Quick viewing(Text Mode)

Romanos I Lekapenos and Nikolaos I Mystikos

CEU eTD Collection Budapest University European Central Legitimizing Usurpation: LekapenosLegitimizing Romanos I andNikolaos I MA in Studies Medieval Thesis Ivan Marić Ivan May 2013 May

CEU eTD Collection Examiner ______SupervisorThesis ______Chair, Committee Examination ______Master of of the inStudies. Medieval degree Arts University, European Central ofthe requirements in partial fulfillment Budapest, Studies, DepartmentofMedieval submitted to the Thesis Examiner ______Legitimizing Usurpation: LekapenosLegitimizing Romanos I Mystikos andNikolaos I Accepted in conformance with the standards of the CEU. standardsofthe with conformance the in Accepted Ivan Marić Ivan May 2013 May Budapest () by CEU eTD Collection External Reader External ______Master of of the inStudies. Medieval degree Arts University, European Central ofthe requirements in partial fulfillment Budapest, Studies, DepartmentofMedieval submitted to the Thesis Legitimizing Usurpation: LekapenosLegitimizing Romanos I Mystikos andNikolaos I Accepted in conformance with the standards of the CEU. standardsofthe with conformance the in Accepted Ivan Marić Ivan May 2013 May Budapest (Serbia) by CEU eTD Collection External Supervisor External ______Supervisor ______Master of of the inStudies. Medieval degree Arts University, European Central ofthe requirements in partial fulfillment Budapest, Studies, DepartmentofMedieval submitted to the Thesis Legitimizing Usurpation: LekapenosLegitimizing Romanos I Mystikos andNikolaos I Accepted in conformance with the standards of the CEU. standardsofthe with conformance the in Accepted Ivan Marić Ivan May 2013 May Budapest (Serbia) by CEU eTD Collection Budapest, __ May 2013 __May Budapest, and unidentified no any to form degree. foran academic ofhigher education institution other this that in submitted been has declare thesis the of part no I that declare also bibliography. I copyright. institution’s or person’s and any on infringes thesis the of external notes part no and such others, of work the only in of made was and use illegitimate research credited my properly on based work, own information my exclusively is thesis present the that undersigned, the I, Ivan Marić Ivan , candidate for the MA degree in Medieval Studies, declare herewith declare Studies, Medieval in degree MA the for candidate , ______Signature

CEU eTD Collection

Plates Plates Bibliography Conclusions ChapterII: ChapterI: Introduction ......

Romanos LekapenosRomanos as I divinely ordained

Supporting the usurper:the of role Mystikos Nikolaos I ...... Table of Contents ......

65 59 56 37 16

1 CEU eTD Collection fig. 6 fig.6 fig.5 fig.4 fig.3 fig.2 fig.1

reverse ( Romanoscrowned byChrist onthe Obverse,Christopher andConstantine 'switching places' onthe St by crowned Johnthe Baptiston reverse the Collection)( obverse, the on Christ Throne-seated Alexander; Emperor of Emperor Alexander,, (AfterUnderwood-Hawkins, fig. 5) (?), sceptre the Vision and Meaning of tip Virgin; a by blessed VI Leo of Nazianzus, Gregory of Homilies the containing manuscript the from illumination Gabriel, by crowned I Basil lid, ivory-casket Christ, by blessed being as Eudokia wife second his and I Basil

(AfterBrubaker, DOC BibliothequeNationale , , 3, pl.xxxvi,5-6) , , 177)fig Vision Meaning, and ,

Paris. gr. 510. (AfterBrubaker, Captions fig.84) Staatliche Museen, Staatliche Visionand Meaning Berlin (After Brubaker, (After Berlin Palazzo Venezia, Palazzo , , 5) fig.

CEU eTD Collection Kresten-Müller, Jolivet-Levy,“L’image dupouvoir” EHB DOS DOC Runciman, PmbZ ODB Mystikos Morrisson,“Byzantine DOP Dagron, Brubaker, Emperor and Priest , , Letters Vision and Meaning Romanos Legitimationsprinzip Money List ofList abbreviations DumbartonOaks Papers (Washington). and in the Fogg Museum of Art, 6: , Patriarchs of Patriarchs Emperors, 6: Art, of Museum Fogg the in and (867-1025) 2. Zeit, mittelbyzantinischen der Prosopographie AlexanderP. Oaks,1973). Dumbarton(Washington:Westerink, G. L. Jenkins- H. J. R. andCirculation”, in 1995). Wiesenschaften, der Akademie Österreichischen Müller, in der Verlag Jahrhunderts 10. Urkundentitel des Hälfte E. ersten der in kaiserlicher Byzanz Andreas und Legitimationsprinzip Kresten, macédonienne”, dynastie Otto la de l'époque Byzantion a byzantin Century Laiou,1-3, (WashingtonC.: D. Dumbarton Oaks, 2002). Fifteenth the through Seventh, Morisson,(Washington D.C.: DumbartonOaks, 2009). Addenda , iehrs II (717-1081) (Washington D. Dumbarton C.: Oaks, 1973). III to III Nicephorus Leo 3: Collection, Whittemore the in Oaks and Dumbarton Collection the in Coins Byzantine the of Catalogue Byzantium Dagron,Gilbert Nazianzus Byzantium:Image as Exegesis in Homilies the of Gregory of Brubaker,Leslie Catalogue of Byzantine Seals at Dumbarton Oaks Dumbarton at Seals Byzantine of Catalogue , Steven Byzantium of Dictionary Oxford The Letters Constantinople of Patriarch I Nicholas Production Its Money: “Byzantine Morisson, Cecile l'art dans pouvoir du “L'image Jolivet-Levy, C. the From Byzantium, of History Economic The , , 57(1987): 441-470. , (Cambridge: , CUP, 1999). , , (Cambridge: CUP,2003). , Berlin: , Gruyter,De 2009-2013. Ka zh Emperorand Priest. The ImperialinOffice Visionand Meaningin Ninth-century dan(Oxford: OUP, 1991). EHB , 909-966. , The Emperor The Lecapenus Romanus d on Nsi n Cecile and Nesbit John ed. , -, e. Pii Grierson, Philip ed. 1-2, , d neii E. Angeliki ed. , Samtherrschaft, -, ed. 1-3, , , (Vienna: , Abteilung , ed. ,

CEU eTD Collection Th.Cont. Stanković, Patriarchs 1838). (Beograd: dynasty], Macedonian the Vizantološki of Institut,2003). emperors the dinastije Makedonske andhis Reign hohns Continuatus Stanković, Vlada ,

(Cambridge: (Cambridge: CUP,1929). [The patriarchs of Constantinople and Constantinople of patriarchs [The airdk arjri I patrijarsi Carigradski d . Bke, (Bonn, Bekker, I. ed. ,

carevi

CEU eTD Collection aeoin yat, n ter poaadsi faue:features: propagandistic their and dynasty, Macedonian Nazianzus of Grabar, (henceforth: 1936) Lettres, Gregory of Homilies the Photios”, of Brubaker, Leslie ideology: imperial Homily constructing Tenth the of Significance “The ”Liquidation of Mango, (henceforth: 133-140 1977), Birmingham, of Univeristy Studies Byzantine for Center (Birmingham: Herrin duCentre Amis des d'Histoire 2007) de andEad., Byzance, Civilization et Auzépy, Marie-France in pieces pertinent various the also See 447-452. 404; Orthodoxy'. of 'Triumph the of organization Haldon, John Brubacker and the in role signifcant a played death ’s after supporter, f ambiguous seemingly the of et Constantinople de Stanković,(henceforth: patriarches Les summary, 2003) (French Institut, Vizantološki (Beograd: dynasty], Macedonian the of emperors the and Constantinople of patriarchs [The Byzantium dynasty: Macedonian period of the concentrating on in Office Dagron, Gilbert Byzantium: in patriarch the and emperor the between relations and Theology Political Kantorowicz, H. Ernst culture: medieval western reflecting appropriately power. of images became images, holy the Thus, authority. and power imperial of source the of ideology hierarchy,the celestial personifying the of members with themselves associate program. question, in rituals and liturgies the attending from apart orthodoxy, expectation. the became behavior anti-iconoclastic, policy-making. anti-imperial of tool a into turned iconoclasm to opposition as just – policy” imperial of “instrument the becoming component, political strong a had involved, disputes theological the to addition in Iconoclasm, that recognized been patriarch. and emperor of hierarchy, those the in positions highest two the of redefinition tacit) so not or (tacit the and images revival of the by characterized is Byzantium in period post-iconoclast The 6 5 4 3 2 1 Classical study on the representation of the emperor: Andre Grabar,Andre emperor: the representationof the on study Classical r The

Relevant titles are introduced of at beginning chapter the I. Politics and personal ties and relations in the highest strata of society mattered more than ideologies, as an example an as ideologies, than more mattered society of strata highest the in relations and ties personal and Politics Cyril Mango, “The Liquidation of Iconoclasm and the Patriarch Photios”, in in Photios”, Patriarch the and Iconoclasm of Liquidation “The Mango, Cyril The classical study on the relationship between the Church and the ruler in the , although more although ages, middle the in ruler the and Church the between relationship the on study classical The ole of Patriarch Photios in the revival of sacred images is well-known: is images sacred revivalof the in PatriarchPhotios of ole 5 Not long after images of heavenly and saintly figures were reestablished, emperors began to began emperors reestablished, were figures saintly and heavenly of images after long Not , (Princeton: PUP, 1997); Dagron’s work is one of the most influential studies concerning the positions the concerning studies influential most the of one is work Dagron’s PUP, 1997); (Princeton: , Cmrde U, 20) (ecfrh arn Dagron, (henceforth: 2003) CUP, (Cambridge: , Patriarchs ). Byzantium in the iconoclast era c. 680-850: a history a 680-850: c. era iconoclast the in Byzantium gr rm te ls eid o cncam ilsrts hots, a fre iconoclast former a Theoktist, illustrates. Iconoclasm of period last the from igure ). L’empereur , (Cambridge: CUP,, (Cambridge: (henceforthe: 1999) Brubaker, 2 Similarly, after the “Triumph of Orthodoxy”, iconophile, or rather or iconophile, Orthodoxy”, of “Triumph Similarly, the after ); an influential article concerning the sacred images in the period of the of period the in images sacred the concerning article influential an ); Vision and Meaning in Ninth-century Byzantium: Image as Exegesis in Exegesis as Image Byzantium: Ninth-century in Meaning and Vision DOP Introduction Vlada Stanković,Vlada /0 15) 2-4) bu hto’ sg f iae for images of usage Photios’s About 125-140); (1956), 9/10, , C. Jolivet-Levy, “L'image du pouvoir dans l'art byzantin a byzantin l'art dans pouvoir du “L'image Jolivet-Levy, C.

e meer e l yate Mcdnen, 315–335) Macédonienne, dynastie la de empereurs les 3 n f te wy f epesn n' proper one's expressing of ways the of One Carigradski patrijarsi I patrijarsi Carigradski L’iconoclasme, L’empereur dans l’art byzantin l’art dans L’empereur The King’s Two Bodies. The Study of Mediaeval of Study The Bodies. Two King’s The meo n Priest and Emperor L’histoire des iconoclastes, iconoclastes, des L’histoire R. J. H. Jenkins, C. Mango, “The Date and Date “The Mango, C. Jenkins, H. J. R. , (New York, (New , CUP, Cambridge: 400- 2011), Iconoclasm Vision and Meaning and Vision 4 (Paris:PUF, 2006). a n' coc f image- of choice one's was Emperor and Priest. The Imperial The Priest. and Emperor

carevi Makedonske dinastije Makedonske carevi , ed. Anthony Bryer, Judith Bryer, Anthony ed. , ; aohr ueu study useful another ); 6 o surprisingly, Not (Paris: Association (Paris: , (Paris: Les Belles Les (Paris: , ). 1 It has It Leslie

CEU eTD Collection eaeo:Rgm,Aheeet,adEie,5551 505-511, #26833. Exile”, and Achievements, Regime, : I Empire, Byzantine Shepard, Jonathan see: rule Romanos’s of treatment recent well: as material Reign his and deliberatelyneglects representations and Stevenart: outdated somewhat in Runciman, 1(2008), 342-360VII, (henceforth: Maladakis, “Corronation ofEmperor”). the c.)”, 11th (10th-mid Theology Political Christian of Case A Coinage: Byzantine Middle on Emperor People and Politics 912): of: ('Alexander') 9 ch. see emperor the became he before 'history' Alexander's Zeremoniell Legitimationsprinzip höfischen Jahrhunderts im Müller, E. Gestaltung Treitinger, ihrer nach 1996). de Sorbonne, la dedynastie la macédonienne”, l'époque image the representedcoins. in behind symbolics the and letters his in preserved Mystikos of words the between consent 925), 912– (901–907, Mystikos I Nikolaos of role the emperor), the (even men and God between intercessor the be to claims who authority, spiritual highest the by confirmed when stronger even was legitimacy usurper-emperors; future (r. I 867–886). Basil of son youngest (r. the Alexander 912–913), family, imperial Emperorof member a by but term, the to an applied sense usual the in by not usurper,least at prompted not was general, in earliest the among and coins, on tendency this of manifestation legitimacy. divine at aiming figures heavenly the with themselves associate to evidence, surviving the on based least at first, the among were deeds, their for justification dynasty, Macedonian the of period the in numerous quite usurpers, 12 11 10 9 8 7 O oninterpretation study the Classical based ofceremonial: the Otto Treitinger,

Cf. below. Cf. coins: in of representations pertinent of survey a For Cheynet, Jean-Claude see periods, later the For 12 Steven Runciman's classical study of the reign of still retains value, although it is by now by is it although value, retains still Lekapenos I Romanos of reign the of study classical Runciman's Steven n Emperor Alexander, its reign and how he deserved a 'bad name' see: Karlin-Hayter “ Karlin-Hayter see: name' 'bad a deserved he how and reign Alexander, its Emperor n patriarch during the reign both of Alexander and Romanos, is pertinent: as can be shown by the by shown be can as pertinent: is Romanos, and Alexander of both reign the during patriarch Samtherrschaft, Legitimationsprinzip und kaiserlicher Urkundentitel in Byzanz in der ersten Hälfte des 10. des Hälfte ersten der in Byzanz in Urkundentitel kaiserlicher und Legitimationsprinzip Samtherrschaft, Kaiser und Reichsidee und Kaiser , (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wiesenschaften, 1995) (henceforth: Kresten-Müller, (henceforth: 1995) Wiesenschaften, der Akademie Österreichischen der Verlag (Vienna: , ,

(Cambridge: CUP, 1929), 6 (henceforth: 6 CUP,1929), (Cambridge: Arnold Toynbee, Toynbee, Arnold ed. Jonathan Shepard, (Cambridge: CUP, (Cambridge: Shepard, Jonathan ed. 2008) ); ); ODB , (Leiden: Brill, 1997), Brill, Tougher 219-232, (Leiden: (henceforth: , 2,1203. 10 the first to follow was Romanos I Lekapenos (r. 920–944). (r. Lekapenos I Romanos was follow to first the ); see also Dagron, Dagron, also see ); Porphirogenitus and His World His and Porphirogenitus Constantine Byzantion , 57(1987), (henceforth: 441-470 Jolivet-Levy, “L’image dupouvoir”). , (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1969) (henceforth: 1969) Buchgesellschaft, Wissenschaftliche (Darmstadt: , Emperor and Priest and Emperor Pouvoir et contestat–ions à Byzance (963–1210), (963–1210), Byzance à contestat–ions et Pouvoir

Runciman, “Equlibrium to expansion”, in expansion”, to “Equlibrium (henceforth: Shepard, “Equilibrium to Expansion”) to “Equilibrium Shepard, (henceforth: , 493-536, sub-heading about Romanos’s reign: Romanos’s about sub-heading 493-536, Romanos ; and the most recent study: Otto Kresten, AndreasKresten,Otto recentstudy: most the and ; 9 His model became the design of design favourite the became model His , Leo , Vangelis Maladakis, “The of the of Coronation “The Maladakis, Vangelis ) ; Toynbee does not take into account visual account into take not does Toynbee ; 7 seeking approval of their position or position approvaltheir seeking of Shaun Tougher, Shaun ). , (London: OUP, 1973), 699. For the most the For 699. 1973), OUP, (London: , 8 oee, te eris surviving earliest the However, Die oströmische Kaiser-und Reichsidee Kaiser-und oströmische Die The Emperor Romanus Lecapenus Romanus Emperor The The Cambridge History of the of History Cambridge The Alexander's Bad Name” Bad Alexander's The Reign of Leo VI (886- VI Leo of Reign The Acta Musei Varnaensis Musei Acta (Paris: Publications (Paris: 11 Since divine Since “Romanos ; PmbZ ; for ; , ,

CEU eTD Collection etr, Azp eosrts ta t ws patcd t rmt eetbihd otooy ai-rne Auzépy, Marie-France orthodoxy: re-established promote Brubaker,Leslie (Ashgate: Variorum, to 1998),in 85-100. l’orthodoxie”, de practiced faveur en propaganda was la de it “Manifestations that demonstrates Auzépy century, seventeenth the from originates term the although http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/478875/propaganda; duCentre amis des (Paris: Association d'histoire de Byzance, 2008). civilisation et and 1985); “Byzantine Oaks, Dumbarton Morrisson, (henceforth: 909-966 2002), Oaks, Dumbarton C.: D. (Washington Money” 1-3, Laiou, E. Angeliki 1966 ed. Oxford, in Circulation”, and Production Its Money: “Byzantine Morrisson, Cecile Studies, contributions: useful very offers equally Morrisson Cecile catalogue. collection Byzantine of Grierson, (henceforth: Material” Congress Source as International Grierson, (henceforth: 1975) Grierson, henceforth: Money” of “Origins (Grierson, 106 Sull Studi Di Italiano Centro (Spoleto: Traviani, Lucia Grierson, and Arslan A. Philip Ermanno ed. 15, West: Colectanes and East both coinage, and money Lekapenos; I Romanos of period the from seals and coins are: used sources of groups main The Methods and Sources letters testimony found arehis the in context. and for bothideology the important understanding the and Mystikos I Nikolaos Patriarch of theology,role the political of field the to belongs Christ by crowned being emperor an of image the Since background. ideological wider and context historical specific the in it place finally, reception; its possible and audience, its image; the of origins the projected; being is what i.e. message, the identify potential; its understand to order in message, the transfers that medium the of characteristicsinvestigate to need will I questions my answer to order in Therefore, message. certain a of symbols”, of means by actions or attitudes, beliefs, people's other manipulate seals coins, of usage the on be will focus The him. supporting in Mystikos I Nikolaos Patriarch of role the hand, other the on and, own his with dynasty Macedonian the replace and usurper-emperorposition his legitimize to the order in undertook efforts Lekapenos I Romanos propagandistic the hand, one the on investigate, to plan I thesis my In Aims 16 15 14 13 nylpei rtnia cdmc oln edition: online academic Britannica, coins: for used edition main The Encyclopaedia Oikonomides, Nicolas are: Byzantium in seals on works introductory Good scholars. contemporary prolific most the of one was Grierson Philip 14 for projecting legitimacy. The term propaganda implies a “more or less systematic effort to effort systematic less or “more a implies propaganda term The legitimacy. projecting for ); Cecile Morrisson and Jean-Claude Cheynet, “Prices andWages Jean-ClaudeCheynet, Morrisson Cecile ); and World”, Byzantine in the in ; dm Idem, ); Byzantine Numismatics enCad hye,Cheynet, Jean-Claude yatn ong, Coinage, Byzantine The Economic History of Byzantium, From the Seventh, through the Fifteenth Century Fifteenth the through Seventh, the From Byzantium, of History Economic The Catalogue of the Byzantine Coins in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection and in the in and Collection Oaks Dumbarton the in Coins Byzantine the of Catalogue 13 ); Idem, “Byzantine Coinage as Source Material”, in in Material”, Source as Coinage “Byzantine Idem, ); ), and the enormously important volumes 2, 3 and 5 of Dumbarton Oaks Dumbarton of 5 and 3 2, volumes important enormously the and ), especially the coin representing Romanos crowned by Christ, and Christ, by crowned Romanos representing coin the especially (Washington D. C.: Dumbarton Oaks, 1999; first published in 1982) in published first 1999; Oaks, Dumbarton C.: D. (Washington ascéébznie ’potdsseu, sceaux, des l’apport byzantine: société La (London: OUP, 1967), 317-333 (henceforth: Grierson, “ Grierson, (henceforth: 317-333 OUP,1967), (London: “The Origins of Money” of Origins “The TeOiiso oe” nin Money”, of Origins “The Byzantium in the Ninth Century: Dead or Alive? or Dead Century: Ninth the in Byzantium Yet, he is most memorable for his studies on studies his for memorable most is he Yet, Byzantine Lead Seals Lead Byzantine ;Ie,Idem, ); 15 Scritti Storici e Numismatici e Storici Scritti i.e. deliberate advertising deliberate i.e. uimtc, Numismatics, Proceedings of the XIIIth the of Proceedings Bilans de recherche 3, 1, 3, recherche de Bilans alto Medioevo, 2001), 69- 2001), Medioevo, alto EHB , (Washington D. C.: D. (Washington , , 815-878. (London: OUP, (London: Coinage 16 and , ed. , , ,

CEU eTD Collection hohns Cniuts ad Jh klte' Skylitzes' Holmes, Catherine John and Continuatus and Theophanes VI Continuatus “Theophanes Zeitschrift, Každan, Featherstone, Centuries Daphnopates: Michael Theodore Jeffrey to Lekapenos: ascribed 4th-13th been has authorship The Byzantium, в.”, X хронографии византийской истории “Из Každan, Alexander in 963: around period the in VI book the of creation the of boundaries the marked text the of examination Každan's Renewal Alexander Markopoulos, in Athanasios approaches”, 870-950: and c. models Imperial period historiography: the Macedonian for in chronicles Great contemporary the the “Costantine in gap the considering especially Whittow, (henceforth: general: leading mentioned, already period used, the compiler period this with For 377-435). Cont. mainly (Th. rule concerned Romanos’s of am end the I until Alexander emperor yet of death 353-481), the after Cont. (Th. II Romanos and VI Leo of rule the between period the see: DAI, about remarks Continuatus”, Theophanes del autoría with la “Algunassobre consideraciones also but I-V, books the concerning Porphirogennetos Constantine VI. and I-IV books remaining the of edition new the preparing are Featherstone however, Ševčenko, Ihor by edition modern the received Porphirogennetos, (850-1000), Basilii Literature Symeon Byzantine 2. 813-867; Logothete 1. – recognized are 'parts' different four and books, VI into divided is it 961; and 813 between chronicle period coveresConffessor. whole the the The Theophanes Mystikos, (henceforth: Daphnopates, (henceforth: XX) CFHB 1981; Correspondance Oaks, Dumbarton (Washington: Addenda well: as to referred Mystikos, (henceforth: VI) CFHB 1973; Constantinople, Oaks, Dumbarton of Patriarchs as the marked of specimen number edition. in the Emperors, 6: (henceforth: 2009) Oaks, Art, Dumbarton D.C.: of Museum (717-1081) III seals: for number.edition indicated main the The under specimens the all check to advised is reader the case study.any my In for important not are variations their and design, Nicephorus to III xxv,variationspl. without e.g. specimen, the xxv, of pl. number not and 1, same the of are specimens those because 1a-1c, Leo main the only put will I coin, 3: a to refering when number. Also, part the number, omitting plate and/or page the to refer Collection, (henceforth: 1973) Oaks, Whittemore primary the from material. evidence the place helping events, main the and narrative historical the for basis narrative main the chroniclesource.as usedThe provideis will rule, chronicleRomanos' of period the for emperor the for written Daphnopates, Theodore of Romanos. letters the extent, lesser a to and, 912–925), (901–907, Mystikos I Nikolaos Patriarch the by written collection surviving the place first the in letters, 18 17

Nicholas I Patriarch of Constantinople Letters Constantinople of Patriarch I Nicholas Theophanes n elgzd acut o ai sebe ne h uevso f hs gado osatn VII Constantine grandson his of supervision the under assembled I Basil of account eulogized an , , the only example of 'Anti-Macedonian' text within the chronicle; 4. 948-963: 948-963: 4. chronicle; the within text 'Anti-Macedonian' of example only the , 17 104 (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2011), 115-123. For the comparison of accounts about Romanos’s rule between rule Romanos’s about accounts of comparison the For 115-123. 2011), Gruyter, De (Berlin: 104 Additionally, the sixth book of the so-called chronicle of Theophanes Continuatus, Theophanes chronicleof so-called the of book Additionally, sixth the , ed. J. Darrouzès, L.G. Westerink, (Paris: Éditions du Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1978) scientifique, recherche la de national Centre du Éditions (Paris: Westerink, L.G. Darrouzès, J. ed. , akWitw Whittow, Mark : 162-170, (henceforth: Každan, Každan, (henceforth: 162-170, : Basil II and the Governance of Empire (976-1025) Empire of Governance the and II Basil Symeon ihls I Ptirh o osatnpe Mselnos Writtings Miscellaneous Constantinople of Patriarch I Nicholas The Making The DOC Correspondance ), although the volume contains two parts, the pagination is continuous, thus I will only will I thus continuous, is pagination the parts, two contains volume the although ), , ed. I. Bekker, (Bonn, 1838), is named like this because it continues the chronicle of chronicle the continues it because this like named is 1838), (Bonn, Bekker, I. ed. , (Athens: National Hellenic Research Museum, 2006), 2006), Museum, Research Hellenic National (Athens: The Making of Orthodox Byzantium, (600-1025) Byzantium, Orthodox of Making The ), which is why it is still regarded as the best account for the reign of Romanos I, Romanos of reign the for account best the as regarded still is it why is which ), , with some addition from the now-lost biography of John Kourkuas, Romanos’s Kourkuas, John of biography now-lost the from addition some with , ) DOS . ), when refering to a seal, I will put the page number, followed by the by followed number, page the put will I seal, a to refering when ), yoss Historiarum Synopsis Literature , ed. and tr. R. J. H. Jenkins, L. G. Westernick, (Washington D. C.: D. (Washington Westernick, G. L. Jenkins, H. J. R. tr. and ed. , , ed. Paul Magdalino, (Aldershot: Variorum, 1994), 159-170; 160. 159-170; 1994), Variorum, (Aldershot: Magdalino, Paul ed. , iaBsli Basilii Vita Catalogue of Byzantine Seals at Dumbarton Oaks and in the Fogg the in and Oaks Dumbarton at Seals Byzantine of Catalogue Letters ); ); ODB , 1-2, ed. Philip Grierson, (Washington D. C.: Dumbarton C.: D. (Washington Grierson, Philip ed. 1-2, , ); Mystikos’s miscellaneous writtings are occasionally are writtings miscellaneous Mystikos’s ); , (Oxford: OUP, 2005), 125-152. , 3, 2061-2062 3, , 6-8;3 8-4 hc svr ls oto close very is which 886-948 3. 867-886; , ed. John Nesbit and Cecile Morrisson, (Washington Morrisson, Cecile and Nesbit John ed. , e: KetnMle, Kresten-Müller, see: , Erytheia Византийский временик Византийский Literature Juan Signes Codoñer and Jeffrey Michael Jeffrey and Codoñer Signes Juan Miscellaneous . Only the fifth book, the so-called so-called the book, fifth the Only e Crmni , 96 I, Cerimoniis De , 10.1 (1989), 17-28. (1989), 10.1 , , (London: Macmillan Press, 1996), 8-9 1996), Press, Macmillan (London: , of autorship the of treatment the For ,

