The Late Medieval Balkans A Critical Survey from the Late Twelfth Century to the Ottoman Conquest JOHN V. A. FINE, JR. Ann Arbor The University of Michigan Pres s First paperback edition 1994 Copyright © by the University of Michigan 1987 All rights reserved Published in the United States of America by The University of M ichigan Press Manufactured in the United States of America 2000 1999 6 5 4 Libra ry of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Fine, John V. A. (John Van Antwerp ), 1939- The late medieval Balkans. Bibliography: p. Includes index. 1. Balkan P eninsulaHistory. I. Title. DR39.F57 1987 949.6 86-16120 ISBN 0-472-10079-3 (alk. paper). ISBN 0-472-08260-4 (pbk.: alk. paper). No part of this publication may b e reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, or otherwise, without the written permission of the publisher. To the inspiring teachers under whom I studied the medieval Balka ns at Harvard and Sarajevo With deep gratitude to Albert Lord Vlajko Palavestra and to the memory of Ante Babic Georges Florovsky Robert Lee Wolff Acknowledgmen ts The decision to write this work began when the American Council of Learned So cieties (ACLS) Committee on Eastern Europe asked me to produce a major regional history of medieval southeastern Europe, as part of a series for which they hope d to receive outside funding. When their funding efforts proved unsuccessful, I decided to go ahead with my part anyway, because there had long been a need for a book such as this one. I divided the project in half, first surveying the peri od from the late sixth century to the 1180s. That volume, entitled The Early Med ieval Balkans: A Critical Survey from the Sixth to the Late Twelfth Century was published by the University of Michigan Press in 1983. The present volume is tha t work's continuation. And to prevent this already long volume from becoming any longer, I have kept the background material to a bare minimum. Thus readers see king a more thorough background about the state of the Balkans in the 1180s tha n this work provides are referred to the earlier volume. Like its predecessor, t his volume is to a large extent based upon lectures for the course on the mediev al Balkans that I have been giving for the past fifteen years at the University of Michigan. I owe a debt to my students' responses to these lectures; their com ments and questions have compelled me constantly to rethink and clarify my thoug hts. A grant from the John Simon Guggenheim Foundation combined with a Universit y of Michigan sabbatical semester gave me the academic year 1982- 83 to devote e ntirely to writing. By the end of the year I had completed a first draft, which became the basis for a semester's lectures in the winter term 1984.1 then carrie d out the revisions I felt the work required. It is a pleasure to recognize here the various people and institutions that have assisted in this work's preparati on. First the John Simon Guggenheim Foundation, in addition to supporting my ti me to write, also provided funds for travelwhich enabled me to go to London and u tilize the magnificent British Library of the British Museum and to visit Yugosl avia to use the Narodna Biblioteka in Sarajevo and to discuss various questions with Yugoslav scholarsas well as funds for typing and preparation of maps. The Ho race H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies at the University of Michigan generou sly provided a subvention to facilitate the book's publication. The Center for Russian and East viii Late Medieval Balkans European Studies at the University o f Michigan, encouraging me to have the manuscript prepared on a word processor, assumed the responsibility for printing what appeared on my many disks. The Cent er also provided funds for me to hire a research assistant, Michael Oyserman, wh o could read Hebrew texts and scholarship; this enabled me to expand my discussi on of Jewish communities in the medieval Balkans. I also owe a debt to Michael, whose enthusiasm for the project equaled my own. My debt to my friend and typist , Mary Ann Rodgers, is enormous. Not only did she do a fabulous typing job, but she also introduced me to the world of computers and went well beyond the call o f duty by producing dictionaries of terms, which made the production of maps an d glossaries much easier. I also want to thank my friends Professor Thomas Traut mann and Marion Hoyer, both of the University of Michigan, who generously assist ed me in proofreading the galleys, and my nephew Ljubisa Mladenovic, who created the computer program to do the index and whose enthusiasm for every aspect of m y project was unflagging. I am very grateful to Professor R. V. Burks of Wayne S tate University and to Dr. Duncan M. Perry and Professor George Majeska, both of the University of Maryland, whose careful reading and detailed suggestions have greatly improved the work. I am also indebted to Professor Sima Cirkovic of the University of Beograd and to Professor Desanka Kovacevic of the University of Sarajevo for their thorough and careful responses to various questions I put to them. None of the individuals named, of course, bears any responsibility for th e errors of fact and interpretation that may remain in the work. I am also most grateful to my family, to my wife, Gena, and sons, Alexander (Sasha) and Paul, w ho all suffered at times from the loss of my attention. They not only bore this deprivation with good spirit but also provided encouragement and a great deal o f time in the thankless job of proofreading. Note on Transliteration and Names S erbo-Croatian is a single language (with, of course, dialectical differences) wr itten with two alphabets, Latin for Croatian and Cyrillic for Serbian. Thus the Croatian Latin scheme is a natural one to use for transliterating Serbian names. Furthermore, it seems to me a better system than any other now being used to tr ansliterate Bulgarian and Russian as well. Thus, following Croatian, the followi ng transliteration