Various TIJCOTic$
The question of determining the origins of Creek national consciousness
arose as a corollary of the nineteenth-century controversy surrounding
the racial derivation of the modern Creeks. Obviously. Creek historians
have been principally concerned with the matter, and it is with their
views that we may convenient ly begin an analysis of tlle problem.
The first tentative hypothe.<;es were advanced by Zambe.lios, who con-
sidered that the origins of this Greek feeling of a national consciousness
could clearly be traced back to the Byzantine period. This particular
scholar's approach is distinguished more by an a priori belief in that
which he sets out to prove than by concrete evidence. Nevertheless, he
points to the continued existence of language and folk songs as sufficient
indication of the early awareness of a Greek cultural identity.1 Pupar-
rhegopoulos later expressed the same view, though with greater clarity
and precision. Recognizi ng the essential continuity of the Greek language
and the existence of a popular literary heritage, he believed that the
origins of modem Hellenism would have to be sought amid the anarchy
and confusion which accompanied the Fourth Cnlsade (1204). He saw
too that there was a marked revival of communal institutions during the
later Byzantine period ( brought aboUI chiefly by tbe progressive deteriO-
ration of centml authority) and that a spirit of popular resistance to th e
Latin conquerors was in the air. All these factors indicate that modem
nationalism derives from t he medieval GreeksY
Althougb yet aoother histori an, Salhas, attempted to embell ish Papar-
rhcgopoulos' theory, the latter's version is general ly accepted by most
modem Greek historians.' Two of these in particular, Amantos aDd Voyat-
zides, have supplemented a primary interest in the history of the Byzan-
tine Empire with studi es on modern Greek history and arc therefore
well qualified to trace the relationshi p between the two eras. Amantos,
in his History of the 8yumU"e Empire, thinks of the year 1204 as the
terminal point of the Byzantine while Voyatzidis suggests that
the Palaeologian period ( 1261- 1453) does not constitute the end of By-
zantine Hellenism but the beginnings of Nt!o-Hell cnism. New polilical
forces, he says, arose in the Eastern Homan Empire and prcsaged the
establishment of a new Hell enic Which of these interpretations
comes closest to the truth is, however, a question tll nt need not concern
us here, since both authorities are in fu ll agreement that many of the
forms of the politicol and cultural expression of modern Greece arc essen-
tially derivative of Byzantine Hellenism. In this sense, the year 1204
marks a watershed in the history of modem Creece and the civilized
PolitiCtJl Decclliraliw.tioFl ufter Fourth Crll$ode
The Byz •• nline Empire was laid low by the Crusaders from the West, but
its structure had already been undermined by a combination of nlinous
taxation, rapacious taxgathcring, and the consequent decrease in the
amount of land owned by peasants.
The dislocation of agricultural life
brought misery and conFusion, amI the rapidity with which the Empire
collapsed brought on a ll acute moral crisis for the Greek population: the
choice between submission and Joss of freedom, or resistance lind loss o(
Certain cities, stich as Thessalonica, submitted meekl y in order to pre·
serve a nominal independence: II promise from the conquerors that local
institutions would be respected,T nobles offered no resistance in
the expectation that their privileges and property would remain intact; It
others chose to fl ee the enemy with the aim of finding secure hiding
plnces from which resistance could be organized. Nevertheless the com·
parative ease with which the conquerors were able to impose their will.
parti cularly upon the nobili ty, aroused the patriotic ire of at one
contemporary observer, Nicetas Choniatcs: "Th ey felt neither degrada-
tion nor dishonor in bowing their heads to the invader. They felt not" a
single pang of shame in disdaining to fight-if only for their children's
sake. Not then, nor later, were they aroused by tlloughts of freedom."
Indeed, his resentment was so impass ioned that he a(.'Cused some-in par-
ticular, the descendants of old military famili es-of intriguing actively
for the destruction of their country: "worthless men, comlpt aDd Hcen-
tious, who were consumed by an ambition to destro}' their country" solely
in order to adva nce their Own interests. ( Even at that time, Choniatcs
seems to have had the vision or a unified nation.) In the general tunnoil,
nobles ensconced themselves in castles and surrounded themselves with
all the pomp and panoply or sovereign princes. This practi ce was most
pronounced throughout the Peloponnese, where petty nobles vied ('"on-
stantly with one another for the perquisites and appendages of princely
power.' Their factious spirit was not 6nall y curbed until the Turkish
conquest of the Peloponnese.
The situation of constant antagonism and actual anned conRict between
Greek and Latin states naluraUy made it aU the easier for these petty
principalities to assert their sovereignty, and this political fragmentation
of the Empire in turn facilitated Turkish domination. The Fourth Crusade
brought about political chaos and physical min at precisely the time
when the Empire was in mOst need of poli t ical uni ty. Whole communi-
ties were uprooted. Some were displaced, only to re-establish themselves
somewhere else. Others completely disappeared. Some cent ers of popu-
lation were swollen by the addition of refugees. Others were depopu-
lated.' Q
Some indication of the extent of the dislocation of the population mlly
be gleaned from events in Nicaea, where large numbers from Constanti-
nople took refuge, and in Ioannina. The city of loanni na was fortiGed by
Michael r Comnenus Ducns ( 1206-1215) , fowlder of the Despotate of
Epirus. Many Creeks sought the security of its wall s and, until they fouod
new homes, there received the solicitous attentions of its nller, this new
"Noah." II Probably no fewer than half of t he refugees from Constantino-
ple found their way to Epirus; others came from the Pcloponnese through
Aetolia.' : This mountainous and isolated region of westem Greece served
not only as an impregnable fortress against the Latin invaders but also
as a focal pOint of active resistance, as much in the thirteenth century as
in the Second World War. This new infusion of Creek refugees, sharing
with all the inhabitant's of the region the experience of res istance to a
common enemy, constituted yet another factor in the assimilation of im·
migrant Slavs.
The importance of t he Crusades and of the Fourth Crusade in particu-
lar is thererore not that they provided a eonnecting link between the two
princi pal segments of European civilization. Bather, they set up an inter-
action between East and \-Vest, which thereaft er characteri zed all relations
between the two and resulted ultimately in the emergence of a new
Creek nation. After 1204-even after the recapture of Constantinople by
Mi chael YIn Palaeologus in 126l- the Byzantine Empire wus never more
than a simulacrum of its former self, because of the persistence of cen·
tripetai inRuences. In its plnce appeared a seri es of separate Creek states,
Nicaea, Trcbizond. Epirus, Macedonia, and Inter, the Peioponnese.
Individual rulers derived such authority as they possessed from alli-
ances with the local nobility. Yet, for precisely the reason that the tradi-
tions of Hellenism were most shl rdy among the peasants, the process of
political decentralization tended to revivify the sense of HelJenism in the
everyday li ves of the people. The shifting of the loci of power, that is,
tended to magnify and clarify what might otherwise have remained dif-
fuse. Roman traditions wi thered in the courts of the new sovereign statesj
Creek traditions throve in proportion. At the same time, in the islands
and mai nland areas which lay under Latin domination, the vitality of
Greek inteUectual life continued to encourage a spirit of resistance.
k we shall presently see, resistance to a success ion of conquerors, Bul·
garian, Serbian, and Turkish, as well as Latin, greatly heightened the
Creek national consciousness. Indeed, the unrelenting struggle for survi-
val, sustained by the knowledge of an illustrious past, constituted the
principal ingredient of Greek nationali sm. The writings of all of the im-
portant histori ans of this period-Nicetas Choniatcs and Nicephorus Creg-
oras, for example-bristle with allusions to antiquity, proclaim the nobil-
ity of struggle, and always exalt the name Hellene. Choniates implored
God "'to keep our people intact." He strove to inculcate in Creeks an
awareness of the glorious nature of their struggle, even to the extent of
referring to their defeat only with the most obvious reluctance: "How
is it possible for history to recount the great deeds of barbarians when
history itself is the greatest achievement of the Creeks?" II
Greek nationalism therefore began to assume a more de6nite form dur-
ing the period of Latin conquest. It was manifest in the deeds and aspira-
tions of the people. It was even evident to some extent in the life of the
Orthodox Church, especially in the period of Turkish domination. To be
sure, the nationalist awakeni ng was counteracted to some extent, after
the twelfth century. by the persistence of a sense of Roman citizenship
within the decrepit framework of the restored Byzantine Empire. But this
became more and more tenuous and artificial because it no longer corre-
sponded to reality. For example, the Byzantine armies which had offered
such ineffectual resistance to the Crusaders H had been composed mai nl y
of foreign mercenariesi but now, ill the struggle with the Latin invaders,
at least in the beginning. their character was completely transformed.
Greek soldiers increas ingly filled out the ranks, and it was the example
and inspiration of their ancient forebears which sus tained their martial
National resistance to the Lati n conquerors was especially fierce in the
Despotate of Epirus ( comprising Epirus, Acarnania, Aetolin, and parts of
Thessaly), the Empire of Nicaea, the Peloponnese, and Crete. [n each,
we see n microcosm of the larger stnlggle. From each, we may therefore
offer graphic illustrations of the importance of Olis period in the historical
evolution of the new Hell enism.
Rivalry bet ween Epims and Nicaea
Apart from the several conBicts behveen Creek and Latin states, the ri-
valry between two important Creek states, Epirus and Nicaea, was a
crucial fnctor in Ule development of Hellenism. Unfortunately, litlle is
known about the political pursuits of Ul e "Grand Comneni" of Trebizond
and their contribution to the growth of Hellenism. Although Trebizond
bccame thc center of an intellectual movement renowned for its scientific
achievements,U the political inSuence of the "Grand Camneni" in the
Greek world was dissipated in a series of futile struggles with the em-
perors of Nicnea. U
The historiography of Epirus is regrettably deficient. Most of our knowl-
edge of this state is derived from Nicaean historians, who naturall y tended
to interpret events from their own point of viewY Apart from these,
virtually the only known records are the writings of a single monk, Isaac
Mcsopotamites. Nevertheless, a careful sifting of both sources enables us
to reconstruct a fairly accurate picture of the poli tical situation in Epirus.
The aims and ambitions of the rulers of that state seem especiaUy c1ear-
Beginning with Theodore Comncnus Ducas (1215-1230), who had
lived for a long time in the royal court of Nicaea, n contest developed
between Epirus and Nicaea for hegemony over the fonner territories of
the Byzantine Empire. Rulers competed for the ri ght to be regarded as
the legitimate successors of the Emperor in Constantinople and for the
titles and honors which stemmed therefrom." At first, the controversy
crystallized around the status of the Church in Epirlls. Political circum-
stances had al ready conferred Il kind of de facto independence upon the
Epirotic Church, and Theodore saw that his own political authority could
be enhanced by maintaining this separation from the Church in
He therefore appointed or encouraged the election of local prelates with-
out reference to the hierarchy of the Church, thereby promoting further
estrangement behveen the hvo states. Since the Oecumenical Patriarchate
supported the principle of ecclesiastical unity and thus, indirectly, the
primacy of the Empire of Nicaea, Theodore also found himself in open
conflict with the central organi7.ation of the Church.