Theophanes Continuatus Theophanes New Constantines, the Rhytm of Rhytm the Constantines, New 5; ad ms-eety t Basil to most-recently and 153; d n r . G Westernick, G. L. tr. and ed. , Alexander Každan, Každan, Alexander ;); Legitimationsprinzip hooe Daphnopatès Théodore , 19 (1961), 76-96; 94-95. 76-96; (1961), 19 Juan Signes Codoñer Signes Juan The book VI covers VI book The ,”, Byzantinisches 18 A History of History A the main the : 144-152, : Symeon and ; Vita

CEU eTD Collection comprehensive by ( Philip theGrierson for coins period of edition characteristics.iconographicalmistakesmost were other the corrected These in and or letters, noticed the of size such as period, the of features numismatic several account into take studies these of none Furthermore, difficulties. more which to 7), led xxxiii, pl. 155, p. Bellinger: 5; viii, pl. 116, p. (Goodacre: I Romanos and VII Constantine for II Romanos and VII Constantine of coin well.However, the as coins mistaking interpretation, erroneous copper an made studies these of both Bellinger, (henceforth: 148-166 (1967), “ Associates," his and Porphyrogennetus Constantine of Coins The 6. Solidi," attraction. studies: quoted less occasionally still comparably few received a period name his from coins However, 167-197. 1992), Ashgate, (Aldershot: Franklin, in Porphyrogenitus”, Constantine “Re-reading Ševčenko, Ihor himself: emperor the from comes Constantine to dedicated titles of myriad of critic and overview wittiest, the certainly Bellinger,”(henceforth: also: see coinage propaganda: of arrangements subtle the than in one, important more much and main, the remained: mints distinguishable, easily two, only , of loss the After traits. characteristic many has (867–945) period Macedonian early the of coinage The Denominations investigatedas well. are examples later or earlier chronologically relevant propaganda, of tools as especially seals, and coins Porphyrogennetos, VII Constantine oust, to verythe tried co-emperor he and whom Lekapenos I Romanos reign of the to belonging seals and coins on is focus main the Although important. it deemed message the designed who those that implying so, conveyed, they messages the of effects the estimate to difficult is it Although propaganda. for medium useful potentially a into them turned seals authority.” appropriate an by such as guaranteed currency, of unit specific a into metal of piece a transforms that mark recognizable a of imposition the is it “for effigy, coin imperial the the quality. of is that vouchedweightstamp, and the official An of control a was there and Palace, Great the in authority.located was imperial mint of The symbols same: practical Although the seals differed, of coins function and amoreon level ideological were they quite the seals and Coins 21 20 19 The l The fineness the in interested more were users the that i.e. role, important more plays uniformity that suggested is It Grierson, Grierson, Numismatic Chronicle Numismatic ongstandng fascination with this emperor in the scholarly world is well-known. Probably the best, and best, the Probably well-known. is world scholarly the in emperor this with fascination ongstandng “The Origins of Money” Origins “The lrd R elne, “h on n yatn meil Plc” Policy”, Imperial Byzantine and Coins “The Bellinger, R. Alfred Imperial Policy” Imperial , 15(1935), 114-119, , 71; ); Grierson, or Byzantine Notes Byzantine Morrisson, “Byzantine “Byzantine Morrisson, Hugh Goodacre, "The Story of Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus, from his from Porphyrogenitus, VII Constantine of Story "The Goodacre, Hugh 21 Grierson, “ Grierson, in order to better understand the peculiar status and usage of usage and status peculiar the understand better to order in 20 is concerned only with goldcoins; only concerned is

the evidence clearly suggests that they were intended to do to intended were they that suggests clearly evidence the Numismatics ”) undertook more in-depth investigation and includedsilverinvestigation and and more in-depth undertook ”) 19 Coinage as Source Material” Source as Coinage The practical function and value of both coins and coins both of value and function practical The yatn ilmc, , Byzantine DOC Money” , 3-4. , 526-540, esp. 535). American Numismatic Society, Museum Notes Museum Society, Numismatic American , 917-919. Alfred R. Bellinger, Notes, "Byzantine ed. Jonathan Shepard and Simon and Shepard Jonathan ed. , 321; about the propaganda in propaganda the about 321; , Speculum 1 , (96, 70-81 (1956), 1, 31, , , 13 , To

CEU eTD Collection Sophia: Sophia: Hagia of narthex- famous the in represented is throne, identical and Christ, of image similar very argued Others was It coinage. Macedonian early as the known and contemporaries, the by recognizableof easily feature prominent a became it and – emperor throne-seated the above Christ 932. dirham the common mostusageforand of coins propagandisticByzantium. in purposes (r. Heraklios emperor 610-641), of time the since practice well-established a was heirs of promotion The ended. of reverse the on use in remained which of ‘relic’ the cross, the been had representations, visual of forms other in like coins, on image religious dominant the period Christ. enthroned an obverse, the on iconography of type new a introduced and 843, in Iconoclasm of end the after coins of (r. II Justinian 705-711), by 685-695, time first the for introduced Christ, of bust The bust). or (enthroned Christ of effigy the carries exceptions, few with obverse, The reverse. own types has its idiomatic features. ( metals: three the ( of each for one only is there as historian, the for trouble metal. precious of shortages without system denomination The debasement. no was there coins. copper low-quality only produced which , in another and Constantinople, miliaresion 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 And indeed trying to compete with the competewith trying the to indeed And below. See i This 9. Ibid.., Grierson, For more the see: details about mints Grierson, Grierson, DOC, DOC 28 DOC, as model. as The The The Thereverse was of gold coins reserved foremperors the usually sons. and colleagues, junior their , 19, 39 19, , 14-15; 14-15; mage was mage 46,147,154-156, 1. pl.xxx, ), and copper ( copper and ), miliaresion nomisma Coinage, Coinage, Coinage ; the the ; Morrisson, “Byzantine “Byzantine Morrisson, 30 most likely based on the which was above the throne in the great palace – a throne-seated a – palace great the in throne the above was which icon the on based likely most This coin is a salient phenomenon in coinage as it remained virtually unchanged in its unchangedin remainedvirtually it as coinage in phenomenon salient a is coin This nomisma , 8. 7-8. ihu xeto, hs a cngahc rpeetto n bt bes and obverse both on representation iconographic an has exception, without , is a silver denomination introduced by Leo III in 721 and designed with the Arab the with designed and 721 in III Leo by introduced denomination silver a is remained pure to a level of 23, out of the ideal 24, carats: carats: 24, ideal the of out 23, of level a to pure remained ). 24 nomisma Every coin consists of iconography and inscription, and each of these of each and inscription, and iconography of consists coin Every Money” DOC dirham , 77-81 91-92 (Constantinople), (Cherson). , 930. , famously, still kept its purity, as evidenced by the stable the by evidenced as purity, its kept still famously, , 26 : just one generation before founded a new dynasty, new a founded I Basil before generation one just Morrisson, “Byzantine “Byzantine Morrisson, senzaton , a loan word from , used for the imperial throne. imperial the for used Latin, fromword loan a , miliaresia 23 The system of denominations pose no pose denominations of system The Money” 25 for a long time after Iconoclasm after time long a for was reintroduced to the obverse reintroducedthe was to , 928-929. Morrisson, “Byzantine “Byzantine Morrisson, 27 During the iconoclast the During nomisma 22 In this period this In ), silver ), Money” 29 ,

CEU eTD Collection 19. xlvii, pl. 631, 611, 600, Ibid., type: Nikopoios Virgin 20; 17-18, xlvi-xlvii, pl. 628-632, 610-612, 600, Ibid., miliaresion: busts special received thus and rest, the than level higher, different, a on placed were coins gold that Saying coins Gold in minted coins to compared lower Constantinople. way was craftsmanship of quality the however, monograms, feature just them of most different; werequite folles Cherson reverse. the on inscription an and obverse, waybetweensilver, and the gold thereas usually,is the onbust a coins, Constantinopolitan the on least at retainingtraditional fiveinthe inscription rowsonreverse, the 'era ending the thus of miliaresion'. ( chest her on Christ of medallion the with Virgin whichshowed the coin silver a of type different first the introduced he Finally middle. the in one of instead cross, the of right the and left the to busts, two but one not with issues several then type, non-bust original the of issue enlarged. medallion the had who 969–976), (r. I John and 969) own. 963– (r. II Nikephoros usurper-emperors the by his again employed be to only rule, sole Porphyrogennetos' with Christ of bust the replaced but example, Alexander's followed Lekapenos Romanos when 931, around until look, traditional cross-arms. the of middle the first the and design, simple rather in bust of Christ's with medallion small a (r.placed I Alexanderwho with 912–913) came change appreciable was miliaresion III's Leo of cross The cross. a reverse the on miliaresion”. the of “era term the use sometimes numismatists thereafter, so changes minor only underwent and centuries, two for design 36 35 34 33 32 31 two the 16; xlvi, pl. 627, 610, future:Ibid., the in obversethe dominant would on become Virgin the with Silver coins Nikephoros II: 580,585-586, Ibid., pl.xli,Ibid., 6;John I: 590,596-598, pl.xlii, 7. Ibid. LeoIII: 928. Ibid.., Bellinger,”Imperial Policy”, 70. In terms of design, copper copper design, of terms In , 554-558, (traditional pl.xxxvii,17-18 20-21 type). type), (new DOC , 225, 227,231-232, 251-253, 20-23; pl.ii-iii, Alexander: Ibid.., 525,pl.xxxv, 3. 32 This innovation was abandoned by Alexander’s successors, retaining the retaining successors, Alexander’s by abandoned was innovation This 31 folles On the obverse it had always carried an inscription in five rows, and rows, five in inscription an carried always had it obverse the On 33 , “ , uiul, te bs a bnoe uig Constantine during abandoned was bust the Curiously, which passed through humblest of hands”, of humblest through passed which 34 Interestingly, Basil II initially had one had initially II Basil Interestingly, Nikopoios ) on the obversewhile the on ) 36 seem to be half- be to seem 35

CEU eTD Collection “Byzantine “Byzantine 951. the of guards the tip to campaigns on going Cremona: coins. gold in paid were expenses, imperial other and salaries, gold; in collected were taxes was: it And use. internal for intended hoarding. the against measures like just possible, as high empire'sborders, trade to allowed not officially were merchants that noteworthy is It treated. be to deserve features its of some that feel I or,Still, generically,denominations metals. more other other to to compared gold of nature the given obvious the stating like seem might emperors the from attention 40 39 38 37 918, Ibid., 951. 936-939. Ibid., W A A remuneration paid annually to civil and military officials and court dignitaries. dignitaries. court and officials military and civil to annually paid remuneration hile other denominations circulated more freely, particularly the miliaresion, which was used by the emperors the by used was which miliaresion, the freely,particularly more circulated denominations other hile n iiay cok … fe ht i umnd te imne hre o is swordsmen, and first two, three, four, five, six, received of dignity their to according others horde the and seven, received immense the summoned first the whom is of headsmen, first treasurers, chamberlains, that swordsmen-in-training, swordsmen, After […] cloak. military one cloaks. military and giventwelvecoins is of two pounds and follows patricians the Lastly,of order the them after right with number, his to according each, to twenty-four coins, gold of pounds issuedare whom to twenty-fourare admitted, generals them After others. by aided effort, an with off them is dragged but shoulders their dignity on away them carry not their could volume the of as because equal, cloaks, and coins of number equal an taking two, These navy.called the are latter the ascalonas him After tis cloaks. military four in placed domesticos are coins the hands, whose into not and shoulders, whose on palaces, the of rector the is in called be to them of first The rank. their of dignity the to according men the of names written recited who herald the of summons the to order, an in emperor,but of jumble, beforethe accordingentered a Thereupon, they in eachbag. not outside the on written number with owed, was each what to according bags in bound coins, the supported which down, set been had width in four and length in cubits ten table way. A this in happened It deserves. rank their what to according offices, various the to appointed those to and soldiers the to both coins gold of payment makes emperor the […] marvellous. noveland was that there saw I else namely,what silence, in over passed be to not ought this that reckon I But Money” , 951. 37 a measure a empirewhichcirculation the keepinto as aimed within ofgold amount the 39 A picturesque account of the annual annual the of account picturesque A and and o delongaris tis ploos tis delongaris o scholai , pages, and members of the the of members and pages, , , of whom the former commands the army and army the commands former the whom of , 38 This also indicates that gold was primarily was gold that indicates also This rhogai . 40

ceremony is left by Liutprand of Liutprand by left is ceremony ODB

Morrisson, “Byzantine “Byzantine Morrisson, , 3, 1801; see also: also: see 1801; 3, , nomismata outside the outside Morrisson, Money” o ,

CEU eTD Collection n alMgaio n“or oit n rsorc”(1-3)i in (Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell,(212-232) 2009). Aristocracy” and Society “Court on Magdalino, Paul and West medieval early 1972) McCormick, Michael also: see expenditures Scientifique, Recherche la de National Oikonomides, Nicolas gold. of pounds eight and twenty, distributed Zoe ten, and Alexander brother his VI, Leo where feast, Broumalia the of account near-contemporary “ Majeska, (henceforth: 1-11 1997), in Oaks, Dumbarton Sophia”, St. of Church the in Ritual Imperial Church: His in Emperor “The P. Majeska, George see: ceremony whole the of reconstruction the For well. as one smaller a and gold, of pounds hundred one of bag huge a offering as left he Sophia, Hagia the in patriarch the by The CatholicC.: University America Press, of 200-202 2007), (henceforth: Squatriti, propaganda. for capacity considerable a possessed coins gold coins, distributed emperor the of hand the which during depended. most emperor, the emperoron dependent the those whom – on and dignitaries high-ranking and officials state the Easter,before empire. the important the inChristian most date just – be significant is not placed is should event the Liutprand, which in as period such the Furthermore, observers underestimated. – least not on and had salaries, have must of ceremony receivers this contemporaries, that impact the had, these of each value and, actual coins the minted with freshly coupled were gold of pounds those All payment. the receiving were officials state many how just illustrates and courtiers, high-ranking his to gold of pounds presents himself emperor 43 42 41 On emperor-elite interplay see the recent chapters by John Haldon, on “Social Elites, Wealth, and Power”(168-211), Wealth,and Elites, “Social on Haldon, John by chapters recent the see interplay emperor-elite On Rogai Rogai The Complete Works of , Cremona, of Liutprand of Works Complete The the whole the weekwhole before Easter. throughout payment makes emperor, the not bedchamber, imperial the of chief the coins], gold seventy-two than [less pound a than less received who those to for days; seventh and sixth the of hour day, fourth the of the hour emperorat the first by weekthe finished at wasthe it of day fifth the on day.begun Having single a in accomplished all was it that think to you want I do Nor one. The number of examples found in the recent past, present, and future (from Romanos' vantage Romanos' (from future and present, past, recent the in found examples of number The civil and military the for designated primarily were coins gold the that concluded be can it Thus, ceremony, the of splendor the shows it as important is description Liutprand’s payment was not the only ceremony where emperors distributed gold. When the new emperor was crowned was emperor new the When gold. distributed emperors where ceremony only the not was payment 43 , (Cambridge: CUP, 1986), ch. McCormick, 228-230 5,esp. (henceforth: Having in mind the actual value of gold and the well-placed and elaborate ceremony elaborate and well-placed the and gold of value actual the mind in Having Byzantine Court Culture from 829 to 1204 to 829 from Culture Court Byzantine 41 Eternal Victory. Triumphal rulership in the , Byzantium and the and Byzantium antiquity, late the in rulership Triumphal Victory. Eternal 2-2. O ruai n gnrl se see: general in Broumalia On 222-225. Les listes des préséance byzantines des IXe et Xe siècles Xe et IXe des byzantines préséance des listes Les tr. and introduction notes Paolo Squatriti Squatriti, (Washington D. (Washington Squatriti, Squatriti Paolo notes introduction tr.and Emperor in His Church” His in Emperor oilHsoyo yatu, Byzantium, of History Social A .I In ). , ed. Henry Maguire, (Washington D.C.: (Washington Maguire, Henry ed. , Liutprand of Cremona of Liutprand hltesPhilotheos Eternal Victory Eternal ODB 2-2. Fr te ls of list the For 327-328. , , 42 ). ). ed. John Haldon John ed. in which the which in , (Paris: Centre (Paris: , there is a is there

CEU eTD Collection Bulgarian Academy of Science, National Institute of Archaeology with Museum, 2009), 87-88; on emperor Alexander: emperor on 87-88; 2009), Museum, with “ Karlin-Hayter Archaeology of Institute National Science, of Academy Bulgarian 61; five the on extant matter a chance?” only Is specimens. of it preserved Seal: interesting are Constantine an emperor is second the “it precisely adds: of inscription and and phenomenon portrait the this that by ascertainment intrigued was Jordanov Professor 944. and 931 between dated are VII Constantine and Romanos only with those and well, as name Christopher's bear already Constantine and Romanos of by confirmed in and Morrisson Cecile and 60), Nesbitt John (p. Zacos-Veglery by excluded previously been has (920-921), period early the and from Romanos Constantine of that being option, possible, theoretically third, The (912-913). Constantine and Alexander or (908-912) Constantine and Leo either possibilities: aretwo There help”. little of is Constantine of name “the IvanJordanov as notes, early too a being as Unfortunately, half. surviving rejected the for candidate is only Preslav, the near as Constantine found VII leaves be Constantine which to son dating Basil's be might it that option The it. on inscription 'Constantine' and Preslav,around most , in found five seals than co-emperor, less right, no have bustthe enough, the only with half Interestingly months. of thirteen within out them wipe completely to task easy an not was it mention and supporters his rooted rule no is there long Leo's soon. name', too died he it, do to time have enough not did 'bad simply he so, do to intended really he nephew, if even but a him giving Alexander, against murder,even or castrate, to biased planned his Alexander co-emperor. that of said rank is the It to anyone promoting Alexander heavily are sources main the although Patriarch 'approved' is 908,that in Euthymios heir, official future. secureson'sto Additionally, he his could all Leo did and co-emperor,was Constantine legitimate palace. from the crowned Patriarch and by Mystikos 906 Nikolaos baptised in I removed and own,Zoe his with trust of men Leo's immediately replaced he death brother's his After own. his of children is question logical a and rule, sole son, Leo's Alexander's during created definitely was it that are it supporting Arguments was name. Constantine's to next mark question image missing the that agree editors miliaresia of series common Constantine. represented probably missing, unfortunately completely; issues coin his on Constantine ignored part, his for Alexander, measure, equal the with heir his treating Leo, to revenge of sort a in Perhaps on appear does name latter’s coins, gold on colleague, official therefore and co-emperor crowned 912-913), (r. Alexander brother his ignored rule, autocratic his for known 886–912), (r. VI Leo emperors. senior the by ‘loosely’ coins, gold that suggests point) 53 52 51 50 49 48 47 46 45 44 DOS 537, Ibid., 23. 560-561, pl.xxxviii, 536-537, Ibid., 554-557, 20. pl.xxxvii,17-18, show sealdoesnot itself The any tracewhich Constantine of makes shaky Although pieceof it evidence. somewhat a 508, Ibid., 516-518, 522,pl.xxxiv, 6-7. E DOS DOC DOC DOS DOC specially thespecially silver miliaresion which have to seems character hadanofficial –order of names, cross, no effigy. 39,5;Hl-el idi ugra Bulgaria: in find Half-seals 55; 93-94, , , 91-93, 53-54. , 97-101, 59-62. , 534,546-547, pl.xxxvi,7. , 523-525, pl.xxxv, 1-4. , 508-510, 512-514, pl.xxxiv, 1-2. 51 and and Alexander's Name” Bad folles oii solidi , 52 and, again, no seal ignored Constantine. ignored seal no again, and, sud ewe 91 n 931, and 921 between issued folles who else could have been? We know from literary sources that Alexander had no had Alexander that sources literary from know We been? have could else who DOS a , 585-596; Tougher, s compared to other denominations, other to compared s edition (p. 100) based on the analogy with similar coins. Also, the earliest seals earliest the Also, coins. similar with analogy the on based 100) (p. edition , 46 while not one seal showing Leo without Alexander is known. is Alexander without Leo showing seal one not while Corpus of Byzantine Seals From Bulgaria From Seals Byzantine of Corpus G. Zacos, Veglery,G. A. DOS Leo provides no explanation, while Zacos-Veglery, only put a put only Zacos-Veglery, while explanation, no provides 48 , 219-232. yet, one seal, from which the important half is half important the which from seal, one yet, 50 but the latter’s name appears regularly on regularly appears name latter’s the but 49 Romanos I ignored Constantine on the most the on Constantine ignored I Romanos Byzantine Lead Seals Lead Byzantine 53 Another telling example comes from comes example telling Another 44 and seals were employed more employed were seals and , 3, ed. Ivan Jordanov, (Sofia: Jordanov, Ivan ed. 3, , , 1,(Basel, 1972) 45 , 53,pl.18, but the but 47

CEU eTD Collection xli, 1-3 Basil). (with xli, i.e. fitting, found they as coins gold employ to emperors of tendency clear a was there that concluded be order. 'actual' the reflect always not did Tzimiskes, John of case the in only attested although seals, even that possible exceptionally was it that and empire, the in emperors of college the of status’ on his him associating by this announce to hastened Leo crowned, and baptised been had and born, eventually was wait to Porphyrogennetos Constantine way. After had the along turmoil had huge creating heir, his for Leo long agonizingly and own, his of children no had Alexander Furthermore, death. Constantine's brother eldest their of experience the had sons I's Basil of both dynasty, and Macedonian young still for was he (presumably)expectedcontinuity. guarantee legal to as true co-emperor especially of isthe Thesignificance senior, the of death the of case the in important was consistently co-emperor more official were The represented. co-emperors documents, official of part integral an seals, on especially and denominations other on coins; gold to came it when colleagues their of status official the bypassing on show. examples extant the as far as seals, and coins both on (VIII) Constantine and (II) Basil both completely sons II’s appearedon coins. Romanos of neither thence but Basil, young also showing coins gold of issue initial one had Phokas, usurper,Nikephoros another rule, Romanos' of end the after long Not nomismata. on Lekapenoi portrait, crafted beautifully Romanos' for famous seals, on post-931 on appear do names Lekapenos' Constantine and Stephen both While death. Lekapenos’ Christopher after is that 931, after period the 58 57 56 55 54 Romanos’s. on based modelled been have to seems coinage Nikephoros’s that comments Grierson DOC DOC DOS DOC 57 What follows from the previous lines is that gold coins do not necessarily reflect the ‘official the reflect necessarily not do coins gold that is lines previous the from follows What werepropaganda, keenerof purpose the emperors,for that suggests here presented evidence The , 101,62. , 508-510, 513-514, pl.xxxiv, 2( , 589-598, pl.xlii. , 537,556-557, pl.xxxvii,20. solidi and 56 Finally, Tzimiskes, John rosewho throne the to murder by of his predecessor,ignored miliaresia . 58 solidi ); 510, Ibid., 515, pl.xxxiv, 4(miliaresia). miliaresia , 54 and at least Stephen's name and bust also appear also bust and name Stephen's least at and 55 there is no trace of any of the younger the of any of trace no is there DOC Thus, it can it Thus, , 580-588, pl. 580-588, ,

CEU eTD Collection 65. Constable, see: challenges these Concerning editors. the for least challenges,not some whichposes criterion, “Letter-Writting”). Papaioannou, 199 (henceforth: in “Letter-Writting”, Papaioannou, Stratis Grünbart, Michael also: Mullett, (henceforth: Kazhdan 1-43 esp. 1997), Variorum, (Aldershot: “ Alexander Mullett, (henceforth: 203-216 of Honor in diplomacy”, of language in Papers “ (Mullett, Byzantinus, “ Mullett, Byzantium (henceforth: 156-185, 1990) CUP, in (Cambridge: Byzantium”, mediaeval Mullett, Margaret early selection: a in just is Here “Writting seminal. is work Mullett's Margaret Byzantium, in letters especially letters, Constable, veiled the mainly sub-categories, 'private' more other, by posed difficulties the of some from free collections, Daphnopates' sense”. accepted moreusually “its in letters of type this of example best the as centuries early-tenth and ninth late the chooses Mullett Margaret diplomacy. to bound inevitably was Byzantium in politics and literature”, and politics of intersection the at “somewhere understood is Byzantium in content. Letter-writing messages the of messenger the remind to only beginning the in communication, for need practical the as emerged letters Thus, representingpolities. envoys or friends, they be addressee, the and letters, all for Essential Letters likely itself. manifestto less was manoeuvring political of kind such hand, other the on seals, regards as while propaganda, for 66 65 64 63 62 61 60 59 Constable, For difficulties Mullett, see: these u A Mullett, “ Mullett, Ibid. “ Mullett, 189. “Letter-Writting”, Papaioannou, Both of these collections have been deliberately selected and bounded, presumably by their authors, according to a to according authors, their by presumably bounded, and selected deliberately havebeen collections these of Both For the sake of understanding, diplomatic letters were composed in somewhat lower style, lower somewhat in composed were letters diplomatic understanding, of sake the For seful study dealing with letters in the middle ages in general, but focusing more on the medieval West: Giles West: medieval the on more focusing but general, in ages middle the in letters with dealing study seful , 210. The madness of genre” of madness The Ahae airm 07, II hneot: Mlet Mullett, (henceforth: III, 2007), Variorum, (Ashgate: , Letters and Letter-Collections and Letters Diplomacy” Diplomacy” Letters 13-15. Epistularum byzantinarum initia byzantinarum Epistularum 59 , 213,n. 81. 216. , esp. , Diplomacy, Byzantine whichever sub-genreinto, theyfall 65 for usedresearch, this fall into category.this Diplomacy” henceforth: Mullett, Mullett, henceforth: The madness of genre of madness The Luan rpl,17)(ecfrh osal,Constable, (henceforth: 1976) Brepols, (Louvain: , The Byzantine World Byzantine The ); Ead, Ead, ); h ss o ieay i Ery Mdavl Europe Mediaeval Early in Literacy of Uses The Theophylact of Ochrid. Reading the Letters of a Byzantine Archbishop Byzantine a of Letters the Reading Ochrid. of Theophylact ed. Jonathan Shepard and Simon Franklin, (Aldershot: Variorum, 1992), (Aldershot: Franklin, Simon and Shepard Jonathan ed. 64 , ed. A. Cutler and S. Franklin, ( Franklin, S. and Cutler A. ed. , Most of the letters in both Nikolaos I Mysikos and TheodoreMysikos Nikolaos I and both in letters the of Most The madness of genre of madness The , (Hildesheim: Olms-Weidmann, 2001), and the most recent: most the and 2001), Olms-Weidmann, (Hildesheim: , Writting” Theophylact ; and , ed. Paul Stephenson, (New York: Routledge, 2012.), 188- 2012.), York:Routledge, (New Stephenson, Paul ed. , Papaioannou, “Letter-Writting” Papaioannou, Letters erne n in reprinted ) 60 is the distance, the separation of the senderthe separation the of the distance, is 63 ). Apart from the works of Margaret Mullett see Mullett Margaret of works the from Apart ). Discussing the 'diplomatic letters' genre, letters' 'diplomatic the Discussing ; Ed, “h ans f gne, i in genre”, of madness “The Ead., ); ), reprinted in Mullett, Mullett, in reprinted ), Washington D. C.: DOP, 1992 C.: D. Washington etr, Ltrc n ieaue in Literature and Literacy Letters, Letters , 188. Letters d . McKitterick, R. ed. , .). When it comes to comes it When , IX; Ead., “The Ead., IX; , Letters ), 233-243 ), Homo 66 , esp. , i.e. 62 61 ,