scheme is used: c ts (except in words already accepted into E nglish such as tsar) c = ch (soft) c = ch (hard) h guttural kh (though I have le ft the kh, since it is standard, for Turkic names such as Khazars, khagan, Isper ikh) j = y (as in yes) s sh i = zh The Slavic softsign is indicated by a single apostrophe ('). The Bulgarian hardsign has been rendered with a double apostroph e (") Greek was undergoing evolution at this time with the b coming to be pronoun ced as a v. However, I have consistently stuck with the b in transliterating na mes, thus Bardas rather than Vardas. The same thing was happening to u, with it s pronunciation shifting from u to v. I have almost always stuck to the u; thus Staurakios rather than Stavrakios. A major problem with Greek names is also the fact that their latinization has already become standard in English. Thus k ten ds to be rendered as c rather than k. I have reverted to the less ambiguous k in all cases (Kastoria, Nikopolis, etc.) unless names have already become commonpl ace in English: e.g., Nicephorus, Lecapenus, etc. In the same way the Greek os t ends to be latinized to us. In names already commonplace in the English literatu re I have stuck with the us, otherwise I have used the os. Since control of part icular territories in the Balkans has changed over time from Romans or Greeks to different Slavic people to Turks, it is not surprising that there are many diff erent names for some cities. On the whole, I have chosen the name used in the Mi ddle Ages by the power that controlled x Late Medieval Balkans that place most. Upon first mention (and also in the index) I give the variant names for each pla ce (e.g., Philippopolis [modern Plovdiv], or Durazzo [Dyrrachium, Durres], etc.) . Personal names have presented an insoluble problem, at least to an author maki ng an attempt at consistency. Originally I intended in all cases to use Slavic n ames; however, how could I say Ivan Alexander when his Greek counterpart was Joh n Cantacuzenus? I then tried to make a distinction between ultimate rulers and nobles, so that I could at least retain the Slavic flavor with the nobility. How ever, should we then suddenly change the name of Djuradj Brankovic to George whe n he became the ruler? As a result I threw up my hands and anglicized all first names, merely providing the Slavic forms on first mention. The only exception is Stephen (a name with various spellings in English as well as Slavic) whose sign ificance on occasions went beyond that of a mere name. Its adoption by Serbian r ulers came close to being part of a title, and its subsequent adoption by the Bo snian rulersafter Tvrtko's 1377 coronationindicates the Serbian origin of Bosnia's kingship. Thus I have used the forms Stefan and Stjepan as they are appropriate . Contents Chapter 1: The Balkans in the Late Twelfth Century 1 Stefan Nemanja A cquires Power in Serbia 2 Byzantine Difficulties in the Balkans under Andronicus I 6 Serbian Expansion and Military Activities, 1180-90 7 Isaac Angelus Assumes Power in Byzantium and Expels the Normans 9 Bulgarian Uprising, 1185-88 10 Bosni a and Hum to ca. 1198 17 Croatia 21 The Third Crusade (1189) 23 Serbs and Bulgar ians, 1190-95 25 Ivanko and Dobromir Chrysos 28 Kalojan Assumes Power in Bulgari a, 1197 29 The Byzantine Triumph over Ivanko 30 The Byzantine Treaty with Kaloja n 31 Chrysos and Kamytzes 32 Greece at the End of the Twelfth Century 33 Abdicat ion of Stefan Nemanja 38 Rivalry between Stefan and Vukan in Serbia 41 Alliances and Church Policy Involving Zeta and Bosnia 43 The Bosnian Church Council of 12 03 47 Vukan Seizes Raska 47 Raska and Zeta, 1206/07 to ca. 1216 49 The Region of Albania in the Late Twelfth and Early Thirteenth Centuries 51 Hum at the End of the Twelfth and the Beginning of the Thirteenth Centuries 52 Kalojan on the Eve of the Fourth Crusade 54 Notes 56 Chapter 2: The Fourth Crusade and its Afterma th 60 Background for the Fourth Crusade 60 The Conquest of Constantinople by the Crusaders 62 xii Late Medieval Balkans Boniface's Conquests and his Vassals 64 The Greek State of Epirus 65 Villehardouin in the Morea 69 Latin Religious Polic y in the Conquered Greek Lands 76 Baldwin and Kalojan in Thrace 80 Kalojan's Act ivities after April 1205 83 The Kingdom of Thessaloniki after Boniface's Death 8 7 Nicea Proclaims Imperial Status 90 Boril in Bulgaria and Balkan Affairs, 1207- 13 91 Boril's 1213 Alliance with the Latins and the Conclusion of his Reign 100 The 1214 War, the End of Strez, and the Division of his Lands 103 John Asen Over throws Boril 106 Serbia in the Second Decade of the Thirteenth Century 106 Notes 109 Chapter 3: The First Half of the Thirteenth Century 112 Theodore of Epirus' First Decade, 1215-24 112 Quarrel between the Churches of Epirus and Nicea 114 Creation of an Autocephalous Serbian Church, 1219 116 Theodore Acquires Thessalo niki and Coronation 119 Theodore's Ambitions and Actions, 1225-30 122 The Battle of Klokotnica (1230) and its Results for Bulgaria 124 Thessaloniki-Epirus after Klokotnica 126 Bulgarian-Hungarian Relations 128 Bulgarian-Nicean Relations 129 Greek Affairs, 1237-42 133 Serbia under Radoslav and Vladislav 135 Zeta in the Second Quarter of the Thirteenth Century 137 Hum in the Second Quarter of the Th irteenth Century 142 Bosnia in the Second Quarter of the Thirteenth Century 143 Croatia in the Second Quarter of the Thirteenth Century 149 Notes 153 Chapter 4: The Second Half of the Thirteenth Century 154 Bulgaria upon John Asen II's Deat h 154 Nicea and Epirus, 1246-61 156 The Nicean Recovery of Constantinople 165 Th e Struggle between Franks and Byzantines for the Morea 165 The Struggle for Nort hern Greece 168 Charles of Anjou Enters into Greek Affairs 170 Bulgaria between Byzantium, Hungary, and the Tatars, 1256-77 170 Contents xiii Byzantium's Effort s to Defend itself against Charles of Anjou 184 Civil War in Bulgaria, 1278-84 1 95 Serbia under King Uros, 1243-76 199 Hungary and Croatia 204 Notes 214 Chapter 5: The Balkans in the