The head of the Epirotic Church was the Metropolitan of Naupactus,
John Apocaucus ( 11 55--1233), one of the most prominent figures of his
time, Apocaucus had received a sound classical education in Constantino-
ple and was particularly inHuenced by the philosopher-historian Michael
Psellus. He was also, like his contemporary, Archbishop CJloni ntes
of Athens, an rtrdent admirer of the ancient Creek world generall y,
Indeed. his role in Naupactus was entirely analogous to that of his fri end
and coUeague in Athens. After 1219, Apocaucus became an eager sup-
porter of and apologist for the f\l ler of Epims. His letters to his patron
arc paeans of praise for Theodore's audacious military exploits. They
record Theodore's conquests of Neopatras, Prosakon, Platamon, and,
SoaIIy, Tbessnlonica ( l224 ). There, Theodore brought to an end the rule
of the MontfclTat famil y; and there, in the spring of 1224, he was anointed
emperor by Archbishop Demetrius Chomatianus of Achris (Ochrida ).
This event- dramati zed Theodore's emergence as a redoubtable ri val of
the emperors of Nicaea,n and Apocaucus thought thnt nothing could be
more fitting than that Theodore assume the imperial mantle in the Great
City.'2 In a letter to Patriarch Germanus of Nicaen he extoll ed the
virtues of his emperor : "Here, in the "Vest this man has looked un-
tiringly to the interests of his people. We already know rum to be a
giFt from God, a savior of the Christians of Epirus. He has reconquered
many towns, bringing back those citizens who had fl ed and reuni ting
those who had been separated from one another. The religious in churches
and monasteries can again perform their proper duties as shepherds of
the people and custodians of the Church. All rejoice as before in shep-
herding tbe people, and the sheep listen to them und gather together in
an ever increasing fl ock-thanks only to our emperor." n
John Apocaucus and two other Church hierarchs who owed their posi-
tions mai nly to his influence, Demetrius Choma tianus, Archbishop of
Achris, and George Vardanis, Metropolitall of Corfu, fanned a bril1iant
intellectual coteri e in the Despotate of Epirus. All were acutely conscious
of being Greek.
Apocaucll s, particularly, made constant use of the term
HeJlas when referring to the southern regions of Greece.
Vardanis was
an Athenian and had studied under Michael Choniates. As a young man
he found L.'ltin nile insufferable and subsequentl y left ror Epirus with a
letter of recommendati on from his mentor. "No longer," it said, "could he
bear living among us here. We have been humiliated, and our country
has become a barbarous land of impious people." Later, while a dencon
in the bishopric of Crevena, Vardanis declined to accept the episcopal
see of Vonitsa despite the fact-at least according to Apocaucus-
that Vonitsa lay in the midst of a Creek-speaking popul ation and was
exclusively Greek. %I He preferred the more chaI1cnging apostolate in Gre-
vena among a people who were predominantl y uncivilized and spoke a
foreign lan!:, ruage.
Learned men such as these served as the standard-bearers of Creek
civilization in the remote areas inhabited by foreign settlers. ao In the
cities, SUd l as Artn, their role was not only a clerical one. Bishops and
nobles frequently sat in conclave I I to discuss and direct the affairs of the
As the conquests of Theodore Comnellll s Oueas extended to Macedonia
and Thrnce, it appeared thot he would be the first to enter Constanti nople
and thus triumph over the emperors of Nicaea in their struggle for su-
premacy. However, his political ambitions were suddenl y cut short by his
defeat at Klokotnitsa in April 1230 at the hands of the Bulgari ans. Still,
Epirus retained its intell ectual lire and cultural orientation towards all-
cient Greece.
Some time later the poet Ennonial.. .. us was commissioned
by his patron, John Dueas Orsini ( 1323-1355), to paraphrase the Iliad
in modern Creek verse. His trochees wcre not the work of a competent
craftsman,1! but at least they rellected the interest in the Homeric epics
thot was current at this time. This literary movement was probably stimu-
lated by Eustathius' commentaries on Homer in his PlIrckvo/ai and seems
to have gathered momentum at the end of the t welfth century.
By the end of the thirteenth century, mounting Creek resistance to alien
intruders was also evident in those parts of Thessaly which had become
detached from the Dcspotate of Epirus. The secular and ecclesiastic •• 1
lords of PhanariOIl combined to extract from their overlord, Michael
CabrieJopoulos, a promise that Albanians would be prevented from set ..
tIi ng in their district. Greek nobles feared the conSC<luenccs of clandesti ne
inmtration by foreigners. Their petition also contained the specific en ..
treaty, quoted previously, that Latin soldiers be e.xcluded from the castle
garrison of the "Lord of Thessaly:' The Creek petitioners demanded that
they should themselves gnrrison the castle, that they should be entitled
to certain tax exemptions, and that they should have the ri ght to trial by
nil their peers in the event of being charged with breach of disci pline-
demands of a sort that could be made only because of the power and
infiuence which they alread}' Wielded. In addition. it was further vouch-
safed to them thnt they might take possession of the monastery of Ler-
kousias and the "Megale Porta, together with all lands appertaining to
it," U According to the Gabrielopoulos document. their influence aIso ex-
tended to the exercise of civil jurisdi ction in particular locaHties. All rights
wcre jealously guarded. It was therefore nn accretion of many vested in-
terests which accounted for the (.'ommon front which many Creek nobles.
of high and low rank alike, prescnted to foreign intruders.
The defeat of Theodore Comnenus Ducas at Klokotnitsn removed the
only fonnidnble rival to the emperors of Nicaea in their struggle to regain
the capital of the Empire, Although themselves refugees from the Latin
usurpers, the policy of reconquest remained uppermost in the minds of
the rulers of Nicaea. The founders of the Nicaean empi re, Constantine
Lascaris ( 1204-1205) U and his brother Theodore were capable, indeed
intrepid, leaders of the Creeks of northweslem Asia Theodore
( 1204-12.2.2)-"a generous man, and one who moved with the celerity of
an eagle in flight" ' G-was especiall y unrelenting in his efforts to imbue
his people with a spirit of militant resistance. Although the inhabitants
of this region were generall y peaceable in outlook and neophytes in the
art of war," they graduall y became a fearless and efficient fighting force."
It was there "in the Bithynian camp," as Sathns so accuratel y observed,
that the By7..nntines were truly transformed into Creeks.·· After 1204,
Hellenism's center of gravity shifted to the Empire of Nicaea.
Theodore I Lascaris was forced b)' the circumstances of his time to
appeal for assistance directly to the people and to indi vidual nobles.
Towns and villages had complet"ely severed aU ties with Latin-dominated
ConsL'lntinopie, were separate and self-contained communities, and had
revived their own local institutions, which had fallen into decay during
periods of imperial control. This situation required the rulers of Nicaea
to descend into the market place to plead their hi gher cause. The people
could only be aroused against the conquerors by a process of cajoling,
haranguing, and shaming; by being engaged in a hundred different bar-
gni ns with the nobles of a hundred different places; by being convinced
of the suffering and humilintion which would attend passive submission.
Evidence, unnoticed until now, that Theodore I frequentl y convoked
assemblies of the people and representati ves of crafts' guilds (ta laode
syslemata)·o from various distri cts, conferred and ate with nobles in
private. and generall y apprised all of the need for concerted mili tary
action,u would seem to suggest that the efforts of the Nicaean emperors
were not all unavailing. r..·lany nobles, including those who were refugees
from Constantinople, were won over by receiving gmnts of land for life.
This policy of making grants in Ilrorloia over both public and ecclesi-
asticallands was continued by Theodore's heir, John 111 Ducas Vatatzes.
The condition of free farmers on these estates, however, grew steadily
worse with the passing of the years, unt il it became indistinguishable
from serfdom.42
The nature of Theodore's appeal, and especiall y his manner of ap-
proach, had the effect of blurring social distinctions ancl awakeni ng in
all, peasant and noble alike, a sense of personal concern about the dis-
memberment of the Empire. His pUI1)ose, like that of his counterpart in
Epirus. Theodore ComnenliS Ducas, was to inflame and direct the spirit
of national resistance to foreign oppression. His efforts met wi th the un-
stinted approbation of Nicetas Chonintes, who was never slow in fi nding
classical analogies and who compared Theodore I with Al exander the
Great. If zeal alone were the princi pal touchstone of fame the comparison
was apt, for Theodore's ambition was the total expulsion of the Latin
invaders and the liberation of Constantinople. Expulsion of foreign in-
vaders was the goal of the Greek raias throughout the period of Turkish
occupation until, by the beginning of the nineteenth ccnhlry, it had be-
come known, quite simply, as the "Greal Idea." "These ancient, natal
lands, where our homes have always been, seem as Paradise to us; and
our Creat City, which is the pride of all the earth and so much coveted
by all the nabons, seems veri ly the city of Al mighty God." H
Theodore 1 also fought valiantly against the Seljuk Turks, who exerted
continual pressure upon the Creeks of western Asia Minor. It was a strug-
gle which, to the people of Nicaea, bore every resemblance to t hat of
Digenis and the Akritai against the invaders. In the popular mind, Tlleo-
dare seemed to embody the spirit of Digenis Akritas. It is therefore
entirely conceivable that contemporary events brought about the revival
of the written tradition of the Digetlis Akrrtas and that it came to be
cherished at least as much by the people of Nicaea as by people in later
PaJaeologian times.
It is even probable that the form of the epic may
have undergone conscious literary renewal at this time and that the extant
versions of it were in fact deri ved from those which appeared in the
Empire of Nicaea." If such is the case, we may presume that the oral
traditions and songs of the Akritic Cycle were also popular and wide-
In sum, the light of Hellenism apparently gave off a bright glow in the
Empire of Nicaea. Its increasing brilliance attracted an ever increasing
stream of refugees from Constantinople-scholars, monks, and ordinary
people. Among them were the historians George Akropolites and Nicetas
Choniates; Demetrios Karykes. the "Supreme Philosopher"; Monasteriotes
who later became Archbishop of Ephesus; Theodoros Hexapterygos, tutor
of Nicephorus Blemmydcs; Blemmydes who, in his role as tencher of the
children of noble families, exerted a profound influence upon the intel-
lectual life of Nicaea, and, in addition to his poems, autobiography, and
correspondence, left behind manuals on logic and physics anel also wrote
proli6caUy in the fi elds of theology, geography, medicine, and rhetoric.Oft
John III Ducas Vatatzes (1222.-1254 ), the son-in-law and successor of
Theodore 1. was no less assiduous than his predecessor in seeking to eX1Jcl
the invaders. He fought Vigorously agai nst Turk and Bulgarian, as well
as against Latin, and successfully freed large segments of the Empire.·
His sphere of operations also reached into the Creek islands.