CEU eTD Collection Since various aspects of Mystikos’s life are touched upon in the course of this thesis, I will provide here just a short a just here provide will I thesis, this of course the reminder of keyin career. his points of upon touched are life Mystikos’s of aspects various Since Mystikos, letters: his of Ead., by orally transmitted been Theophylact equal Mystikos. ” of standing… servant a yourworthyGlory,of person send … similar a “ side says: from he our send negotiations will course we of and … in found be can achievement 213. both”. Ibid., literary of expectations same the speech, of figures same the quotations, same the topoi, patriarchfuture the and (VI) Leo emperor future the that said is it Photios, by taught society. being Both Constantinopolitan of circles highest the to belonged and time, the of figures learned most the of one origin. Italian of probably chancery,852, emperor’s around the born was in service previous from Mystikos epithet/surname the acquired had who I, Nikolaos patriarch later The Authors The the adressee, the and sender of backgrounds (including the in letter statements etc), as rhetoric well historical ascontext, the as muchpossible. as the of investigation the is, that analysis, discourse power”.therefore and communications control could trickery and “cunning it puts Mullett as day, this to change not did medium the over control of value system. spy the of target the some on represented as publicly, read the in illuminations were they Often, be. to intended were they if even private, taxis present, actually was sender the if as much ceremonial, diplomatic famous the in illuminations or riddles, and messages 74 73 72 71 70 69 68 67 For a general overview of Mystikos’s life, as well as reference to the older titles, see the introduction to the edition the to introduction the see titles, older the to reference as well as life, Mystikos’s of overview general a For peace the concerning Symeon to letter one In case. this in exemplary are Mystikos Nikolaos of letters The “ Mullett, “ Mullett, “ Mullett, “ Mullett, below.Cf. . Although text of the letter which one reads today is most-likely not the entire message, the other part could have could part other the message, entire the not most-likely is today reads one which letter the of text Although 69 Diplomacy” ult, “ Mullett, Finally, and most importantly for this work, letters, especially diplomatic letters, were rarely were letters, diplomatic especially letters, work, this for importantly most and Finally, , 35,115. n. Diplomacy” Writting” Writting” Diplomacy” , 214. Madrid Letters , 183-185; “ Eadem, , 178, n. 169; Eadem, Eadem, 169; n. 178, , , 216. komistes 0; “hohlc opan f te dfiut f fnig a go err” Mullett, bearers”. good a finding of difficulty the of complains “Theophylact 205; , , xv-xxvii; for an updated survey see: see: survey updated an for xv-xxvii; , asapheia Letters 71 Madrid Skylitzes Madrid Letters can carry vital informations, or disinformations, and the political the and disinformations, or informations, vital carry can Letters

, or it might have been a gift: Mullett, Mullett, gift: a been have might it or , , 126.95-97. . 67 , Diplomacy” 70 In several of her studies, based partly on the investigation of investigation the on partly based studies, her of several In but, as one letter of Nikolaos Mystikos suggests, letters were also were letters suggests, Mystikos Nikolaos of letter one as but, “ Diplomacy” , Margaret Mullett expounds that letter-reception was a was letter-reception that expounds Mullett Margaret , , 216; Idem , 213. Despite this difference between the two types, “the same “the types, two the between difference this Despite 213. , 72 Thus, the method for dealing with these letters is letters these with dealing for method the Thus, , Theophylact ODB , 1466–1467; and the most recent: recent: most the and 1466–1467; , Theophylact , 31-43. 68 and thus bound and regulated by regulated and bound thus and 74 He was brought up by Photios, by up brought was He , 31-35; Ead., “ Ead., 31-35; , Writting” PmbZ , 182-183; , , #25885. , 73

CEU eTD Collection (1978), 219-295. Correspondance of the eparchto position Romanos of Constantinople II's reign.during after 963.died some time He Yet,appointed was VII. he Constantine under influence some lost but Romanos, emperor the of ministers Lekapenos. I Romanos of politics the for important so 927, in treaty Bulgarian the on oration an of author the probably was He 933. and 925 between mystikos Romanos’s was diplomatic he that deduced emperor,is it the ten of name the in signed on he letters Based Romanos. emperor the for Greek into Armenian from letter one translated magistros of titles bore he letters, surviving his of headings the on Based Lekapenos. I of Romanos court the high-rankingatAlreadywashe between 920'sdignitary a bornand 900. the 890 by of whichmost the memorable aspect wascorrespondence his ruler Symeon.with Bulgarian rule, Romanos’s of period early the in role important an played He deserved. well seem his letters, surviving reading which, reputation a diplomat, master empire’s the as recognized been has and activities, 925. May 15 on death his until position this at remained and Alexander, brother latter’s the by or Leo penitent the by either throne patriarchal the to back brought was Nikolaos resign. to forced was he eventually emperor; the opposed have to seems again Mystikos controversy, tetragamy the of course the in Nevertheless, position. this for Mystikos chose emperor the of office established recently fairly seemingly the to him chancery,appointing imperial to Nikolaos introduced who Leo was It monk. a became he where Tryphon St of monastery the in time spending followed, have voluntarily to said is Mystikos and Photios, exiled emperor,he became Leo However, after friends. became (I) Nikolaos 78 77 76 75 On this treaty and authorship of Daphnopates see: Ivan Dujčev, “On the Treaty of 927 with the Bulgarians”, Bulgarians”, the with 927 of Treaty Dujčev, Ivan the see: “On Daphnopates of authorship and treaty this On 410. Th. Cont. Paul Magdalino, ‘The Not-So-Secret Magdalino, ‘The Paul Functions ofMystikos’, the Basic information about the author is drawn from the introduction of Daphnopates’ letters edition, edition, letters Daphnopates’ of introduction the from drawn is author the about information Basic The early history of Theodore of history early The . It is assumed that he was of Armenian origin because apparently he knew the language, as he as language, the knew he apparently because origin Armenian of was he that assumed is It . , 1-27; 1-27; ODB mystikos mystikos , 588;and (“private secretary”) (“private PmbZ 78 Daphnopates has been recognized as one of the most important most the of one as recognized been has Daphnopates , #27694. . 75 77 After the death of Patriarch Stephen, Leo's brother, Leo's Stephen, Patriarch of death the After is rather obscure, but it is supposed that he was he that supposed is it but obscure, rather is REB, 76 42(1984): 229–240. Mystikos had a long history of political of history long a had Mystikos , ,

patrikios Daphnopates, DOP , and , , 32 ,

CEU eTD Collection Annuaire de l’Université de Sofia ‘St Kliment Ohridski’, Centre de recherches Slavo-Byzantines ‘Ivan Dujčev’ ‘Ivan Slavo-Byzantines recherches de Europe Centre East-Central and Ohridski’, Reuter, CUP, (Cambridge: 2008) 567-585; 574 (henceforth: Shepard, “Bulgaria Balkans Kliment the ‘St in general: in Sofia de Byzantium Shepard, Jonathan studies: collected l’Université in reprinted Bulgaria”) of “Symeon Shepard, (henceforth: 9-48, de Annuaire see: aftermath its and 913 of events the Concerning important. However, menace. in Bulgarian the with deal to sought but Symeon, with arrangements his to comply to wish not did and unsummoned, come to him forbidding palace, the from patriarch removed the She Zoe. title. imperial his of recognition a as understood Symeon whichcrown” a involving “rite of kind emperor,some young performed the and and daughter Symeon's between marriage imperial an to agreed have to seems who Mystikos, patriarch the from gains diplomatic extort to opportunity the ceased Byzantium', of 'student a (r. 893-927), Bulgaria of severe.were repercussions the and life, ' and coup the ended which fight bloody ofa stage claimhippodromethrone.the and the streetsthe into and turned The ofConstantinople presumably Mystikos, city the to come to Doukas died, Constantine general army the invited regent, chief emperor the is he that unknowing the after Immediately VII. Constantine boy-emperor, young church. the additionally in divide the aggravating supporters, latter’s the and Euthymios, patriarch interim the opponent, his on revenge get to allowed was Leo, or Alexander by either back brought Mystikos, Nikolaos Patriarch and months, thirteen only after died but state, the of strata highest the sweep to began he as worse, matters made Church. the in discord and age minor of heir an leaving by uncertainty political of period this initiated involuntarily VI Leo Emperor patriarch. the and emperor the by represented state, Byzantine the of spheres major both in power-struggle intensive by characterized was images, the over struggle the with involved directly generations the last the saw of disappearance which gradual (867-912), Iconoclasm' of 'aftermath long the following (912-920) decade critical The background Historical 82 81 80 79 In regard to Symeon and the challenges that he posed for Byzantium, works of Jonathan Shepard are the most the are Shepard Jonathan of works Byzantium, for posed he that challenges the and Symeon to regard In 382-385 Th. Cont. Karlin-Hayter, “Alexander’s Name”. Bad For treatment detailed oftetragamy the controversy see: Idem , , “Bulgaria: The Other Balkan Empire”, in in Empire”, Balkan Other The “Bulgaria: 82 80 After these events, Mystikos was replaced by Constantine's mother Constantine's by replaced events, wasMystikos these After After Alexander's death, elites contested for the regency over the over regency the for contested elites death, Alexander's After , study III, (Ashgate:, study Variorum, 2011) (henceforth: The New Cambridge Medieval History, 3, 900-1024, 900-1024, 3, History, Medieval Cambridge New The Shaun Tougher,Shaun Jonathan Shepard, “Symeon of Bulgaria – peacemaker”, – Bulgaria of “Symeon Shepard, Jonathan 79 The emperor Alexander's short reign only reign short Alexander's emperor The ”). Leo PmbZ , ch. 6133-163. , #27467.

81 Furthermore, Symeon Furthermore,

Emergent Elites Emergent Emergent Elites and Elites Emergent , 83.3, (1989), 83.3, , ed. Timothy ed. ) ; and

CEU eTD Collection formativeperiod of Romanos’s government. the in especially played, Romanos ministers two the strategies that role the the and power of his maintain to some order in investigate employed to plans thesis my Thus, Daphnopates. Theodore and Mystikos I Nikolaos society: Constantinopolitan the of members educated highly two on relied Romanos testify. him against plots many of accounts smoothly,as go not MystikosI 17 on December 920. the brother-in-law, his and there. from Phokas Leo general army the of pretensions the from emperor young the protecting pretextof the On most. the profited battles, the of course the in suffer not did fleet whose navalcommander the Lekapenos, Romanos aftermath, the In empire. the of echelons upper the in which a dignitaries vacuum and left officials high-rankingof many loss the Symeon, suffering by defeated heavily was Phokas, Leo by lead army, Byzantine the Katasyrtas, and Acheloos near battles, major two 85 84 83 Th. Cont. 398-400. Th. Cont. 397-398. Th. Cont. Runciman, Kresten-Müller, Romanos was a provincial general with few connections in the capital, and his rise to power did power to rise his and capital, the in connections few with general provincial a was Romanos 83 Eventually, he was crowned by the under-aged Constantine and PatriarchNikolaos and Constantine under-aged Eventually, the by crownedaugustus was he Constantine, Romanos was accepted into the palace, and gradually built up his position his up built gradually and palace, the into accepted was Romanos Constantine, Legitimationsprinzip Romanos 84 , 7-11. , 62.

85 In his efforts to ascertain his position, his ascertain to efforts his In

CEU eTD Collection iulseug vn Hrshf. Fümteatrih eiezn etl n Zeremoniell un Gestalt Residenzen. Frühmittelalterliche Herrschaft. (NewStephenson, York: 2012), Routledge, 162-173; in general: von “ Featherstone, Michael Jeffrey or 2005); (Istanbul, “ Kalavrezou, Visualisierung (henceforth: 53-79 1997), Oaks, Dumbarton in Court”, Byzantine the at Relics of Cult the and Ceremonies Imperial Empire: the for Hands “Helping Kalavrezou, Ioli also: see volume Church same His the in Church”;in “Emperor Majeska, see: emperor the of aspect religious and coronation of ceremony the concerning 1–20; Byzantine (1985) the of triumphs: the about Ritual and MacCormack, MacCormack, Sabine Dagron, importance. hand'. 'extended the gesturethe wasperformedritesof byfour symbolically all of case in aquality noteworthy conferring that to Christ).” in entity single a (constituting marriage to and rule) to capacity the (conferringcoronation applied be also may it extension By ordination. and baptism to appropriate is It rite. sacramental a undergoing of consequence the as soul human the by acquired quality or capacity supernatural the to character applied is 'character': term describes “the further He eternity”. to soul human the of passage final the celebrate or facilitate which those’ and 'character' a confer which “those empire: Christian Byzantine the in ceremonies of type distinctive two defines his Walter and Christopher proclaimed, projected. legitimacy publicly was the authority as and power such emperor's stages, the various Sophia, Hagia the or From Hippodrome them. between relations defining of of elements constitutional and society, the and Byzantine emperor the between communication of means primary the of emperor. the on focused everything ceremonial, court Byzantine to comes it When coronation of ceremony The 88 87 86 Walter,

Kalavrezou, “Helping Hands”, 72,n. 76. ngnrlseTetne' lsia td:study: classical Treitinger's see general In Emperor and Priest and Emperor Art and Ritual and Art Art and Ceremony and Art McCormick, McCormick, Art and Ceremony in Late Antiquity Late in Ceremony and Art 88 Romanos I Lekapenos as Lekapenos Divinely Romanos I Ordained Emperor From the perspective of this thesis, the ceremony of coronation is of particular of is coronation of ceremony the thesis, this of perspective the From , 116,n. 3. ; esp. headings 2 and 3, 54-124; relating to the period of late antiquity until Justinian see: Justinian until antiquity late of period the to relating 54-124; 3, and 2 headings esp. ; ); the study concerned about the religious aspect of ceremonies: ceremonies: of aspect religious the about concerned study the ); Eternal Victory Eternal Lno:Vrou,18)(ecfrh atr Walter, (henceforth: 1982) Variorum, (London: ,

Byzantine Court Culture from 829 to 1204 to 829 from Culture Court Byzantine ; useful article is also: Idem also: is article useful De Cerimoniis De riigr Treitinger, Chapter I Chapter (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1981) (henceforth: 1981) Press, California of University Angeles: (Los epn Hands” Helping ODB, Kaiser und Reichsidee und Kaiser and the Great Palace”, in in Palace”, Great the and 400-402. ; mr eety e olcin o works: of collection see recently, more ); , “Analyzing Imperial Ceremonies”. Ceremonies”. Imperial “Analyzing , , ed. Henry Maguire, (Washington D.C.: (Washington Maguire, Henry ed. , ; Dagron's work is indenspensible: is work Dagron's ; Art and Ritual and Art The Byzantine World Byzantine The d . A ae, BZS 5, BYZAS Bauer, A. F. ed. , 86 Ceremonial was one was Ceremonial Christopher Walter, Christopher ); for detailed study detailed for ); , ed. Paul ed. , JÖB 87 It is It Art 35 26

CEU eTD Collection Art and Ceremony and Art of traditions the in roots its has itself, ceremony the like art, Byzantine in coronation of image The art in Representations an in resulted century, ninth the of half ofthe patriarch's amplification role. second the in successes missionary the and Iconoclasm of end the after church the of power and influence increased the with coupled which, usurpers, with reign.” their of beginning the at crowned were usurpers “only notices, Walter As well. as colleague new any of crown the blessed nevertheless emperor,but senior the of absence the in only coronation the performed patriarch the and colleague, his crowned who emperor crown associated prince.” the of head the on place crownwill emperor the which the blesses or sovereign new the the of of head the terminus on crown church, the places the who patriarch, the to to devolved and itinerary, be to seems role principal “the that namely mentioning, Porphyrogennetos’s Constantine consistency. little with Sophia. Hagia in eventually and Hippodrome the in first emperor, at the crowned who capital the of patriarch the was it and torque, the Constantinople. of palace great the in more and empire the around camps military in time less spent emperors that fact the to due changed elements 'constitutional' as ceremony, civil/urban more a with complemented later was takeover– military a imitating city the into entrance triumphant subsequent army, and the from acclamation an by followed torque a by coronation and shield a on raising the – ceremonial military distinctively originally An transformations. various 93 92 91 90 89 Walter, Dagron, occurred:Dagron, that coronations of number providesa Dagron surveyof in 641. withII Starting Dagron Between Roman late antiquity and the middle Byzantine period, the ceremonialthe coronation of period, Byzantine sawmiddle the and antiquityBetween Romanlate , Art and Ritual and Art Emperor and Priest and Emperor Emperor and Priest and Emperor , 242-246. , 119. 91 lhuh te dsrpin o h ooain crmn s dsrbd in described as ceremony coronation the of description the Although , 54-56. , 59-64 90 ODB However, for a large part of this period both types of rites were staged were rites of types both period this of part large However,a for De Cerimoniis De

MacCormack, , 534. Art and Ceremony and Art , 'disappointed' Dagron, one of his impressions is worth is impressions his of one Dagron, 'disappointed' , , 93

242-243. The period under investigation is 'rich' is investigation under period The 89 The diadem slowly took the place of place the took slowly diadem The Emperor and Priest and Emperor 92 Thus, it was the senior was the it Thus, , 70-78; 70-78; , MacCormack, 27

CEU eTD Collection 119; MacCormack, sovereigntyof notions the combined which providential tradition, and Walter, Jewish of victory”. kingship Messianic 118- blessing. and investiture, triumph, symbolizing: scenes coronation of types intertwined, yet threedistinctive, discern examples, extant symbolisms the on the based can, that we scrutiny, say under period to the for precise Thus, multiplied. more perhaps is it so representations), (triumphant meaning ( iconography 'ancient' both of examples have we dynasty Macedonian the of period the In century. ninth late the from come investiture, of notion the of virtue by agents Christian the by performed coronations, of depictions of was examples surviving earliest the Iconoclasm,earth, of nature the Given subjects. his on power further conferring on representative God's as acting likewise, who, emperor, the onto God from transferred diadem. the by symbolized as emperor, the upon power sacred God’s of gift the confer to represented were God Christian the of agents is, that saint; a or angel, an Virgin, the Christ, by crowned being as depicted now was emperor The innovations. of additional ideology brought power the on church the of influence Increasing one. civil more a to connotation military from Also, celebrate. to ideology of focus the in shift a prompted turn in which Constantinople, in residence victories their fixed emperors fewer in resulted empire the of shrinking The changed. representation emperor. the of symbol a as diadem sovereignty. of insignium the was which diadem, or crown, bejewelled the and victory; signifying always wreath, laurel the distinguished: were symbolism, different bearing crowns, of types two antiquity in Already centuries. the over changed it however, meaning, not; does the same; the remains place, in already one touching or head, the on crown same. the is scheme iconographical the that seen be can it angel, an or Virgin or Nike as such impersonal figures, personification by crowned depicted were emperors Victorious antiquity. 98 97 96 95 94 Grabar, the signifying aptly epoch, Christian the into persisted crown-diadem “the that describes Walter Christopher Walter, 118;more crown: about the MacCormack, Grabar, Cf. belowCf. L’empereur L’empereur manus Dei, manus Art and Ceremony and Art , 117. , 115 but, as Grabar eloquently explains, even if Nike is replaced with the image of the of image the with replaced is Nike if even explains, eloquently Grabar as but, manus Dei manus ; Jolivet-Levy, “L’image dupouvoir” , 241. hwvr ol n h the on only however, – 96 95 ne h itrcl ocrecs smoim ad is visual its and symbolism occurrences historical the Under From the fourth century onward, imperial art 'kept' only the only 'kept' art imperial onward, century fourth the From Art and Ceremony and Art , 446;Walter, solidi , 241. Ritual f Jh Tzimiskes) John of 97 , 118. All the power was perceived as perceived was power the All 94 The gesture of placing a placing of gesture The 98 and 'ancient' and 28

CEU eTD Collection Magdalino, (Aldershot:Magdalino, Variorum, 139-158, 1994), esp. (henceforth: 139-151 Brubaker, in centuries”, ninth and eighth the in authority visual the and Constantine emperor: an legitimize Brubaker,“To Leslie see: well as labarum after “Gabriel reads: Gabriel Byzantium”, Ingerina. above Eudokia and I Basil are couple inscription blessed the for candidates strongest the but Basil, to labarum a pass Elijah does only Not meaning. triumphant the of example obvious an offers image This emperor. the crowning is who right) a passes who viewpoint) spectator's the from Basil Paris in kept ( nowadays Nazianzus of Gregory of Homilies the containing manuscript famous the in terms the in Or emperor. previously,defined the and investiture. blessing upon legitimacy bestowing and marriage the blessing both – mind in this Doukas, X Constantine Makrembolitissa.Eudokia wife his and him blessing represented is Christ 'six-header', so-called (r.the Diogenes 1068-1071), IV Romanos the of reverse the On well. as survives ivories, scene this of specimen in numismatic later howevera come examples Most legitimacy. of carrier the as wife the often having used, exceedingly couple, a blessing Christ of representation the of case in meaning the discern to alwayseasy morenot specifically, or is portraits, it family Jolivet-Levythat notices marriage. a blessing 1). (fig. Christ ( all which predateAlexander's coin, are examined.beto art, Byzantine in figure celestial a by coronation the of examples extant earliest three The Bibliotheque Nationale Nationale Bibliotheque Venezia Palazzo 103 102 101 100 99 seeing the cross in the heavens. heavens. the in cross the seeing Identification is not definite, but by analysis of the text and images on the casket, Henry Maguire casket, the that the concludes Henry on images textthe and of analysis by but definite, not is Identification Labarum was was Labarum Brubaker, DOC Jolivet-Levy, “L’image dupouvoir” The next example also comes from the time of Basil I; it is one of the splendid illuminations found illuminations splendid the of one is it I; Basil of time the from comes nextexample also The Rome in today kept lid, casket a on carving ivory an is representation such earliest the Arguably , 786-790, pl.lxv, 1-2 The Art Bulletin Art The 99 Vision and Meaning and Vision This would be a blessing or a benediction type which is in most cases connected to the to connected cases most in is which type benediction a or blessing a be would This ) and )representing, probably, most by blessed Isecond wifeas and Eudokia being his Basil a symbol of Constantine's military standard which he adorned with Christian insignia (Christogram) insignia Christian with adorned he which standard military Constantine's of symbol a New Constantines, the Rhytm of Imperial Renewal in Byzantium, 4th-13th Centuries 4th-13th Byzantium, in Renewal Imperial of Rhytm the Constantines, New Paris. gr. 510) (fig. 2). (fig. gr. Paris. 510) , 70,(1988): 88-103; 89-93, 1-5. fig. 101 , 158-162, 5. fig. As Eudokia was of legitimate dynastic origin, ex-wife of the late emperorex-wife late wasofthe origin, Eudokia dynastic legitimate As of DOC , 449. , 134-138; , is a good example of the 'mixed' symbolism that Jolivet-Levy had Jolivet-Levy that symbolism 'mixed' the of example good a is 102 about symbolism of Constantine's cross, the cross in general, and general, in cross the cross, Constantine's of symbolism about Here, Basil is flanked by the prophet Elijah (to the left of left the (to Elijah prophet the by flanked is Basil Here, labarum 103 to him, and the archangel Gabriel (to the (to Gabriel archangel the and him, to Henry Maguire, “The Art of Comparing in Comparing of Art “The Maguire, Henry New Constantines New 100 as this motif has been has motif this as ). ). histamenon , ed. Paul ed. , of 29

CEU eTD Collection 447, n. 20; or 447, n. 20;or Centuries) Kamm”, Neuer (9th–11th Gudrun see: one-rowcomb, solid a of grip the is object the Byzantium in Cutler, (henceforth: 158a, fig. Society and Ivory, also: see Scepter”); Ideology”, Imperial Post-Iconoclastic du pouvoir”, 450. Gabriel. as Jolivet-Levy) his projecting indeed was (by he that and Pentecost, of feast the during identified sceptre the used Leo that concluded again right), (far archangel an of presence the in middle) the (in Virgin the by crowned being is viewpoint) spectator's the from left far the (on VI Leo and son by owned I. indeed Basil of successor was sceptre this that convincingly argued Corrigan Kathleen yet, VI, or ( Berlin in located ofimperial victory.origins the divine emphasises and image, the of character triumphal reinforces presence whose depicted, ones the like warrior sacred likely,or, more general, military victorious a resembles Basil indeed, that concludes Jolivet-Levy himself. Basil like much armour wearing and spears holding depicted, are saints warrior emperor, the of right of position the in are enemies, war, defeated of prisoners feet emperor's the under Furthermore, stemma. golden emperor's the touching by benediction or coronation of gesture a makes I, Basil of case the in agent same the like much right), the (to Gabriel archangel a the and spear, him hands viewpoint) spectator's the from emperor the of left the (to Michael archangel the head, emperorrepresentedis armour, in a on standing ( Venice in kept now Psalter the from II Basil of image famous the – period Archistrategos”. 110 109 108 107 106 105 104 Jolivet-Levy, “L’image du pouvoir”, 446–447, 2. fig. Cutler, see: discussion Forthis about more details of StatementA VI: Ivory“The Leo of Corrigan, Scepter Kathleen detail: in this artefact with dealt Corrigan Kathleen Ibid., Jolivet-Levy, “L’image dupouvoir” She adds that this image is not, as supposed previously, in relation to his 'Bulgarian' victory. 'Bulgarian' Jolivet-Levy, his “L’imageto previously, relation supposed in as not, is image this that adds She The final example is yet another ivory, presumably originally a tip of the sceptre, the of tip a originally presumably ivory, another yet is example final The fig. 6. fig. Cutler, Hand of the Master the of Hand Jahrbuch Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Preußischer Jahrbuch

104 Brubaker, Hand of the Master the of Hand Staatliche Museen Staatliche For the 'triumphant' type of image we have another similar example from a later a from example similar another have we image of type 'triumphant' the For 108 On one side, Christ is represented flanked by and Paul, and Peter by flanked represented is Christ side, one On Vision and Meaning and Vision Hand of the Master the of Hand , fig. 158, fig. a. The Art Bulletin Art The , 200,n. 56. , 446. ) (fig. 3). For some time scholars argued whether it belonged to Leo V Leo to belonged it whether argued scholars time For 3). some (fig. ) Corrigan, Corrigan, ). However, ). , 398, fig. 177; Anthony Cutler, Anthony 177; fig. 398, , 39(2002): 289–306. , (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1994), 200–201, 1994), Press, University Princeton Jersey: New (Princeton, , , 60 (1978): 407–416, figg. 1–2 (henceforth: Corrigan, “The Ivory “The Corrigan, (henceforth: 1–2 figg. 407–416, (1978): 60 , suppedion 106 Ivory Scepter Ivory Bühl and Hiltrud Jehle, “Des Jehle, Hiltrud and Bühl note that the latest examination led to the suggestion that suggestion the to led examination latest the that note . While Christ above Christ While . acrown himplaces his on , esp. 407, n. 2; 2; n. 407, esp. , The Hand of the Master. Craftsmanship, Master. the of Hand The proskynesis Jolivet-Levy,“L’image pouvoir”, du Kaisers Altes Zepter – des Kaisers des – Zepter Altes Kaisers Biblioteca Marciana Biblioteca 109 , and to the left and left the to and , and on the other, the on and 107 110 nowadays Corrigan ). 105 The 30

