ВЛАДЕТЕЛ, ДЪРЖАВА И ЦЪРКВА НА БАЛКАНИТЕ ПРЕЗ СРЕДНОВЕКОВИЕТО Сборник с доклади от международна научна конференция, посветена на 60-годишнината на проф. д-р Пламен Павлов HAGIOZACHARITAI – A LITTLE-KNOWN BYZANTINE ARISTOCRATIC FAMILY FROM THE 10th – 11th C. Symeon Antonov АГИОЗАХАРИДИТЕ – ЕДИН СЛАБО ПОЗНАТ ВИЗАНТИЙСКИ АРИСТОКРАТИЧЕН РОД ОТ X – XI ВЕК Симеон Антонов Abstract: Hagiozacharitai were a Byzantine aristocratic family, attested in 10th – 11th c. sources of different nature – narrative, epistolary and sphragistic. The last dominate the primary material. Some twelve Hagiozacharitai are known at present. Their careers are studied as best as possible, given the scarce data, coming predominantly from lead seals, many of them with un- known or uncertain provenance. Two main questions are specially considered in the paper: 1) origin of the family name, the family itself, and the cult towards St Zacharias, whose brilliant image is found on some seals be- longing to members of the Hagiozacharites’ lineage; 2) Hagiozacharitai’s place in state and society and the changes through the lifetime of the family between the end of the 10th and the whole of the 11th c. Keywords: Hagiozacharites, Byzantine nobility, Byzantine elite, St Zacharias, Byzantine prosopography. he name Hagiozacharites (Ἁγιοζαχαρίτης) is found in sources from the last Tthird of the 10th and the whole of the 11th c. These sources are predominantly sphragistic (some 85% of all). The first and only written historical text, mentioning the Hagiozacharitai, is the Synopsis Historion of Ioannes Skylitzes. Another member of the family, unfortunately unnamed, is the addressee of a letter from the synkellos Leo, bishop of Synada. The fact that no thorough study has ever been published of this family, makes the present paper worthwhile. In his book about the Byzantine ruling elite from the 11th – 12th c. Alexander Kazhdan takes only four of them into account (Каж- дан 1974, 96, 159)1. Various paragraphs and footnotes in corpora of Byzantine 1 One of whom bears the name Trishagiozacharites – notarios Eusthatios (12th – 13th c.), where the connection with the Hagiozacharitai is more than hypothetical. 762 Hagiozacharitai – а Little-Known Byzantine Aristocratic Family... 763 lead seals are also devoted to the Hagiozacharitai (Laurent 1981, 221; Йорданов 1993, 156; Seibt, Zarnitz 1997, 127; Stavrakos 2000, 48; Šandrovskaja, Seibt 2005, 113 – 114). The only prosopographic information that is nearly complete is that in Ivan Yordanov, but the nature and the volume of the edition predetermines its brief analysis (Yordanov 2006, 38 – 39). An important issue, connected to the current topic, is that of the origin of the family name. A few suggestions dominate the secondary sources. Jean-Claude Cheynet believes the Hagiozacharitai belonged to the “aristocratie micrasiatique”, because they sided with Bardas Skleros during his revolt (Cheynet 1996, 229). The author put no effort into interpreting their name, though. A. Kazhdan supposes that it should be traced back to a monastery, named after the prophet Zacharias, the father of St John the Forerunner (Каждан 1974, 190). Evidence of a church with the name of Ἅγιος Ζαχαρίας ἐν τῷ Καταβόλῳ are found in the vita of the 5th-century saint Daniel Stylites. It was built on the European coast of the Bos- porus, to the north of the capital city of Constantinople. Other sources bespeak a palace and a district of that name, probably in the same place (Janin 1950, 144). Another hypothesis relates the family to a homonymous settlement – Ἅγιος Ζαχαρίας (Nesbitt, Oikonomides 1994). In this case it should have been a small fortified kastron or even a village, the information about whom, at least as far as I know, is currently unavailable, or why not the above-mentioned Constantino- politan suburb. The two suggestions are easy to combine in one, since it was a common practice in the Byzantine and Post-Byzantine world that settlements or quarters bore the name of a church, which had functioned as a nucleus in their earliest history. There is one other possibility – that there had been a family cult of the saint, which eventually led to the foundation of a church or monastery, consecrated with his name. It preceded the adoption of this uncommon family name, which re- mained in use by their descendants. This is suggested by the saint’s presence on the obverse side of some lead seals – a traditional place for showing off certain cultic or religious preferences. When using the term “family”, we should be aware of a certain danger. It con- cerns our database, consisting mostly of sphragistic pieces. Therefore, it is impos- sible to establish any bloodline joining the various Hagiozacharitai into a single lineage (γένος). We can be sure only of these presumably earliest members of the family – the brothers Theodoros and Niketas, mentioned by Ioannes Skylitzes for A.D. 977. If they were named after a toponym, it is possible that it was used as a nickname by persons completely independent from one another, having only one thing in common – their birthplace. However, the limited time frame of the evidence and the rarity of the saint itself, unambiguously indicate the opposite. 