In 1230 the two noble Cretan families of Melissinoi and Skordylai rebelled
against their Venetian overlords. Emissaries from the rebellious Creeks
appeared at the court of John III and promised to merge their island with
the Empire of Nicaea in return for assistance. John HI immedi ately dis-
patched thirty-three galleys to Crete, whi ch disembarked a military de-
tachment under the leadership of the Grand Duke Auxentius. However,
the combined Creek forces met with only limited success. After two yea rs
of fi ghting, Rethymnon, r.,·!y!opotamos, and Ka inourgion (Castel Nuovo)
were occupied, hut Creek fortunes were eventually confounded by the
shh)wreck of thirty of their galleys, the res istance of the Venetian castle
of Boniface, and the diplomatic astuteness of the dukes Bartolomeo and
Angelo Cradenigo. The rebeUion finally sputtered out in 123B.d
Venice, to be sure, was never as ensily defeated as the other Latin
powers. She possessed vi rtuall y unquestioned superiority at sea.
taut outposts throughout the Aegean and the entire eastern Mediterra-
nean. and almost unlimited Il nancial resources. Nevertheless, the
tians, like the Turks and Germans after them, were never able to break
the stubborn and implacable will to resist for which the Cretans became
renowned. Unfortunately. since our knowledge of Crete in this period is
necessariJy derivcd from Venetinn sources, the details of Cretan resistance
and the precise nature of the Cretan connection with the Empire of
Nicaea are largely hidden from us.
Within the context of the formalion of the new Hellenism, mention
should be made of the oracles and prophecies in circulation concerning
the Lascarids and John IU Ductls Vatatzes in ptlrticuJar"
Although these
prophecies were sl1bsttlntiall y the stl mc as those which had widespread
popular currency around 1200,"" after that date they were related more
and more to the splendid deeds of the Lasctlrids. Greeks who lived under
the Latin occupation looked to them as sources of courage and inspira-
tion, thereby rolltributing to a cult of the Lascarids which bordered on
hero worshi p. After his death, John ITJ was rapidly canonized. at least in
the popular imagination.
Later, if for no other reason than that Vatatzes
had donated considerable tracts of land to the Church, that canonization
was officiaJ ly
Politic(ll (llJ(l Tnteliectual Developments ill NiceJea
If Greek nationalism was horn under foreign occupation, it was nourished
by the increasing consciousness of past greatness which appeared simul-
taneously in the Empire of Nicnea. The poli tical and intellectual leaders
of the Greek p(."Op1e looked upon classical civilization as an ideal expres-
sion of their national individuality and therefore identified themselves
ever more closely with it. The past seemed alJ the more brilliant and
tinguished in view of the chaos and which surrounded them; a
past which afforded n paradigm of achievement and courage; a past which
thus could inspire the Greeks to overthrow thei r oppressors. However,
the crucial role that reverence for the past played in the fonnation of
Neo-HeUenism does not seem to have been fully grasped, even by Nicaea's
principal historians, Anthony Meliarakis and Alice Gardner.
The revival, after 1204, of the name Hellene together with its vari-
ous derivatives,n its widespread adoption in place of Romaioi, was
naturally stimulated by a heightened awareness of cultural differences in
the presence of alien conquerors. A marked fascinat ion for the word can
be traced in the writings and ut terances of emperOrs and scholars, al-
though its general use in everyday life was still inhibited because of re-
li gious distaste for its pagan overtones. In a letter to Pope Gregory lX
between 1231 and 1237, John 111 Ducas Vatat-zes was clearly conscious
of being Greek in spite of the apparent obligations of his imperial ti tle,
''John Ducas, by the Crace of Jesus Christ, Faithful King and Emperor
of the Romans." He proudly acknowledged the Pope's admission that
"wisdom reigns supreme among the Greeks .. , Wisdom, and the good
which Hows from it, first flowered among the Greeks, whence it spread
to all others who cared anything for its acquisition and its practice."
Vatatzes bristled at the Popc's oversight in fai ling to mention that the
Roman imperi rHIt had been bequeathed to the Greeks from the time of
Constanti ne the Creat : "for who in all the world gainsays the fact t hat the
Greeks are the onl y heirs and successors of Constantine? , . , The pro-
genitors of Our House, the Comneni and the Ducases-to say nothing of
the many other rulers-were all of Hellenic stock, and it is they who have
reigned ill Constantinople for hundreds of years." Vatatzcs believed t hat
the Roman Empire had truly become a Creek empire from the time of
Constantine the Great. To him, the offici al des ignation of the Byzantine
Emperors, "King and Emperor of the Romans," had been retained solely
out of the respect due to tradition and to the name of Constantine,
Thus, Vatatzes' claims to the territories held by the Frankish usurpers
were based upon the rights of legal succession anel historical continuity,
"Although We have been driven forcibly from Our lands, We preserve
Our rightful authorit y in them, which, under God, is inalienable and
irrevocable." His refusal to accept the sovereign pretensions of John de
Brienne ( 1231-1237), the Frankish Emperor of Consta ntinople, was un-
equivocal. "Moreover," he remarked with more than a trace of sarcasm,
"we are at a loss to comprehend where on sea or earth the dominion and
jurisdiction of the said Emperor could possibly lie," He then announced
his intention to resist the conquerors: "We shaD never stop fighting or
resisting the usurpers in Constantinople, for if We did not fight them with
aU Our might We should be sinning against Nature, Our Fatherl and, the
graves and sacred temples of Our Forefathers." His letter to Pope Gregory
concluded with the threat that Greek arms were not to be despised: "We
have cavalry and n whole host of soldiery whose valor and fine martial
qualities have already been tested against the Crusaders and have not
been found wanting." at
A consciousness of Greek nationality is similarly proclaimed by Va-
tatzes' successor, Theodore II Lascaris ( 1254-1258) and the latter's tutor,
Nicholas Blemmydcs. B1emmydes referred to the Empire of Nicaea as an
"Hellenic Dominion." n Theodore [J called it simply "an Hellenic coun-
try" or It included within its borders parts of present-day Yugo-
slavia, the whole of southern Albania, Creek Macedonia, and Thrace. and
a great part of southern Bulgaria.
! Theodore U was familiar wi th the
ethnic composition of the Balkans and knew each national group by name.
As in the case of the various invasions, the antagonism between the Creeks
and the nationalities of the region sharpened the national consciousness
of ench. The feeling was naturally most intense in the ranks of the oppos-
ing armies. The relations between the Creek and Bulgarian soldiers were
particularly acrimonious. When Theodore II wrote to inform his tutor of
his victories over Michael of Bulgaria, whose armies were pillaging eastern
Rumelia (now part of sout hern Bulgaria ) and Macedonia, he spoke excit-
edly of the "remarkable feats of Creek arms and exemplary Creek bravery
which could only elicit your deepest admiration." Since Theodore 11 was
constantly in the midst of his soldiers, he can hardl y have faUed to infuse
in them at least a modicum of his passion for Bellas. It is possible to fonn
some idea of the depth of }tis Creekness from certain literary and philo-
sophical fragments which are still extant. These are Significant, not merely
for the fervor they express, but for the way in which they reBect the essen-
tial character of Greek nationalism. rn one place, he speaks of his delight
in using the language of ancient Greece and says he prefers it to the
ecclesiastical language of the period, which, because of its innumerable
biblical express ions he has not been able to master. He looks upon the
classical language as "more dear to him than life itself." U He also admires
the ancient monuments of Pergamon, which he considers to be "replete
with the genius of the Greeks-very images of Wisdom itself." The city
of Pergamon, "which so reflects the glory of our ancestors, is for that rea-
son a constant reproach to us as their descendants." To Theodore 11 it
seemed that the people of his empire should feel forever humble in the
presence of such artistic greatness.
n le Nicaean interesl in the physical heritage of the past extended to a
preoccupation wi th archaeology not equalled until the Renaissance. It was
also paralleled by a dedication to "all the arts and sciences." In spite of
the extemal menace which the emperors of Nicaea faced at aU t imes,
they found time to collect manuscripts, establish libraries,.o and generally
encourage intellectual and artistic pmsuits.
Theodore II himself re-
ceived an extensive education in li terature, theology, and philosophy,
and dreamed of making his capital the center of Greek learning. He
praised its accomplishments lavishly and believed, in fact, that it bad
surpassed ancient Athens because classical learning and Christian theol-
ogy had been brought into harmony with each other. ''This glorious city
of the Nicaeans prides itself precisely on this point. It has doubly en-
riched philosophy by reconci ling objective wisdom, which is the funda-
mental achievement of ancient Greece, with the knowledge of God, which
transcends it. Although there are many schools of philosophy here. they
are all concerned with one or the other of these two sources of truth.
Thus, they philosophize in the manner of Aristotle and Plato and Socrates,
combining ancient philosophy with theology in a novel fashion, though,
having been nurtured on the di vine words of Scripture, the Apostles,
and the Church Fathers, the premises with whi ch they begi.n are the
divine doctrines of Chri st." n Nor was the inRuence of Nicaea confi ned
to urban centers alone: "Its learning was diffused far and wide, and
even peasants were educated in its ideals."
Thus, from an intellectual as well as from a political and milit ary point
of view, Nicaea not only shone as a symbol of cultural unity but served
as a rallying point of active to the Frankish conquerors. "Many
cities have acquired power, many have gained renown, many have mag-
. nined the glory of tlleir people; but you, Nicnea, surpass them all. You
alone remain to shore up the mighty noman Empire, which has been
shattered by the annies of so many different nations." 03 In yet another
encomium, Theodore II Lascaris extolled the brilliance of philosophical
thought which was to Nicaea "what music is to Corinth, weaving to
Thessaly, and tanning to Philadelphia ... &4 If this analogy seems to descend
to a proletarian level in sharp contrast to his cllstomary grandiloquence,
this was perhaps because Theodore II had reason to suspect the dedica-
tion to philosophy of many of his countrymen. In a letter to his teacher
Blemmydes, he bewailed the indifference many young people seemed to
show towards philosophy, despising it as a foreign science, although no
fOrm of knowledge was more e.....sentially Greek. Theodore II certainly
had this in mind when he predicted that philosophy would depart from
Creece and find refuge among the "'barbarians" of the West, wbere it
would eventually make them famous. Those who denigrate philosophy,
he said, or who would alienate it from its proper home will only bring
disaster and barbarity to the inhabitants of Greece. "Those who were
once proud of their philosophical inheritance would then become the
laughing stock of the entire world." 86
Theodore II Lascaris regarded these symptoms wi th uneasiness. He
knew from discuss ions with a nllmber of the Western 'barbari ans" that
they were becoming adept in every aspect of phiiosophy.Gt It was incon-
ceivable for reasons of national prestige that they should be all owed to
challenge, let alone excel, the Creeks. Thus, on one occasion when he
worsted Berthold von Hohenburg, emissary of the Gennan Emperor
Konrad IV Hohenstaufen, in n philosophical debate, he considered this
no less than a national tri umph, "a victory of the Creeks over the Ital-
ians." G; Instances such as this demonstrate the project ion of naHonal feel-
ing among the Lasctlrids and the scholars of Nicaea.