CEU eTD Collection all the saints!”, Mystikos, saints!”, the all Pure Lady,and Holy ofmost salvation,and our and intercession hope of through the God Christians' our the Christ is who by it granted be deprived,but not you be [felicity] which words:“Of the with writing his patriarchended The Symeon. to most the was cult her and city the of protector main the as regarded was venerated one. 1;Tesserae: 533,541,pl.xxxvi, Coin: DOC, 96, DOS, 58.1-58.2. she as obverse, the on Virgin the having of echelons “QuatrePapadopoulou, Tesseres”). highest the Lecapene”, Christophore is that conveyed, was message the whom to audience the share hand’. ‘extended the of gesture the through them upon quality supernatural of blessing a conferring which agents celestial with themselves associate to question in emperors the of intention the represent All showsimilarities. more abstractdo certain levela at interpretation, understood, of they and symbolize to act investiture, havebut may ofblessing. an meaning additional had would ivory Leo’s Thus, ivory. the of side other the on represented Christ, of agent the on Nikopoios Virgin the obverse. had tesserae, several and pattern, a be to assumed coin, one regency, loins. her around Virgin the of image the with scarf woresilk a she which to prior Theotokos, the by intervention miraculous after only pregnant became Zoe that says said is It instance. another by suggested as benediction, Theotokos’s the project to Leo incited that heir effigy. the of right and left “ΘΥ” the “MR” to sacrum Virgin his of type one as coins, on attested is Virgin the with flanking remindto Christ is Paul thatusemperor the was successor of the apostles. and Peter of presence the that concludes Jolivet-Levy and Corrigan both Furthermore, power. imperial 116 115 114 113 112 111

i.e. sent Mystikos Nikolaos that letters the of one in found is Virgin the of role intercession the concerning Testimony for reason main the be may purposes, charity for used was which tessere, the of nature the that add be should It Corrigan, “The Ivory “The Corrigan, Scepter” DOC Vivien Prigent, Cécile Morrisson, Pagona Papadopoulou, “Quatre Tesseres de Plomb et un Portrait de L'empereur de Portrait un et Plomb de Tesseres “Quatre Papadopoulou, Pagona Morrisson, Cécile Prigent, Vivien Orans While all three images belong to a specific context within which they should be primarily placed primarily be should they which within context specific a to belong images three all While The role of the Virgin was to intercede, to was Virgin the of role The association Leo's agent. divine the as Virgin the chose Leo why reason additional be may There Cheirotonia 114 , 508-509, 512,pl.xxxiv, 1.

on the obverse, with the rarely attested inscription “MARIA”, and an abbreviated nomen abbreviated an and “MARIA”, inscription attested rarely the with obverse, the on

Letters Нумизматика, Сфрагистика и Епиграфика и Сфрагистика Нумизматика, , Ep. 7,44.40-43;, Ep. 45. , 416;Jolivet-Levy, “L’image dupouvoir”, 447,n 21. 115 she is conferring a blessing upon the emperor as an as emperor the upon blessing a conferring is she 112 Perhaps it was difficulties in securing a living male living a securing in was it difficulties Perhaps solidi , 5 (2009), 207, n. 36 (henceforth: Prigent-Morrisson- (henceforth: 36 n. 207, (2009), 5 , 113 , presumably a ceremonial issue, has the has issue, ceremonial a presumably , Furthermore, during the period of Zoe's of period the Furthermore, during 111

116 They also They 31

CEU eTD Collection themselves with their namesake saints, but already Bellinger expressed some concern (“if the analogy is sound”, is connected analogy emperors the when (“if cases concern some later expressed some Bellinger to already analogy but saints, in namesake opponent), their Arius' with and themselves Constantinople of bishop (first iconography. and coinageits Byzantine Thus Alexander was the to: first regard with remarkable to importance of Emperor reignis (912-913) Alexander’sdetail. short in discussed be to ought ‘predecessor’ its specimen, Romanos’s However, closely examination. more examining before under period the during politics power Byzantine of understanding our and thesis my for importance high of is introduced, already coin’, ‘coronation so-called the – examples later or earlier chronologically on drawing also occasionally – investigated is rule Romanos’s coin during issued coins of series whole a While coronation Alexander’s whoeverthat (at least) expectedthem designed tothe message.audience understand the assumed be can it propaganda, of purpose the for employed obviously were they Since world. Christian the in i.e. earth, on authority highest the becomes thus which representative, terrestrial his onto power sacred authorityconferring celestial highest the message: ideological and clearlypolitical understandable borders, its beyond even and empire, the across circulated coins more are more, or hundreds likely carried most and thousands, of Tens they audience. wider a reaching messages ultimately the yet further, much travelled coins composition, simpler, in similar was audience much target the While immediate/direct. are coins on images illuminations, manuscript and ivories of with compared skill So, exquisite. still the was testify, sophistication of level coins and craftsmanship the as but, representations, lavish and elaborated for space much provide not does millimeters, 20 around is which coin, gold a of size The underlined. be to need that audience its and medium the of nature the to regarding distinctions significant are there work, this in scrutiny under coins unique two the by shared also are mentioned traits society.the court Although Constantinopolitan 119 118 117 • This coin, and especially effigy of the saint, arroused some confusion. At first, saint was recognized as St Alexander St as recognized was saint first, At confusion. some arroused saint, the of effigy especially and coin, This Liutprand, example, for was given Squatriti, by Constantine. goldcoins bag a of periodare outputthe for goldcoins about “Byzantine estimations If sound.Morrisson, employ a full-length representation of an emperor being crowned by a sacred figure on the on reverseof introduced he coins: effigy crowningBaptistthe figure of John St the him; sacred a by crowned being emperor an of representation full-length a employ 118 propagating a straightforward and straightforward a propagating Liutprand of Cremona of Liutprand Money” 119

, 941, 6. table , 202. 117 of gold of 32

CEU eTD Collection atse sr l oiu ’lxnr 9293, (912–913),” Baptiste”). d’Alexandre solidus le sur Baptiste 42-44. Alexander,” Kaisers des Solidus Ein Münze: byzantinischen einer auf Konstantinopel Mystikos. NikolaosI time, the at Constantinople patriarch the of actually is 'saint' the that proposed who Sommer, Andreas by offered was interpretation erroneus, albeit interesting, another article, Thierry's to Art, Imperial Byzantine in Ideology 447-448 pouvoir”, “L’imagedu innovationsmonétaires”, quelques impériale: l’iconographie à byzantine numismatique Thierry, la “ApportsN. de Baptist. the John left St fact in the is represented in cross (long saint the attributes that conclusion and same the to coat), independantly,Jolivet-Levy,came apparently Catherine camel-hair and Thierry (characteristic Nicole hand), cloths beard), and hair (long face the on Based “ Ῥωμαίων Christ. of (Ι REGNANTIUM hand. right his with head Alexander's on crown a placing and bareheaded bearded, Alexander, towards turn three-quarter a in represented is latter The Baptist. the John St i.e., a holding While cross. by crown surmounted a and , traditional the wearing representedbearded, frontal, is inscription) an by (identified Alexander Emperor viewpoint), spectator's the (from left the On length. full in figures two featured reverseit the On years. forty than more for use in already then by (r.and I 867–86), father, Basil Alexander's by time first the for introduced as Christ enthroned the period, the for image standard the Imperial Policy” Imperial 123 122 121 120 • • 523-525, Ibid., pl.xxxv, 3;Romanos’s miliaresion: 537, Ibid., 20. 556-557, pl.xxxvii, DOC DOC DOC Nicole Thierry responded with yet another, more thorough, article, finally ending the discussion. N. Thierry,“Le N. discussion. the ending finally article, thorough, more another, yet with responded Thierry Nicole For the time being I am interested in Alexander's 'coronation' solidus (fig. 5). The obverse shows obverse The 5). (fig. solidus 'coronation' Alexander's in interested am I being time the For of his title the use types whichin those later emperors, Romanos,owntheir with starting inserted effigies; of forerunner the was cross the of arms the of intersection the at placed Alexander which Christ the of patterns iconographic traditional modify , 176-183. , 182. , 523,525,pl.xxxv, 3. 122 Coin: ); ); which a is standard formula. On the reverse inscription reads: +ALEXANd ROSAVGUSTOSROM' ( ROSAVGUSTOSROM' +ALEXANd reads: inscription reverse the On miliaresia DOC , 76, n. 23). Grierson accepted this interpretation and passed it on without any comment ( comment any without on it passed and interpretation this accepted Grierson 23). n. 76, η without σοῦς Χριστός σοῦς , 523-525, pl.xxxv, 2. globus cruciger globus . 121 a halo, wearing a tunic and himation, holding a long cross in the left hand, and hand, left the in cross long a holding himation, and tunic a wearing halo, a

. This interpretation was recognized as sound by scholars e.g. e.g. scholars by sound as recognized was interpretation This . ” Bulletin de la Société Française de Numismatique de Française Société la de Bulletin

, reserved for the senior emperor, on coins, more precisely on the reverse the on precisely more coins, emperor, on senior the for reserved ,

r Gesta ex regnatium ex , 28/2, (1989), 226-227 (henceforth: Maguire, “Style and Ideology”). and Maguire,“Style (henceforth: 226-227 (1989), 28/2, , in his right hand, he reaches with his left hand toward the right, the toward hand left his with reaches he hand, right his in 123 eu numismatique Revue ); ); Rex Regnatium Rex miliaresion

Inscription reads on the obverse: +IhSXSREX obverse: the on reads Inscription 4 19) 3-4 hneot: Tiry “Le Thierry, (henceforth: 237-241 (1992), 34, , frequently accompanies representations accompanies frequently : the medallion displaying the bust of bust the displaying medallion the : , 41/10, (1986), 124-125; (1986), 41/10, , Schweizer Münzblätter Schweizer A. Sommer, A. Patriarch “Der von Henry Maguire, “Style and “Style Maguire, Henry Ἀλέξανδρος αὔγουστος Ἀλέξανδρος Jolivet-Levy, , 154, (1989), 154, , In responce In 120 DOC , 523). , 33

CEU eTD Collection Politics in Byzantium in Politics centuries”, XI and X the ruler. sole a as himself present to wish his shows still it mosaic, this with himself' 'flattered only Alexander if even Nevertheless, propaganda. not was purpose Ibid., onright: 1. is the 748-752,Virgin pl.lxii, the while left representedthe on 1055-1056). She reign herself sole of Empress(period of Theodora coin the on attested is practice this to exception lxiv,An pl. 2. 767-770, 764-765, Ibid., X: Constantine 1; lxii, pl. 756-757, 754, Ibid., VI: Michael 1; c the 2; lviii, pl. 726, 722, are:casefirst Nikephoros Michael the for 4-5; xli, Examples right. 583-585, IV,the 580-581, pl. Ibid., on II: placed 721-Ibid., always is it case which in hand, extended of gesture the by coronation performing unless left, the to honour of place the 1960”, and 1959 in Institute Byzantine the Work by on Done Report EmperorA Alexander: the of portrait The Istanbul: at Sophia Jolivet-Levy Both provocative: been have might scene this that noted been also has legitimacy.It divine with heir-apparent was Constantine as himself assert to alive, effort latter's the hence colleague, his was being Alexander Leo While emperor. sole the as himself displaying Sophia, Hagia in mosaic the on alone representinghimself and coins, the arrangement was the wayother around orderin respectto the hierarchy ofthe sacred figure. the if inconvenient highly be would which hand, right his with coronation the perform should saint the the and honour, of place place the is case it practicality: and any protocol both of in reasons for position would left the on coin emperor the on disposition The model. perfect a mosaic the makes which coin, the on right the to moves mosaic the on hand left the in globe i.e. around, way other the turns it struck actually is coin the when so negative, a carved image, this at looking was he die-sinker, the if that one. needed he die-sinker, if the for model a as served have might Sophia Hagia in mosaic his schematized, is models. as city the around found be to images various used been. had brother and father his of representations the like much standardized, quite is effigy emperor's the hand, other the On numismatics. Byzantine in unparalleled 128 127 126 125 124 126 Although Oikonomides pointed out that the mosaic was placed in a private narrow space, implying that the that implying space, narrow private a in placed was mosaic the that out pointed Oikonomides Although on usually is agent celestial the that show specimen, Alexander's before none are there as examples, extant Later DOC DOC o h ealdteteto h oacse see: mosaic the of treatment detailed the For DOP If we compare the images, a certain resemblance is noticeable (figg. 4–5). We should keep in mind in keep Weshould 4–5). (figg. noticeable is resemblance certain a images, the compare we If By employing this scene, using the the using scene, this employing By Baptist the John St of representation a features craftsmanship exquisite of coin beautiful This , 146-147. 480, I: 1;LeoVI:, Basil 487,pl.xxx, 508-509, pl.xxxiv, 513-514, 2. , 15(1961), fig. 187-217, 5. , (Ashgate: Variorum, 2005), XI, 1-11; 5. oronation examples: John I: John examples: oronation Zograf , 25 (1996), 23-26; reprinted in collected studies: Nicolas Oikonomides, Oikonomides, Nicolas studies: collected reprintedin 23-26; (1996), 25 , Nicolas Oikonomides, “The significance of some imperial monumental portraits of portraits monumental imperial some of significance “The Oikonomides, Nicolas autokrator autokrator

Ibid., 589-590, 592-596, pl. xlii, 1-6; Romanus III: Ibid., 711-712, pl. lvi, pl. 711-712, Ibid., III: Romanus 1-6; xlii, pl. 592-596, 589-590, Ibid., Paul A. Underwood, Ernest J. W. Hawkins, “The of Hagia of Mosaics “The Hawkins, W. J. Ernest Underwood, A. Paul

title on silver, completely ignoring Constantine on Constantine silver,ignoring on completely title 125 In that regard, although Alexander's effigy Alexander's although regard, that In 124 Grierson assumed that the designers the that assumed Grierson 128 Alexander obviously aimed at aimed obviously Alexander autokrator and to draw upon draw to and Society, Culture and Culture Society, 127 34

CEU eTD Collection a public bath. public a to visit a or bread, charity,i.e. grain, of for purpose token the exchangethe could for owner used the been has It seal. the more with in comparison the usedannounce', 73,n. 83. commonly 'blessing'. Ibid., i.e. seals in or coinage, in found examples earliest the are these that fact the Perhaps halo. the was – coin a on a without represented Virgin also was Virgin the the here VI: Leo of brother Alexander’s of appearance nomisma aforementioned first the – Virgin the of but saint, a of not example, obverse. the on depicted was Michael archangel nimbated the while halo. the with represented is saint the but obverse, the on Basil St of effigy an had reverse the on Leo and Constantine sons two his Alexander.A to related closely all specimens, comparable of couple a however coinage; areByzantine there on saint the representationof first the was this mentioned, already As 'scandalousness'. assumed consequently and Christ, with association the enhance would mentioning, through parallelsymbolism.” compositional and allusion expressed only then until was what graphically, appropriately more or literally, represents office. imperial restating of ritual established the as contemporaries to recognizable indeed was Christ and in described as Epiphany of sources. biased heavily from come manner negative highly the in son youngest Basil's portray which accounts the that forgotten be not should it yet magic, and rituals pagan of scandalous. practitioner a behaviour, been unorthodox Alexander’s of have image the must into fit seemingly, which Christ, with himself compared and period, this of scene the recalledAlexander image, this with Maguirethat agree and 135 134 133 132 131 130 129 of function the perform not could it thus tread, the for channel a have not does which object seal-like a Tesserais 74. Ibid., Jolivet-Levy, “L’image dupouvoir”, 447-448; Maguire, andIdeology”, 226-227, “Style n. 46-47. DOS DOS Karlin-Hayter, “ Kalavrezou, “Helping Hands” “Helping Kalavrezou, 131 mtig te hl n te rpeetto f of representation the in halo the Omitting She further notices that “immediately upon his [Alexander’s] accession he issues a solidus which solidus a issues he [Alexander’s]accession his upon “immediately that notices further She , 93,54.1 , 91,52.1 ODB , 69-70; Alexander's Name”. Bad DOS , 234. 134 De Another Another , 72-73; she also emphasizes significance of the term used – kerutto – 'to proclaim','to 'to – kerutto – used term the of significance emphasizes also she 72-73; , tessera , concluded that the motif of parallelism between the emperor the between parallelism of motif the that concluded , represented Leo VI and Alexander himself on the reverse, the on himself Alexander and VI Leo represented 132 She not comment doesabout it being scandalous. 130 However, Ioli Kalavrezou, analyzing the ceremony the However,analyzing Kalavrezou, Ioli Prodromos hc ooy des wrh of worthy deems nobody which , tessera 135 Epiphany Finally, the only comparable only the Finally, 133 representing Basil I with I Basil representing , widely recognizable in recognizable widely , 129 tesserae hs would, This , have , 35

CEU eTD Collection especially with some of Romanos’s coins. some of Romanos’s with especially 6. coin. do with to this hadnothing thus, it representedit obverse, Prodoromos and on Florentinealone coin, of was copy a It VI. John and V reign John of the during well: offer Baptist are Johnthe nimbated depicting Examples numerous: Ibid., 10,13; fig. as research halo this a of without Prodromos course representing the is in one investigated that and material examples, that several mentioned be can it Nevertheless, thesis. this of limits towardsstep legitimacy. Therefore,proposed Grierson's dating sounds reasonable. the received Romanos 919, May 4 on VII Constantine married Helene after family, because imperial, now the, within coronation Theodora, include we if triple or double, encounters thus One 921. January 6 on 921; May 20 himself Romanoswas crownedon and wife onDecember 920, had Theodora augustushis 17 crowned augusta co-emperor crowned was Christopher Appendix), the in table chronological the (cf. coronation. Christopher’s of occasion the precisely more or coin, the of date the as 921 numismatic on also based but issues, ceremonial are these Since Occasion? reverseshows differencessome relevant particularly presentfor the argument. the while same the exactly is types both of obverse The character. ceremonial a of coin a implies this extraordinaryiconography, its with Coupled time. of period short a for wereminted they that suggesting 6). paradigm? (fig. “VI” and “V” types so-called the – issues similar very two least) Alexander’s (at had Lekapenos I Romanos by struck investiture reviving divine of representation same the bearing coin, coin The coronation Romanos’s well-established – the manner seated on throne, which complicate toseems interpretation further. form. this in repeated phenomenon. this to pertinence some 140 139 138 137 136 T For convenience'ssake, kept edition: I the classification in as the numbers centuries, four than more of distance the from comes coins on Baptis the John St of example extant only The the exceeds that but art, of forms other in Baptist the John St of representations for look to reasonable be would It DOC he lettering on the coin is large. Starting from 920's onward, letters on coins diminish, which helps with dating, with helps which diminish, coins on letters onward, 920's from Starting large. is coin the on lettering he , 534. title, and attached himself, and his family, with the imperial dynasty, thus taking important dynasty,taking imperial thus family,the with his and himself, attached and title, 137 However, Christ is not omitted, He is represented on the obverse of the coin in a in coin the of obverse the on represented is He omitted, However, not is Christ DOC DOC 136 , 5,79-80, pl.63,1207. , 530-531. Alexander’s choice was indeed an unusual one as it was never was it as one unusual an indeed was choice Alexander’s 139 Thierry, “

evidence, Grierson proposes the year the proposes Grierson evidence, DOC 138

, 544, pl. xxxvi, 5; Ibid., 545, pl. xxxvi, Ibid., 545, 5; 544,pl. xxxvi, , Kalavrezou, “Helping Hands” “Helping Kalavrezou, Both issues are extremely rareextremely are issues Both Le Baptiste”Le , fig. 2-3., fig. 140 As it is known is it As , fig. 9. fig. , 36

CEU eTD Collection subservience of the one to the other.” ofone the the to subservience Maguire, “ letters:his Mystikos, 108-149; 1959), Munksgaard, (København: Mango, Cyril gate: the about work seminal Mango's of Lord”, Our of Image four,“The chapter Ibid. Chalkites'. 'Christ been have might Christ ( XPISTOF'ETCONST'AUgg'b reads: inscription the V, type Fororder. the around? provide which inscriptions the by way identified are Both Porphyrogennetos. VII Constantine other or son VI’s Leo and bearded, Christopher son eldest his represented: are ‘colleagues’ two then Romanos’s reverse, the On beardless Reverse: The betweencomparison twothe reverse after describing issues of Romanos’s coin. Romanos, than higher in looking Romanos; like frontal shown is as Christ while direction, Alexander's represented is Baptist the John while furthermore, head; his behind cross a precisely, Further himself. Christ more nimbus, by a bears Christ Baptist, the performed John St unlike Christ: of now figure the to connected are is differences coronation the that and obverse, the on placed now is scene the that is eyeobserver’s the meeting difference major The severalrespects. in differs design the Ῥωμανὸς ( NΩδΕCPOTH A ROM +KEbOHΘΕΙ runs: inscription The Romanos. crowns he hand, right the with while gospels the of manuscript the holds he hand, left the In himation. and tunic wearing bearded, is Christ right, head, his the behind cross a To with facing, Romanos, than Christ. higher slightly towards only full-length, in also extended represented is hand left the and cruciger, globus the holds he ornamented traditional wearing bearded, full-length, in facing, viewpoint) spectator's the (from left the representedto is Romanos obverse, the On Obverse The 144 143 142 141 Grierson suggests that double 'g' for plural for suggests double that 'g' indicatesLatin rather Grierson than Greek. definite of but Alexander'scoin], with [as parallelism of one longer “no relationshipis Maguireexplainsthat Henry Maguire emphasizesthis: Maguire, DOC 3,5455 l xv,56 f pedx i.3 ocrigmdl,models, Concerning 3; fig. Appendix, cf. 5-6; xxxvi, pl. 544-545, 534, , δεσπότης Letters ). 141 There is no doubt that Romanos’s coin used Alexander’s issue as a model, however model, a as Alexander’s issue used coin Romanos’s that doubt no is There 143 , Ep. 95,, Ep. 362.2,363;Ep. 156,474.2, also: 475.See while on Alexander's specimen it was the other way around. I will return to return will I around. way other the was it specimen Alexander's on while Style and Ideology and Style the the despotes , 147, 155-156; a detailed analysis of this famous image can be found in found be can image famous this of analysis detailed a 155-156; 147, , Style andIdeology Style loros and crown with cross and and cross with crown and Nik olaos Mystikos refers to Romanos with this title in several of several in title this with Romanos to refers Mystikos olaos , 227. ”, 227. Χριστοφ DOC 142 finally, Christ is represented slightly representedfinally, is Christ , 178, n. 531. ό ρ Grierson supposes that the model for model the that supposes Grierson ο DOC ς

perpendulia καὶ , 177.

Κωνσταντῖνος . In the right hand right the In . The Brazen House, Brazen The Κύριε βοήθει Κύριε

augusti 37 144

CEU eTD Collection beardless. right, the Christopher, to and bearded, left, senior the on Romanos features it reverse the on and type, Christ-enthroned a in him represent to than Constantine ignore just to easier was it that comment and interpretation Still, not? did class next the on Constantine of absence complete the come how ask to reasonable is it weretrue, opposition much omitted, standard situation.” difficult very a in at arrived compromise a as interpreted be must “it that concludes and character”, in abnormal be to issue this show to itself in sufficient is bearded shown are figures both that fact “the that adds he (VI), issue next the on Commenting reversed”. be to had position relative their that disapproval much so “aroused which coronation, his after immediately Constantine to senior placed was Christopher that interpretation hypothetical a advances and VI”, class than earlier be Christopher,must to it relation in beardless as Constantine shows it “since that arguing other, the before V class places Grierson cases. lower frontal, the on right, wearing bearded, frontal, left, senior frontal, traditional the (from position left senior the on represented is V,Christopher class On detected. are differences important several types, two the Between portraits. Ῥωμαίων Ῥωμαίων 149 148 147 146 145 Beard was a of seniority, sign whenmore importantandhelpful one particularly than figure represented. Small DOC DOC Design of this coin is completely standardized, used by emperors to promote their heirs. Obverse is the usual the is Obverse heirs. their promote to emperors by used standardized, completely is coin this of Design Therefore it can be noticed that, unlike Constantine, Christopher is represented bearded in both in bearded represented is Christopher Constantine, unlike that, noticed be can it Therefore beardless 149

, 5 , 544,pl.xxxvi,5. DOC solidi solidi ). The effigies of the junior colleagues are depicted in a traditional manner, with schematized with manner, traditional a in depicted are colleagues junior the of effigies The ). ); “b” is frequently “b” is instead used of “R”. 148 this interpretation sounds less convincing. If Grierson’s assumption that type V aroused too aroused V type that assumption Grierson’s If convincing. less sounds interpretation this 34. 145 loros If compared with the next issue, which is commonly considered to have been Romanos’s been have to considered commonly is which issue, next the with compared If , 534,546-547, pl.xxxvi, 7. n o ye V: CNTN'TPSO''' ( CONSTANT'ETXPISTOF'b'R' VI: type for and during the 921 to 931 decade (marked as class VII), whereby Constantine is completely is Constantine whereby VII), class as (marked decade 931 to 921 the during and crown with cross. Constantine is represented on the right, lower than Christopher, than lower right, the on represented is Constantine cross. with crown and wearing chlamys bearded iin Piet éie Mrisn aoa Ppdpuo, acp this accept Papadopoulou, Pagona Morrisson, Cécile Prigent, Vivien and crown cross.with , wearing, oo loros DOC chlamys chlamys and crown with cross. Christopher is represented slightly represented is Christopher cross. with crown and , 183. observer and crownand with cross. 147 On classOn representedVI,is Constantine the on ’s viewpoint), frontal, bearded, frontal, viewpoint), ’s ωσατνς κί Χριστοφ καί Κωνσταντῖνος ό ο βασιλεῖς ρος 146 wearing DOC , 110. 38

CEU eTD Collection 1828-1829. sovereign”: lawful his Notes of disadvantage the to types gold the of maneuvering the by rebelion to roused been Bellinger, “ 398.12-399.7; quote: Runciman, ceremony important the was(Pentecost) forcause the the major plots. in dynasty the of heir the ignoring newcomer, a toward resistance natural mint. the and treasury the of master Anastasios, involved emperor new the against conspiracies the of last the that noticed been also has procession”. Pentecost the in proceeded Christopher] and [Romanos them of two “only that said is it as far so in towardsConstantine, ousting step a took Romanos coronation Christopher's of occasion the coronation. Christopher's after immediately plots two lists Continuatus Theophanes in described events of discovered”.sequence was The plot after “plot when interpret,to difficult soevery perhaps beshould aspect revised. Christopher.” for this affection his on lost never commenting “Romanos that Runciman, concludes incident and information, additional any offer not does chronicle The 928. promotion, Christopher's ofgracefall outChristopher’s because ofhis involvementsupposed withrebellion the Romanos in against and marriage Bulgarian so-called the of occasion part that of whichthe truth Romanoshaveto intended known and accepted.” a function as but truth, had whole the not official, situation, imperial was the about truth it the tells It documents not. did they legal which propaganda the like though one, large a was which gold, of comparedposition subordinatedChristopher.to 156 155 154 153 152 151 150 Runciman, Runciman, Cont.’schurchTh. the in plots:398.8-11; union the of coronation: announcement 398.4-8; Christopher's is: sequence 417.3-7; Th. Cont. Kresten-Müller, “QuatrePrigent-Morrisson-Papadopoulou, Tesseres”, 205 ”, 157, n. 35. was at the head of the 35.Sakellariosthe of157,n. ”,washead the at Bellinger, “ Th The date, which was accepted as sound, places this coin in the difficult period for Romanos’s rule Romanos’s for period difficult the in coin this places sound, as accepted was which date, The the with former the connecting VI type the before V type places also Bellinger Grierson, Like . Cont Byzantine Notes 9.-:398.7-8: . Byzantine Notes Romanos Legitimationsprinzip Bellinger, “ καὶ μόνοι δύο ἐν τῇ αὐτῇ προελεύσει προῆλθον προελεύσει αὐτῇ τῇ ἐν δύο μόνοι καὶ , 67, n. 1; 1; n. 67, , ”, 158,n. 26. Romanos ”, 158. Byzantine Notes Byzantine Bellinger adds that “it is interesting to think that the master of the mint might have might mint the of master the that think to interesting is “it that adds Bellinger , 65. , 22-33, more 37;for Bulgarian the marriagebelow. see details about ”, 160-161;”, Runciman, Sakellion 150 156 Commenting on this class, Belliger says that “thisissue that says class,this on Belliger Commenting As for the rebellions, I would say that, other than the than other that, say would I rebellions, the for As the treasuryOikonomides, money: the of 154 Furthermore, evidence suggests that already at already that suggests evidence Furthermore, Romanos . Bellinger also comments on this incident: this on comments also Bellinger , 71-72. 151 153

