University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Textile Terminologies from the Orient to the Centre for Textile Research Mediterranean and Europe, 1000 BC to 1000 AD 2017 Terminology Associated with Silk in the Middle Byzantine Period (AD 843-1204) Julia Galliker University of Michigan Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/texterm Part of the Ancient History, Greek and Roman through Late Antiquity Commons, Art and Materials Conservation Commons, Classical Archaeology and Art History Commons, Classical Literature and Philology Commons, Fiber, Textile, and Weaving Arts Commons, Indo-European Linguistics and Philology Commons, Jewish Studies Commons, Museum Studies Commons, Near Eastern Languages and Societies Commons, and the Other History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons Galliker, Julia, "Terminology Associated with Silk in the Middle Byzantine Period (AD 843-1204)" (2017). Textile Terminologies from the Orient to the Mediterranean and Europe, 1000 BC to 1000 AD. 27. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/texterm/27 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Centre for Textile Research at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Textile Terminologies from the Orient to the Mediterranean and Europe, 1000 BC to 1000 AD by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Terminology Associated with Silk in the Middle Byzantine Period (AD 843-1204) Julia Galliker, University of Michigan In Textile Terminologies from the Orient to the Mediterranean and Europe, 1000 BC to 1000 AD, ed. Salvatore Gaspa, Cécile Michel, & Marie-Louise Nosch (Lincoln, NE: Zea Books, 2017), pp. 346-373. doi:10.13014/K2SN074F Copyright © 2017 Salvatore Gaspa, Cécile Michel, & Marie-Louise Nosch. Photographs copyright as noted. 22 Terminology Associated with Silk in the Middle Byzantine Period (AD 843-1204) Julia Galliker uring the 1st millennium AD, silk became the Together, these sources have shaped much of the most desirable fibre in the Mediterranean re- existing Byzantine scholarship pertaining to silk. The D gion. While the expansion of silk production conventional interpretation is that for much of the mid- and consumption is widely acknowledged, specific dle Byzantine period, silk was an imperial prerogative features of the industry’s development are more dif- confined to the most elite members of society.4 How- ficult to discern. Chroniclers had little reason to doc- ever, close reading of the larger body of source evi- ument silk manufacturing processes, and producers dence shows that the prevailing Byzantine silk narra- were not inclined to record or publicise their trade tive has numerous shortcomings and limited value in secrets. Historical knowledge of silk comes mainly the study of historic processes. From the standpoint of from accounts of its consumption in a variety of forms contemporary scholarship, the role of silk in the mid- and contexts.1 dle Byzantine period requires reconsideration through For the middle Byzantine period (AD 843-1204), application of current research methods. the two most elaborated sources associated with silk To provide a more secure historical basis for silk date from the 10th century. The Book of the Eparch research, other types of writing should be considered (BOE) (911/12) is a collection of regulations applied including histories, chronicles, and testamentary doc- to guilds under the supervision of the eparch of Con- uments. A survey of Byzantine and other contempo- stantinople.2 The Book of Ceremonies (BOC), attrib- rary sources dated between the 6th and 13th centuries uted to Emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogennetos reveals a large number of textual ‘mentions’ describ- (945-959), is a compilation of 5th- to 10th-century pro- ing textiles. Many mentions contain only partial infor- tocols used by court officials to stage imperial rituals.3 mation, but include terms associated with silk such as 1. For a more detailed discussion of the history of silk in the Mediterranean region, see Galliker 2014, 33-80. 2. BOE, Koder. 3. BOC, Reiske. 4. For example, see Lopez 1945, Muthesius 1995b; Muthesius 1997, Muthesius 2004; Oikonomides 1986; Starensier 1982; Beckwith 1974. 