-A - 11
11", -I, 61 ' 164 -4-r

-I"*
I'"
1,
#0
IvI
-, .,
,-, f. ,-,
C4

16 Chrysobull A. First Part

.
 .2

1, op
fl, , I Ik- A
: 1,
mh.
?f, ... md
,. .1 404 1 ., 11,1

17 Chrysobull A. Second Part

.
 colt

KP'A- -V 74v

-S asp, t 'p-4

-e

a A0,44, 71 of

54-. rww

;. ova" Mot rid

1.0,-4-

11 1"f.. Vf I
'e. -

V*4WPVWI- wpnv
0% pfvA. ,0
rva %A_ -- -rr-,

t. I.

At

V L4
J--V miu
ilk

.0

't 4r

19 Ms. Neapol. Gr. c-II-36, fol. 62 r. Copy

. of

chrysobull A by Macarios Melissenos. lst part

 1%.

n of
..
11110
.7 01,
,. a-, -

A h'-6-* AV
I., ^. 91. *'
to LOP AM of
i

. 00

t
Aw

'0
"414.
Pow-"r

S
10
,. . t, -14- 00,

- -1

tr

r low
OW Ir -%. .--
I

r4

of

I,
of

-J: L. Ir, -4

wav .
--/

62 v Copy
20 Ms. Neapol. Gr. C-II-36, fol. of
.
.
Melissenos. 2nd part
chrysobull A by Macarios
 all. --If w-7 to, J-ttq -av- 71951-
naoii- *V-iiz
=_1 9

-4 . 60 row

I
wpto.

r2l

W-

p 1w

op - 4c

f'.
- II-t-

jp I
,
bmOr -Z I

A (Tl
'40ll,;
14, lzoiwlm"r oc. v, A,

21 Ms. Neapol. Gr. C-II-36, fol. 63 r. Copy

. of

chrysobull A by Macarios Melissenos. 3d part

 -I-I-.
d9. I- "' - to
is #. -
0- 70
o4i
kff

.0 Wo

tr

got -17C

rot
a

PA 01
-I r "96A: ffl

a%

Sao, r
'flews
1 ifff tI spa
-W

itp.

Pvr 7

dWr*

f &A 9,15%;
0-

22 Ms. Neapol. Gr. C-II-36, fol. 63v. Copy

. of
chrysocull A by Macarios Melissenos. 4ht part
 0- .0

T, 4)jorvIw Ile- ", Wv-v

-; r -
T -4147TOA Aid

lot%.

.0-

9paW.
--

04 4
4e
-e___

IV

ruL- Eli; , 4. t-4x

,T, Aj,, Ajt t;
7 j ' "- 91i; spm
1- 0. -t
44
k4

%PA#i -1 sl,, V.1r,

4 01. oft j
- a

Uf

? tf. 2
Is, k; &; --.6*&:1 -; -&-t AW4 9A70-ko-C
14

MO-v
.:):

23 Ms. Neapol. Gr. C-II-36, fol. 64r. Copy of

.
chrysobull A by Macarios Melissenos. 5th part
 at 0 feel. ce
I- a
v xj AV44T
41
I rv'no no
4 .1

Ir
4L
I f-. .41
JVA, 3
mg;
z
150:'f
rut *,, I.
;Tq
'0
O.S:; 4wi It
I- grow, vi

7talm i 4vv .4eto

IF

;
tv4r-# Avg C;Irl
00,1

Ic" 'skp
tp
JL---
-v* a*
w: I.

%71: 71; 1 &.

two tvrr

.0

rro r. F-lbi) L-A

VLP. 0/
4L
IIALOLL
5
a
,j .,

64 v copy
Neapol. Gr. C-II-36, fol. of
24 Ms. .
.
A by Macarios Melissenos. 6th part
chrysobull
HYPERMERA
ell
.

600
.

768

736

704

672

60

606

576

stz
-

312

Zoo

LLO
-

L16
-

384
-

3S2
-

320
-

288
-

256
-

224
.

' t. 2
-

160
-

128
-

90 -

64
-

32
-

S67 6 $10 1112 1314 15 IG 17 18 ID 20 2) 22 21 24 25 M 27 26 25 30 31 32 33

23& *.
. I
1
I Is 9 3G 17i Methymna so 25: Buye 100
Melenikon
2: 24 10: Rhosion 36 IS- Philippoupolls 60 26. Didymottichon 100
Alkidioupolis
36 15, Lacedaernonia 60 27: Mytolent 100
3: Drama 24 11 : Van the 1&
40 20; Tra'anoupolls 70 26: philippoi too
4, Gare I 1& 24 12: Pa I ra s
50 21 : RokooeSoll 72 29 serves ISO
6 Detkob U 13: Brysis
Ainos 103 30: Kylikos 200
6 Lopaclicn 24 50
, 14: GAnos 212.
7 14adyIa x IS: Lemnos so 123. Adrianoupniis DO 31' Heiaklea 200
serro-a IDO 32: Ihesss(oniki 200
M&T0ne Llk 3G 16. Medela so J24.
33. Mone mv a51a Boo

25 Contributions of the metropolitan Sees of the

.
Byzantine Empire to the Patriarchate in 1324