Indeed this issue seems issue this Indeed 152 n h atr with latter the and Les Listes Les sakellarrios , 312; 312; , “ Byzantine ODB 155 39 , 3, It

CEU eTD Collection Maguire concludes that “it is perhaps not altogether surprising that this coin type was not repeated by repeated not was type coin this that surprising altogether not perhaps is “it that concludes Maguire Henry issue, Romanos’s with it comparing and design coin ‘provocative’ Alexander’s on paradigm Commenting Alexander’s Applying over precedence official Christopher’s announce and Constantine. marriage Bulgarian the celebrate to issue ceremonial finally,another and truth'; the of 'part only completely, showing Constantine ignored which VII class the by followed was This left. senior his kept Constantine thus position, his ascertaining still was Romanos while coronation, Christopher's of occasion the on struck indeed was bearded colleagues of front in advanced was Christpoher the in official status. Constantine when marriage Bulgarian the is that (VI): class previous the has issued presumably was coin this when date likely highly one so, If dating. early an support to used been has and issues regular on recognized size reduced the by affected been were have not them may of they sense, both this In that issues. mind ceremonial in kept be should It sequence? in issued not were design, in identical virtually although twospecimens, the that possible framework;it would greatly broadenis the possibility V. class One the for explanation an necessitates This VI). class (i.e. left senior the at Constantine keeping still co-emperor, while the as him introducing coronation, his of occasion the on favour Christopher’s in 'compromise'was character,it in perhaps abnormal but, be to seem issue this notices, Grierson’s As case. Romanos’s with lines the allong be would order, which reverse the in at looked be should these perhaps So, (IV). left senior the to moved then Christopher,and like just bearded, but (III), side right the on first classdated. coins which safely III–IV), isin ‘status’ 157

DOC Therefore,wouldI like proposeNamely, hypothesis. to another classthe thatrepresenting VI both of rise Romanos’s with combination in case difficult this observe to reasonable is it that believe I , 533,542-543, Kresten-Müller, pl.xxxvi, 3-4; already already Legitimationsprinzip 157 been

He himself slowlyhimself improvedHe projected his rank, being proposed – although Bellinger connected it with it connected Bellinger although – proposed , 11-14, 37,67-69. of letters that is that letters of 40

CEU eTD Collection rmt hi ucsos fr a ln ie s Afe elne oe: “hn i a usin of question a was it “when notes: Bellinger succession tradition establishing was much beto felt ofexpression.” modesafer Alfred As time. long a for successors their promote to emperors senior by used coin of type ‘co-emperor’ well-established the on so did and decade, a almost presumably period, long a over issued was It coin. ‘coronation’ the than important more even seems VII co-emperor. as class son mind, his advertisingin and Christopher Christ, Having by ordination divine and more. titles their in difference the by achieved already purpose a – Constantine from spatially himself Finally,separated himself. he disposition this with Christ by crowned being was he that fact the did legitimacy, as his to further added Romanos side, ‘holy’ the on himself positioning Thus, ruler. Christian proper a as himself present orthodoxy,and his as well as position, his approval of divine the advertise and demonstrate to needed He all. at purpose Romanos’s serve not would coin, Alexander’s of case the in reaction the was that if Christ, with himself comparing by opposition arousing potentially coin, the obverseof the on Baptist the John St with scene, Alexander’s ceremonial rather of exception character, surviving on only with Christ, by ‘occupied’ usually was side ‘holy’ the As coinage. previous in figures divine for reserved side the – obverse the onto representation own celestial the of agent hierarchy, it was achieveto not possible ‘forced’ofa oncoin. this sideThis one all toRomanos transferhisan by crowned being himself representing by legitimacy divine his propagate to wanted obviously he as and, well, as coin the on represent to co-emperors two were There . paradigm emperors.”later 161 160 159 158 titled is Romanos already The mentioned Maguire, “ Bellinger, “ It can thus be safely concluded that with this gold issue Romanos was promoting his coronation his promoting was Romanos issue gold this with that concluded safely be thus can It 159 hs arneet ws a pret slto o oao’ netos ned repeating Indeed, intentions. Romanos’s for solution perfect a was arrangement this Style andIdeology”Style Imperial Policy Imperial 158 It should be addedIt beshould Romanosa more that had practicalreason to not repeat Alexander’s despotes solidi ”, 75. , while junior colleagues are colleagues junior , while of Leo VI featuringVirgin LeoVI of , 227. 160 – and thus diminished Porphyrogennetos’s position even position Porphyrogennetos’s diminished thus and – augusti Orans on obverse. . 161

41

CEU eTD Collection coinage of the period after Christopher's death, Grierson dates it between 931 and 944. 944. and the 931 25. xxxix, between for it characteristic dates effigy, Grierson bearded death, Christopher's elaborated after period somewhat the and of coinage evidence, numismatic on based and was he alone, while Romanos coins, in role some given been has Constantine from way this banished in that adds Grierson 920-931. period the to it frontal,represented is Romanos of bust the obverse, character.the ceremonial On a implying thus issued was it which during time of period short verya yet raresuggests which another is type, mint Cherson the Christopher. to ascribed be should coin the that and reproduction, of quality low a to due arisen have might concerns that suggests Grierson Still, identification. its about doubts express scholars some and VI, Leo to ascribed issue an over re-struck been has It problematic. ( OMEON Ῥωμαίωνβασιλεὺς the holding is he hand, left his In cross. crownwith and chlamys wearing bearded, frontal, represented is Christopher of bust the obverse, the On issue. ceremonial implying again once specimen, single a from known is coin Constantinopolitan A point. of Constantine. trace any bears one, monogram a even not Cherson, but from effigies specimen show single not a did not yet, them monograms, of most and quality lower of were coins mentioned, already as but, varieties, more had mint Cherson The death. Christopher's after i.e. place, took 931, coinage of after redesigning and from before types dated major safely Two relatively did. and gold identified as varieties are many Constantinople as produce not did us, to down came it as ‘advertised’VII, have to seem Romanos seals Constantine and I Romanos of coinage copper The well. implies, as society and of strata lower the among Christopher further coins evidence sigillographic from and numismatic As propaganda of evidence Further 165 164 163 162 Ibid.. 537-538; Ibid.. on Leo's which folles one was this restruck: Ibid., plxxxv, 8. 537-538, Ibid., 561,24. pl.xxxviii, 539-540, Ibid., 571-573, pl.xl, 32-38. commonissue firsta is andrepresents The one, VII Constantine beardless. Theseare arguments main dating for the Two specimens among the lowest denominations, one from each of the two mints, are cases in cases are mints, two the of each from one denominations, lowest the among specimens Two Πιστὸς ἐν Θ ἐν Πιστὸς 163 solidi

. ). On the reverse there is only inscription in four rows: +PISTO / ENΘEObA / SILEVSP / SILEVSP / ENΘEObA / rows: four +PISTO in inscription reverseonly is therethe On ). DOC εῷ , 537, 560-561, pl. xxxviii, 23; The second specimen is also quite common one. It represents It one. common quite also is specimen second The 23; xxxviii, pl. 560-561, 537, , βασιλεὺς Ῥωμαίων βασιλεὺς akakia ). 164 . The inscription reads: XPISTOFO PbASPOM' ( PbASPOM' XPISTOFO reads: inscription The . However, it must be said that this specimen is somewhat is specimen this that said be must However, it 165 The second specimen coming from coming specimen second The DOC , 538, 562-565, pl. xxxviii- pl. 562-565, 538, , 162 hn h general the when Χριστοφ ό ρος 42

CEU eTD Collection the bestpreservedthe in specimenPrigent-Morrisson-Papadopoulou). (1e Mosch: is which 2829, no. and item Lots, and Gorny Coins Ancient 2007, 8-9, 1142; October 160, Auction - no. Munzhandlung Giessner Mosch & item Gorny 2008, 8-9, January XI, Triton Group Numismatic Classical Triton: houses: auction two the articlespecimen and which treats it. Constantine before Porphyrogennetos,931. death inand his advanced was he when 927, between period the in placed only be can It narrow. and safe quite least, at dating, the makes which precedence, in second the is Christopher inscription, the R]/ BACIΛ [S / EVSE XW En / ConSTAN ( CE / XRISToFOR / RomAnO / + cross: usual the following ( 'OR' and 'XR' effigy the of right the and left the to field the in running inscription abbreviated the by identified is Christopher seals. and coins on emperors of insignia imperial of repertoire standard are those as unusual bit a is which cross, a shows crown the nor sceptre the Neither identification. safe a allow not does specimens the of state the but scroll, a be may which object an right, the in and sceptre, long a holds he hand left the In crown. single a with pearls with crown a and chlamys a wears He head. his problems. a precisely, more or, seal a but coin a not coronation.– Christopher’s the issued occasion on same busts. the accompany which inscriptions abbreviated the to due certain is identification its capital, the from coins the to compared especially craftsmanship, crude its Despite and pinnacles three with crown and robes wearing frontal, represented is Christopher of bust the reverse, the On inscribed. letters effigy the of right and left the To ornament. trefoil with crown and loros wearing Ῥωμανὸς 169 168 167 166 this me to out pointing specimen: for a of Description Vienna) Sciences, of Academy (Austrian Seibt Werner Prof. to grateful very am I 539, Ibid., 571,pl.xl, 31. Prigent-Morrisson-Papadopoulou,“Quatre Tesseres”, 206 The major difficulty with this specimen is, however paradoxical it may sound, the identity of identity the sound, may it paradoxical however is, specimen this with difficulty major The is Christopher, promoting in efforts Romanos’s for important highly possibly specimen, Another 167

Χριστοφόρος Χριστοφόρος On the obverse we can see the effigy of a man with a pointy beard, and a dotted halo around halo dotted a and beard, pointy a with man a of effigy the see can obversewe the On perpendulia  καὶ

Ibid. Κωνσταντῖνος , , . To the left and right of the effigy the letters ‘Χ’ and ‘P’ are affixed. are ‘P’ and ‘Χ’ letters the effigy the of right and left the To . 201-203, pl. xx, 1a-1e. Images of a better quality can be found in the catalogues of catalogues the in found be can quality better a of Images 1a-1e. xx, pl. 201-203, Prigent-Morrisson-Papadopoulou, “Quatre Prigent-Morrisson-Papadopoulou, Tesseres”. Χριστοφ 169 ἐν Χριστ ἐν ό ρς tessera ). 168 On the reverse, there is an inscription in five rows five in inscription an is there reverse, the On ῷ ; unfortunately, its interpretation is not without not is interpretation its unfortunately, ; . εὐσεβεῖς βασιλεῖς βασιλεῖς εὐσεβεῖς

epnuin perpendulion Ῥωμαίων 166 Both coins might have been have might coins Both ). As can be seen from seen be can As ). hanging from the from hanging ‘ Ρ’ and ‘Ο’ are ‘Ο’ and Ρ’ 43

CEU eTD Collection Byzantium and the West at the Turn of the First Millennium First the of Turn the at V,study 129(henceforth: Shepard, “AWest marriage far?”). too the studies: and collected Byzantium imperial the on open, the in held was It spectacle. public a as designed deliberately was Pege, at God of Mother the of church the in place took and wedding the after days three Romanos by organized was that feast the that concluded Eirene. and event, this masterfully.analyzed thoroughly opportunity Shepard this Jonathan exploited Lekapenos name the adopted symbolically Maria agreed, finally was which peace the of importance the more even emphasise To Minor. Asia i.e. east, the on freely more forces the for both liberation government, its Byzantine concentrate brought whichthe could for and proximitycapital the of in population territory, Thracian neighbouring the for devastating particularly war, of period long the waswhich of end The position. improving further his of opportunity the Romanos provided which event, important politically a was This 927. in Constantinople in held Symeon, of son Bulgaria, of Peter and daughter, Christopher's Lekapene, Maria between marriage the is that marriage', tessera century. tenth the of beginning the in 'empire' Bulgarian the within was which , identify. to easier somewhat seems issue this of occasion The “ The conclusionthatprobablyeffigy the not representdoes but Lekapenossaint, Christopherhimself. the a to came and rule, Lekapenos’s of time the at capital the in presence its and representations, its cult, Christopher's St of investigation thorough a undertook specimen this on worked who scholars of team –, show Baptist the John St or aforementionedthe examplesas even figures and omitted, ofVirgin the – sometimes is celestial to it then attributed ever only is seals, and coins on representations in which, halo, a of presence Christopher.The 173 172 171 170 Alexander’s Leo’s Cf. and solidus. Prigent-Morrisson-Papadopoulou, Prigent-Morrisson-Papadopoulou, Prigent-Morrisson-Papadopoulou, Bulgarian Marriage” Bulgarian oahnSead Amrig o a?MraLkpn n ee fBlai” nin Bulgaria”, of Peter and Lekapena Maria far? too marriage “A Shepard, Jonathan is of a ceremonial character, it is assumed that it was struck on the occasion of the 'Bulgarian the of occasion the on struck was it that assumed is it character, ceremonial a of is Emergent Elites and Byzantium in the Balkans and East-Central Europe East-Central and Balkans the in Byzantium and Elites Emergent dromon 170 suggests that the effigy is that of a saint – St Christopher. However,a Christopher. St – saint a of that is effigy the that suggests

anchored in the wharf of Pegai, so that the citizens of the capital could capital the of citizens the that so Pegai, of wharf the anchored in Tesseres Tesseres , 201. , 206-212. , ed. A. Davids, (Cambridge: CUP, 1995), 121-149, reprinted in CUP, reprinted 121-149, (Cambridge: Davids, 1995), A. ed. , Tesserae were found near Lake Ochrid in Ochrid Lake near found were 173

s i em, Rmns I Romanos seems, it As , (Ashgate: Variorum, 2011), Variorum, (Ashgate: , The Empress Theophano. Empress The 172 As the As 171

44

CEU eTD Collection h as fr isig te seie, wih a eetees rftd b: PietMrisnPpdpuo, “Quatre Prigent-Morrisson-Papadopoulou, by: refuted nevertheless was which specimen, Tesseres”, 211-212. the issuing for cause the share government”.and hadno in matters of of authority chieflawfultheof and “wasshe emperor, daughter not 164, 75: junior,thirdand most theof but who was subordinate still ᾐτήσαντογέγονεν ὅπερ καὶ βασιλεύς, Κωνσταντῖνον,ἐνστάσειτὸνὁ οὕτω τῇ τούτωνῬωμανὸς ὑπεῖξε propaganda.Lekapenan 128. Ibid., son's his proclaim to order in wedding promotion. the before tokens the event, prepared the Romanos of understanding that our confirm meaning would it rank, in second the as Christopher have already Porphyrogennetos. Constantine over son his promoted Bulgarians, the from ‘pressure’ Emperor Constantine, then for”. asked they what done was it only and request, their fulfill to accepted Romanos and first, acclaimed be should Christopher that Bulgarians strongly “the allegedly, insisted that, suggest Continuatus Theophanes from Lines treated. be to deserves philanthropia the advertisewould that – play into comes specimen our where is this and – charity of kind receivesome also presumably and splendour the observe could which populace Constantinopolitan the of strata lower the and wedding, the at present dignitaries and officials high-ranking the to both address to managed to projectdesigned the emperor's powerauthority. and wedding celebrations”.and the of sort “this that the for publicity maximum for assumes part Romanos’s on desire a with activitywouldcompatible havequite been and city the of north the to south the from travel to had newly-weds the festivities. the follow 179 178 177 176 175 174 I Kresten-Müller, 414.15-18: Cont. Th. A Ibid., Shepard, “A marriage too far?”, 129-130; Shepard also points out that such a detailed account of the weddingthe reflect of “AShepard, account detailed suchthat a out points Shepard129-130; also far?”, too marriage t should be added that Christopher's death has been proposed as the other possible occasion which may havemay whichoccasion possible been other the proposed as been has death Christopher's that added be should t nd marriage in particular is understood as purely particular is as nd marriage in understood ceremony: imperial Walter, An unprecedented number of specimens allows us observe the gradual development in the way the in development gradual the observe us allows specimens of number unprecedented An wedding this with connected aspect another ideology, and legitimacy of questions Concerning society, and of layers various to addressed were Byzantium in ceremonies mentioned, already As 129,26. n. 179 ofRomanos more and, importantly,that of Christopher. The identity of ‘Christopher’, identity however, of The remains problematic. Legitimationsprinzip 174 τῶν δὲ Βουλγάρωνδὲ τῶν ἔνστασιν ποιησαμένωνΧριστοφόρον, πρότερον μικρὰν εὐφημισθῆναι οὐ εἶθ᾿ Shepard adds that, as positions of the church and the warf implies, it seems that seems it implies, warf the and church the of positions as that, adds Shepard 175 , 32-33. 176 By staging the ceremony the By staging as described, Romanos

Art and Ritual and Art 177 Thus, Romanos, under Romanos, Thus, , 117. 178 . . DAI As our our As , ch. 13, 74.161- 13, ch. , tessera 45

CEU eTD Collection reasonable to assume that this might have been the case. So, hypothetically, this coin might have shown Romanos shown have might reverse,coin perhaps like VIII type ( is this it hypothetically, then So, sons, case. two the other the been crowned obverse, bythe Christ on flankedhave of senior andChristopherthe justas VandVI, as types two by his brothers on the coronation might was this issue that supposed the assume for By to occasion not. reasonable the or if omitted and been VII, have type would the Porphyrogennetos to Constantine analogy whether is question real only the present; have definitely been also would Christopher obverse. the on scene ‘coronation’ have a doubt in a depicted presumably without them; would among Romanos been college. imperial the for reserved places four with us leave would This omitted. havebeen to unlikely is Christ of effigy However,the Porphyrogennetos. impossible, Constantine not plus although sons, three his wouldhave Romanos, these problem: been a muchof pose wouldnot identification the family”, “imperial the of execute.topractically five had really the impossible attested andit been members not If is side one on four as coin, the of and Stephen’s of coins occasion the IV’s on issue Romanos ceremonial actual another been to its would side images other of havethe and threeon distribution one coronation.two The onConstantine’s be had to effigies have about to similar assumed speculate be only nickname, can it can exist, the one did discovered it hand If is production. coin other a the such Until on perceivable. seems reliable”; “six-headers”, “very nicknamed not is Skoutariotes respect, this nicknamed coins gold issued Romanos Emperor Skoutariotes, Theodore of chronicle the in entry odd an to according that comment ( Grierson Both issued. been have might issue, ceremonial Christopher. into dynasty a establishing for hopes his all placed Romanos that suggesting sources additional confirm to seems this All Stephen. by presumably ousted, easily be to old too old, years twenty-six already was seals, Constantine death, on Christopher's of time the at appears that noted be also should It also rank. in however, third only Stephen both. over precedence takes Porphyrogennetos inscription, Constantine an of where form the in miliaresia silver on found be can trace only the and – Christopher and himself promote to Romanos by used denominations two – copper or gold on appears them of none 931, death. Christopher's before seals, or coins either on them of any of trace no is there 924, in of absence conspicuous the crownedwere Constantine and Stephen by Although specimens. extant the from reflecting sons also two other Romanos’s but examples co-emperors, the of by rank the just in not elevation rapid confirmed Christopher’s is This priority. latter’s The main Christopher. Romanos’s son, his was of promotion that and rank increased his projected Romanos Emperor that 180 At least none of the extant specimens. However, written sources suggest that one such coin, presumably another presumably coin, such one that suggest sources However, written specimens. extant the of none least At pentalaimia (lit. “five throaths”) because they represented “five emperors”. Both scholars comment that in that comment scholars Both emperors”. “five represented they because throaths”) “five (lit. DOC , pl. xxxvi, 8). , pl.xxxvi,8). DOC , 46, n 151) and Bellinger ( Bellinger and 151) n 46, , Byzantine Notes Byzantine 180 Even after Even , 165, n. 40 n. 165, , 46 )

CEU eTD Collection position in the palace. If Nikolaos Mystikos’s account is not his fabrication, already in his first letter after letter first his in already fabrication, his not is account Mystikos’s Nikolaos If palace. the in position his regained he when disaster, Acheloos the after ruler Bulgarian the with correspondance established of Bulgaria. Symeon from came them, on counting probably but palace, the within plots as immedate as not although most your insulting seem, would majesty.” honorable it and, [you] of improperly speaking by do, to formerely used he as heart, honorable vexyour again not will he believe I and instruction, proper the gavehim and him for the regards “as Majesty” Imperial your of improperly speak and rave often who those of folly the to according not and goodness, imperial your of elevation the with accordance in subjects your toward “disposed be should he that Romanos to suggests Mystikos letter, the of part introductory Churchthe of (the officials emperor. new the severalagainst plots position Romanos’s of speaks Continuatus Theophanes of Chroncile challenges. many saw rule Romanos’s of period early The challenging Bulgaria: of Symeon the with choice design. of particularthis divine involved intimately more his was patriarch the support that possibility the to in interested order am legitimacy. Moreover, I in employed Lekapenos I Romanos that image the corroborate to seem which Mystikos, I Nikolaos of letters from passages certain investigate to plan I chapter second the In 182 181 Mystikos, Th. Cont. 398-400. Symeon, at first, ignored Romanos, and the communication continued via Mystikos, who re- who Mystikos, via continued communication the and Romanos, ignored first, at Symeon, Letters Supporting the usurper: therole theusurper: Supporting ofNikolaos I Mystikos , Ep. 86,, Ep. 347; 346.6-9, 346.11-348.14, 347-349 by I. (slightly adapted M.). 182

However, the best documented challenge to legitimacy of Romanos’s position, Romanos’s of legitimacy to challenge documented best the However, oeconomos of St Sophia) testifies to this opposition to the new emperor. new the to opposition this to testifies Sophia)ofSt the In 181 A letter of Nikolaos Mystikos sent to Romanos’s on behalf of one of behalf on Romanos’s Nikolaosto Mystikos of sent letter A Chapter IIChapter oikonomos , I sent I , 47

CEU eTD Collection the newly-established archbishopric of Bulgaria, and sent him to Constantinople to be educated, probably educated, be to Constantinople to him sent archbishopricand Bulgaria, newly-established of the have may Symeon, firsthandexperience for seemed sound had who courtexplained ofthe as Byzantine below. strategy this Thus, politics. court of circles high the in functioned things how else anyone than better knew patriarch the exaggeration, an be may it as caution with taken be course, of should, account his While reduced. was patriarch, a still although politics, on influence his and unsummoned, complains: he Alania, of Peter,archbishop to the sent letter the In himself. Mystikos by reported as private, rarely were Byzantium worthisin letters rememberingit wereterms, these imperial that On palace. within the found actions, diplomatic this with Romanos’sposition destabilize announcing letter Mystikos’s in suggested as “ coronation: Romanos’s – capital the in situation the with aquainted likely 924 in meeting Senate. the to but emperor the to not responded Symeon yet channel, communication direct a establish to attempted Romanos letters, abdication. latter's the for asked Symeon coronation, Romanos’s 189 188 187 186 185 184 183 Mystikos, Shepard considers possible: this optionas Mystikos, Greek The are terms Daphnopates, Mystikos, Mystikos, those who, for my sins, are eager to conspire against me may, even from my letters, obtain, in someunexpected way, obtain, a lever against for me. action letters, my from even may, me against conspire to eager are sins, my for who, lest those danger some without write cannot myself I that mind in bear also must you Secondly, me. meet to afraid even are people most that plight a such in am I bearers. for off badly am I consider first must you me, from arrived have letters no because head your entered has thought a such If Tsar Boris I (r. 852–889) prepared Symeon for the career of a bishop, presumably to take the see of see takethe presumably to (r. bishop, I a Boris career of Tsar the prepared for 852–889) Symeon palace the into come to forbidden was he when 914, after period the in writing was Mystikos Letters Letters Letters Letters 185 – Symeon accused him of being a “ a being of him accused Symeon – Correspondance , Ep. 133,, Ep. 434.47-53, 435. 16,, Ep. 108.68,109. 28,, Ep. 194-197. 18,, Ep. 120-127. ξένος as I dare say you have heard yourself” heard have you say dare I as

and 184 , 16. ἀλλότριος When he eventually did write to Romanos – as it seems only after their after only seems it as – Romanos to write did eventually he When :

Shepard, “Equilibrium Expansion” to Daphnopathes, Letters stranger” 189 188

, 73.51,72. counting on the fact that a willing listeners willing a thatfact the on counting and an “ an and 187 183 – and probably attempted to further to attempted probably and patriarch's the from judging Next, , 508. usurper” . 186 Symeon was most was Symeon 48

CEU eTD Collection Kaiserliche Universität von Konstantinopel. Konstantinopel. von Universität Jahrhundert Kaiserliche Runciman Steven maketh YoungRomans? emperor's the court.” at in men” of salvation the over “watchman the as position his explains Mystikos usual, as letter, the of part introductory the In coronation. Romanos’s and battle letters Acheloos the five between years least three the at in Symeon sent Mystikos as series, a of part a when is time letter same The struck. the was at coin Romanos’s roughly is that 920, December 17 on emperor crowned was Romanos after discourse. Constantinopolitan learned in participants full as identified be can adressee the and sender the both Thus, about. writing was Mystikos what understanding of capable quite ideology,i.e. Byzantine with acquainted well was he that indicates write.” I what of truth the know books, of reader a and past the of student keen a as Son), beloved (my you that know too,” that study “read you know history,I ancient since the well: to back go then and as write, I what diligently authors ancient the with acquaintance Symeon's about remarks makes he but those, on peace for arguments usual his bases he because scriptures, holy the of teachings the in versed was he rumor ( by not wisdom, your of greatness the know “I writes: Mystikos Nikolaos Symeon, letters to surviving adressed twenty-six the of one In education. Symeon’s to refer may which trace another yet Byzantium.” in Aristotle of logic the and Demosthenes of rhetoric the his learned had he boyhood since that fact the of account on half-Greek, was Symeon say to used they “And account: famous rhetorics, and grammar in also but scriptures, holy the in just not practice. usual the following well, as peace of guarantee a as φήμαις 196 195 194 193 192 191 190 Mystikos, Squatariti, “Manners Shepard, Jonathan Symeon: including court, Byzantine the at princes young the with dealt Shepard Ibid., Ep. 14-15.Ibid., 9-11, Ep.Ibid., 26, 184.64-66, 185. Ep.Ibid., 31, 210.66-68, 211. o oeifrainaotteeuainaalbei osatnpedrn hspro e:see: period this during Constantinople in available education the about information more For The most important testimony for this thesis is to be found in the first letter sent to Symeon soon Symeon to sent letter first the in found be to is thesis this for testimony important most The )

but by personal experience.” personal by but (Munich: C. H. Beck, 1974). Letters 195 Liutprand , ed. E. M., ed. E. Jeffreys, CUP, (Cambridge: 135-158 2006), It is important to bear Symeon’s Constantinopolitan education in mind, because it because mind, in education Constantinopolitan Symeon’s bear to important is It , Ep. 27,, Ep. 186.20-21, 187. , 124,56. andn. 193 Präzisierungen zur Frage des höheren Schulwesens in Byzanz im 9. und 10. und 9. im Byzanz in Schulwesens höheren des Frage zur Präzisierungen Mystikos rarely misses the opportunity to ‘remind’ Symeon that Symeon ‘remind’ to opportunity the misses rarely Mystikos Byzantine Style, Religion and Civilization. In Honour of Sir of Honour In Civilization. and Religion Style, Byzantine reprinted in: 190 Symeon was educated in Constantinople in educated was Symeon 191 of which Liutprand of Cremona left a left Cremona of Liutprandwhich of Emergent Elites Emergent , study XII. alSek Speck, Paul 192 Wehave 194 or “I or 196 Die to 49