764 Symeon Antonov Prosopographic list of the family of the Hagiozacharitai (late 10th – 11th c.): 1. Theodoros2 and 2. Niketas Hagiozacharites3 (977) Theodoros and Niketas were brothers, who took part in the attempted usurpa- tion of Bardas Skleros. At a particular moment (probably soon before the battle of Rageas in thema Anatolikon) they had defected from his army and joined the loyalist forces. This we learn from the narrative of Ioannes Skylitzes about the aforementioned battle, where the protovestiarios Leo, commander of the impe- rial troops, was eventually defeated and captured. Among the captives of Bardas Skleros were the two brothers Hagiozacharites, who were blinded before the whole army of the usurper (Skylitzes 1973, 32162 – 32285) – a typical imperial sentence for apostasy4. The exemplary nature of the punishment, implemented only on Theodoros and Niketas, if we are to believe Skylitzes, is a definite proof of their importance. Unfortunately, the late-11th c. Byzantine author did not provide any information on their official titles or offices by that time, which could have helped make a better estimation in this direction, or establish a link with the owners of lead seals with these common within the family Christian names. There is no doubt, according to most of the scholars, that both had some sort of military or military/administra- tive careers, otherwise they would not have been in the army of first Bardas Skleros and then in that of the protovestiarios Leo. 3. N. Hagiozacharites5 (988) A letter from the bishop of Synada Leo was sent to an anonymous Hagio- zacharites in the time the bishop was involved in an imperial embassy to Italy and the Holy Roman Empire (Leo of Synada 1985, № 3). The author addresses him as ὑπέρλαμπρε καὶ θαυμάσιε ἄνθρωπε which is a testimony of his social status (Leo of Synada 1985, 61). The main part of the letter consists of Leo’s account of his own deeds in Longobardia and Frankia. Some sort of intimacy becomes apparent at the end. Hagiozacharites is called συνετώτατε καὶ καλὲ φίλε καὶ προστάτα, and the author expresses his wish to “be judged worthy to see you, pay my respect to you, embrace you, and rejoice in your company and so leave this present life” (Leo of Synada 1985, 617 – 22). We could suppose that this Hagiozacharites is a relative of № 1 and 2 or even identical with one of them, but unfortunately the available data cannot confirm that. 2 PMbZ, 27764. 3 PMbZ, 25788. 4 For these two persons, see also: Holmes 2005, 265. For the rebellion of Bardas Skleros: Cheynet 1996, № 11, 170. 5 PMbZ, 22542. Hagiozacharitai – а Little-Known Byzantine Aristocratic Family... 765 4. N. Hagiozacharites, hypatos, basilikos protospatharios and chartou- larios tou dromou6 (end of the 10th – beginning of the 11th c.) A single sphragistic piece from the collection of Dumbarton Oaks with uncer- tain reading of the Christian name – either as Theodoros Laurent( 1981, № 451; Seibt, Zarnitz 1997, 127; Stavrakos 2000, 48) or Konstantinos (Jordanov 2006, 39). Obv: bust of St Theodore with vertical legend: Ὁ ἅγιος Θεόδωρος. Circular invocation inscription: Κύριε βοήθει τῷ σῷ δούλῳ. Rev: inscription of seven lines: […] ὑπάτῳ βασιλικῷ πρωτοσπαθαρίῳ καὶ χαρτουλαρίῳ τοῦ δρόμου τῷ Ἁγιοζαχαρίτῃ. 5. Manouel Hagiozacharites, spatharokandidatos of the Chrysotriklinos (10th – 11th c.) A lead seal, mentioned by G. Schlumberger (Schlumberger 1905, № 229). Its provenance and fate after the publication are unknown to me. Obv: bust of St Nicholas with the inscription: Ὁ ἅγιος Νικόλαος. Rev: Μανουὶλ σπαθαροκανδιδᾶτος ἐπι τοῦ χρισοτρικλινίου τῷ Ἁγιοζαχαρίτῃ. 6. Niketas Hagiozacharites, anthypatos patrikios and vestes7 (last third of the 10th – first third of the 11th c.) He is known from at least two lead seals – one from the Hermitage and another unpublished belonging to L’Institut français d’études byzantines (IFEB) (Šandrovskaja, Seibt 2005, № 98; 114, n. 35). Obv: bust of St Theodore, indicated in the legend as ὁ ἅγιος Θεόδωρος, with invocation circular inscription: Κύριε βοήθει τῷ σῷ δούλῳ. Rev: inscription of six lines: Νικήτᾳ ἀνθυπάτῳ πατρικίῳ βέστῃ τῷ Ἁγιοζαχαρίτῃ. His elevated titles indicated a later dating, probably within the early 11th c., thus greatly hindering the attribution of the seals to the homonymous, mentioned by Skylitzes. This could not be ruled out completely, though. It is possible, if we assume that he was compensated by the emperor Basileios II (976 – 1025) for his betrayal of the usurper Bardas Skleros. Blinding itself did not mean the end of one’s public career. One of the best examples from the period, which comes to my mind, is that of the patrikios Basileios Skleros (grandson of the above-mentioned candidate for the throne), who had been blinded in the time of Konstantinos VIII (1025 – 1028), but his successor Romanos III Argyros (1028 – 1034) honoured him with the higher rank of magistros despite his sightlessness (Skylitzes 1973, 37280 – 86, 38820 – 24; Psellos 1926, VI: XV, 12516 – 25).