Early Fourteenth Century 217 Serbia at the End of the Thi rteenth Century 217 Bulgaria at the End of the Thirteenth Century 224 Byzantium and Greece in the Early Fourteenth Century 230 The Byzantine Civil War between A ndronicus II and Andronicus III 250 Thessaly and Epirus under Andronicus III 252 Serbia in the Early Fourteenth Century 255 Serbia Loses its Part of Hum 266 Vid in in the First Quarter of the Fourteenth Century 268 Bulgaria in the 1320s 269 Serbia, Bulgaria, and Byzantium, 1324-32 270 Bosnia from the 1280s to the 1320s 275 Notes 285 Chapter 6: The Balkans in the Middle of the Fourteenth Century 286 Dusan and Byzantium to 1334 286 Dusan and Hungary 288 Dusan, the Empire, and Al bania 289 Dusan in 1340 290 Turkish Activities in the Balkans 291 The Byzantine Civil War between Cantacuzenus and the Constantinopolitan Regency 292 The Serbs Are Drawn into the Byzantine Civil War 296 Despot John Oliver 298 Serbian Partic ipation in the Byzantine Civil War 300 Cantacuzenus' Triumph 307 Dusan's Coronat ion (April 1346) 309 Administration of Dusan's State 310 Dusan's Law Code 314 Se rbia's Peasants 317 Dusan Conquers Thessaly and Epirus 320 The Condition of the Byzantine Empire in the Middle of the Fourteenth Century 321 Dusan, Byzantium, a nd Bosnia in 1350 322 Civil War Again in Byzantium 325 xiv Late Medieval Balkans Manuel Cantacuzenus in the Morea 327 Greek Landholding, Peasants, and Lords 329 Dusan's Last Years and Death 334 Hungary and Venice Struggle for Dalmatia 337 N otes 343 Chapter 7: The Balkans from Dusan's Death (1355) to the Eve of Kosovo ( 1389) 345 Initial Territorial Losses for the Serbian Empire after Dusan's Death 345 Thessaly and Epirus 346 Dusan's Albanian Lands 357 The Lands that Remained L oyal to Uros 358 Bulgaria 366 Bosnia: The Early Years of Tvrtko's Reign 368 The Albanian Lands in the 1360s 370 Civil War among the Serbs 373 The Turkish Threat and Ugljesa's Response to It 377 The Battle of Marica and its Aftermath 379 Act ivities of the Independent Serbian Nobles 382 The End of Nicholas Altomanovic 38 4 Lazar's Principality 387 The Balsici in the 1370s and 1380s 389 Tvrtko of Bosn ia from the 1370s to 1391 392 Hungarian Civil War 395 Attica, Boeotia, and the P eloponnesus 398 Notes 404 Chapter 8: The Balkans in the Late Fourteenth Century 406 The Turks and the Balkans after the Battle of Marica 406 Kosovo 408 Albania and Zeta 414 The Ottoman Conquest of Bulgaria 422 The Battles of Rovine and Niko polis and their Results 424 Serbian Affairs 425 Affairs in Greece 427 Religion a nd Culture 435 The Jews in the Balkans 446 Notes 451 Chapter 9: The Balkans in t he Early Fifteenth Century 453 Bosnia after the Death of Tvrtko 453 Religion and Culture inside Bosnia 481 Contents Dalmatia 488 Croatia 495 The Battle of Ankar a 499 Serbia after Ankara 500 The Ottoman Civil War 503 Stefan Lazarevic and Hun gary 509 Albania and Zeta after Ankara 510 Stefan Lazarevic's Last Years in Serb ia 522 George Brankovic's Succession 526 Zeta and Albania, 1427-30 528 Serbia in the 1430s 529 Zeta in the Late 1430s and Early 1440s 531 Albania in the 1430s 5 35 Byzantium and the Turks after Mehemmed I's Death (1421) 536 The Morea and Non -Turkish Greece 538 Notes 546 Chapter 10: The Balkans for the Remainder of the F ifteenth Century 548 The Crusade of Varna 1443-44 548 Hungary and Croatia after Varna 551 Serbia after Varna 554 Skanderbeg's Revolt in Albania 556 George Brank ovic and Zeta 558 Affairs in Greece from 1443 561 The Fall of Serbia 568 Bosnia from 1443 577 Croatia after 1463 590 Albania and Zeta after 1455 595 Explanation for the Ottoman Success 604 Notes 611 Appendix: Medieval Rulers 613 Byzantine E mperors from 1143 to 1453 613 Latin Emperors of Constantinople 614 Rulers of Epi rus 614 Rulers of the Morea 614 Greek Despots of the Morea 615 Latin Rulers of A thens and Thebes 615 Bulgarian Tsars 616 Rulers of Serbia 617 Rulers of Zeta 617 Rulers of Bosnia xvi Late Medieval Balkans The Kosaca Rulers of Hum/Hercegovina 618 Kings of Hungary 618 Ottoman Sultans 619 Glossary of Terms 621 Sources and Authors of Sources Referred to in the Text 629 Selected Bibliography 633 Index 6 45 CHAPTER 1 The Balkans in the Late Twelfth Century By 1172 Manuel I Comnenus h ad recovered for the Byzantine Empire all the Balkans except for what is now Slo venia and the Croatian territory north of the Krka River, which Hungary retained . But the Hungarian presence was not a major danger to Byzantium because the Hun garian throne was then occupied by King Bela III (1172-96), an imperial in-law ( having married the step-sister of Manuel's wife) who after a long residence at t he imperial court had been allowed to return to Hungary to take its throne after having sworn allegiance to Manuel. In the warfare against Hungary, prior to Bel a's assumption of power, the empire had recovered from Hungary Dalmatia, Croatia , Bosnia, and Srem. Probably in Croatia and Bosnia little or no direct imperial rule existed, which would have left these lands in the hands of local nobles who only nominally accepted Byzantine suzerainty. Closer to imperial centers, the S erbian lands of Raska, Zeta, and Hum were under vassal princes at the time loyal to the empire, while Bulgaria and Macedonia were still annexed and under regula r Byzantine administration. These last two regions, Bulgaria and Macedonia, were divided into three themes (i.e., militarized provinces under military governors entitled strategoi). However, although the empire seemed to be in a strong posi tion with direct control over much of the Balkans and indirect control (through vassal princes) over the rest, seeds of destruction existed that threatened the maintenance of this situation. First, as we saw in the previous volume,1 the the me administration was in decline. No longer did the military governor have suffi cient forces directly under his command to control and defend his province. Prov incial magnates had been increasing their estates and building up large private armies. In order to carry