CEU eTD Collection Tomos of Union of Tomos letter,same the In Mystikos provides more‘proofs’ of God’s favour for Romanos: veryby though the as guided ofGod.”hand throne,” the on set – other any almost than so more – easily so thus was and God of hand the by led was he that facts the from conclude rather but empire, of height the to ascended recently but has he that obstacle no it Think gift. this you brings opportunity now Romans: the of emperor the of marriage by relative the be to desired “You alliance: ( empire say. I what to attend “Now point: the to comes finally and desires, his attain to order in advice his take to Symeon urges Mystikos battle, father. common their Christ, for be must Romans, and , in betweenwarbrothers the horrible how Bulgarians describes and peace”, “advocateof and 202 201 200 199 198 197 t ses ta ytks ws nt ke n edn h icr, ie e ws msrsfl n atd written wanted and mistrustful, was he i.e. discord, the ending on keen not was Mystikos that seems It Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ep.Ibid., 16, put into into put his […]. hand was empire of scepter the favorthat God's without not was it that know may you that so this add I days? these in performed be should it approvedthat has which Providence, Divine undoubted of assistance the by except about come have this can How Spirit. in Holy together the come of have Grace the divided by were union and fought who those and peace, and calm in be to seen Church;Churchofthe ofthe affairsdisturbance the and tempest mightyinstead, that areand, and he, when But God. of will the Romanos seems, it not, was this since efforts, their of fulfillment the see not did they but him; after commonwealth governed our who those emperor,by the then Leo and by undergone was toil much how aware of Youris Honor man. this to shown God favorof the realize better will you consideration, into Church the of condition the take moreover, will If, you The calm and peace in the Church about which Mystikos is writing is of course the so-called the course of is writing is Mystikos which about Church the in peace and calm The as I dare say you have heard yourself) heard have you say dare I as , , , Ep. 16, , Ep. 16, Ep. 16,108.84-110.95-96, 109-111. Ep. 16,108.82-83, 109. 108.77-8, 109. 108.67-68, 104-107. , was appointed to govern our state, then those long-standing offenses were dissolved, were offenses long-standing those then state, our govern to appointed was , , which ended the tetragamy controversy, established on 9 July 920. July 9 on established controversy, tetragamy the ended which , 109. 201

God by His inscrutable Judgments has established on the throne of the of throne the on established has Judgments inscrutable His by God 199 and concludes: “But he [Romanos], as I say, attained to this rule this say,to I attained as [Romanos], he “But concludes: and 200 the kyr Romanos.” kyr the 197 After making reminiscence of the Acheloos the of reminiscence making After 198 Then he adds an offer of marriage of offer an adds he Then 202 Mystikos had Mystikos kyr 50

CEU eTD Collection Byzantinoslavica mistake: a made simply Mystikos loyalty. of confirmation name the Daphnopates, in of Romanos, writes: 924. November in occurred which Romanos and Symeon between meeting the after long not dated is himself, Romanos than rather Daphnopates Theodore by written presumably letter, The circumstances. similar the in position his defended Romanos which in way the his justifyposition.to seeking …” rule and dominion every cometh letter: next to the known in explains power Nikolaos imperial as Symeon, of source the of ideology established the with agrees for position provides Romanos’s Mystikos that support The obvious. is lines these by expressed idea the and Lekapenos, as well.purposes whichpurpose, itbeen hasrecognized beshouldsurprise; no that tweakedhe accounts hisfit historical to it”. approved has “God however, letters, that previous says his just of he one in Symeon to union the announce already 206 205 204 203 Mystikos, History”, Roman on Mysticus “Nicholas Baldwin, Barry Daphnopates, Mystikos, his faithful guardian and protector, he proclaimed me his father and companion in empire – God’s – empire in protector,companion and and guardian father faithful his his proclaimed he me was I because and reasons these For life. his witness, the is God him, gave and conspiracy godless rescue not his did to I them. come banished and faithfully obeyed I and palace; the from them expel to him from already him, against slandered him, against conspired emperor.time the were son-in-lawthe excercisingtowardpower who at our obedience Those and proveYour that perceived carelessly. Rationale this Forloyaltygreatest wethe shownhave indeed will we arguments, your corroborate to apostles the of words the quoting us, to belong not does which something possession in Romanos] [i.e. we that insinuated also letter your since But, It is interesting now to compare Mystikos’s account to that of the emperor ‘himself’, and observe and ‘himself’, emperor the of that to account Mystikos’s compare to now interesting is It I Romanos of coin ‘coronation’ the on projected message symbolic the between similarity The 203 Letters Letters , 54(1993), 89-94. This example shows how quickly Mystikos adapted his writtings to any newly-emerging any to writtings his adapted Mystikos quickly how shows example This 204 Correspondance

, Ep. 17,, Ep. 118.147-148. 14,, Ep. 92.29,93. at my own instigation, but obeying his orders. I liberated him from their from him liberated I orders. his obeying but instigation, own my Liliana Simeonova, “power in Nicholas Mysticus’ letters to Symeon of Bulgaria”, of Symeon to letters Mysticus’ Nicholas in “power Simeonova, Liliana , 15-16. 205 Mystikos was in fact confirming Romanos’s divine legitimacy and legitimacy divine Romanos’s confirming fact in was Mystikos “ And I trust the heavenly King and God, from Whom from God, and King heavenly the trust I And Byzantion sharpening the knife the sharpening , 58 (1988), 174-178; although it is possible that possible is it although 174-178; (1988), 58 , 206

Responding to Symeon’s allegations, Symeon’s to Responding . I received an order an received I . 51

CEU eTD Collection massive and that, in the long term, a waiting strategy costs less. The same strategy had already had strategy the same breach The less. costs not strategy waiting a could term, long Symeon the in raids, that, and Constantinople Bulgarian of walls massive from Romanos suffered was, population he Thracian as the pragmatic although Secondly, that, soldiers. well (experienced) understood of number the shrunk certainly and traces left have βασιλεία ἡ καὶ τοῦτο διὰ καὶ γενόμενος, συναφείας γάμου κοινή τοῦ μ τῆς διὰ ἐθέλεις, μέλος συνορᾶν καὶ σῶμα εἰ ἓν ἀλλ᾿ υἱῷ λογισθείην, πατρὶ ὡς φρονοῦσι δόξα, εὖ κἀκείνῳ τοῖς ἀλλότριος καὶ ἀ ξένος οὐδὲ τοῦτο ἀθορύβως, τοι βασιλείας διά ἡσύχως, τῆς ἀνεβιβάσθην. ὅπως οὕτως πεποιήκαμεν, δορυαλώτους ἀλλ᾿ δὲ ἃς […], κατεκαύσαμεν, ἀξιώματος βασιλείας πυρὶ ἐπιβησώμεθα τῆς μὲν τοῦ ἃς οὐδὲ πόλεις, ἐστιλβώσαμεν, καὶ μάχαιραν χώρας τὴν οὐδὲ γε ἀπώσαμεν‧ μήν οὐ προσέλαβεν. κηδεμόνα καὶ φίλον ὡς ἀλλ᾿ [… ἐκκομίσαι με ἀναρρώσαντός τοῦ παρορμήσαντος καὶ κινήσαντος, τοῦτο ὡς καὶ τοῦτο, τοι διά ζωήν. Θεοῦ τοῦ πάντως πεποίηκε, βασιλείαςτὴν κοινωνὸντῆς ἐπεγράψατο καὶ ἑαυτοῦ πατέρα ἐκδικητήν, φάναι, καὶ φύλακα αὐτοῦ πιστὸν Θεῷ σὺν δεῖ εἰ ἐχαρισάμην, ἐπιβουλῆς, ἀθέου τούτων τῆς αὐτὸν ἐλυτρωσάμην ἐξέωσα ὑπήκουσα, παλατίου‧ γαμβ ἐπεδειξάμεθα ἡμέτερον οἱ τηνικαῦτααὐτῷ κρατοῦντες, ἐμελέτων κατ᾿ αὐτοῦ,τὸν μάχαιραν τὴν ἠκόνουν. προετράπην παρ᾿ αὐτοῦ τούτους τοῦ ἐξεῷσαι πρὸς σύνεσις. ὑποταγὴν ἡ καὶ πίστιν σου διεσκέψατό μεγίστην τοῦτο ὅτι νουνεχῶς γάρ, Μεγίστην οὐ ὡς ἀποδείξομεν προβαλόμενον, ἀφορμὴν ἀποδείξεως εἰς ῥητὸν ἐκεῖνο of strategy waiting. a and adopted defence he precisely, more anymore; peace for eager so not was Romanos that seems It senate. the or Mystikos with of instead emperor the with communicating started finally Symeon why perhaps is This 921. in case the been had than secure more was position Romanos’s when 924, late the differentslightlyinterpretationallow a lines for well. letter as was these account, The probably in written into taken is Romanos and Symeon both of minds the on been have may which discourse multi-layered power.” to rise Romanos’ for pretext the of speciousness the on finger his put had Bulgarian the all; it said denial Romanos’ of furiousness “The notices: correctly Shepard as accusations, 209 208 207

. Mytranslation (I. M.). Shepard, “Equilibrium Expansion” to Ibid., There are several reasons for that. Firstly, the heavy defeats inflicted by Symeon at Acheloos and Katasyrtai must Katasyrtai and Acheloos at Symeon by inflicted defeats heavy Firstly, the that. for reasons several are There limb limb through and the ofmarriage,thereforebond we the imperial poweralso common.is one and body one became we because son, and father as him, and me by judgment same the and one is there this, comprehend to wish you if but, usurper an or stranger a as me consider could man sane no Therefore throne. imperial very this to peacefully,elevated were we and bloodshed, and turmoil without calmly, but […] power imperial attain to order in weapons, and force with rest the enslave not did cities, and lands the of part one burn not did empire, of office his him from banish not did sword, the unsheathe not did We protector. and friend a as me greeted but [ saveto on me afresh urging everyencouraging me intervention [God] in respect this and affecting t cn b en ta oao a ioosy jsiyn i eiiay aant Symeon’s against legitimacy his justifying vigorously was Romanos that seen be can It this very this emperor(?)] from danger. emperor]stranger,repulsethe a [i.e. not as me did Andhe […] Ep. 6, 71.35-73.54 (simplified): 71.35-73.54 6, Ep. 209 Still, the emperor could not ignore Symeon, especially since Romanos’s words Romanos’s since especially Symeon, ignore not could emperor the Still, ὡ ς εὐγνωμονῶν, οὐκ οἴκοθεν πρὸς αὐτὸν κινηθείς, ἀλλὰ ταῖς αὐτοῦ πεισθεὶς προτροπαῖς‧ πεισθεὶς αὐτοῦ ταῖς ἀλλὰ κινηθείς, αὐτὸν πρὸς οἴκοθεν οὐκ εὐγνωμονῶν, ς

ἀ , 508. λλ᾿ ἐπεὶ καὶ τὰ ξένα κατέχειν ἡμᾶς ὑπηγόρευέ σου τὸ γράμμα, τὸ ἀποστολικὸν τὸ γράμμα, τὸ σου ὑπηγόρευέ κατέχειν ἡμᾶς ξένα τὰ καὶ ἐπεὶ λλ᾿ ν ιάτς κὶ ερνκς πὸ οτν ὸ αιιὸ θρόνον βασιλικὸν τὸν τουτονὶ πρὸς εἰρηνικῶς καὶ αιμάκτως ν …ν] τὸν βασιλέα‧ καὶ οὐχ ὡς ξένον ἀπώσατο, ξένον ὡς οὐχ καὶ βασιλέα‧ τὸν …ν] ρ νκὶβσλα βασιλέα. καὶ ὸν 208 Now, if the notion of notion Now, the if ἐ πεβούλευον 207 ί α ἐμοὶ α 52

CEU eTD Collection 1970); Dvornik, Francis see: conflicts ecclesiastical 354-357; 94,358-361. Ep. Mystikos, rule: Romanos’s of beginning the at war’ ‘Bulgarian the for churchlevy a even was there dated, correctly is letters Mystikos’s from testimony the if and, expensive, is war Furthermore, rule). Romanos’s during matters Whitow, see: terms these On period. the of manuals military by described/prescribed as homelands, Minor,Romanos’s Asia in decades several for practiced been be will latter, Photios”. the well. as underlined patriarch by expressed the Mystikos, of Nikolaos and theme Photios favourite between a relations the [...] Additionally, state and church between power of balance “the and Virgin, the of image the especially images, sacred the for caring his in also reflected behaviour anti-iconoclastic, or iconophile, strongly his career: his of aspects characteristic two emphasising while Mystikos. Nikolaos relative, future his patriarch, the of and Alexander, and Leo emperors future the of father an spiritual and teacher played the was and he century, ninth the of Additionally, Byzantium. figures post-iconoclast in Photios images of world the prominent shaping in role significant exceptionally most the patriarch of the of one was Photios influence Patriarch and significance The basis of Mystikos’sthe well. as authority was which world, Christian the among authority and power empire’s the of ideology the behind essence) (the system theoretical whole the defended he more, is emperor.What Byzantine the of defender the as acted he that obvious is it Symeon, to sent yetletters from his Christians, among peace advocateof the as himself described world, Christian Byzantine the in authority spiritual highest the as Mystikos occasions several On Byzantium. early-tenth-century of ideology imperial the of understanding the into insights legitimacy,founded onas his relation withPorphyrogennetos. Constantine his details in explaining of opportunity fine a havehim given also would which court, at werecirculating 212 211 210

arac hto nue mes neet o coas o uvy o hs ok n ocrig the concerning and works these of survey a For scholars. of interest immense induced Photios Patriarch Photios Cyril Mango’s article article Mango’s Cyril Brubaker, Photios (810–893; first patriarchate 858–867; second 877–886) second 858–867; patriarchate first (810–893; Photios providefirst-rate posed he challenge the to reactions Romanos’s was, agenda Symeon’s Whatever was even of p Basil's one sons, godfather a to Vision and Meaning and Vision is regarded by Leslie Brubaker as the “best modern assessment of Photios” ( Photios” of assessment modern “best the as Brubaker Leslie by regarded is , 413. The Making The The The Photian Schism, History and Legend and History Schism, Photian 210 Thus, it is important to make a short excursus about him about excursus short a make to important is it Thus, , 175-181 (on the defensive strategy in general), 316-322 (on military (on 316-322 general), in strategy defensive the (on 175-181 robably Leo.Tougher, 212 Leo came from a notable family; his family; notable a from came , 49-50, n. 36-38. , (Cambridge: CUP, (Cambridge: , in reprinted 1948; Vision, Letters 201, n. 1): n. 201, , Ep. 92, Ep. , 53 211

CEU eTD Collection 71, n. 16. ”, Basil of Honor Ashgate, 1994),(Aldershot: 139-158, esp. in centuries”, Meaning Iconoclasm”, Liquidationof “The Mango, ODB Dagron, see: emperor patriarch between and relations chapter Tougher, three see of: exile final its and VI, Leo relationwith Photios’s for 238; Iconoclasm”) of image-patronagechapterPhotios’s in fivepatriarchon“The exegesis”, book and visual emphasis her Photios 201- of Ibid., Liquidation “The Mango, (henceforth: patriarch:Brubaker,133-140 the about providesextensive bibliography 1977), Birmingham, of Univeristy Studies Mango, ideology. Basil's of architect past”, imperial and documents trickery. of forgery by achieved was this legend to According favour. emperor’s the regained quickly have to seem Photios Nevertheless, back. brought was Ignatios and patriarch, of position the waspatriarch.ordained he sixth the on and ordination of ranks the all through led – days five in namely – quickly was Photios 858. Christmas on throne patriarchal the to Photios brought 867), , with relation close especially and dynasty, Amorian ( chancery imperial the of head the became and administration exile. in died parents Photios’s of both emperor,and (r.probably, iconoclast 832/3, 829–842), Theophilos last in the by banished was family family”, dignitary, wealthy a was Sergios father 222 221 220 219 218 217 216 215 214 213 , 70-71; Tougher adds an interesting question “who was creating Basil's ideology in the beginning of his reign?” Ibid., reign?” his of beginning the in ideology Basil's creating was “who question interesting an adds Tougher 70-71; , , 3,1669-1670, and ele Buae, “o lgtmz n eprr osatn n h iul atoiy i h ihh ad ninth and eighth O the in authority visual the and Constantine emperor: an legitimize “To Brubaker, Leslie magic: and trickery by favour regained Photios that story the About replaced He patriarch Bardas to said have is shared love the Tougher, Photios. education with of that notices Mango 138. Ibid., Dagron, 137;Ibid., Tougher, Iconoclasm”, Liquidationof “The Mango, 139. n Photios role in shaping the ideology of Basil I: Basil of ideology the shaping in role Photios n “The Liquidation of Iconoclasm” and the Patriarch Photios”, in in Photios”, Patriarch the and Iconoclasm” of Liquidation “The , 238,n. 190;Stanković, 214 220 and Patriarch Tarasios (784-806) was his uncle, or “relative on the father’s side”. father’s the on “relative or uncle, his was (784-806) Tarasios Patriarch and Scholars suggest that this reinstatement occurred because Basil I “was an emperor without an without emperor an “was I Basil because occurred reinstatement this that suggest Scholars New Constantines, the Rhytm of Imperial Renewal in Byzantium, 4th-13th Centuries 4th-13th Byzantium, in Renewal Imperial of Rhytm the Constantines, New Emperor and Priest and Emperor 221 DOP and needed an experienced politician like Photios, who is recognized as the chief the as recognized is who Photios, like politician experienced an needed and , 46 (1992), 225-232; 228-229; 228-229; 225-232; (1992), 46 , PmbZ Leo “… there can be no doubt that Photios grew up in the shadow of the Iconoclastic persecution.” Iconoclastic the of shadow the in up grew Photios that doubt no be can there “… 219 Ignatios, who opposed Bardas, whoopposed Ignatios, triggering , #26667. , 68. Immediately after the murder of Michael III (867), Basil I removed I Basil (867), Michael III of from murder the Photios after Immediately Patrijarsi , 226-227. 222 Furthermore, Basil I found in Photios the ideal teacher for his sons his for teacher ideal the Photios in found I Basil Furthermore, 151. 139. , 63. 216 fe h n f Iools, Pois etrd te imperial the entered Photios Iconoclasm, of end the After 213 i ohr Ern rltd b arae t h imperial the to marriage by “related Eirene mother his Brubaker, Brubaker, Emperor and Priest and Emperor

Athanasios Markopoulos, “An Anonymous Laudatory Poem in Poem Laudatory Anonymous “An Markopoulos, Athanasios Vision and Meaning and Vision Vision and Meaning and Vision a conflicta church. in the Ibid., 139; 217 the uncle of Emperor Michael III (r. 843– (r. III Michael Emperor of uncle the Iconoclasm ; also: Stanković, also: ; protasekretis 218 Leo oge,Tougher, Since he was a lay civil servant, civil lay a was he Since , 69. , chapters 4, 5, esp. 199-200; Tougher, 199-200; esp. 5, 4, chapters , , 201, n. 1; and a short biography with biography short a and 1; n. 201, , , (Birmingham: Center for Byzantine for Center (Birmingham: , Leo Leo , 68-88; for Photios’s role in the role in Photios’s for 68-88; , Patriarchs 0 rbkr Brubaker, 70; , ) . Family ties with the with ties Family , ed. Paul Magdalino, Paul ed. , ; in general see also: see general in ; Tougher, 215 The whole The Vision and Vision ; Brubaker ; Leo , 69. 54

CEU eTD Collection 111-115. Tenththe of Photios”, Homily against struggle iconoclasts, linked Photios cause iconophile throughout with the career. himself his the in credit Meaning much claim and not could Ignatios opponent Iconoclasm”, “his Photios to compared respectability”; generally is this, it accepted as valid: Tougher, (henceforth:1970) Jenkins, in reprinted 146-147, (1963), of symbol (obverse-type) the remained Iconoclasm reflectedwell.of seals as end after transitionis the patriarchal in the coinage, to Similar seals. Virgin the empire, of fall the until on, then from and seals, patriarchal his on obverse-type the as Virgin the of image the use to patriarch post-iconoclast first the homilies. his of one performed, and wrote, Photios occasion this On Iconoclasm. after church Great the in mosaic first the was which 867, March 29 on Sophia Hagia mosaic Theotokos the of unveiling the was program this of episode famous most The patriarchal tenure. Photios’s period the during place took projects most not if Iconoclasm.Many of end – official – the after immediately started not had which decoration, church of program a on embarked supporters. his and Ignatios namely cause’, ‘just the for fighting exile in died had family his that fact the purposes, political for exploited, Photios that argued also He it. explain to enough was alone persecution iconoclast of experience Photios’s that concluded empireoccupying highest by positions. its the of life the shaped subsequently that figures several on, influence an had and to, connected closely lessons. same the attended Leo, than older years fourteen approximately although patriarch. next the become to groomed was he as brothers his than longer tutorship his under remained who Stephen, especially Alexander,and Leo, Constantine, 228 227 226 225 224 223 by: suggested as fresco, Or see: dates decoration their churches and the of list Forthe great of rate, any or,at martyrdom of aura an him on conferred sufferings early father,his his of death “Glorious Tougher, Mango, “The Liquidation of Iconoclasm”, Liquidation of “The Mango, 140. R. J. H. H. J. R. ag’ seset o hto’ ieln niiools tie i eeal cetd He accepted. generally is strife anti-iconoclast life-long Photios’s of assessment Mango’s , 413: , Mango, “The Liquidation of Iconoclasm”, of Liquidation “The Mango, Jenkins, “A Note on the Patriarch Nicholas Mysticus”, Mysticus”, Nicholas Patriarch the on “A Note Jenkins, Leo

“Perhaps in part because he was the first patriarch after 843 who had never had connections with connections had never had who 843 after patriarch first the was he because part in “Perhaps , 49. so he could rightfully employ anti-Iconoclasm as a weapon in fighting his opponents, his fighting in weapon a as anti-Iconoclasm employ rightfully could he so Note Studies on Byzantine history of the 9th and 10th Centuries, 10th and 9th the of history Byzantine on Studies DOP ). Although editors of Mystikos’s Although editorsof ). comment there that letters no is positive about evidence Nicolas Oikonomides, “Some Remarks on the Apse Mosaic of St. Sophia”, Sophia”, St. of Mosaic Apse the on Remarks “Some Oikonomides, Nicolas , 9/10,(1956), 125-140; 139-140. 225 Indeed, political controversy was one of the reasons why Photios why reasons the of one was controversy political Indeed, Leo , 50,40; n. 139-140; basically the same view is provided by Brubaker, by provided is view same the basically 139-140; Stanković, R. J. H. Jenkins, C. Mango, “The Date and Significance of Significance and Date “The Mango, C. Jenkins, H. J. R. Acta Antiqua Academiae Scientiarium Hungaricae, Hungaricae, Scientiarium Academiae Antiqua Acta 223 228 Patriarchs Nikolaos Mystikos, a relative of Photios, of relative a Mystikos, Nikolaos It is worth mentioning that Photios was Photios that mentioning worth is It , 88. . V (London: Variorum Reprints, Variorum (London: V 224 Thus, Photios was Photios Thus, 227 in the apse of apse the in DOP , 39 (1985), 39 , Vision 55 226 2,

CEU eTD Collection the Institute for Art History Art for Stanković,(henceforth: Christ”); icon of in the general “Living about Institute the in Significance”, Its and Eisagoge the of Introduction meaning its and also: patriarch see Law”); of Significance “The Lokin, (henceforth: Stanković, 78-80 Eleventh esp. to 71-91, Ninth 1994), the Oaks, Dumbarton of C.: Books D. Law (Washington the in Legislation and Law in of Significance Centuries, “The Lokin, A. H. J. laws: Justinian's well: as found be can titles previous of most it puts Dagron as emperor”. or, the from role, stolen was gained important patriarch that more “everything a with latter the provide to redefined were patriarch triad). a forming (thus Christ” of image living and “incarnate the as patriarch the third, and, authority” “legitimate as emperor the of definition theology. political his of reflection the as him, to introductoryfamousworth empire,the the it is chaptersin mentioning positions of the the is, that Virgin, the with patriarchate protector-patroness may wellof the capital, have an reason. the additional been identify to wish The differentiation. this for reason nne was ones imperial from seals patriarchal distinguishing likelihood, all In obverse-type. dominant the type). arm left her in Christ-child holding ( Virgin standing the Ignatios: as reasons types, same two the also for used perhaps and opponent, his from himself distinguish to presumably motif, the changed 'Christ-Chalkites'). (presumably standing Christ Christ and of type) bust 'Pantokrator' the the as patriarchates: (recognized two his of each for one presumably types, two used 867-877) 858, (847- PatriarchIgnatios did. emperors the as just Christ, of bust the patriarch(s)post-iconoclastused first obverse, the on monograms invocative cruciform used period iconoclast the of patriarchs While Hodegetria 234 233 232 231 230 229 The Like Kassymatas I Anthony (821-837). Dagron, Dagron, DOS DOS 231 Concerning Photios’s role in the shaping, or rather the reshaping, of the ideology of the highest the of ideology the of reshaping, the rather or shaping, the in role Photios’s Concerning It is interesting to compare these with the imperial seals, where the image of Christ remained as remained Christ of image the where seals, imperial the with these compare to interesting is It , 204-205; about these types of images, and its usage on coins, see: see: ofcoins, , 204-205;theseandits usage images, types on about , 203-204. list of bibliographical references about these chapters is quite long, so here only a short selection where the where selection short a only here so long, quite is chapters these about references bibliographical of list Patriarchs type) and the bust of the Virgin holding a medallion of Christ on her chest ( chest her on Christ of medallion a holding Virgin the of bust the and type) Emperor and Priest and Priest Emperor and Emperor a n oit n Bznim it-wlt Centuries Ninth-Twelfth Byzantium: in Society and Law

; esp. 66-69; and the most recent most the and 66-69; esp. ; : Vlada Stanković, “Living icon of Christ: Photios’ Characterization of the Patriarch in the in Patriarch the of Characterization Photios’ Christ: of icon “Living Stanković, Vlada : , ed. Ivan Stevović, (: Faculty of Philosophy University of Belgrade, 2012), 39-43. 2012), Belgrade, of University Philosophy of Faculty (Belgrade: Stevović, Ivan ed. , , 231; Lokin, “The Significance of Law”, Significance, 231;Lokin,“The of 78-80; Stanković, , 230-231; Stanković, DOS 233 arn Dagron, , 201-203. Scholars agree that the competences of the emperor and the and emperor the of competences the that agree Scholars ΣΥΜΜΕΙΚΤΑ. Collection of Papers Dedicated to 40th Anniversary of Anniversary 40th to Dedicated Papers of Collection ΣΥΜΜΕΙΚΤΑ. Patriarchs discussion about particular choice of words used to describe the describe to used words of choice particular about discussion Emperor and Priest and Emperor 232 Christ’s law is introduced first, followed by the by followed first, introduced is law Christ’s , 68. Eisagoge d neii E ao n itr Simon, Dieter and Laiou E. Angeliki ed. , oi nlzslnsbtenbetween links analyzes Lokin ; DOC 234 : ODB Dagron analyzed the formulations, the analyzed Dagron , 169-172. , 1,703-704. Patriarchs , 66. Eisagoge Eisagoge 230 Nikopoios ascribed Photios 229 the and 56

CEU eTD Collection des iconoclastes, iconoclastes, des in siècle), of archbishop Nicholas, “I, words: the controversy,with tetragamy begins the during sign to him forced it.” in me confirmed Who Christ my of Judgments inscrutable the by wedded nonetheless was men, of sinful most and humble though the usurped yourselves, know you as who, him by thither dispatched and been consecrated had who an another expelling sending and are – Neapolis you of him that mean, I us, – Humility from my by departure ordained archbishop emperor's the since report, a heard have “I writes: Constantine to Alexander, or Leo inscrutable His by Who He lest silent, watchmanhas made judgments thatme …” be cannot I men, of salvation the over unworthy) (though Romans: and Bulgarians the between peace make to try and act to duty his is it why explaining is Mystikos Symeon, to sent he letters the of one In Mystikos. Nikolaos of letters Mystikos to according the in found be patriarchcan the and emperor the of positions of understanding similar a of traces Some patriarch the of role The divine with emperors of agents. elsewhere, and coins on representations, the for background theoretical possible the as seen been have Photios’s to ascribed passages the research, this for most-importantly Christ. with connected directly more no is which position emperor’s the undermining truth' 'living as interpreted been coded”. has It interesting. particularly is formulation, are original only the as recognized patriarch, words all but original, is formulation “the that concluded and 240 239 238 237 236 235 Mystikos, Mystikos, Brubaker, 231. Ibid., Dagron, Stanković,Christ” of icon “Living 238 ΕΥΨΥΧΙΑ. ΕΥΨΥΧΙΑ.