Theodore n Lascaris, by the qua li ty of his administrative and military
reorgani7.3tion,e8 had al most created a viable Creek empi re. [n the task
of administrati on he had relied exclusively upon men of ability, many
of whom were not of noble birth. Indeed, he deliberately tried to limit
the power and infl uence of the nobili ty and thus to lessen class divisions.
This undivided attention to the welfare of all his people eventuall y pro-
voked the opposition of the nobili ty, as Pachymeres 8D has most convinc-
ingly pointed out. Yet, though many of his efforts were rendered vain
by his early death, Theodore 1I Lascaris remai ns a fi gure of fundamental
importance for Creek history through his love of Creek civili l'.ation, his
strength of charncter, and his impressive intellectual powers. More impor-
ta nt histori call y, given his faith in the destiny of the Greek nation, which
was symbolized by fl steadfast ambition both to reconquer Constantinople
and to reunite all Creeks under the imperi al scepter, he may be regarded
as the true originator of the "Creat Idea." He was the first Greek em-
peror to be pictured with the double-beaded eagle of the Byzantine
Empire, which, in the opinion of Voyatzidis, represented a projection of
imperi al claims towards the Creek lands of both Europe and Asia. The
double-headed eagle thereafter became the emblem of the Byzantine
state. Later, duri ng the Turkish occupation, the eagle became the cher-
ished motif of the Creek raias, signifying the national aspiration of all
Creeks to be free from foreign domination-or for the "Creat Jdea." 10
rr many of the actual reforms of the Lascarids soon disappeared, the
"Creat Idea" certainl y inspired the Palaeologian usurper, Michael VIII
(1259-1282). This, in itself, was an indication of its power and pervasive-
ness, even at so early a time. However, the work of internal reorganiza-
tion tha t had so distinguished the reign or Theodore received fl setback.
The nobili ty enjoyed a resurgence of power, and this was accompanied
by progressive deteri oration and demorali zation of the army and the civil
.service. When, in 126J, Michael VIU captured Constantinople, which
then became the capital of the new Byzantine Empire, his ephemeral
tri umph, far rrom arresting the deteri orat ion, even contributed to it. His
subsequent successes in Mistra, Monemvasia. and Maina (1262) H cer-
Ininly established important bridgeheads from which the Latin invader
was rlnall y driven out of the Peloponncse. but, on the other hand. through
his lack of concern with the Turkish menace io Asia Minor, the Creek
foothold in this vitally important region was graduoll y pri ed loose.
Michael VIIT threatened not only to complete the reconquest of the
Pe1oponnese but also to occupy Crete. Here, the Creek inhabitants still
offered resistance to the Venetians. Venetian apprehension in the face
of what seemed to be an impending invasion led the Doge Ranieri Zeno
to implore Pope Urban IV in a letter dated 8 September 1264 to or-
ganize a new crusade agai nst the Creeks. The Venetians were naturally
concerned over the fat e of their colonies, especially Crete, WitJl its vital
strategic position, and wanted desperately to secure their rami6cd eco-
nomic interests throughout the eastern For this reason,
they also addressed similar appeals to the rulers of other countries.
For the time being. however. lhe recapture of Constantinople led to
a revival of hope among all Creeks under foreign domination. Tn Crete,
ror example, the Venetians experienced considerable difficulty in re-
newing alliances with those local elements which, for reasons of profit
or securi ty, had seen rlt to acknowledge fealty to Venice. The prospect
of restoring the Byzantine Empire prompted the Orthodox clergy to re-
emphasize its attachment to Emperor and Patriarch. Many of the clergy
preached sermons which were distinctly nationalistic in tone. They
stressed the legality of Michael Vill's succession to the throne and ex-
horted all those still under foreign rule to redoubl e their efforts agai nst
the conqllerors and thereby hastcn the fulfi ll ment of imperial reunifi(:a-
tion. From 1264 to l299, Crete was convulsed by revolutions led by
George Chortatzes and Alexius Kall erges.
This protracted stmggle must
have greatly stimulated feelings of fraternal compassion among all Creeks.
However, Venetian detennination to thwart the ambitions of Michael
VITI, together with the reappearance of the Turkish menace on his
Hank, was sufficient to induce him to open negotiations with Venice. [n
two agreements of 1268 and 1277 he seems not only to have abandoned
his plans for Crete, but also for the Messenian strongholds of Modon
(lo.·lethone) and Caron (Korone). This utterl y discouraged even the
most resolute of the Creek fighters, and Cretan resistance effecti vely col-
lapsed. Chortatzcs and many of his fol.lowers sought refuge in tbe im-
perial court at Constantinople.
It is not known how large this stream of
refugees was or how long it lasted. Most of them, including Chortatzes
himself, settled in the eastern marches of the Empire towards the end of
the thirteenth century. AndroniClIs II Palaeologlls ( 1282-1328 ) rewarded
them with "'salaries to be fixed annuall y." There they joined the fight
against the Turks.
Venetian power therefore remaint.>d fi rmly entrenched in Crete and
throughout the eastern Mediterranean. Yet a subtle change in relations
between the new Byzantine Empire and Venice occurred at this time.
A number of Venetians who were especiall y well acquainted witb the
political situati on in the Empire saw that the two states could mutually
benefi t from a uni ted front against the Turks. They believed that any
diplomatic overtures made with the ai m of effecting such an alliance
with the Byzantine Empire would be warmly received. Marino Sanudo
Tarsella ( 1270?-l 343?) , in his work relating to the Venetian possessions
and the projected crusade. also recognized that any co-opcration between
the two states would most likely prove doubly useful to Venice: it
would nol only lead 1' 0 successful confrontation with the Turks, but
would also assist in the pacification of her Greek possessions.
Michael VIU Palaeologus and his heirs proved in the end to be power-
less to resist the Turkish flood. Quite apa rt from the egregious error of
allowing the administrati ve reorganization effected by Theodore Lascaris
to fall into decay, the removal of the throne from Nicaea to Constanti-
nople meant that the center of government was isolated from the nerve-
center of Greek civilization. Here, ill the ancient capital of the Eastern
Roman Empire, the old Roman traditions qui ckly reasserted themselves
and the Orthodox Church resumed its traditionally close association with
the imperi al polity. Tn these circumstances the growth of an Hell eni c out-
look, exemplified in, for instance, the use of the national name, Hellene,
was temporarily suspended.
However, the national spirit was rekindled in direct proportion to the
extent to which the Empire was forced to contract to the predomi nantl y
Greek regions of the Empire in Europe and Asia Minor, to Bellas as
Theodore II Lascaris had called them. Actual use of the words Bellas
and Hellene tended to become more widespread:1 towards the end of
the fourteenth century despite the imperial restoration. For example,
although Demetrius Kydones generally used the words Greek and
Homan 7 ~ interchangeably, he once tried to explain the gap between East
and West on the assumption that educated people could not really be
interested in wha t was bappeni ng in the West, because ';anyone who is
not a Creek is a barbarian.'" TP Thus, whatever meani ng he attached to
the word Roman, it was clear from this cont ext that he at least regarded
the Creeks as the indisputable heirs of ancient Greek civilization.
The Westerners had no doubt in their minds who the Creeks were.
Tn various official documents, Popes and Western kings invariably used
the words Graecia and Graeci, or the latter's then-current French equiv-
alent, Grieu.
Nor do they appear to have doubted where these Graeci
lived. I n the fifteenth century, Thrace was explicitly identified as being
part of Greece; U and it is precisely in Thrace, of course (or Eastern
Rumelia, as it came to be called ), that overland travellers in Irl.ter cen-
turies orst became aware of their arrival in G r e e c e . ~ ~ Even in the thir-
teenth century Theodore I J Lascaris wrote: "You will have arrived ill
Greece from Europe when first you arrive in Thrace:' 83 11ms, in spite of
a certai n imprecision which surrounded the usc of the word Hellene after
the Palaeologian restoration, it is apparent that the inhabi tants of the
Byzantine Empi re were Homan in only the most formal sense. If the
majority did not full y appreciate this fact , the Western Europeans cer-
tainly did; so, too, did the writer of the C/rro"iclc oj Morea, a GasIDlllus,
when he said: "Long ago, tlrese ' Romans' were called 'Greeks: They
were always disti nguishable by their extreme arrogancc; indeed, they
still are. It was only from Rome that they took the name 'Homan.' " s.
This period then, from the thirteenth through the fift eenth centuries,
was a seminal one in tile formntion of Hell eni c nationalism. It was at this
time t.hat the words HelJene and Hellas carne into usc in conjunct ion
with the word nation. John In Ducas Vatatzcs appears to have been the
first to effect this conjunction (see above, page 37) and the word genos
also recurs constantly in \' arious texts during the last two centuries of
the Byzantine Empire.
It was used with increasing Frequency during
the peri od of Turkish occupation (1453--1821) and was especiall y promi-
nent in the writings of scholars towards the end of the eighteenth century
and at the beginning of the nineteenth. What tbis signified, of course.
was that the culhl ral Ilnd racial equation, the essential strength of the
nationalist mystique, was cstahljshed by the time of John IH.
Cultural Actioity duril1g the 1 ... atin Period
Although the Greeks were reduced to a condition of political subservience
during the period of Latin domi nation, their national cohesion was never
reall y broken. There were, for example. a variety of cultural manifesta-
tions. Marino Sanudo Torsello had this to say of the underl ying impor-
tance of religion in Greek life: that the inhahitants of the Despotate of
Morea, of Cyprus, Crete, Euboea, Rhodes, and many other islands, being
Greek. remai ned faithful to the Orthodox Church even though they were
dominated by the Franks and fell techni cally within the ecclesiastical
jurisdiction of the Pope; but their hearts and minds were immutably
Creek, and whenever they were free to do so they never hesitated to
show it.1e Torsello specifically mentioned a number of places tluoughout
the Aegean where nationalism was in constant ferment. His information
is rel iable and corroborates the conclusions of modern li terary research-
ers, who, by methods of linguistic analogy, have identified the local
origins of some of the Greek literature of the period. Both sources under-
line the pOint that specific fOims of nationalist expression were never
stifled, even in those places where the Latin conquest appeared to be
most (.'omplete.