out its military needs when it found its thematic army (i.e., the state troops directly under the strategos) insufficient, the state h ad had to turn to these magnates and award them additional lands as fiefs (calle d pronoias) in order to obtain military service from them. The pronoiar (or pron oia holder) owed for his fief military service accompanied by a given number (de pending on the size of the fief) of retainers. By Manuel's time in most province s the retainers of the pronoiars plus mercenaries made up over half of a provinc e's 2 Late Medieval Balkans armed forces. Thus in a time of weakness at the cent er, the strategos might well have been unable to force obedience from the magnat es; as a result more and more local authority was falling into the hands of loca l magnates, setting the stage for separatism. We shall soon return to this probl em when we turn to the imperial Balkans (especially Greece and Thrace) in the pe riod after Manuel's death. Second, the vassal princes, though cowed by Manuel's successful military campaigns against them, culminating in his forcing submissi on from Stefan Nemanja of Serbia (Raska) in 1172, were not necessarily happy wit h this situation. Thus the people in the border regions were more or less waitin g for Manuel's death to re-assert themselves. This was particularly true of Serb ia. Stefan Nemanja Acquires Power in Serbia The previous volume traced the cours e of events in Serbia under Vukan, Uros I, Uros II, and Desa through the mid-116 0s. It discussed the large number of Serbian revolts (often aided by Hungary) fo r full independence. Each time, the Byzantines were able sooner or later to supp ress these uprisings, but Serbia never remained pacified for long. Even when By zantium changed rulers in Serbiaas it did upon occasionit could not prevent new re bellions from breaking out. Finally in about 1166 a major change occurred in Ser bia. The old dynasty was replaced by a new one headed at first by a certain Tiho mir who was quickly replaced by his brother Stefan Nemanja. This new dynasty was to reign in Serbia until 1371. Where the founders of this new dynasty came from and whatif any connection they had to the preceding dynasty is a matter of great controversy. Unfortunately, very little is really known about the subject. In th e years prior to 1165/66 Serbia had been ruled by a family related to the dynast y of Duklja or Zeta (what is now Montenegro). This Serbian or Raskan branch of t he family traced its descent to a certain Vukan, a nephew of Constantine Bodin o f Duklja, who had been appointed governor of Raska by Bodin in 1083/84. After Vu kan's death, succession went to his son Uros I who was then succeeded by his so n Uros II. With a brief interruption when the Byzantines ousted him in favor of his brother Desa in 1155, Uros II ruled Serbia until 1161/62, when the Byzantine s intervened again and restored Desa. Desa, under pressure, supported Byzantium in its campaign of 1163 or 1164 against Hungary. In the late 1160s Uros and Desa disappear from the scene and four brothers (Tihomir, Stracimir, Miroslav, and S tefan Nemanja) came to rule Serbia. Who were they and where did they come from? Most scholars have concluded that the four were somehow related to the preceding dynasty. Later Serbian and Dalmatian sources from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries state Nemanja was the son of Desa. A relationship to the previous dyn asty is also suggested by the fact that both Nemanja's charter issued to Hilanda r in 1198 and the biographies of him written by his sons state that he came to B alkans in the Late Twelfth Century 3 power in his grandfather's patrimony, imply ing he had a right to inherit it. They also state that Nemanja's great-grandfath er and grandfather had ruled the land but make no such claims about his father. The natural inference from this is that Desa could not have been his father. Als o militating against Desa as his father is an inscription written in a Gospel by Nemanja's brother Miroslav that states Miroslav was the son of Zavid. Nothing e lse is known about Zavid, but he might well have been an otherwise unknown son o f Uros I. Also suggesting descent from Uros I is the fact that several of Neman ja's descendants who were to rule Serbia bore the name Stefan Uros.2 The life of Nemanja by his son Stefan states that Stefan Nemanja, the youngest son of a man whose name is not given, was born in Zeta near Podgorica (modern Titograd) afte r his father, having involved himself in a power struggle with his brothers, had fled Raska for Zeta. There Nemanja received a Catholic baptism, for that region was under Catholic jurisdiction. This statement reflects the strength of Cathol icism in western Zeta and shows that that faith was not limited to Zeta's coasta l cities. When the family returned to Raska, Nemanja was re-baptized in an Ortho dox ceremony. The father presumably had either tried to oust Uros II or Desa or else had tried to acquire an appanage of his own and, failing in his attempt, ha d then fled. Subsequently when this father, presumably named Zavid, eventually d ied at an unknown date, each son received a hereditary appanage. Thus his lands were divided among his sons with precedence going to the eldest, Tihomir. Nemanj a's appanage lay in the region of the Ibar River and included Toplica. Though no dates are given in any source as to when Nemanja received this appanage, it was probably about 1166, the approximate date when the four brothers replaced Desa as joint rulers of Serbia, with seniority belonging to Tihomir. In fact, it seem s likely that this family was installed by Manuel, and one would expect him to t urn to the existing ruling family, for its members would be more likely to gain acceptance from the Serbs than would leaders from an entirely new family. Manuel 's role and the approximate date of 1166 for the change of ruler find support in a Byzantine oration published by Robert Browning and referring to events of abo