Emperor and Priest and Emperor Vision and Meaning and Vision Letters Letters 77–89]. 236 n s“seto htteptirho osatnpewsaa was Constantinople of patriarch the that “assertion as and Mélanges offerts à Hélène Ahrweiler, Ahrweiler, Hélène à offerts Mélanges , Ep. 146,, Ep. 460.2-9, 461. , 104.6-9, 105. , 231. , 159. 240 , 42. Compare also Marie-FranceAuzépy,, 42.Compare also (VII l’empereur l’image Christ, et “Le protoasekretis The second version of Mystikos’s written abdication, which Leo VI Leo which abdication, written Mystikos’s of version second The 239 In another letter,another In after the some time death of emperorsent , concerning the removal of one of his men, Mystikos men, his of one of removal the concerning , (Paris: Presses de la Sorbonne, 1998), 35–47 [= Ead., Ead., [= 35–47 1998), Sorbonne, la de Presses (Paris: “Set as I am to be the watchmen the be to am I as “Set 235 The definition of the of definition The Christ on Earth, on Christ throne throne 237 Finally, to which I, which to L’histoire ” thus ” and e –IX 57 e

CEU eTD Collection that he may break laws and do whatever he pleases, but so that he may be such in his unauthorized his in such be may he that so but pleases, he whatever do and laws break may he that his presents controversy, tetragamy so not law’, unwritten the ‘an say, emperor, is they “The law: the with relation in of emperor the of perception viewpoint his explaining Mystikos, Nikolaos throne, well, Mystikos describes morein detail role, ‘their’ the role archbishop of an their‘rights’: isthat down from even His time until the metoday worthless, upon by God's Judgments.” inscrutable disciples: His to said Lord Our what of ignorant not are you “… coronation: Romanos’s after soon sent Symeon, to letter another in directly fathers.” their honor should children that is it Father,law Whose Heavenly the person, my in but, me, rejected not have you that know this: is you to say to have I “All warns: patriarch the 914), 913–February (June regent chief the was Mystikos when period the to content ( apostles” the to “equal as own?) his of the that emperor, directly fromor least projectedChrist, at view thishis to correspondents. as terms similar in authority patriarch's the of source the understood Mystikos that show testimonies …” gift heavenly and great this received have God of Grace the by only who Constantinople, 245 244 243 242 241 Ibid., Ep. Ibid., 4,22.8-16. Ep. Ibid., 17, 110.12-112.14, 111-113. Mystikos, term the Dagron, see: Concerning Mystikos, Finally, in the letter sent to the Nicholas, soon after he had returned to the patriarchal the to returned had he after soon Nicholas, pope the to sent letter the in Finally, more valid when wepleadbefore men. incomparably are intercession for grounds our and speak to right authority, our in since those by time to time from inflicted punishments the another,deprecate to one and transgressionsagainst weGod, men against evenbe by must committed deprecatingsins morethe ready dissolveto their while and, … heaven in is Who Lord towardthe station earthly our from turning earth, upon men of behalf on mediate to here put are and Sanctuary Holy the at stand to worthy held are we since In the letter sent to the archbishop of Bulgaria, in an attempt to influence Symeon throughSymeonas archbishopinfluence him tothe toattempt sent an in letter the ofBulgaria, In (or position patriarch’s the presented Mystikos how detail more in reveal examples other Several Letters Miscellaneous , Ep. 186,, Ep. 518.7-8 , #194/II, 18.4-6. Emperor and Priest and Emperor He that rejecteth you, rejecteth me rejecteth you, rejecteth that He isapostolos 245 ). 242 , 135-143, esp. 141-143. In the letter to an unknown addressee, dated by its by dated addressee, unknown an to letter the In 243 This relation is expressed even more even expressed is relation This , and their succession has come has succession their and , 244

241 These 58

CEU eTD Collection mean Photios, the most holy patriarch...” holy most the Photios, mean Father my I – matter this “On Archbishop. new that: Mystikos the mentions appointing of purpose the for 925 and 924 between sent 922-954), (r. II Ashot king Armenian the was which princes', of prince the 'To ...” nobility your of father the to united was Spirit, Holy the in father my Photios, renowned the God, of archpriests the among greatest the that aware is wisdom your “For relations: good in were addressee the of father the and Photios that mentions he point one prisoners. the of exchange the about negotiate to and name, own his Emir, in the with (‘friendship’) connection a establish to trying was letter, Mystikos this With 914). 913–February (June regent chief the wasNikolaos when period the during of emir the to sent letter the provided by is example first The father. (spiritual) his as him to refers and qualities Photios’s emphasises Mystikos letters, his in occasion and of treason,accusation Mystikos said ishaveto voluntarily asleft well, following father’s his spiritual exile, the under time, last and second the for Photios exiled Leo When attention. of worthy are that Mystikos, by expressed relationship, this of aspects more several are there However, previously. upon touched been already have Mystikos Nikolaos and Photios between connection of aspects general more Some “ the in Photios by established lines the along seen be can perceptions authority.These in those i.e. rulers, the criticize emperor.the of that exactlyas same the Furthermore, patriarchspeakfreelythe and with to right the has lawsthose ?” fear shall who laws, the of opponent and enemy the is emperor the If be. would law written a as actions My father – I mean Photios” mean I – father My 250 249 248 247 246 spent his time in the monastery of St Tryphon, where he became a monk. a became he where Tryphon, St of monastery the in time his spent Ibid., 139, Ibid., 450.49-50, 451. Ep. Ibid., 2,12.17-19, 13. addressee: andthe On dating 526. Ibid., xvi; Ibid., Tougher, 220.89-92. Ibid., Thus, in Mystikos’s extant writings the origins of the patriarch’s authority and power is described power is and patriarch’s authority the of origins the writings extantMystikos’s in Thus, 246 Eisagoge Perhaps this examplethis Perhaps with lines most from common the the in has Leo . , 80. 250 The final example comes from the letter sent to the emperor the to sent letter the from comes example final The 249 The next testimony is found in the letter titled letter the in found is testimony next The 247 Furthermore, on several on Furthermore, Eisagoge . 248 At 59

CEU eTD Collection most intriguing images in the , the famous 'Narthex mosaic of Hagia', representing an representing emperor in Hagia', of mosaic 'Narthex famous the art, Byzantine the in images intriguing most the well understood the he of one that that mentioning worth is it power', assume of 'images the to to regard With images. the reasonable of importance is it politician, skilled a and diplomat a master was he that fact the given and reach, predecessor's his exceeded Mystikos patriarchs, the of power political the to has comes it when former Nevertheless, it. the of evidence that surviving no is those there least to at or advertised, similar programs oversee to chances many that as seems have it not did Photios, Mystikos to Compared well-documented. is Mystikos the Nikolaos between and connection Photios The patriarchs agendas. political his for medium this employing in and iconography carelessness,having despite the proper the men atChurch.head of the power, and wereordained office had back in he general' whom the of because empiredefeats suffered the those and Photios although however, example, second the in zeal'; sustained and 'careful by victories great achieve to managed still he Basil, with not was favour God's that meaning removed, was Photios although case, first the in example: an make to Photios using is Mystikos lines, these from seen be can As to demonstrates Church, the into back howRomanos dangerous carelessness be:can accepted be to were written who a those extort from to loyalty attempt of an declaration in Mystikos, point one At Church. the in schism the concluding for underwaywere still negotiations while – time the at emperor the yet crownedas not was who – Romanos 252 251 Ep. Ibid., 75, 326.52-60, 327. Nicolas Oikonomides, “Leo VI and the Narthex Mosaic of Saint Sophia”, NarthexSaint Sophia”, ofOikonomides, and the MosaicNicolasVI “Leo Though certainly not the only one, Photios onlyplayed not one, Photios Though the certainly an important rolethe inrevival ofthe Christian Adrian. meanfleet, I .of the all of and admiralSyracuse wasthen lost the carelessnessof the of Because why? And kyr when But dominion. from cities other Taranto tore and and Longibardia, subjugated , emperor our When proskynesis Church, the in united were ordained had he whom those and Photios kyr and died Ignatios kyr Photios the patriarch and all whom he had ordained were expelled, the grandfather of grandfather the expelled, were ordained had he whom all and patriarch the Photios kyr kyr in frontin enthroned of the originates from Christ, period. this Constantine [Basil I], by careful and sustained zeal, destroyed Tephrike,zeal, sustained and careful captured by I], [Basil Constantine 251 DOP DOP 30 (1976), 151-172, proposed that it was151-172,it30 (1976), proposed that 252 60

CEU eTD Collection image does not represent doesnot image particular emperor. any Jolivet-Levy,the interpretation, 890. before enticing Oikonomides’ despite “L’imagethat comments 453–454, pouvoir”, du Datierung”, paläograpischen Versuch einer der und Sofia H. der in Narthexmosaik Das Proskynese. die und Schreiner,Kaiser Peter “Der but accepted, widely been has interpretation This 907. after period the to it dates and mosaic, the on represented is who Leo penitent The chroniclerpeace. rulers negotiated records thatRomanos the addressed words:Symeon these with two the and appeared Eventually,Romanos himself. emperor the with speak to insisted and 913, since receiving been had he letters whose patriarch, the see to happy particularly not was ruler Bulgarian the suggested. been has as November 924, in Symeon met latter the when emperor the for speech prepared the indeed had Mystikos if surprise a be not would it Thus, Symeon. and Romanos between negotiator as served Mystikos that out pointed been already has emperor. It the of advisor the as role namely, his mentioned, be to deserve Mystikos of function 'spiritual' The power. 'secular' the towards tendencies clear expressed Mystikos career, his Throughout advisor” “the Mystikos 253 Mystikos, the Christians for once will be free of misfortunes and refrain from killing Christians, for it is not is it for Christians, killing from refrain and misfortunes of free be will once for Christians the and disturbance, without and blood with unstained and peace of life a live to order in harmony cherish peace, Embrace hand. right your extend just [wealth]: wish you what that of [glutted] full youyou are until fill love will the for wealth, of I youthis do If judge? righteous and fear-inspiring the at look you will face of kind what With there? depart you when slaughter, unjust God the about the death, to give will you awaits answer the is who What behavior. wanton out put man will fever One dust. a into dissolved be are will you You tomorrow [and] today, exist faith? you retribution; and in judgment, resurrection, brothers your Christians co-religionists the of Christians, of blood the with hands your stain being to covet and not do and being yourself, Christian Christians, a called us, with peace make and bloodshed, unholy and the slaughter end are], unjust [you assured am I as Christian, true a indeed are you If blood. of shedding unjust the and slaughter in delight takes man unbelieving and impious the of sight the but love], be [to said is and love is God indeed if love, and peace welcomes Christian and man pious A words. the match not do yourdeeds that see I but Christian, true a and man pious youa arehave I that heard Letters , xxvii. 253 Before speaking with Romanos, Symeon was greeted by Nikolaos Mystikos, but Mystikos, Nikolaos by greeted was Symeon Romanos, with speaking Before Bolletino della Badia Greca di Grottaferrata, Grottaferrata, di Greca Badia della Bolletino has long been recognized, but several aspects concerning his activities his concerning aspects several but recognized, been long has N. S. 54 (2000): 97-108, dates it to the period the to it dates 97-108, (2000): 54 S. N. not so not 61

CEU eTD Collection Bulgaria what he should say and what arguments he should employ in order to induce Symeon to agree to make peace make to agree the empire.with Ibid., 4,22-23,to Ep. 12, Ep. 86-87. of Symeon archbishop induce to the order in instructing employ should is he Mystikos arguments what letters and say two should he in what e.g. Bulgaria situation, particular the in say should they what officials οἱ καὶ ἀπράγμονα, καὶ ἀναίμακτον καὶ ὃπλα εἰρηνικὸν αἴρειν αὐτοὺς γὰρ ζήσῃς καθ᾿ ὁμοπίστων.θέμις οὐ βίον ἀπαιρεῖν‧ Χριστιανοὺς τοῦ αὐτὸς στήσωνται καὶ καὶ συμφορῶν τῶν ποτε ἳνα παύσωνταί Χριστιανοί ὁμόνοιαν, τὴν ἀγάπφυν εἰρήνεν, τὴν δεξιάν.ἄσπασαι τὴν ἐπίσχες μόνον ἐμπλήσῳ‧ ἐπιθυμουμένου τοῦκατακόρως σε‧ ἐγώ ταῦταποιεῖς, ἐρῶν πλούτου εἰ κριτῇ; ἐνατενίσεις δικαίῳ φοβερῷ ἀπελθὼν καὶ τίνατῷ λόγονἀδίκωντῶν ἐκεῖ οὖν ὑπὲρπροσώπφ θεῷ ποίῳ σφαγῶν; τῷ δώσεις φρύαγμα. τὸ κατασβέσει πυρετὸς εἷς διαλυθήσῃ. κόνιν εἰς αὔριον καὶ ὑπάρχεις, σήμερον καὶ ἀνταπόδοσιω‧ καὶ κρίσιν καὶ ἀνοσίων τῶν τὰς ἀνάστασιναὐτός, θάνατον καὶ προσδοκῶν καὶ μολύνεσθαιεἶ αἵμασινδεξιὰς Χριστιανῶνἄνθωπος Χριστιανῶν. ὁμοπίστων καὶ σφαγὰς ἀδίκους τὰς ποτε θέλε μὴ ὀνομαζόμενος, καὶ καὶ αὐτὸςὢν καὶ Χριστιανὸς στῆσόν Χριστιατῶντῶνεἰρήνη ἡμῶν μεθ᾿ σπεῖσαι καὶ αἱμάτωνἐκχύσεις, πεπληροφορήμεθα, καθὼς ὑπάρχεις, Χριστιανὸς ἀληθὴς οὖν μὲν αἵμασινἐκχεομένων.εἰ χαίρεινἀδίκως τὸ καὶ ἀπίστου σφαγαῖς καὶ δὲ ἀσεβοῦςλέγεται‧ καὶ τε ἔστι ἀγάπη θεὸς ὁ εἴπερ ἀσπάζεσθαι, ἀγάπην τὴν καὶ εἰρήνην τὴν τὸ Χριστιανοῦ καὶ θεοσεβοῦς ἀνθρώπου γὰρ μὲν ἴδιον συμβαίνοντα. μὴ λόγοις further to say should he what Romanos them'. 'encourage to suggests and pay”, more for asking not “are they that of rank the raise to emperorletter, one the In advises affairs. he and occasions other Mystikos, ridiculed even wouldwhy so moved behe words similarby the now? and years, ten than more for patriarch the accept. from words difficult similar very quite by is unaffected words was Symeon emperor's the by awe and shame Symeon's about story The agenda. to letters similar a his with and addresee same the to sent letter in Daphnopates’ Theodore in account the than Symeon, contained rhetorics Mystikos’s more much resembles Continuatus Theophanus in other The Mystikos. by written though have However,to provided wordsTheodorewasDaphnopates. candidate Romanos’s described oration the as sound mouth Romanos’s into placed words the agreed. Indeed, been had that peace the regarding sign bad a as interpreted was this ; towards flew were rulers two the one while other the while City sky the towards going one ways, their the parted then but met in eagles two negotiating: appeared omen an Yet, Constantinople. the left and peace, 256 255 254 ytks Mystikos, 409.6-17. Th. Cont. Th. Cont, 408.7-409.5: 408.7-409.5: Cont, Th. right these that raiseright [Christians] weapons of against the those faith. same Apart from being Romanos’s negotiator with Symeon, Mystikos had something to say on various on say to something had Mystikos Symeon, with negotiator Romanos’s being from Apart make finally to agreed speech, this by embarrassed and moved Symeon, that said further is It Letters 256 Although not entirely clear, the function of the the of function the clear, entirely not Although , Ep. 95 A, 362.8-9, 363. In several other letters Mystikos proposes to various (mostly) church (mostly) various to proposes Mystikos letters other several In 363. 362.8-9, A, 95 Ep. , ἀκήκοά σε θεοσεβῆ ἄνθρωπον καὶ Χριστιανὸν ὑπάρχοντα ἀληθινόν, βλέπω δὲ τὰ ἔργα τοῖς ἔργα τὰ δὲ βλέπω ἀληθινόν, ὑπάρχοντα Χριστιανὸν καὶ ἄνθρωπον θεοσεβῆ σε ἀκήκοά antigrapheus 254 had something to do to something had antigrapheis , adding , 62 255

CEU eTD Collection 137-148 (henceforth: Holmes, “Political Literacy”).137-148 Holmes, (henceforth: 146,Ep. 460.1;460.9, 461. Mystikos, repeated]” is grafw [apla write? I how“Youplainly you, sentences: don't of see, couple a after adds and manner, even grafw]… [apla language simple words plaininlogwn]”, write [idioteia“I understand it: adresee the so could “infamously an was he Since period. the in education of pertinence the examining for 'specimen' good word”. written overthe command exercise to able be powershould with those that expectation contemporary a was another then Byzantium, medieval in literacy political of element one were office with constitutes environment graphic rich charged a “if or writing”, of medium over the command exhibit to those expected which in culture political a by characterized was Byzantium that is point salient more “The explainsthat: She Byzantium. tenth-century early and ninth late in education, to study,recent her In literacy political Romanos’s consequently, the under importance investigation. in period implies its empire. the running facto de and regent chief the was he when period the during particularly politics, court of summit the at position long-standing his from havecome to likely is patriarch, a befitting not affairs about advise and instruct to tendency His sevenyears. interestingis It howto imagine Romanos may have perceivedletter.this for fleet the of commander the been had who Romanos, navy,to the precisely,concerning more affairs, military about advice offering is Mystikos as interesting, particularly is example latter The expertise. the place.”rescue and guard to here, from galleys of couple a of even or available, if line, the of based home- of dispatch the by either “… countered be should threat this that proposes Mystikos intrusion, laws. of issuing the and offices judicial with 261 260 259 258 257 Ibid., 138-139. Ibid., in Literacy”, “Political Holmes, Catherine simple in a howopponents write can exampleMystikos he one his of of Thereleast one atdescribingto ironically is Mystikos, were They the under 258 These examples reflect Mystikos’s meddling in diverse spheres of the political life in Byzantium. in life political the of spheres diverse in meddling Mystikos’s reflect examples These On both occasions it looks as if Mystikos is dealing with affairs falling outside the area of his of area the outside falling affairs with dealing is Mystikos if as looks it occasions both On Letters 260 , 363;Ep. 95,362.11-13. Catherine Holmes emphasizes the importance ascribed to the written word, that is word,that written the to ascribed importance the emphasizes Holmes Catherine in the hierarchy. in The Byzantine World Byzantine The 257 In another letter, responding to the news of the Bulgarian the of news the to letter, responding another In ODB I believe that it also illustrates Mystikos’s Mystikos’s illustrates also it that believe I , 112; quaestor , ed. Paul Stephenson, (New York: Routledge, 2012.), York: Routledge, (New Stephenson, Paul ed. , : Ibid., 1765-1766. 261 Basil I seems like a like seems I Basil paideia , 259 Letters and, 63 ,

CEU eTD Collection 63; whicheducated you and haveranksbrought in up military been the in that son), (my true not it “Is army: Euthymios’s – bishops the in deserters the the with comparison a makes church, from the into back them affidavit receiving before – supporters extort to trying Mystikos, education. his and origin low emperors' the both concerning indication some provide might Church, the in schism the ending about doubt. beyond is stock' noble and imperial of he was nor … palace the in up 'brought not was Romanos that notion the nevertheless, caution; extreme with taken be must account son-in-law,Porphyrogennetos’s his and Romanos between ...” stock noble and imperial of he was nor beginning; the from manners Roman agrammatos marriage, Bulgarian the of occurrence “kyr that: the comments Constantine concerning precisely more notion, last the to princesses. relation purple-born and fire, liquid crowns, imperial nations: foreign to give Constantine ever not must emperor the from comes origin and his Porphyrogennetosin education Romanos’s of account direct most education. Romanos’s on bear which sources in instances several out point and Lekapenos, Romanos next noto importance?” of was writing whom for emperor the of that image: daunting exceptionally and alternative an cultivate to determined was Basil network, bureaucratic this within entrapment prevent and manoeuvre political roomfor some maintain orderto in that be it “could question: open an with article concludes her Holmes emperor”, uneducated

PmbZ, 267 266 265 264 263 262 Although sources offer next to nothing on his early life, he certainly was of provincialori of was certainly he life, early his on nothing to next offer sources Although “ Holmes, 70-72.Ibid., Tougher, Leo,71. Ibid.. DAI In analogy to Basil's case, it is justified to investigate, on a limited scale, the 'political literacy' of literacy' 'political the scale, limited a on investigate, to justified is it case, Basil's to analogy In , ch. 13,66-77. #26833 , ch. 13,72.149-152. ), and not from among those who have been brought up in the palace, and havethe followed and palace, the in up brought havebeen who those among from not and ), Political Literacy”Political . 262 264 Basil is said to have been intellectually dependant, particularly on Photios. on particularly dependant, intellectually been have to said is Basil DAI . In a famous chapter,famous a In heir, his . he items emperor advises the the of Romanos, , 147. 267 A letter that Nikolaos Mystikos sent to Romanos during the negotiations the during Romanos to sent Mystikos Nikolaos that letter A Romanus, the emperor, was a common, illiterate fellow ( fellow illiterate common, a was emperor, the Romanus, 266 Considering relations Considering gin. Runciman, Runciman, gin. idiwths Romanos 265 kai The In 64 263 ,

CEU eTD Collection fromGreekto Armenian the for emperor, which may exemplarybe on terms. these letter a translating Daphnopates about story the remember to interesting is It Daphnopates. Theodore on relied significantly Romanos recognized that been also has It asserted. be yet position to his and court, the around plots with care taking still was he while rule, his of beginning the in Romanos supporting in Mystikos patriarch the of role crucial the towards remark general a make to only possible perhaps whom for emperor the was writing ofnext importance”,he no to but wanteddid his the heirs? forsame of image alternative an cultivate to determined “was indeed I Photios. Basil to Perhaps patriarch, the and Photios. emperors on future sons, dependent his highly of seems, education the it entrusted as he was, Furthermore, he yet well, as skills political the of much showed discussion, this in 'specimen' I, Basil term. the defined Holmes as literate', 'politically was he that imply fingertips”. his to “politician a as recognised been has Romanos providedhere. may wellletters, accountthis haveat ‘history’.hint to Romanos’s intended his in manifested occasionally cynicism his the and Mystikos of of shrewdness strength the considering Yet, argument. the lies there since career military Romanos’s with concerned primarily is Mystikos ...” greatest the to command small a from 269 268 Mystikos, Shepard, “Equilibrium Expansion” to To return to Romanos and the issue of his dependence on his highly educated associates. It is It associates. educated highly his on dependence his of issue the and Romanos to return To be can than analysis detailed more a necessitates literacy political Romanos’s of question The Letters , Ep. 75,, Ep. 324.22-25. , 506. 268

This is, however, not a particularly strong point, because point, strong particularly a not however, is, This 269 This, however, This, not does 65

CEU eTD Collection undoubtedly backed the usurper-emperor Romanos. He negotiated with Symeon instead of the new the of instead Symeon with negotiated He Romanos. usurper-emperor the backed undoubtedly heavenand earth.on in authority: highest the by confirmed if effective particularly was Legitimacy shows. evidence extant the as usurpers, amongst favourite became Christ, involving not performances repeat in although motif, This himself. divine Christ by projecting approved choice, of legitimate the matter as himself a presented Romanos was Thus legitimacy. it position: his of approval the rather or legitimacy, his prove to needed usurper, Romanos other every As rule/usurpation. his against Constantine, young of name the in plots, of period initial the survive to managed still latter the capital, the to connections no provincewith the from Coming create. to wanted Romanos one the i.e. order, imperial of demonstration direct a or heir, Leo’s of exclusion tacit a have been could It shows. Constantine young oust to order in maneuvering Romanos’s as medium, the employed emperors which in ways various the demonstrates also diversity with rich particularly ceremonial character.of as extraordinary described some varioususually also regularspecimens, but This was scrutiny under period The honour. of place the to back came II, Justinian of reign the durign time first the for introduced been had which Christ, of bust the ended, Iconoclasm emperors used subjects. their communicate medium to this with potential, its power.Harnessing emperor’s the of source substantial, most the perhaps one, represented the i.e. ‘pay-day’, annual the on just not ceremonies, various a in Distributed empire. the within circulation the that ensured control’ steady the secure to aimed ‘quality borders outside trading and hoarding against constant laws stable; was denomination attention; special the under were They investigated. been has propaganda for ones, gold the especially coins, of potential the chapter introductory the In rhogai Thus, the second part of this thesis looked into role of the patriarch, Nikolaos I Mystikos. He Mystikos. I Nikolaos patriarch, the of role into looked thesis this of part second the Thus, after but coins, on heirs promoted and busts their placed emperors quality, of mark a As eeoy wih fild cutes ad frin evy lk ih ae on = wealth) (= coins awe, with alike envoys foreign and courtiers filled which ceremony Conclusions 66

CEU eTD Collection image of the emperor's divine investiture appeared for the first time on coins. And he had supported had he And coins. on time first the for appeared investiture divine emperor's the of image the when rule, Alexander's experience during patriarch father, the was spiritual he power.Furthermore, of his images the Photios’s, concerning of some had and knowledge theoretical possesed he that obvious is It coronation. Romanos’s Constantine, his young the justify with together to performed, also and He emperor position. new the support to reasons and motives of plenty had Mystikos well? as coins of design the haveinfluenced may he that assume/conclude to reasonable thus it would thesis, this referring emperorto alwaysitis formthat impersonal uses. an he that Symeon, to announces he when once, only name Romanos’s mentions Mystikos Bulgaria, of Symeon to sent letters his in that notice to interesting is It time. same the patriarch) at as (again position own his confirming Lekapenos, Romanos of legitimacy divine the verified he men, and God between intercessor and authority, spiritual highest the As time. same the at patriarch the of position the protecting thus world, Christian the in role leading Byzantium’s augusta, as Zoe recognize and his thatopponent Church, in something rejectedEuthymios, to to. consent pride his of some swallow to prepared was he which for see', envied much 'that keep to order in also Romanos supported Mystikos mentor, own Photios). his from learnt had Mystikos lession a been have may (this families aristocratic leading empire's the of one of scion the than a climber, social a influencing of hope greater was there and overlapped, interests mutual Simply, Phokas. Leo e.g. their Mystikos,comparedto of eyes the in emperor of office the for choice better a was not he because did presumably and Zoe, with enmity he his family.given Therefore, (t)his with empire that the identify perhaps, or dynasty, Leo's towards inclined that particularly suggest not Doukas, was Mystikos Constantine Nikolaos by coup unsuccessful the with involvement tetragamy his the and of controversy circumstances The regency. Zoe's during situation the to contrary war, Bulgarian the for necessary Church-levy the supported also He ignored. initially Bulgarian the whom emperor, stranger As he participated in all sort of affairs within the empire, closing the circle to the first chapter of chapter first the to circle the closing empire, the within affairs of sort all in participated he As of background ideological the defended also Mystikos emperor, new the defending While to the Constantinopolitan high echelons, Romanos Lekapenos must have seemed a much a seemed have must Lekapenos Romanos echelons, high Constantinopolitan the to kyr Romanos has been chosen by God, and thence, if thence, and God, by chosen been has Romanos homo novus homo 67 ,

CEU eTD Collection position proposetoposition did, remains actually Whether he its difficult,ascertain.design. to if not impossible, the in was He coin. the on represented image the of meaning symbolic the with completely agrees which background ideological an employing by so did he and emperor; as position his and Lekapenos Romanos Alexanderwell, as for motives supportfor accounting similar those of to his Romanos. Two conclusions can be safely drawn from the previous pages. Mystikos definitely supported definitely Mystikos pages. previous the from drawn safely be can conclusions Two 68

CEU eTD Collection ______. ______. ______. In l’orthodoxie”. de faveur en propaganda la de Auzépy,“Manifestations Marie-France. Literature Secondary Cremona. Alexander and Zacos, George Veglery. of Continuatus Liutprand Theophanes of Works Complete The Correspondance Writtings Daphnopatès, Miscellaneous Théodore Constantinople of Letters Patriarch I siècles Nicholas Xe Constantinople et of IXe des Patriarch I byzantines Nicholas préséance des listes Bulgaria 3: Les Imperio from Seals Collection, Administrando Byzantine Whittemore of De the in Corpus and Collection Porphyrogenitus, Patriarchs Oaks Emperors, 6: Dumbarton Constantine Art, the of in Coins Museum Fogg Byzantine the in the of and Oaks Catalogue Dumbarton at Seals Byzantine of Catalogue Sources Primary Ahrweiler, Alive? or Dead Century: Ninth University Press,of America 2007. recherche national de la 1978. scientifique, Dumbarton Oaks Research Library 1981. and Collection, Dumbarton Oaks Research Library 1973. and Collection, la RechercheNational de Scientifique, 1972. ofArchaeologyNational Institute with Museum, 2009. Washington:Dumbarton Oaks Research Library 1967. and Collection, (717-1081) III Nicephorus Research Library 1973. and Collection, to III Leo Addenda OaksResearch Library 2009. and Collection, Constantinople, of “Le Christ, l’empereur et l’image (VII l’image et l’empereur Christ, “Le L'iconoclasme. L'iconoclasme. 35–47. . Ed. Bonn, I. Bekker,I.. Bonn, Ed. 1838. Paris: PUF, 2006.