The theme of Creek bravery permeates these diverse works. There was,
for example, the chivalric novel, The Troian \Var, which was written by
an unknown Creek poet , probably about the middle of the thirteenth cen-
tury. Based upon Benoit de Sainte-Maur's romance of tht? same name
( 1180). its purpose in the Creek vers ion was to extol the well-known
Homeri c heroes who triumphed over their adversaries ,s7 It was a source
of direct inspiration for Lhe writer of the Namltive of Achilles and it
helped to catalyze national feeling.
The NarrllUl)c bears no relation to the Iliad. Its author is concemcd
solely with lifting the morale of his compatriots by using Achilles as a
uni versa l symbol of Greek bravery. Thus, the hero, "in whom all Creeks
take pride," is transplanted to the period of Latin conquest, where he
confronts the lmights of the West with all the courage of his ancicnt
counterpart. lndeed, i t is probable that the Norrative was written as R
Creek response to the Chronicle of Morea, whose author, as we have
seen, was given to lavish praise of the Latin conquerors. If such is the
case, the Narrative was probably writt en towards tbe end of the thir-
teenth century or at the beginning of ule fourteenth century. This, to be
sure, is not the conclusion of Hesseling, one of the editors of the Nm"TfI-
tive. Although he detects 1m orgllcllil notiollol. assez fort, a strong na-
tional pride, he considers rather that it was wcitlen at the beginning of
the fifteenth century 80 as n narrati on of "past grandeur" and only inci-
dentally as an anodyne to the feelings of a resentful, conquered people.
In other words, he overlooks the facl that a conscious evocation of the
past was one of the essential springs of Creek national feeling and that
both were invariably aroused in circumstances of foreign occupation. It
would seem that Sathas came closer to the truth when he said that
Achilles personified the Creek des ire for revenge against the Crusaders.
The Achilles of the Narrative is demonstrabl y n medieval hero, a second
Digcnis Akritas. The very si milarities in their li ves suggest a common
inspirational backgrowul. Both possessed heroic qualities which deter-
mined their subsequent achi evements; both received a classical Creek
education; both wore the armor of Byzanti ne soldiers; both abducted
their wives and were pursued by their brothers-in-law, whom they de-
feated. The inllucnce of popular legend und poetry in eadl work is plain.
AJthough the Narrative has never had the same vogue 1>0 as the Digcllis,
it may be considered as the connecting link bctween the Digcnis Akritas
and the popular seventeenth-century romance, Erotocritlls. Some of the
images and episodes of the ErotocrUus are obviously derived from it, for
example the duel of Achilles with the Frankish knight-D!
The appearance of five romantic poems between the thirteenth and
fifteenth centuries may also be regarded as possi ble expressions of the
cultural nationalism of this period. Written in a demotic language and
fifteen-s yllable iambic verse, they are all landmarks in the development
of modern Creek literature: Callimadllls and Chrysorrhoe (thirteenth
century ), VelthandrtlS alld Cllrysallt.U/ ( thirteenth century ), Lyoistroa
and Rhodamne (fourteenth century), Florills alld Platzia/fora (end of
fourteenth, or beginning of fifteenth century ) and 1mbcrius and Marga-
rona (fifteenth cenhITY). The oldest of the five, CaltimacllUs, was written
by Andronicus Conmcnus Ducas Palneologus. The authorship of Vellhan-
drua and Lyvi.stro8 is unknown. Many incidents in these poems can be
traced to t he ballads and love songs of troubadours who sang in the
courts of the Latin rulers in Greece and the eastern Mediterranean. These
songs were learned by the indigenous Creeks and were gradually adapted
to the Creek mode. They contain, of course, many episodes and all usions
which reflect the social and cultural environment of Western Europe;
neverthe1ess, they have become an authentic part of the modem Creek
literary tradit ion,"
Thus, the period of Latin conquest witnessed not only the reinforce-
ment of tbe oral traditions of the Creek people, but also the establish-
ment of the demotic language as a formal literary vehicle. Vivid and alive,
the language of the people insinuated itself into the courts of the Latin
rulers against all their efforts to preserve and to impose their own. The
conquerors found it necessary to use Creek, in both its written and spoken
forms, in order to regularize their relations with the conquered, There-
after, most of the official documents, seals, and proclamations were in
modem Creek, as were the inscriptions on aU Venetian coins destined
for coloni es, In these ways the invaders gradually "succumbed to the
ever growing demands of Creek national feeling," IS
of Friedrich Pfis ter, "Alexander cl er Crosse in der byzantinischcn Litemtur
und in neugri cchischen Volksbiichem [Alexander the Grea t in Byzantine Lit·
erature and in Modem Creek Popular Books]," Probleme der IIcugriccllisclwll
LlteratuT. W, Berliner by:afltillisclll! Arbeil c'l. XVI ( 1960), 112- 130.
39. See Pallis, Alexander tite Creat (38) , p. 32, for the relevant bib!;-
40. See Stilpon Kyriakidis, .. '0 M. £iii "wu; r.ui ta;
1[(lgaMo£lS" (Alexander the Creat in ?"-Iylh and Tradition] ," MEE. IU, 66D-
664, which contains also the relevant bi bliogrnphy. Cf. also George Spyridnkis,
"IUf.l6o;l.lJ dO; n'}v p.d,EnI" !liw i)1l].HOOWV n:uQaMOEW\' Y.al/)o;aoullv nElIi -cou
MEyaAOU ' AM.!idvl)t>Ou IA Contri bution to the Study of the Popular Traditions
and Beliefs Concerning Al exnnder the Creal]," Avt. KE(lUI-lOl'tOllhAOtl
(Athens, 1953) , pp. 385-419. where there n supplerncntnl bibliography.
41. See Andreas Xyngopoulos, .. ' 0 !\'1. ' AU;av5gG; tv Tn dy.
y£IOY!?UlJlIf;l [Alexander the Creat in Byz:mlinc Pottery Painting)," EEBI , XI\,
( 1938), 275-276; and Pallis, Alexander 1116 Creal (38), p. 32.
42. Salhas, La Tradiliarr lre/Uniqlle (36 ), p. 123, on VinSl.lufs ltil!erfl rium
regis Anglorum Ricardi [Tir e IIinerary of Ric/lOrd, King of EnglandJ (Ox·
ford, 1687), p. 26L
43. Michael Clykas, y'QO\' txit [C/.ronicie), ed. Immanuel Bekker
(Bonn, 1836), p. 599.
44. Kurt Weitzmann, Greek Myl110/ogy in ByZllllline J\ rt ( Princeton, 1951),
p. 194.
45. See Andreas h 'tOu "coli
l\t ' A/JO;av5QO\l btl &yy£(wv [Representations from the Alex-
ander Romance on Byzantine Vases]," AE, 1937, pp. 19Z-202; and " '0 l\'f.
( 41 ), pp. 267-276. Cf. also Weinmanll, Greek Mytho/og!J (44 ),
especiall y pp. 104, 186-188, 194, 197-198.
46. Anastasios Orhmdos, "Niov avciy},vqlOv uvaJ.1j11!f:W;: tOU ' AiJO;av-
5(lou [A New Bas-Helief of the Ascension of Alexander]," EE(I):E n A. II ( 1954-
1955), 281-289, where there is an excellent bibliography; and ''['},ul'tta 'tOU
11°"0£10\1 a116o)\' [Sculptures in the Musewn at Thebes) ," 'A(l1.£lm' 'to}\!
moWv 1-l"llI-lEiwv 'Ellubo;;, v (1939-1940), 134-136; also with a bibli-
47. See Tomadukis, " 7HOllV 6ciQS(lgOl at (24 ), pp. 88-109. On
the relationship between Eustathius and Michael Choniates. see Spyridoll
Lambros, Mly'Ury. 'AX0f.ltvUTOlJ to. O'wl;,cS"IEVU [Wll at Refll(lills of Miclracl/\ ko-
minatos) (Alhens, 1879), I , xvi, xxxvi-xxxvii. xxxvii i, 283--306.
48. Lambros, AXOfUWltOU (47), p. xxxviii.
Chapter 3
1. Spyridon Zambelios, .. thlf.lOnXU 'Iii; ' ElJ400;' Ex/')03ivta
JIEQl VJ. llvlO]1oii {Popular Songs of Greece,
pubUslled with 011 Historic(I/ Sl lldy of Mec/ielJ(11 HellenismJ ( Athens, 1852 ).
See especiall y pp. 462 ff. , and the same author's f.l eJ.E'CUl. n £(IL
itllYWV tU"lVlXij; Ulvon]'l:olO nita 11' UXQL tK(l"t"onOETllt>t8olO (By.:ontine
Studies. Conccnliug fhe Sources of Greek Natiollolity, / ro/ll tile Eiglltll to tile
TenOI Century] (Athens, 1857).
2. Constantine Paparrhegopoulos, ' l m:oQlu TOU OJ''lVlXOU [ History
of the Greek Nation] 1932), v. part I , v, 3, 5, 8-9, 15.
3. Constantine Sathas, MEGCltwvlJodl fn6Aloih'p(11 (2:23) (Venice, 1812-
1874), vu (1894), x If.
4. Constantine Amantos, ' I O"ToQta '(ou X(H:lrOUC; (1:9) (Alhens,
1939) . J, 7-8.
5. lo[umis K. Voyatzidis, .. 'lO"tOQLxu.t [lei.hoL [Historical Studies],"
EE<I):EnS, u ( 1932).302. See also lo ... mnis Mamalakis, "n p06/.ilflu'ta Til;
VEO£U'IVtxij; lm:o(lla; [Problems of Modero Creek History]," XQOVIXU "TOU
Il ElpaflUny.oii l:xoJ.£lou O(.I\"t:1tUmllLlOU Eku(JaAOVi1'.ll;, v (1951). 72 K.
6. For descriptive infonnnlion, see Constantine Dyovouniotis, "At
Toii fl'lTQ01(Ohicou 'A-ft'lvWV MtXa1lA 'Ai'.oJ.l tvo'mu [The Unpub-
lished Catechisms of Michael Akomimtl'os, Metropoli te of AthellS]," n AA, III
7. Sec Geoffroy de Villehardouin, La COllqIl6/C de COllsl untillOp/c, ed. Ed-
mond Fuml (Paris, 1939), II (1203- 1204), 88-89; and Orestc Tafmli , TIles-
saialliqllc 611 qllulorz;elllt1 siCela (Paris, 1913), p. 67, whcre the relevant bibli ·
ography will bc found. The tcndency on the part of Creek cities and countries
to hang on to their autonomy was pronounced. However, I am Dot aware of
the sources on which Neroulsos based assertion that the inhabitants of
Athens, Mcgal1l, Thebes, Levadia. and Atalante submitted to the Franks in
exchange for the retention of their local independence (Tassos Neroutsos.