346 22. Terminology Associated with Silk in the Middle Byzantine Period 347 production place, materials, weave type, end use, de- middle Byzantine period. This process is aided by sign, quality, and usage context. considering written sources from a framework that Philologists have long tried to clarify the meaning follows the general sequence of silk textile processes of textile words in Byzantine sources with limited including material acquisition and preparation, tex- success.5 For example, in his preface to BOC, Vogt tile construction, decoration, and pattern reproduc- observed that it is not possible to know the precise tion. The larger objective is to use the collective ter- nuances of textile-related terms.6 The general view minology data to redefine historical understanding is that lexical analysis can recognise the incidence of of silk in the middle Byzantine period by demon- various words, but there is seldom sufficient descrip- strating its social importance, contribution to tech- tive information in written works to form a recon- nology development, and integration in the regional structive view of textiles.7 economy. Probing more deeply, there are several reasons why textile terminology presents such a challenge. With Terms for silk in Byzantine writing few exceptions, authors used specific textile terms in context without elaborated definition or provision of Silk was explicitly identified in Byzantine sources descriptive details. Like other specialised lexicons, by one of three terms: serika, blattia, and metaxa. In textile terminology usage was sometimes inconsistent the majority of mentions, references to silk were ge- and localised. Moreover, textile terms were not sta- neric and not elaborated. Several scholars have dis- ble, but evolved different meanings over time. Vari- cussed silk terminology in the middle Byzantine pe- ous factors contributed to the migration of meaning riod and concluded that the words were part of an including changes in material type, production loca- evolving lexicon, but that their meaning became more tion, and technology. or less synonymous over time.9 Contextual analysis In recent decades, new research methods supported of the database corpus demonstrates usage patterns by computer information technologies have equipped that clarify the development and specific meaning of historians to analyse evidence more exhaustively and the terms. dynamically than in the past. To study Byzantine tex- tile terminology, I developed a relational database of Serika textile mentions similar in concept and form to a pros- opography.8 This database comprises over 800 de- While the incidence of both serika and blattia was scriptive mentions of textiles found in a variety of nearly equal among the sources surveyed, the terms Byzantine sources dating from the 6th to 13th centuries. developed and were used in different ways. Serika The resulting corpus provides an evidentiary basis to was the word used by Theophanes of Byzantium in discern patterns that are difficult to perceive with con- the second half of the 6th century to describe the trans- ventional methods. fer of sericulture technology to the empire.10 Signifi- The textile mention database supports critical ex- cantly, serika was the principal term for finished silk amination of textual evidence to define the meaning goods employed by all Byzantine historians from Ni- of terms pertaining to or associated with silk in the kephoros, Patriarch of Constantinople (806-815), to 5. Lombard 1978, 239. 6. BOC, Vogt, Vol. I, 30. 7. Schmitter 1937, 201. 8. In its conventional form, prosopography is a method of extracting historical information by compiling information about individuals defined chronologically and geographically based on one or more master criteria. For additional information, see Keats-Rohan 2003; Short & Bradley 2005; Keats-Rohan 2007. 9. For example, Imp Exp, 205-207 n. (C) 173; Jacoby 1991-1992, 458 n. 29. 10. Theo Byz, 4, 270, 3. 348 Julia Galliker in Textile Terminologies (2017) Niketas Choniates (c. 1155-1217).11 While silk was the late Roman period to a generic designation for typically discussed as a luxury good, there were also silk textiles by the 9th century.17 However, analysis exceptions. An account by Anna Komnene suggests of the corpus indicates that usage remained ambig- that silk garments were included on military cam- uous. Some later sources used blattia with reference paigns. Finding that he had insufficient iron for his to purple silk. Compiled in the 950s, De Adminis- troops at the battle of Lebounion (1091), Emperor trando Imperio described remuneration to the Pe- Alexios I Komnenos (1081-1118) equipped some of chenegs in blattia and other precious textiles in a his men in silken garments that resembled iron in col- way that indicates purple silk was involved.18 Simi- our for battle against the Pechenegs.12 larly, Anna Komnene used the word with the specific The term holoserika appeared in the 7th- to 8th-cen- meaning of imperial purple silk in her description of tury Rhodian Sea Law referring to the reward due to Alexios’ gift to Henry IV.19 In some other texts, blat- sailors for salvaging valuable silks.13 In a compre- tia was combined into a compound word that specif- hensive