Paris: PressesParis: de la 1998.Sorbonne, . Ed. John Nesbit and Cecile Morisson. Washington D.C.: Dumbarton D.C.: Washington Morisson. Cecile and Nesbit John Ed. . Byzantine Lead Seals Lead Byzantine . Ed. Leslie Brubaker, Leslie Ed.. Ashgate: 85-100. Variorum, 1998. . . . Ed. J. Darrouzès and L. G. Westerink. Paris: Éditions du Centre du Éditions Paris: Westerink. G. L. and Darrouzès J. Ed. . Ed. Ivan Jordanov. 3rd ed. Jordanov.ed. Ivan 3rd Ed. Bibliography , 1-2. Ed. Philip Grierson. Washington D. C.: Dumbarton Oaks Dumbarton C.: D. Washington Grierson. Philip Ed. 1-2. , . Ed. R. J. H. Jenkins and L. G. Westerink. Washington: Westerink. G. L. and Jenkins H. J. R. Ed. . e –IX r al qart. Wsigo .. h Catholic The D.C.: Washington Squatriti. Paolo Tr. e ice.I In siècle). . vol.. Basel, 1972.1. . d y oaci. T. R . H Jenkins, H. J. R. Tr. Moravcsik. Gy. Ed. . Comp. Nicolas Oikonomides. Paris: Centre Paris: Oikonomides. Nicolas Comp. . ed. and tr.L. G. Westernick, Washington:Westernick, G. tr.L. and ed. . ΥΥΙ. ΕΥΨΥΧΙΑ. Sofia: Bulgarian Academy of Science, of Academy Bulgarian Sofia: Mélanges offerts à Hélène à offerts Mélanges Byzantium in the in Byzantium 69

CEU eTD Collection The Economic History of Byzantium, From the Seventh, through the Fifteenth Century Fifteenth the through Seventh, the and From VI Continuatus “Theophanes Michael. Jeffrey Featherstone, Byzantium, of History Economic The Dvornik, Francis. Dujčev,Ivan. Treaty the “On Bulgarians”, of 927 the with Gilbert. Dagron, Anthony Cutler, Ideology”. Imperial Post-Iconoclastic of Statement A VI: Leo of Scepter Ivory “The Kathleen. Corrigan, Giles Constable, Continuatus”. Theophanes del autoría la sobre “Algunasconsideraciones Signes. Juan Codoñer, Jean-Claude. Cheynet, Jean-Claude. Cheynet, Bühl, John. Haldon, and Leslie Brubacker, ______. and Eighth the in Authority Visual the and Constantine Emperor: an Legitimize “To Leslie. Brubaker, Associates.” his and Porphyrogenitus Constantine of Coins The 6. Notes, “Byzantine ______. Bellinger, Alfred Imperial Policy”. R.“The and Coins Byzantine Barry. Baldwin, “Nicholas onHistory”, Mysticus Roman ______. Gudrun Laiou, Laiou, 1-3. Washington C.:D.Oaks Research Dumbarton Library 2002. and Collection, 2003. Centuries) Bulletin Art The 10,(1989): 17-28. 1 no. d’histoire de 2008. Byzance, etcivilisation 1996. Kulturbesitz Preußischer Cambridge: CUP,2011. Nazianzus of Centuries In Centuries”. Ninth Notes Museum Society, Numismatic 2007. Byzance, Vision and Meaning in Ninth-century Byzantium: Image as Exegesis in the Homilies of Gregory of Homilies the in Exegesis as Image Byzantium: Ninth-century in Meaning and Vision ’itiedsioolss iconoclasts. des L’histoire n el, Jehle, and . Letters and Letter-Collections and Letters . . The Hand of the Master. Craftsmanship, Ivory, and Society in Byzantium (9th–11th Byzantium in Society and Ivory, Craftsmanship, Master. the of Hand The . Emperor and Priest, The Imperial Office in Byzantium in Office Imperial The Priest, and Emperor Photian Schism, History and Legend and History Schism, Photian . Ed. Paul Magdalino, 139-158. . Ashgate, Aldershot: Paul Magdalino, 1994. Ed. . Princeton, PUP,N J:Princeton, . 1994. . Cambridge: . CUP, 1999. Pouvoir et contestations à Byzance (963-1210). (963-1210). Byzance à contestations et Pouvoir ascéébznie ’potdsseu. sceaux. des l’apport byzantine: société La 60 (1978): 407-416. 60 (1978): Hiltrud New Constantines, the Rhytm of Imperial Renewal in Byzantium, 4th-13th Byzantium, in Renewal Imperial of Rhytm the Constantines, New 39 (2002): 289-306. Ds Kies Ats Zpe e asr ee am. Kaum”. Neuer Kaisers des – Zepter Altes Kaisers “Des . Paris: Association des Amis du Centre d'Histoire et Civilization de Civilization et d'Histoire Centre du Amis des Association Paris: Byzantium in the Iconoclast Era c. 680-850: A History A 680-850: c. Era Iconoclast the in Byzantium 13 (1967): 123-166. 13 (1967): . Louvain: Brepols,1976. . Cambridge: . CUP, 1948. Byzantion DOP 32 (1978): 219-295. Speculum 58 (1988): 174-178. 58 (1988): Paris: Association des amis du Centre du amis des Association Paris: eCrmni Cerimoniis De Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne, la de Publications Paris: 70-81.no.1 31,(1956): . Tr. Jean Birrel, Cambridge: CUP, Cambridge: Birrel, Jean Tr. . I, 96 I, ,”, . Ed. Angeliki E. Angeliki Ed. . Byzantinisches . New York, New American Jahrbuch Erytheia 70

CEU eTD Collection Laiou, Angeliki E. “Law, Justice, and the Byzantine Historians: Ninth to Twelfth Centuries”. Centuries”. Twelfth to Ninth Historians: Byzantine the and Justice, “Law, E. Angeliki Laiou, Müller.Andreas Kresten,Otto,, E. ______Ka Karlin-Hayter, “The EmperorPatricia. Alexander's Bad Name”. Ernst. Kantorowicz, the at Relics of Cult the and Ceremonies Imperial Empire: the for Hands “Helping Ioli macédonienne”. Kalavrezou, dynastie la de l’époque a byzantin l'art dans pouvoir du “L’image C. Jolivet-Levy, Photios”. of Homily Tenth the of Significance and Date “The Cyril. Mango, and H. J. R. Jenkins, Mysticus”. Nicholas Patriarch the on Note “A H. J. R. Jenkins, Solidi”. his from Porphyrogenitus, VII Constantine of Story “The Goodacre. Hugh, Catherine. Holmes, John. Haldon, in Money”. of Origins “The ______. ______. ______. In Material”. Source as Coinage “Byzantine Philip. Grierson, Grabar, Andre. Mosch: and Gorny & MoschGorny OctoberMünzhandlung - 8–9,Auction 160, 2007. Giessner ž a, Aeadr И сои иатйкй хоорфи X в” [n te Hsoy o Byzantine of History the [On в.” X хронографии византийской истории “Из Alexander. dan, Byzanz in der ersten Hälfte des 10. Jahrhunderts 10. des Hälfte ersten der Wiesenschaften,der 1995. in Byzanz ChronographyTenth of the 1997. WashingtonDumbarton Oaks D.C.: Research Library 1997.and Collection, In Court”. Byzantine Byzantion (1956): 125-140. Hungaricae 114-119.15 (1935): and Lucia Traviani 1966 Oxford, Studies, Byzantine of Congress Zeitschrift . A History of (850-1000) Literature Byzantine of History A . Numismatics, Numismatics, Byzantine Coinage. Coinage. Byzantine A Social History of Byzantium of History Social A L’empereur dans l'art byzantine l'art dans L’empereur Basil II and the Governance of Empire (976-1025) Empire of Governance the and II Basil 57 (1987): 441-470. 57 104 (2011): 115-123.104 (2011): The King's Two Bodies. The Study of Mediaeval Political Theology Political Mediaeval of Study The Bodies. Two King's The 2 (1963): 146-147.2 London: London: OUP,1975. , 69-106. , Washington C.:D.Oaks Research Dumbarton Library 1999. and Collection, Byzantine Court Culture from 829 to 1204 to 829 from Culture Court Byzantine Samtherrschaft, Legitimationsprinzip und kaiserlicher Urkundentitel in Urkundentitel kaiserlicher und Legitimationsprinzip Samtherrschaft, Spoleto: Centro Sull Studi Di Italiano Century]. Scritti Storici e Numismatici e Storici Scritti . Chichester:. Wiley-Blackwell, 2009.

. Paris: Les Belles Belles Lettres,.Les Paris: 1936. Византийский временикВизантийский , 317-333. , London: OUP, 1967. . Athens: National Hellenic ResearchAthens:National Hellenic Museum, 2006. . Vienna: VerlagÖsterreichischen Akademie der Vienna: . Speculum Proceedings of the XIIIth International XIIIth the of Proceedings Acta Antiqua Academiae Scientiarium Academiae Antiqua Acta ,Colectanes 15. Ed. Ermanno A. Arslan A. Ermanno Ed. 15. ,Colectanes . Oxford:OUP, 2005.

19 (1961): 76-96.19 (1961): alto Medioevo, 2001. , 585-596. 44 , (1969): . Ed. Henry Maguire, 53-79. Maguire, Henry Ed. . Numismatic Chronicle Numismatic . Princeton: PUP, Princeton: . in in DOP Law and Law 9/10 71

CEU eTD Collection Morris, Rosemary. “Succession and usurpation: politics and rhetoric in the late tenth century”. In In century”. tenth late the in rhetoric and politics usurpation: and “Succession Rosemary. Morris, Michael. McCormick, “An______. LaudatoryAnonymousPoem Honor I”. in of Basil Approaches”. and Models Historiography: Macedonian in Great the Athanasios.“Costantine Markopoulos, In Photios”. Patriarch the and Iconoclasm of Liquidation “The ______. Cyril. Mango, P. George Majeska, in Sophia”.Church the St. Church: of in His Ritual Emperor in Imperial “The Christian of Case A Coinage: Byzantine Middle on Emperor the of Coronation “The Vangelis. Maladakis, ______Centuries Maguire, Henry. Imperial Art and Byzantine in “StyleIdeology 4th-13th Byzantium, in the ______and Wise Renewal the Leo Imperial of of Bath “The Rhythm ______. The Constantines. ______.New In Centuries”. Twelfth to Ninth State, Byzantine the in Finance and “Justice Paul. Magdalino, Sabine. MacCormack, Eleventh to Ninth the of Books Law the in Legislation and Law of Significance “The A. H. J. Lokin, osatns h ht f Ipra eea n Bznim t-3h Centuries 4th-13th Byzantium, in Renewal Imperial of Rhytm the Aldershot: Magdalino, 199-215. Variorum, 1994. Constantines, West Medieval Aldershot: Magdalino, 159-170. Variorum, 1994. of University In Studies, Byzantine for Center Birmingham: 133-140. 1977. Birmingham, Herrin, Judith and 1204 to 829 from ResearchLibrary 1997.and Collection, Culture Court 11th (10th-mid c.)”. Theology Political Iconography, Ceremonial, Ideology”. Magdalino. Ashgate,Aldershot: 1994. Centuries Ninth-Twelfth Byzantium: Washington Dumbarton C.: D. Oaks Research LibraryCollection, 1994. and in Society 1981. Simon, Dieter71-91. Washington C.:D.Oaks Research Dumbarton Library 1994. and Collection, Centuries.” In Centuries Ninth-Twelfth Byzantium: Washington Dumbarton Oaks D.C.: Research Library 1994. and Collection, in Society . “The Byzantium”.Art of . Comparing in “The Not-So-Secret. ofthe Mystikos”. Functions New Constantines, the Rhytm of Imperial Renewal in Byzantium, 4th-13th Centuries 4th-13th Byzantium, in Renewal Imperial of Rhytm the Constantines, New The Brazen House Brazen The Eternal Victory. Triumphal Rulership in Late Antiquity, Byzantium and the Early the and Byzantium Antiquity, Late in Rulership Triumphal Victory. Eternal Art and Ceremony in Late Antiquity Late in Ceremony and Art Law and Society in Byzantium: Ninth-Twelfth Centuries Ninth-Twelfth Byzantium: in Society and Law . Cambridge: .CUP, Cambridge: 1986. .

Copenhagen: Munksgaard, Copenhagen: 1959. . Ed. Henry Maguire, 1-11. Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Dumbarton D.C.: Washington 1-11. Maguire, Henry Ed. . DOP Acta Musei Varnaensis Musei Acta The Art Bulletin Art The 42 (1988): 97-118. aeoin Rnisne Renaissance Macedonian . Ed. Angeliki E. Laiou and Dieter Simon, 151-187. Simon, Dieter and Laiou E. Angeliki Ed. . . Ed. Angeliki E. Laiou and Dieter Simon, 93-117. Simon, Dieter and Laiou E. Angeliki Ed. . REB . Los Angeles: University of California Press, California of University Angeles: Los . ”. 42 (1984): 229-240. 42 (1984): DOP Gesta 70 (1988): 88-103. 70 (1988): 46 (1992): 225-232. 28/2 (1989): 226-227.28/2 (1989): 7,(2008): 342-360. no. 1 Iconoclasm. Iconoclasm. . Ed. Angeliki E. Laiou and Laiou E. Angeliki Ed. . eiie: Topography, Revisited: Ed. Anthony Bryer Anthony Ed. d Paul Ed. . Byzantine . Ed. Paul Ed. . . Ed. Paul Ed. . Law and Law New 72

CEU eTD Collection ____ AMrig o a?MraLkpn n ee fBlai” nIn Bulgaria”. of Peter and Lekapena Maria Far? Too Marriage “A ______. Peacemaker”. – Bulgaria of “Symeon Jonathan. Shepard, Versuch der und Sofia H. der in Narthexmosaik Das Proskynese. die und Kaiser “Der Peter. Schreiner, Steven.Runciman, de Portrait “Quatreun Tesseres Papadopoulou. et Plomb Pagona and de Morisson,, Cecille Vivien. Prigent, In Byzantium “Letter-Writting”. of Stratis. Papaioannou, Dictionary Oxford The ______. ______. “Some ______. onApse Remarks Mosaic the of St. Sophia”. Oikonomides,and the “Leo VI NarthexNicolas. Mosaic of Saint Sophia”. ______. In Diplomacy”. of Language “The ______. in genre”. of madness “The ______. In Byzantium”. Mediaeval Early in “Writing Margaret. Mullett, WagesWorld”.and “Prices Byzantine the Jean-Claude. in Cheynet, In Cécile, Morisson in Circulation”. and Production Its Money: “Byzantine Cécile. Morrisson, Byzantium and the West at the Turn of the First Millennium First the of Turn the at West Dujčev the “Ivan and Slavo-Byzantines Byzantium recherches de Centre Ohridski”, 108. Datierung”’ paläograpischen einer 214. Lecapene”. Christophore L'empereur York: 2012. Routledge, Byzantium Oikonomides, Nicolas reprintedstudies: 23-26; collected (1996): in 1997. Franklin,Variorum,Aldershot: 203-216. 1992. 233-243. 1992 Collection, Franklin, S. and Cutler Europe Laiou, 815-878. Washington C.:D.Oaks Research Dumbarton Library 2002. and Collection, 909-966. Washington C.:D.Oaks Research Dumbarton Library 2002. and Collection, “The significance of some imperial monumental portraits of the X and XI centuries”. centuries”. XI and X the of portraits monumental imperial some of significance “The Byzantine Lead Seals. Seals. Lead Byzantine Theophylact of Ochrid. Reading the Letters of a Byzantine Archbishop Byzantine a of Letters the Reading Ochrid. of Theophylact . R.McKitterick,Ed.. CUP,156-185. Cambridge: 1990. The Emperor Romanus Lecapenus and his Reign. his and Lecapenus Romanus Emperor The . Ashgate: .Variorum, Ashgate: 2005, 1-11. 9, . Washington Dumbarton C.: D. Oaks Research LibraryCollection, 1985. and , 1-3. Alexander, ed. P. Ka Homo Byzantinus, Papers in Honor of Alexander of Honor in Papers Byzantinus, Homo Bolletino della Badia Greca di Grottaferrata, Grottaferrata, di Greca Badia della Bolletino ahntn D . ubro as Rsac irr and Library Research Oaks Dumbarton C.: D. Washington The Byzantine World Byzantine The

Нумизматика, Сфрагистика и Епиграфика и Сфрагистика Нумизматика, yatn ilmc. Diplomacy. Byzantine Annuaire de l'Université de Sofia “St Kliment “St Sofia de l'Université de Annuaire zh DOP dan. Oxford:dan. OUP, 1991. The Uses of Literacy in Early Mediaeval Early in Literacy of Uses The 39 (1985): 111-115. 39 (1985): . Ed. Paul Stephenson, 188 -199. New -199. 188 Stephenson, Paul Ed. .

Cambridge: CUP,1929. Ed. Jonathan Shepard and Simon and Shepard Jonathan Ed. ” 83, ” 9-48.no. 3 83, (1989): DOP DOP . Ed. Adelbert Davids, 121-149. Davids, Adelbert Ed. . EHB EHB Society, Culture and Politics in Politics and Culture Society, 30 (1976): 151-172. 30 The Empress Theophano. Empress The 1-3. Ed. Angeliki E. Laiou, E. Angeliki Ed. 1-3. . Aldershot: Variorum, Aldershot: . EHB NS 54 (2000): 97- (2000): 54 NS . Ed. Angeliki E. Angeliki Ed. . 5 (2009): 201- (2009): 5 Zograf . Ed. A. Ed. . 25 73

CEU eTD Collection Triton: Classical GroupClassical Numismatic Triton: JanuaryTriton XI, 8-9, 2008. . Albert Toynbee, Tougher, Shaun. Treitinger,Otto. innovations quelques impériale: l’iconographie à byzantine numismatique Thierry,“Apportsla Nicole. de (912–913)”. d’Alexandre solidus le sur Baptiste “Le Nicole. Thierry, In Porphyrogenitus”. Constantine “Re-reading Ihor. Ševčenko, the of Introduction the in Patriarch the of Characterization Photios’ Christ: of Icon “Living ______. Vlada. Stanković, Paul. Speck, des Solidus Ein Münze: byzantinischen einer auf Konstantinopel von Patriarch “Der Andreas. Sommer, Bulgaria”. of Symeon to Letters Mysticus Nicholas in “Power Liliana. Simeonova, ______. In Expansion”. to “Equlibrium ______. in Empire”. Balkan Other The “Bulgaria: ______. In Court.” Emperor's the at Barbarians Young Romans? Maketh “Manners ______. 1973. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1969. monétaires”. 241. History Art ShepardSimon and Franklin, 167-197. Aldershot: Variorum, 1992. for Institute the of UniversityPhilosophy ofBelgrade, 2012. In Significance”. Anniversary Its and Eisagoge emperors Dynasty]. of the Macedonian Jahrhundert 10. und 9. im Byzanz in 1974. Schulwesens Kaisers Alexander”. (1993), 89-94. 2011. Shepard,CUP,493-536. Cambridge: 2008. Runciman Steven Sir of Reuter,Timothy Cambridge: CUP,567-585. 2008. Honour In Civilization. and Cambridge: CUP, 2006. Religion Cambridge: CUP,1995. Emergent Elites and Byzantium in the Balkans and East-Central Europe. Europe. East-Central and Balkans the in Byzantium and Elites Emergent Die Kaiserliche Universität von Konstantinopel. Die Präzisierungen zur Frage des höheren des Frage zur Präzisierungen Die Konstantinopel. von Universität Kaiserliche Die The Reign of Leo VI (886-912): Politics and People and Politics (886-912): VI Leo of Reign The Die oströmische Kaiser-und Reichsidee nach ihrer Gestaltung im höfischen Zeremoniell höfischen im Gestaltung ihrer nach Reichsidee Kaiser-und oströmische Die airdk arjriicrv aeosednsie dinastije makedonske carevi i patrijarsi Carigradski Bulletin de la Société Française de Numismatique de Française Société la de Bulletin Constantine Porphyrogenitus and his World his and Porphyrogenitus Constantine Schweizer Münzblätter Schweizer The Cambridge History of the Byzantine the of History Cambridge The ΥΜΙΤ. Cleto f Ppr eiae o 40th to Dedicated Papers of Collection ΣΥΜΜΕΙΚΤΑ. Belgrade: institut, Vizantološki 2003. The New Cambridge Medieval History 3, 900-1024. 900-1024. 3, History Medieval Cambridge New The 154 (1989): 42-44.154 (1989): E. vn tvvć 94. Blrd: aut of Faculty Belgrade: 39-43. Stevović, Ivan Ed. . Munich: C.H. Beck‘sche Verlagsbuchhandlung,Beck‘sche C.H. Munich: . Leiden: Brill, 1997. Brill, Leiden: . yatn ilmc. Diplomacy. Byzantine Revue numismatique Revue . London: , University Oxford London: . 41,(1986): 124-125. no. 10 [Constantinople’s patriarchs and patriarchs [Constantinople’s d . M efes 135-158. Jeffreys, M. E. Ed. . Burlington: Ashgate, Burlington: yatnsaia Byzantinoslavica Byzantine Style, Byzantine 34 (1992): 237- (1992): 34 . Ed. Jonathan Ed. . d Jonathan Ed. Ed. 74 54 .

CEU eTD Collection Visualisierung von Herrschaft. Frühmittelalterliche Residenzen. Gestalt un Zeremoniell un Gestalt Residenzen. Whittow, Mark. Frühmittelalterliche Walter, Christopher. Herrschaft. von Visualisierung the of Portrait The Istanbul: at Sophia Hagia of Mosaics W.“The J. Ernest Hawkins, A. Paul Underwood, (fig. 1) Basil I and his second wife Eudokia as being blessed by Christ, ivory-casket lid, lid, 84) fig. ivory-casket Christ, Meaning, by and blessed Vision being as Brubaker, Eudokia (After wife Rome second Venezia, his and I Palazzo Basil 1) (fig. BYZAS Istanbul, BYZAS 5,2005. 187-217.15 (1961): 1960”. and 1959 in Institute Byzantine the by Done Work on Report A Alexander: Emperor The Making of Orthodox Byzantium (600-1025) Byzantium Orthodox of Making The Art and Ritual of the Byzantine Church Byzantine the of Ritual and Art . London:Variourum,. 1982. . Press,London:Macmillan. 1996. Plates . Ed. F. A. Bauer. A. F. Ed. . DOP 75

CEU eTD Collection of Nazianzus, Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris. gr. 510. (After Brubaker, Vision and Meaning, fig. 5) fig. Gregory of Meaning, and Homilies the Vision Brubaker, containing (After 510. manuscript gr. the Paris. from Nationale, illumination Gabriel, Bibliotheque by crowned Nazianzus, I of Basil 2) (fig.

76 CEU eTD Collection (fig. 3) Leo VI blessed by a Virgin; tip of the sceptre (?), Staatliche Museen, Berlin (After Brubaker, Vision and Meaning, Meaning, and Vision Brubaker, (After Berlin Museen, Staatliche (?), sceptre the of tip Virgin; a by blessed 177) VI fig Leo 3) (fig. 77 CEU eTD Collection (fig. 4) Emperor Alexander, Hagia Sophia, Istanbul (After Underwood-Hawkins, fig. 5) fig. Underwood-Hawkins, (After Istanbul Sophia, Hagia Alexander, Emperor 4) (fig. 78 CEU eTD Collection (fig. 5) Solidus of Emperor Alexander; Throne-seated Christ on the obverse, Alexander crowned by St John the Baptist Baptist the John St by crowned Alexander obverse, the on Christ Collection) Oaks Throne-seated Alexander; (Dumbarton reverse Emperor of the on Solidus 5) (fig. 79 CEU eTD Collection (fig. 6) Romanos crowned by Christ on the Obverse, Christopher and Constantine 'switching places' on the reverse reverse the on places' 'switching Constantine and Christopher Obverse, the on Christ 5-6) by xxxvi, pl. crowned 3, (DOC, Romanos 6) (fig. 80

Top View