"X(ll(JtL(l.VI1'.Cli. 'A{hjval {Christian Athens]." AlEE, IV (1892-1895) , 53
8, On the questi on of the voluntary servitude of (.'Crtain nobles, see Snthas.
M&oau,UvLxlj Ih6hlOlh'rl.lj (2:23), I , 109-110.
9, Chonintes, XQOVl1'.ll [Historical Narrat ion], ed. Imman-
uel Bekker (Donn, 1835), pp. 840--844.
10. See Snt has, 616hlo61I1'.11 (2:23), I, 104; Athanasios Papa-
dopoulos-Kerameus, "nE(J1 1f\J\'OLXLaf,l.oii tw\' ' 1(rlavvivwv IlE'ta.
xanixTl10w KwvlJTnvrtvouJt6},E(O; (Concemillg the Settlement or loannina
after the Frallkish Cnpture of Constantinople]," alEE, III (1889) , 454; the de-
Scription in Choniates, (9), pp. 837 H.; and Spyridon Lam-
bros, 'Axoluvo..wu 'ttl (JO)tOJ.l.EVa (2:47), II ( 1880),292.
1 L Sec Papadnpoulos-Kernmells, n &Qt (10), pp. 451-455.
For the correct mime of Michael I. see Lucien St:iemon. lOW Origines du
des-potat d'Epire. A propos d\m livre recent," REB, xvu (1959), 91-126, Cf.
the communication to the Conb'TCs intemntional des ctudes byzantines,
Ochrida, 1961: "Les Origines du despotat d'Epire--problcmes de titulature et
de chronologie," Resllmes dC4 commllnicatlons (Belgrnde-Ochrida, 1961), pp.
12. See Donald Nicol, Tile Despot(lte of Epirlls (OxCord, 1957), p. 16.
13. Ch(miatcs, (9), pp. 767-768. After the fall of Con-
stnntinople (12.£M ), Bishop Theodore of /\ Inni:l wrote his younger brother:
.. 'E&AW ,lEv 1) r!U' (f0l:['1';l JtU:; .61lO; ·EIJ.4; [Our country has
been taken, but to the wise man ally plflce is" Greece)" (PG, CXL, col. 414).
14. See Louis Halphen, "Le R61c des 'Latins' dans I'histoire intcrieurc de
Constanti nople a ta fin du xu" sicc1e," Mr!lougc$ Charles Diehl (1930), I .
15. See Toannis D. Pnpadopouios, ' T(lllYO(liOll tou (tCfTQov6polJ
l;nfftoAal [The Letters of Gregori os Chioniades the Astronomer},"
I ( 1927). 151-203.
LB. See William Miller, Trcbi;:ond, TIle Lasl Greek Empire ( London. 1026),
pp. IS If.
17. See Nicol. TIl l! Dc.v1'JOlllte 0/ E,Jirus (12). p. x.
18. See Salhas, MtoQl,wVl')(il ( 2:23), VII , 460-461, 46S-iBH.
19. See Mathias Wellnhofcr, JOllUrlllC' A,JOkouko.f, MeirOlwiil 11m! NfWIlflk.
lOS ill Acto/iell (c. 1155-1223 ) [Joallnis AP(lClJlIClIS, Mclropolitc of Nallpactwy
ill Actol/a (ca. 1155-1223) } (Freising, Germ., 1913) , pp. 31 fr.
20. ParthenioS" Polakis. ' Jrllu"v1llO 'A1[6i1.uu:A.o:;;. IllltQorrnHnlt; NUU1[fiil.tuu
[lot'lrlnis Apocallcus, Mo'ropoiite 0/ NlWpaC'I/S] (Jerusalem. 1923). pp. 5,
21 If., 37 fE. On the oppnsitiun between tho of Epirus nnd NicaCa and
the attendant controversies, see Wellnhofer's comments in lohmlllc,f
(19), pp. 46-64, 67-68. Cf. nlso Nicol, TIl e Dcspolule of (12), pp.
21. Vnsily Vasilevsky, "Epirolica sacculi XIlr [Affairs of Epirus ill the
Thirteenth Century}," Viz. Vrem., IH (1896), 246. 265. See also Wellnhofcr,
JolwllllC!J Apokuukos (19). pp. 6-30, and, for Apocaucus' position in the
hierarchy of lhe Church of Epirus, pp. 4'1-45. On the actual date of the cap-
ture of Thessalonica, see Jeml Longnon, "La Reprise de Salonique par
Grees en 1224 [The Recapture of Thessnkmica by the Greeks in 1224J."
Congres internationru des etudes bY.talltines, P.ans, 1948. Acl o.f. 1 (1950), 141-
146; and B. Sinogowit'Z, "Zur Eroberung Thessalonikes im 1224 [On
the of Thessalonica in the Aut'llmn of 1224]." BZ. XI.V (1952), 28.
22. See Nikolaos Tomndakis, "01 I.OYWt tau &o1[o1:d1:oU ' Hrcdeou [The
Intellectuals of the Despotate of Epirus]," X.""'II (1957), 13. See also
Wellnhofcr, l a/lal mes Apokuukos (19), p. 47 j Polakis, ' lwu"I'll';: 'Aaoil.Ct\lxo,;:
(20), p. 36.
23. See Polnkis, 'Jwuvvlli 'AruixUlr'(o; (20), p. 66.
24. TomaduJ..is, Ot A6ylOL (22), pp. 24-25.
25. Sec Athanasios Pnpadopoulos-Kerameus, YOUIAf.lUt'Cl 'Iwri.VVOIl
tOU ' An:oxuuil.ou IllltQo](Of.t.ou NumtcbtLOU (The Synodic Letters of Joannis
Apocaucus. Metropoli te of NaupactusJ," I (1909), 10.
26. See Eduard Kurt z, "Georgios Bartiancs, vall Kerkyrn [George
Vardanis, Mctropolite of CorcyraJ," BZ, xV (1906).603-613. Cf. also Welll1-
hofer, Johomlcs Apokolfkos (19), pp. 38-39.
27. See Lambros, MlXU11A (2:47), 11 , 350.
28. See Panagiotis Arnvantinos, XQovoyeatpl.Ct 'Hmil,lou ( 1 :46) ( Athens,
1856-1857), 11, 34-35.
29. Vasilevsky, Epirotlca (21), p. 252. Cr. also Wcllnhofer, Jollallnes Apo-
kaukos (19), pp. 41-42_
30. See Apocaucus'\etter to Vnrdanis (Vnsilevsky, cpirotica (2 1]. pp. 250-
252). c r. Tomadakis. OtMylO( (22), p. 18. and Polakis, ' lwtivv1l; ·Arr{n'.aUiw;
(20). p. 29.
31. Pupadopou!os-Kcnuneus, }:uvob(xu (25), p. 21.
32. TIle monograph announced by Michael Dendins more than forty years
ago, on Michael 11 Comnenus Ducas and his contribuUon to the renascence
of the Greek nation (see" ' E1.tv1l 'Ayy€Hvtl 8ouxl1wa, 6aoiAuJ(m
Nwnoi,Ew; [Helene Angelina Ducaina, Queen of Sicily Naples]," HX,
t [1926],219-2.2.0) has not yet- been published.
33. See Demetrius TIl; VfWTEQW; tlJ.lj-
y;.wauljt; [A Select /oil 0/ the Monuments 0/ /ll e Modern Greek Lan-
gill/ge] (Athens, 1866), I , vii-x, 73-182, and Karl Hopf, Grieclttmlontl /m
A!ittelaller Imel III der NCII:.eit (1:51) ( Leipzig, 1867- 1868), I , 429.
34. Franz Miklosich and Joseph Mull er, Acta et diplomat" gflleca medii
(l em sacra et pro/(//I(J ( 1:43) ( Vienna, 1860- L887), v, 260-261.
3.'). Regllrui ng the brief reign or Constantine Lascaris, see B. Sinogowi t7.,
"Ober das byzanlinische Kaisertmn nach dem IV KreUT.LUge (1204-1205)
[Conceming the BY7.antine Empire after tIle fourth Crusade (120·1-1205)],"
BZ, XLV (1952), 353-356.
36. See Jean Pappadopoulos, TileodQre 11 I..osctlris. ernpercur de NieCu
(Paris, 1908). p. 24, fn.
37. See Villehardouin, La ConqulJ(c (7) . II , 267fT.
38. See Sathas, MFIJOU·.oVLXf) (2:23), I, 112.
39. Ibid .• VII, xxi. On Nicaea as It focal poillt of Creek studies, see Pappado-
poulos, TModorc (36), pp. 9-14.
40. An expression which would seem to correspond with that used by the
Metropoli tllll of Neopiltras, Euthymios Malakis: ""noo'UVa;im TE xCli, GUOXE\I(t(
[gatherings and assemblies of tIm peopler (Athanasios Papndopoulos-Kera-
mcus. f-l'l tQollo;.ln)t; Ntwv n (tTQwv [Euthymi os Mnlakis,
Metropolite of Nea Futfns]," 'EnE"rl](Jl; IT!lQvaolJoii. vn [ L903], 22).
41. Snthas, i\'IElJmw\'L)n'l (2:23). I, 110.
42. Sec HeMme Glykatzi-Ahrweiler, " Ln Poli tiquc agrai re des empereUT5 cle
NieCe," ByuIIIUon, XXVIlI (1958),51--66.
43. Satbas. MEIJIltWV(l'.l'\ 61/)"lOfull!.ll (2.: 23), I, 106-107, 110, 112, 113, 115,
122, 129, 131 fE.
44. See Stilpon Kyriakiclis, ForsclulIIgsbericll l ZIIIII Akritos-eI'OS (2:30)
(Munich, 1958), p. 23, abo p. 9; and Nicephoros Gl'egoras. lrn:oe1a
[ ROI/1U1I His/onj], cd. Ludwi g Schopen, I ( BOlin, 1829), 377.
45. See Kyriakidis, ForscllU"gsbcrlcht (230), p. 25.
46. Herbert Hunger. "Von Wissenschaft und Kllll st der rriihen Palaiolo-
genzeit [On Science and Art in Early Palaeologian Times]," JOBG, \'1Ii ( J959),
47. Sec Pnppadopoulos, TModorc (36), p. 23.
48. Xanthoucliclis, ' H httOxQuTia EV y.ui ot XUTU t OW
' Ev£'t/lw aylilYf:!; t lilv K(Hrro:w (Venetian Rille ill Crele allff 1I1(! St ruggles 01
tile Cretans against tIle Venetians ) ( Athens, 1939), pp. 37-43. Cr. nLID Freddy
Thinet, La Rom(lIIie oCtlilian1l c all moyctl age ( Paris, 1959) , pp. 97-99.