ut 1166. The oration states that Manuel easily reduced the Serbs to submission; they repented and accepted the change of ruler that Manuel imposed on them. Thus quite possibly Desa did something to displease Manuel, leading once again to By zantine intervention and a change on the Serbian throne. Or possibly since a ma jor war with Hungary had flared up in 1166, Desa's ties with Hungary simply made his continued presence as leader of Serbia seem too dangerous. Since 1166 is ab out the date other sources give for Tihomir's coming to power, it makes sense to conclude that Tihomir was the ruler appointed in that year over the Serbs by Ma nuel. From the start of Tihomir's reign Serbian territory was divided among the four brothers: Tihomir, Stracimir, Miroslav, and Stefan Nemanja. Tihomir, the el dest, bore the title Grand zupan. Now, with Tihomir on the throne, we can turn t o the Serbian sources, 4 Late Medieval Balkans which unfortunately provide no da tes for events. The near contemporary ones are two lives of Stefan Nemanja (each in the form of a saint's life) written by two of his sons early in the thirteen th century, after Nemanja's death. One was written by Stefan Prvovencani (the Fi rst-Crowned), his successor on the throne of Serbia (1196-1227), and the other w as written by his youngest son Sava, who became a monk and later, in 1219, the f irst Archbishop of Serbia. These biographies state that Nemanja received his inh erited lands from his father. As noted, these consisted of the Ibar region with Toplica. Whether he received this territory before or after Tihomir acquired the throne is not known. We are told that Nemanja also received Dubocica as an appa nage from Manuel. Most scholars believe that the Dubocica appanage was the same as the appanage of Dendra near Nis, which Manuel had assigned to Desa previously when he deposed him and restored Uros II to the throne in 1155 or 1156. As a re sult Nemanja was not only the vassal of his elder brother Tihomir but was also a direct vassal of Manuel for Dubocica. This direct tie to Byzantium probably ala rmed Tihomir, who must have seen it as a threat to his own rule. Stefan Prvovenc ani's biography also states that Nemanja built a church to the Virgin at Toplica and a second church dedicated to Saint Nicholas on the near-by River Banja wit hout seeking Tihomir's approval, as Tihomir believed Nemanja should have. Nemanj a, on the other hand, considered himself free to erect churches on his own init iative. Thus it seems Nemanja was, or Tihomir at least thought he was, trying to assert his own independence, possibly through an alliance with the Byzantines. Tihomir summoned Nemanja, and when he came had him thrown in jail in chains. He then seized Nemanja's lands. Nemanja's supporters made Tihomir's actions appear to be a response to Nemanja's church building, and thus the Church was mobilized against Tihomir, be it at the time or subsequently, by using this issue to jus tify the revolt that won Nemanja the throne. Nemanja prayed to Saint George, who effected his escape. He fled to his own province. Since a clash was inevitable, Nemanja began mobilizing an army. Warfare followed, and through the help of God and of Saint George Nemanja triumphed and expelled his brothers. The other two brothers presumably suffered expulsion for continued support of Tihomir. Very li kely the real miracle behind Nemanja's victory was Byzantine help. Manuel may we ll have been displeased with Tihomir for acting on his own against Nemanja, who was also Manuel's vassal. By depicting Nemanja's victory as a miracle, Stefan Pr vovencani was able to imply God's favor for Nemanja. Moreover, having Nemanja do it alone (or with God's help) was more in keeping with Serbian pride than an ad mission that he needed Byzantine help. Nemanja's explusion of Tihomir and assump tion of the throne probably occurred in 1167 or 1168. Niketas Choniates refers t o Nemanja as being Grand zupan in 1168 but does not give the date he assumed the title. Nemanja, having acquired all Raska after the expulsion of his brothers, had quickly become a powerful figure. Presumably his success had made him strong er than Manuel liked. In any case, Manuel soon gave his support to Balkans in th e Late Twelfth Century 5 Tihomir and the two other brothers, who had all fled to Byzantium. After all, the Byzantines had initially installed Tihomir and presum ably did not like his expulsion; surely they wanted to see Serbia divided among several princes to keep it weak. When Nemanja was the weaker figure, they had be en willing to support him, but they had not sought his total triumph. So, claimi ng that Nemanja had acted against the legal rulers of Serbia, the Byzantines pro vided Tihomir with an army. Choniates describes the background of this new camp aign as follows: Then the emperor [Manuel] turned west to Philippopolis, for he had learned that the Serbian satrap, who was Stefan Nemanja, had become bolder t han he should have, and being a man who evilly used his free time and who was fi lled with unsated desires, he strove to expand his authority over all the neighb oring provinces, cruelly attacking his own family, and not knowing any limit he tried to take Croatia [?] and Kotor. This Byzantine force, as well as the Serbia n troops collected by the brothers, invaded Raska from Skopje. This attack posed a serious danger to Nemanja; not only was he worried about the size of the armi es against him, but he also found himself for the first time fighting against th e troops of his suzerain Manuel. Possibly, however, the presence of Byzantine tr oops tarnished Tihomir's cause in the eyes of the independent-minded Serbs. In any case, Nemanja was able to raise a large army. The two armies met at the vill age of Pantino near Zvecan on the Sitnica River. Nemanja won a major victory, ag ain with Saint George's help, and Tihomir was killed, drowning in the Sitnica. T he two remaining brothers, Stracimir and Miroslav, made peace with Nemanja and r ecognized