49. XQ{ 1'1 GUt OC; u!t6 m Qu
ijtchWOEV x' lltLUOEV 't6tcov
to }.EyOIIEVOV l:Y.OlltOlllV
E;(WV b680v Aumc:u!?(hov
Il t 't' uxavatv.
["And the bmmblc from ufar spread and pressed upon the place cnlled
Scutari, having n scarlet rose and Armenian thorn. "] In August Heisenberg,
"Kaiser BlItalzes der Burmherzige. Eine mittelgriechischc Legcll de
[Emperor Johannes Batatzes the Charitable. A Middle-Creek Legend]," BZ,
XIV (1905), 176; sec also Cyril l\Iango, "The Legend of Leo the Wise,"
Zbornik Rac/ovo ( Reel/eil de fravau:c of the Institute of Byzantine Stmli es of
Belgrade), LXV ( 1960), 110.6, 66-67.
50. Mango, "The Legend of Leo" (49 ), pp. 71- 72.
51. Heisenberg, "Kaiser Johannes Bata tzes" (49) , p. l BO.
52. See Cl yKat-Li. Ahnveiler, "La Poli ti que" (42) , p. 66.
53. Only Je;m Pappadopoulos, in various p..1fts of his monograph Theodore
(36). speaks about the cul tivation of Creek studi es in Nicaea and Theodore
n 's lo" e of antiquit y. See Nicetas Choni ates, P OO\.Hiixl\ i moQia [Roman His·
toryJ. ed . Immanuel Bekker ( Bonn, 1835), p. 794: "XUI l\ uQiol1C; (Jurijc;
l IU6ij"UI ·.wi 6l' )Wi XElQwIJaafi m 0'1" lOU n [AOtcCH; [to a ttack
Larissa itself and 10 march through Creece and seize the Peloponnese]." Cr.
p. 860: "tv 'Ai<'l i(p, 6 EOTt\' i ) xn3' ' E)'Mlin Nnt01tol..t.; [i n Actium, which the
Greeks call Ni kopolisJ."' See also Spyridon L1mbros, IVhxuit:t 'Axottt vchou "to.
(2:47 ) (Athens, J 879) , 1-11, passim.
54. See loannis SakeUi on, .. ' Avtxbo'tOl; f tcuJLoJ.Tt TOU U,'/TOXQ(.hO(IO; '.I wav,'ou
AO"Ih.u Bu"turol\ tcQO;: TO" n: utcav r Ql] YOQlOV, a vE"tlQd n:i oa tv [An
Unpublished Leiter from the Emperor Ioannis Ducas Vatatzes to Pope
Gregory, Discovered in PatlnosJ. " 'A1hlvutO", I ( 1872), 369-378 ( wrongly
numberccl ) .
55. Pappadopoul os, TModore (36), p. 13.
56. Nicola Festa, Tll eoclori Ducae ulscaris epistu/ae CCXVII [217 Letters
of Theodore Ducas Luscarls] ( Florence, 1898 ) , pp. 165, 176: ·'tln:6Tav at 0
l1aVtEQwTUTO!; 1111't(Wl'to}' ITl]C; l:d(l()EWV £x TijC; EUQWl111t;" £1((1vO.-31\ tcQOIO 'to
VJ.11Vtl16v [when the most reverend metropolite of Sardes comes from
Europe to Greece}." See hi s letter to Phocas. the metropolitan of Sardes: '"l:u
at rc6T' ltv tx t:ij c; uVEA-3UC; -01" 'ElJ.u6u· tcOT' It,, at -01"
8 WXI]V lll.EJ.{)wv 'tov ' EIJ.it Ol1"OVTOV lil UJtEQuunc; xui nl" EOW 'Aulu,' xUTII) Il ;:;
[And when will )'ou come to Greece from Europe, and when, passing through
Thrace and crossing the Hellespont. will ),OU look upon Asia on the OPPOSi te
57. On the extent of Theodore II 's state, see Pappadopoulos, T Mo(/(lfe
(36), pp. 56-S7.
58. Festa, TllCor/ori (56), I'p. 58, 62-03, 252-253: nlv <(l l/.iruwu
y.uf yij\' Hh:nO(l!1POU. i1tJtIJ'tE. niv 'Ai.E;u"bQou l'tOrE (lY.\lI.t:uo-
xai 1t(lQtl. BUUAYUl'WV OJ,lyoatWV uofhvwv [we came to the
land or Philip and Alc.'mndcr l md looked UpOI1 it, 0 noblest, that which
was ravished from very few nnd powerless Oulgarians] ," and p. 268.
59. Ibid., p. J07. For some liternry reflL'Ctions on his leuer to George Acro-
politis, see Sophie Antoniadis. "Sur une IcUre de Thl'Otiore n Lascnris." I-I ell .
contcmp., 1954, pp. 356-361.
60. SalhlLS, MEOUWlVlY.tl 6l(i),IO{h'pol (2:2.'1). \ 11 . 507. 535-536.
61. For details, sec 1)nppadopollios. Thc(}(iorc (36). pp. 85--89. For Theo-
dore U's nvownl, see Festa, 'l' /' l'Ollorl (56) . p. 272.
62.. For extracts from Theodore II's see !)app:lc1opoulos, TModore
(36), p. 86. On the question of the rc(:onciliation between cLusical Jeanting
and Christian tllcology. S(.'e J-JulI/o:cr, bVon W',sellschufC' (46). pp. 136-138.
Theodore's encomium wnli hy Ludwig Bachmann in Tllcod()ri Ducae
LoSCliriS illlllerator/$ ill lUlu/em Nil'acae urM, oralio [TI,e Emperor rhcooor('
Duces Ulsctlris' Speech in Praise o/lhe City 0/ Niecee) ( Ilostock, 1847).
63. See Hunger, "Von Wis.senschnft" (46) . p. 137, where the relevant ex-
tructs will be found.
64. See Johannes Draseke, "Theodoros Lascnris," BZ. UI ( 1894), 500.
65. Festa, TII(..-OOor/ (56), p. 8.
66. Ibid., pp. 201-21 l, for hi s lett erll to Pope Alcxnnder IV and the car-
dinals Hicardo, Octavia!)o, tint! Peter the CUPIl Z;'.o.
67. Ibid., p. 52. for his letter to hi s teacher, Blemmydcs.
68. See Pappauopoulos. TlI6otlore (36). pp. 79-89, nnd Festa, TJwooori
(56), p. 58.
69. George Pachymeres, IfltoQiuL [ lf istories], ed. Immanuel
Bekker (Bonn, 1835), I , 37--38. Cf. PI'. 24, 33; nnd Gcorge Acropolit is, Opera,
ed. August Heisenberg (Leipzig. 19(3). I . 123-J24; lind Pappadopoulos.
Theodore (36). pp. 79, 8L
70. See loannis K. Voyntzidh, .. ' I I l\IfYU}"1 ' Iata [The Creat Idea)."
Hell. oonterll p., commemorati ve volumes, 1453--1953 (Athens, 1953). pp.
307 H.; and his okler shldy ... ' 11 UI.lXl'l xul ;1 :\I£yJ).ll; ' IbiD;
(The Origin and Evolution of the Creal Idea)," H;\IE. 1923, pp. 161-171.
In connection with t he double-headed eagle. sec Giuseppe Gemla, "L'Aquila
bizantina imperi:lle U due teste [The B)'7A'lntinc Impcri:11 Eagle with Two
He.'ldsl ," Feli.T RtWCllrIU, J943, fuse. I , pp. 7-36, where the early
will also be found_
71. After a while, the liberated part of the Peloponnesc with its capital at
Mistm became an importull t center of Greek resistance against the Frankish
conquerors lind a bright l>e:tcon or civi li 'l.nllon. The Church of Sts. Theodore
was built there between .1290 and 1295 (scc Anastasios Orlandos, "I.'i.uvn'j},
b ltgWTQ; XThw{l {w\' ' Ay. rou l\JUo-t{lcl [ Daniel , the First Founder
of the Church of Theodore of Mistr.ll," EEB!, XII [ 1936], ,143-448).
[n 1291- 1292 lhtl Church of St. Demot rios wns built by Nkephoros Mos·
chopoul os, Metropolitan of Lncoocmoni a (.'Icc Manoussos ManoussaClIs, .. ' H
X(wvo}.Oy1U ;:nToQl;:ljt; € TOU ' Ay. 6 IUIl ]T(lIOll TOU l\1lltHQa [The
Dil te of the Dedicatory l11scription of the Church of Saint Demetrios of Mistm]:'
6.XAE, IV, 1 [1959] . 72-79 ). While in Mistra at the cnd of the thirteenth
century and the beginnillg of the four teenth century, this latter Church hier-
arch and scholnr, },,'Ietropolitun of Lacooemonia and J'[(loEll{JOt; of Crete, also
made artistic copies of ancient Greek and Christian manuscripts or commis-
sioned their copying by others. His annotated codices, which have survived
to this day, bear witness to the richness of his own libmry (I\Ianoussacas,
"N t%lj<pOQOU MoaX0ltouf.OU bet YPUflflaTU DE Xf.l(}()y(lucpa Tij; "[Oll
[The Epigrams of Nicephol'os Moschopoulos in t ile Manuscripts of His Li -
brary] ," ' ElJ.1jVIX!:I . xv L1957] , 232---2,16) . In 1310 the Church of Panagia
Hodegelria ('AcpEV'tlXOU) was also built (see Ma nolis Chatzidakis, MUOT(!o.;
[Athens, 1948], p. IS).
72. Sec Thiriet, La Romonie (48), pp. 145-146, for the relevant bibliogra.
73. Ibid., pp. 152---153. For details, see Stephanos Xanthoudidis, 'H hno-
xpuTla h, Kglrrn (48), pp. 45-74.
74. Ibid., pp. 134, 149-150, ] 52. Of course, Venice reli nquished her plans
to tc-establish the Latin control of the Near East only af ter a long: time (see
pp. 155 if.).
75. Sec Pachymeres, :£uYYl'{l.(pl%ui io"tot>iw (69),11,209; "oil; K(H1H]{tEv
1tgooxwlHl oan(ll; (jam}.Ei w; ,.111 %aml)f. Z0f.!€VOut; n'lv Ex TWV ' h n}.Wv Eitl;:QU-
TEla" Iwho. goi ng over to the ki ng, from Crete, as if not accepting tllO dominion
of the It alians]." Regarding their leader, George Chortatzes, sec pp. 22 1 if.