him as Grand zupan of Serbia and as their suzerain. Nemanja allowed th em appanages, presumably restoring to them their former holdings. Miroslav obtai ned Hum, and Stracimir a territory in northern Raska on the West Morava River ce ntered near modern Cacak. The two brothers were allowed broad autonomy in ruling their lands; they remained loyal to Nemanja thereafter. Then, if not later, Ti homir's son Prvoslav submitted to Nemanja and seems to have been allowed a small appanage, Budimlje (near modern Ivangrad) on the Lim, in which he built the wel l-known church of Djurdjevi Stupovi, the seat of the subsequent Bishop of Budiml je. The important battle of Pantino occurred between 1168 and 1171; most scholar s now accept a date nearer to 1168. At this time Hungary, still under the anti-B yzantine Stephen III, and Venice, angry at Manuel's massive arrest of the Veneti ans residing in the empire in 1171, were trying to create an anti-Byzantine coal ition. A Venetian embassy visited Nemanja, who was probably expecting further By zantine action against himself for his resistance against the Byzantine army tha t had supported Tihomir. Thus he willingly joined the coalition. His troops move d against Kotor while those of Miroslav attacked Omis. The Serbs were also activ e against various Byzantine forts along the Nis-Beograd (Belgrade) 6 Late Mediev al Balkans route. When a domestic naval revolt ended the Venetians' participatio n and the death of Stephen III in Hungary made it possible for Manuel's candidat e, Bela III, to mount the Hungarian throne, Stefan Nemanja was left high and dry . Manuel, now free to turn against him, marched into Raska. Nemanja, seeing that resistance against a major Byzantine force was hopeless, went forth to surrende r and submit to the emperor. The emperor made him go through a humiliating cerem ony at the imperial camp and then took him back to Constantinople for another hu miliating ceremony there that featured long orations celebrating his submission. Some wall-paintings depicting Nemanja at this ceremony bareheaded, barefooted, and with a rope around his neck were painted. Then, as a sworn loyal vassal, Nem anja was allowed to return to Serbia as its Grand zupan. Nemanja remained loyal to the oath he took to the emperor for the next eight years, the duration of Man uel's life. During this period Nemanja, though a Byzantine vassal, firmly establ ished himself as ruler of Raska. Byzantine Difficulties in the Balkans under And ronicus I Manuel died in 1180, and a brief and unsuccessful regency for his mino r son, Alexius II, followed. What had held Bela III of Hungary and Nemanja loyal had been personal ties to Manuel. Now those ties were broken, and in 1181 Bela recovered Srem, Dalmatia, and most probably Croatia as well. It seems this was a bloodless recovery; perhaps the Byzantines even acquiesced in it. It was a time of anarchy and intrigue at home, and Byzantium was in no position to send troop s to Dalmatia. Presumably it seemed better to lose Dalmatia to friendly Hungary than to Venice, with which Byzantium was at war. Venice had in fact already seiz ed Zadar (Zara), and the Hungarians had to take it by force in February 1181. Me anwhile, the regency for the young Alexius was unpopular, and an elderly cousin named Andronicus Comnenus, who had long been a dissident against Manuel and had been exiled all over the map, appeared with an army in Asia Minor. At first he s eemed appealing to the population of Constantinople. He was willing to pose as b eing anti-Western (for the Westerners under Manuel's widow, a Latin princess, he ld great influence) and anti-rich. And he was to ride to power on the coattails of a riot in which hundreds of Westerners in the city of Constantinople were ma ssacred. He awaited the end of the bloodbath and then entered the city, whose ga tes were opened to him. He became regent for the little boy in 1183. He quickly had Alexius' mother strangled, then made himself co-emperor, and finally had Ale xius strangled. As a result he became the sole emperor. These murders gave Bela the opportunity to step forward to avenge the victims. Bela's wife was the step- sister of Manuel's murdered widow. Bela moved at once and occupied Beograd and B ranicevo. Then, picking up the Serbs as allies, he headed down the main invasion route (the modern Orient Express route), driving out imperial garrisons from Ni s and Sardika (modern Sofija) and sacking them both. Six years later, passing cr usaders spoke of the two Balkans in the Late Twelfth Century 7 towns as being de serted and partly in ruins. The Hungarians were to keep control of this highway and the towns along it for the next three years. At home Andronicus was fighting corruption, but he also seems to have been intent on eliminating any and all po werful and rich figures who might conceivably have sought his overthrow and on a venging himself on those who had opposed him earlier. Falling victim to a persec ution mania, he unleashed a reign of terror in the capital, which led to various plots against him. The Hungarians, who occupied much of the central and eastern Balkans, were in Thrace and threatened to attack the capital. Then in June 1185 the Normans from southern Italy launched an attack on Durazzo (Dyrrachium, Durr es). The commander of Durazzo, Alexius Branas, immediately surrendered the city to them, for he was opposed to Andronicus. The Norman army then moved across the Balkans toward Thessaloniki (Salonica), while the Norman fleet, having occupied Corfu (Kerkira, Corcyra), sailed around into the Aegean and occupied various ot her islands. In August 1185 this fleet finally reached Thessaloniki. The army ar rived there at about the same time, and after a brief siege the Normans took The ssaloniki on 24 August and sacked it, massacring large numbers of its citizens. Part of the Norman army then moved toward Serres and took that city; other Norma ns went off plundering into Thessaly, while still others headed for Constantinop le. Serbian Expansion and Military Activities, 1180-90 Stefan Nemanja took advan tage of this chaos to assert Serbia's independence and expand his territory. Bet ween 1180 and 1190, when a partially recovered Byzantium was able to take action against Serbia, Nemanja made considerable gains. The dates that he acquired pa rticular territories are often not certain. However, taking advantage of the int ernal disorders under Andronicus, of the Hungarian attack launched in 1183 with which Nemanja was allied, of the 1185 Norman invasion, and of the Third Crusade in 1189, Nemanja, during those ten years, was able to conquer Kosovo and Metohi ja, including Prizren, and penetrate into northern Macedonia, taking Skopje and the upper Vardar (Axios). He also moved northeast, acquiring most of the towns a long the Morava. By 1188 Nis on the Morava was functioning as his capital. His a rmies then pressed further east and reached the upper Timok River. In the 1180s he also pushed into Zeta and in the course of that decade took it all. The conqu est of Zeta was completed by 1189, when Desislava, widow of Michael, the last ru ler of independent Zeta, appeared as an exile in Dubrovnik (Ragusa). No territor y remained under the former Dukljan dynasty; Zeta was incorporated into Nemanja 's state of Raska. Soon he assigned Zeta to his eldest son, Vukan. Having reache d the coast, he acquired southern Dalmatia, including the towns of Kotor, Ulcinj (Dulcigno), and Bar (Anti- bari). From Zeta he also advanced into northern Alba nia, obtaining the region of Pilot lying between Prizren and Lake Skadar. Nemanj a's activities in southern Dalmatia brought him into conflict with Late Medieval Balkans Dubrovnik. Fighting seems to have broken out in 1184. The issues of dis pute seem to have been both territorial and ecclesiastical. As Nemanja acquired Hum (formerly Zahumlje) and Zeta, which as principalities had controlled much of the territory around Dubrovnik, Nemanja and Dubrovnik laid overlapping claims to certain borderlands. Furthermore, Nemanja had acquired Bar, whose bishop had been made an independent archbishop by the pope in 1089. Since this change had m eant a considerable loss of territory for Dubrov- nik's archbishop, Dubrovnik ha d protested long and hard against it. Finally in 1142 Dubrovnik had triumphed wh en the pope reduced Bar's archbishop to a bishop and again subordinated Bar to D ubrovnik. Outraged by this reversal of policy, Bar was still protesting when Nem anja acquired Bar in the 1180s. Furthermore Hum had now been annexed by Raska an d assigned as the holding of Nemanja's brother Miroslav. Having as its capital t he coastal city of Ston, Hum was oriented toward coastal affairs and had economi c and territorial ambitions that clashed with Dubrovnik's. One such ambition was to control the island of Korcula. In 1184 Nemanja's brother Stracimir, presumab ly with Nemanja's blessing, launched an attack against Korcula. The action fail ed as the islanders, aided by Dubrovnik, repelled the invaders, and Hum was soon forced to give up its claim to Korcula. Dubrovnik's support of the islanders of Korcula rankled with the Serbs. It is not clear whether Nemanja had already gon e to war against Dubrovnik, making its support of Korcula part of its war agains t Nemanja, or whether Dubrovnik's assistance to Korcula was the last straw leadi ng Nemanja to initiate his war against Dubrovnik. But in any case in 1185 Nemanj a attacked the city of Dubrovnik itself and laid siege to it. Later chronicles f rom Dubrovnik (written three hundred or more years later) state that the siege f ailed. However, a Church document prepared for the pope in the 1250s (probably i n 1255) in connection with the Dubrovnik-Bar Church quarrel, explaining the loss of certain documents, states that Nemanja captured Dubrovnik. Although most hi storians have accepted the statements made by the chronicles, Fore tic argues pl ausibly that the city fell.3 After all, the 1255 document was prepared only seve nty years after the event and is far older than the chronicles. Foretic thinks N emanja penetrated into the town or at least into part of it. For the 1255 docume nt states he plundered part of the city, including the archives, which as a resu lt lost certain documents. The archival losses were not wanton theft, but includ ed the calculated removal of certain materials that argued against Bar's claims. The Serbs were unable to hold the town. Did a Ragusan counter-attack force them out, or did Dubrovnik receive outside help? Since Dubrovnik in 1186 is found un der Norman suzerainty, it seems likely that the town received Norman assistance. Either the threat of Norman intervention or even an actual Norman campaign may well have forced the Serbs to depart. By autumn 1186, for whatever reason, but m ost probably one related to Ragusan negotiations with the Normans, Nemanja had given up the idea of conquering and retaining Dubrovnik. He made peace with the city. The treaty was signed 27 Balkans in the Late Twelfth Century 9 September 1 186 in the city of Dubrovnik "in the lands of lord King William," the Norman rul er of Sicily, and before his representative, thereby showing the existence of No rman suzerainty. The treaty was also signed in the name of all three Serbian bro thers by two of them, Nemanja and Miroslav, showing that their rule was a family enterprise and that Nemanja as Grand zupan, though senior, was obliged to consu lt his brothers. The treaty ended the war. Both sides agreed not to seek damages for destruction occurring during the fighting. It re-established the pre-war b orders, enabling Dubrovnik to retain rights to its "patrimony," which had been u nder dispute (presumably to Rozat and Kurilo mentioned in the document). Dubrovn ik received the right to trade duty-free in Nemanja's and Miroslav's lands, part icularly along the Neretva and at the customs station at Drijeva. Dubrovnik also received the right to carry out other economic activities (including chopping wood and grazing flocks) without hindrance in Serbian lands in the vicinity of D ubrovnik, according to former custom. The tribute that Dubrovnik had formerly re ndered partly in wine and partly in cash to the princes of Hum and Trebinje, pre sumably in return for these economic privileges, would henceforth be paid entir ely in cash. Joint courts were to be established; thus legal disputes between Se rbs and Ragusans were to be settled by a court composed of an equal number of Se rbs and Ragusans. Hum renounced its claims to the islands of Korcula and Vis. Ea ch party to the treaty received the right to give asylum to the enemies of the o ther but was obliged to see that such enemies did not use this asylum as a base to attack the other. Isaac Angelus Assumes Power in Byzantium and Expels the Nor mans4 On 12 September 1185 Andronicus ordered the arrest of a Constantinopolitan nobleman, Isaac Angelus. Isaac resisted arrest, and since his family stood join tly responsible for the correct behavior of all its members, his resistance thre atened the whole Angelus clan. The Angeli began stirring up mob action. This was not difficult to do, for there was much popular dissatisfaction with the reign of terror unleashed by Andronicus and there was widespread belief that he was do ing nothing to resist the Normans who were rapidly approaching the city. The up rising was made easier by Andronicus' being outside the city at that moment. The revolution succeeded. Isaac Angelus, a cousin of the Comneni, obtained the thro ne. He was to rule for the next decade, 1185-95. Andronicus was seized and tortu red to death. Isaac's first task was to expel the Normans from the Balkans. He q uickly mobilized a large force and sent it out against them under the able comma nder Alexius Branas. Unaware of Andronicus' overthrow and in considerable disor derfor they were out plundering in small bandsthe Normans were quickly defeated. T hessaloniki was recovered and then the Byzantine forces pushed west to regain Du razzo and Corfu. Isaac also made peace with the Hungarians, whose justification for their action had been to avenge Manuel's 10 Late Medieval Balkans family. Is aac's elimination of Andronicus had resolved this issue. Isaac agreed to marry B ela's nine-year-old daughter, Margaret. For her dowry the Byzantines recovered a t least certain cities along the Morava-Orient Express route. Beograd, Branicevo , and probably Nis were returned. Various other cities along the middle and uppe r Morava may not have reverted to the Byzantines at once since they were in the possession of the Serbs. In exchange for this territory and Bela's agreement to withdraw all his troops beyond the Danube, the Byzantines recognized Hungarian p ossession of the Dalmatian cities. The royal wedding took place, probably in Nov ember 1185. Bulgarian Uprising, 1185-88 In the interim, when the Byzantine campa ign against the Normans was still underway, Isaac had gone to the fortress of Ky psela (modern Ipsala) near the mouth of the Marica. Over the previous weeks he h ad been actively recruiting troops to fight the Normans and granting pronoias (f iefs) in large numbers for service. By the early fall he had raised a large enou gh force for his present needs, and his troops under Branas were rapidly clearin g the Normans out of the Balkans. Thus, Isaac was no longer seeking recruits and granting pronoias for that purpose. At that moment, in the fall of 1185, two br others named Theodore (soon to take the name of Peter) and Asen, from the region of Trnovo in Bulgaria, arrived at Kypsela to seek audience with the emperor. Th ey hoped to obtain a mountain district in the Balkan (Haemus) Mountainsone, accor ding to Choniates, of little valueas a pronoia for service to the emperor. Not ne eding more troops, the emperor refused. Asen tried to argue his case and became quite heated in his words. At that point Isaac's uncle, Sebastocrator John, orde red Asen struck across the face. The two brothers withdrew in a huff and, return ing to their region of Trnovo, immediately began to raise a rebellion. Before tu rning to that rebellion, I want to draw attention to two odd features of this st ory noticed by Mutafciev.5 First, it had not been necessary for the brothers to go directly to the emperor for a pronoia of little value; these were usually dis tributed by relevant bureaucrats. Thus, Mutafciev wonders, could the brothers in fact have been seeking something considerably more significant, like a provinci al governorship? Second, Asen's insolent manner of protesting to the emperor was most unusual behavior. That he dared to behave in this manner and also that he was not immediately pitched into prison or worse suggest to Mutafciev that the b rothers must have been people of considerable stature. Whatever the explanations for these two oddities, it is also strange that, having refused their request a nd insulted them in the bargain, Isaac and his officials allowed the brothers t o return freely to Bulgaria. Bulgaria at the time was not calm. Choniates mentio ns that Bulgarians, holding small fortresses in inaccessible places, were alread y acting uppity toward the Romans. Dujcev thus sees the first stirrings of revol t in Bulgaria as occurring even prior to the Theodore and Asen incident. These s tirrings, Balkans in the Late Twelfth Century 11 Dujcev believes, were probably spontaneous and quite disorganized, carried out by small, scattered groups of pe asants and shepherds and lacking unified leadership or even any denned goals. Th e Bulgarians were dissatisfied with taxes, which increased rapidly in the first months under Isaac, who sought cash to award his followers and to establish the luxurious court he was to maintain. At the time, taxes also included a special w edding tax to finance the elaborate ceremonies for his wedding with the Hungaria n princess. Presumably other Bulgarians sought independence as well. Memories o f the First Bulgarian State, which existed from the late seventh century until t