76. See Karl Hopf, Griecht; Il/and illl Mittdalter llI1d ill der Nellzcit (1 :51)
(Leipzig. 1867- 1868), I , 464; and Thiriet , La Romonie (48), p. 161. On
Sanudo. see the article hy Giovanni B. Picotti , "Salludo, Marin, i1 vecchio,"
ill Enciclopedio i/CI/iana, xxx ( Rome, 1936) ,801-802.
77. See Steven RUllciman, "Byzantine and Hell ene ill the Fourteenth Cen-
tury," TOfln;: Kwv01:aVtlVOu 'AQfIEVOJ'[o\·Ji.ou btl "til
6i6i.ou aiiroii, VI ( Thessalonica, 1952) (= NOll .. :EZ. TIavEl't1.oHU110u 0f.ooa-
}.ov[;.:ll':;, fl'tftllQl':;, TOflO; ;'), 29; and Tafrali,
(7), p. 157. Since hc mcunt Lesbos when he wrote to Manuel. Chrysoloras in
1404, Manuel Calecas used the word Nclll/oS wi th its present-day connotation
( Haymond Locnertz, Corres/JOndllJlce de MliflUe/ Co/ecIM' [Rome, 19501. p .
300) . CL Kilian Lechner, Hellenel! lind Darbf/rell illl WeltbiM der By:.tmtiller
(2:4 ) (Munich, 1955) , pp. 64---72.
78. Sec Raymond Loenert?:, /Jemetrius Cydones, correspollliance (Vatican
City, 1956), 1, 3, 12, 20, 96. 100, ll5; II (1960) . 56. 57, 62, 66 IT. ,
79. Giovall ni Mercali, Nolde di Procoro c /Jeme/rio Cirf07w, t\ll/Iwele
Caleca e Theodoro Mditelliota cd alt ri lIppl/llti pt;r La storill dellll (;
della /et/eraillra iJiUl7l!illll del secolo XIV [Not es cOllccmillg Proconls, Deme-
lrius Kydollcs, Malluel C(I/ecas, Theo(Lore Melitcl!iota, l/flt! Olher Remarks OIl
the History of Byumtine Theology wul Lit erature ill the Fourt eellth Cellillry]
(Vatican City, 1931), p. 365: "01. yap TJfIE1:E()Ol 1tQ6n:pov fl€V 1tft/.(lUI;
{)1!llQ€OEW; dXOVTO ;Wl ;[(/.vra; av{t(!(.Il1tOU; d; " E!J.llva; ;:(11 6C1.g6ugou;
.0 nne' nmO\!'; nav dv6l]tov 4lov-ro xat O"lI.aU)V, 6vwv 11 60Wv
tou,; 6E}.·tiOUli ,jYOlJI-lEVOl (Since fonner ly our people held to
the ancient division and, separating al l men into Hellenes and barbarians,
considered everything beyond Lhemselves senseless and rude, thinki ng the rest
no better thnu donkeys or oxenJ, "
80. See, for example, Geoffroy de Villehardouin, La Conquete (7), passim.
According to an old traditioll , the word was used in !he Creek lan-
guage at that time (Vasil y Vnsilevsky. "Epirolica sReculi XlU [3;21]," Viz.
Vrem., UI (1896) , p. 252). See also Joseph Bryennios, TO. nCt(,>aA£W'tofIEVCI
(2:22), ed. Thomas Mandaknssis ( Leipzig. 1784), 1Il, 148, and passim. Cf.
Panagiotis Christou, At )'[f;(ImEttlal tavlKWV 6vOj.lO:twv TWV 'EI.111vwv [The
Vicissitudes of thc National of the Greeks] (Thessalonica, 1960), pp.
81. Bertrandon de 1a Brocquiere. Voyage d'-Olltrelllcr et rclour de Jerusalem
(:II France '1)(1r III voie de terre. pendant Ie des annees 1432 et 1433, ed.
Pierre Legrand D'Auss)" in Memoire,f de fJn$filut lIolional des sciences et arts;
sciences lIIorales ct poliUqucs, , . ( Paris, fructidor an XII ). p. 569: (An-
drcnoply) .. la p lus forte de toutes cclles que Ie Turc possMe drills la
Grece [the strongest of all those which the Turk possesses in Greecel." See
Pero Talur, Travels and Adventures, 1435-1439. IT. Malcolm Letts (New York-
London, 1926), p. 128.
82. See Giannis Tozis, .. ' 0 VJ' '1\'IY.c$I; y.o:tU "t6v It..' utiiwu,
-r6\' lvw; ' Ian:avoo; [The Creek World in the Fourteenth Cen-
tury; How a Spanish Traveler Viewed It]," ASrAS, XXII (1957). p. 150:
",jQ{ta 0.,'\ M£(nll.l6(1ia Xl' 'in:6 l'.£i Ba(Jva. ' Eliw d val;\ 'E.llciaa
II went to Mesembria, and from there to Varna. Here is the real Greece]."
83. Festa, Theodori (56), p. 176. This use of Hellos was retained from the
time of the church histori an, Evagrius, in the sixth century, which ci rcum·
stance, as Tozis aUempts to cOlwi nce us, at least helps to explain the obscure
sentence, "ot "AQa6EO; ... ' AyxiaAOV"IE XUL n'\v ' Walla.v n:aoClv [The Arabs
... Anchialos and all of Hellas]" (Tozis, " ' 0 'EJ..1'lvlz6; (82). p. lSD, n. 2).
See also Constantine Amrmtos, do; "tilv f.\ toalwvlxilv yEO)-
y(Ju<pi av [Observations on Medieval Geography/," EEBl:, 1 (1924). 42. Did
Theodore's love of Greece lead 10 its revival?
84. Chronicle of Morea, ed. John Schmitt ( London, 1904). verse 794 fr.;
and cd. Peter P. Kalonaros (Athens, 1940), verse 794 £I.
85. Sce Ni kolaos Tomadakis, '0 ' lwoll<P B(JlJEVVlO; -xai 1} KQijtll :.tUTU t6
1400 [Joseph Bryennios and Crete around 1400] (Alhens, 1947), pp. 73-74.
86. Karl Hopf, C/lroniqlles grcco-romanes ( Berlin. 1873), p. 143. See also
Michael Dendias, "Sur les rapports enlre Ics Crecs ct les Francs en Orient
apres 1204," EEBl:, XXIII (1953), p. 377. This study. as the author says
(p. 371), is extracted from the introduction to his unpublished monograph on
the Creek despot-ate of Epirus.
87. Sec Mnvrophrydis, 'Ez},Oyll I-' VlJf.ltiW\' (33), I , 183-2I J; and Antoine
Cidel, £lIldes sur In litlcmlllre grecqllC mademe (Paris, 1866), pp. 63-64,
88. See Dirk Hes.'Icling, L'AcltlfMide byu mlille (Amsterdam, 1919), p. 15.
89. Const:mlille Sathns, "Le Homan d'A(:hi1lc," AAEEG, X1l1 (1879 ); and
Paolo Stomeo, "Achilleide, poema bizantino anonimo,"' Stud; salcntiJli, Leece-
Cnlatina, "II ( 1959), 156-157. Stomeo places its origins somewhere l>etween
the twelfth ecntury and the beginning of the fifteent h. Sec also Borje Knos,
L'His/oire de la IitlCm/ure neogrocquc (Stockholm-Coteborg-Uppsaln, 1962),
pp. 133-137.
90. See Hesseling, L'Acltillcide (88), pp. 9, 11.
91. Paolo Stomeo, Osserr;az.iOlli sull'Acldlieide bizll7lfina ( Leeee-Gnlatina,
1958 ), pp. 5-6.
92. See "'Ionoussos Manoussacas, "Le!; Romans byzantines de chevalerie ct
retnt present des etudes les coneemanl," HEB, x (1952), pp. 70-83; and
Emmanuel Krlaras, "Die zeilliche Einreihung des 'Phlorios und Platzia-Phlora'
Romans im Hinblick auf den ' Imbcrios und Margarona' Roman IThe Chrono-
logical Place of the 'Phlorios and Plalzia-Phlora' Romance in regard to the
Imberios and Margaronn Romance] ," Congres Intemntional des etudes
b},z.1nlines, Munich, 1958, Aklcll ( Munich, 1960), pp. 269-272. For an op-
posing view. see Hugo Schreiner, "Oer oliesl"e Imbcriostext [The Oldesl Im-
berios Text}." XI" Congres international des eludes byzantines, Muni ch, 1958,
Ak/en ( Munich, 1960 ), pp. 556-562. A more comprehensive analysis of Ole
novels and the vari ous problems associated with them \vill be found in Knos.
L' llis/oire (S9), I , 104 ff.
93. See Ioannis Romllnos, ' I O'O{H)O(U EQyn [Historical Works] (Corfu , 1959),
pp. 173-175, where the relevant bibliogntphy will nlso be found.
e /lap/cr 4
L See Herbert Hungers commcnts in "Von Wissenschaft und Kunst in der
friihen Palaiologenzeit" (3:46), JOBG, VUI (1959). 139-144.
2. Ibid., pp. 145, 147. See Wi!amowitz' comparison: "D.T. ist in der
Wnhrheit eher als der crste madcme Tragiker-kritiker zu flihren [D.T. is,
indeed, to be considered rather the first modern tragedian-critic]."
3. See Basileios Laourdns, " But nvrtvu Yonl flna6ul;n\'Ll\'cl tyl'..wfua d o; .o\'
"Ay. [Byzantine and Post-BY7,antine Encomia of St. Demetrius] ,"
l\1Ui'.f;t\O\,lKU. IV (1955-1960),84 fr., 142-143.
4. See Pol}'chronis Enepekidcs, "Oer Bricfwechsel des Mystikers Nikolaos
Kabasilas [The Correspondence of the Mystic Nicholas Kavasil nsJ." BZ, XLVI
(1953). 31.
5. See Bnsileios Laourdas, ' H :.!oJ-nom;!.!'1 qllAOAOYI(1 nl\' 9Eooa}.oVLy.11V
xrmi. . 0'" MY.«.ov Ltm()tO\' alii:wn [Classical Philology in Thessalonica in the
Fourteenth Century) (Thessalonicn, 1960). 13-15, where there is also a special
6. Hunger, "Von Wissenschaft" (3:46), pp. 148-149, 150-151.
7. For the date of his birth, his life, and his education, see Herbert Hunger,
Mctochites als Vorlii uFer des Humanismus in Byzan"T. [Theodore
Metochitcs the Forerunner of Humanism in Byzantium] ," BZ, XL\' (1952),
4-19. See also Hans-Georg Beck, TIWOOorO$ Mctoc/d/es (Munich, 1952), 1 ff.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful