¹ PL 215, 699 (Book VIII, no. 126); Potthast 2564, July 12, 1205: ‘Quomodo enim Graecorum ecclesia … ad unitatem ecclesiasticam et devotionem sedis apostolicae revertetur, quae in Latinis non nisi perditionis exemplum et opus tenebrarum aspexit ut jam merito illos abhorrent plus quam canes?’ Peter Capuano was of an ancient and noble Amalfitan family, Counts of Prata, and should not be called Peter of Capua. See Camera, M., Memorie Storicodiplomatiche dell’antica Città e Ducato di Amalfi (Salerno 1876) I, 90 n. 1; 383ff., 665.Google Scholar

² PL 215, 710 (Book VIII, no. 133); Potthast, 2573; Tafel, G. L. F. and Thomas, G. M., Urkunden zur älteren Handels- und Staatsgeschichte der Republik Venedig (Fontes Rerum Austriacarum, zweite Abtheilung, Diplomataria et Acta 12–14 [hereafter T.-Th.]) I, 561, no. 155.Google Scholar

³ PL 215, 963 (Book IX, no. 140); Potthast 2860; T.-Th. II, 19, no. 170: ‘… propter novitatem mutationis imperii … sit cum maturitate plurima procedendum.’ Exactly the same words are used by Innocent in a letter of April 19, 1207, to the Latin Archbishop of Patras, who had reported that, when the Latins had conquered Achaea, certain of the Greek bishops subject to Patras had fled. Some refused to return to their dioceses, though cited; others could not be reached. Innocent required the archbishop to follow the same procedure as that laid down for the Patriarch, except that the Cardinal legate Benedict alone was empowered to substitute new Latin bishops. PL 215, 1142 (Book X, no. 51); Potthast, 3090.Google Scholar

⁴ PL 216, 201 (Book XIII, no. 6); Potthast, 3925, March 4, 1210.Google Scholar

⁵ Reference as in note 3: ‘… in illis ecclesiis in quibus sunt solummodo Graeci, Graecos debes episcopos ordinare, si tales valeas reperire, qui nobis et tibi devoti et fideles existant, et a te consecrationem velint accipere humiliter et devote. In illis vero in quibus cum Latinis Greci sunt misti, Latinos praeficias et praeferas ipsos Graecis.’ Google Scholar

⁶ Gesta Episcoporum Halberstadensium (Anonymous of Halberstadt), MGH SS 23, 118: ‘Cum apud Corphinum exercitus moram fecerit, archiepiscopus civitatis eiusdem quosdam ex prelatis eorum ad prandium invitavit. Qui cum inter se conferendo disputarent et de principatu Romane sedis plurima disceptarent, idem archiepiscopus dixit: nullam aliam causam se scire primatus vel prerogativam sedis Romane, nisi quod Romani milites Christum crucifixissent.’ Google Scholar

⁷ PL 215, 1352 (Book XI, no. 21); Potthast 3318; T.-Th. II, 67, no. 187.Google Scholar

⁸ PL 215, 1353 (Book XI, no. 23); Potthast 3320; T.-Th. II, 68, no. 188: ‘… si qui jam consecrati sunt induci nequeunt ut recipiant unctionem, id in hac novitate sub dissimulatione poteris pertransire. Consecrandos vero nullatenus consecres, nisi more Latino voluerint consecrari …’—On the complex canonical problem of the effectiveness of schismatic ordinations see Gratian, C.9 q.1; C.1 q.7 c.24; Decretales 5, 8, 1–2, and the relative commentaries. The doctrine of substantial validity, provided that the forma ecclesiae was observed in the consecration, had been worked out in passionate discussions by the canonists (cf. Saltet, L., Les réordinations, Paris 1907). The anointing, to be supplied for Greek bishops under Innocent III’s ruling in the letter to the Archbishop of Tirnovo, ‘Primate of the Bulgars and Vlachs’ (PL 215, 282; Book VII, no. 3; Decr. 1, 15, 1; Potthast 2138, February 25, 1204) was a requirement of ritual, not of the sacramental form. But it is understandable that the Greeks remained suspicious of these fine points of distinction.Google Scholar

⁹ PL 215, 1030 (Book IX, no. 193); Potthast 2921, November 27, 1206.Google Scholar

¹⁰ PL 215, 1031 (Book IX, no. 194); Potthast, 2922. See addition, note 105 below.Google Scholar

¹¹ PL 215, 1492 (Book XI, no. 179); Potthast, 3552, December 8, 1208.Google Scholar

¹² Pressutti, P., Regesta Honorii Papae III (Rome 1888–1895 [hereafter Pressutti]) 4730.Google Scholar

¹³ Stadtmüller, G., Michael Choniates, Metropolit von Athen (Orientalia Christiana 33, ii [1934]) 193 and passim. Google Scholar

¹⁴ Boniface’s candidacy for the imperial throne is discussed by Gunther of Pairis, Historia Constantinopolitana, ed. Riant, P. (Geneva 1875) 53; and his efforts to secure the election, including his marriage to Margaret (doubtless entered into because her position as widow of a Greek Emperor would strengthen Boniface’s claim in the eyes of the Greeks) are reported by Villehardouin, , La Conquête de Constantinople , ed. de Wailly, N. (Paris 1874) 146, 154; ed. Faral, E. (Paris 1938–39) II, 50–52, 68; by de Clari, Robert, La Conquête de Constantinople , ed. Lauer, P. (Paris 1924) 80, 91–92, 97; and by Choniates, Nicetas, Historia , ed. Bekker, I. (Bonn 1835) 792. For the Venetian attitude toward his election, inspired by their distrust of his close relations with Genoa, see Nicetas, 789–790. For his final acquisition of Thessalonica, after a quarrel with Baldwin, see Villehardouin, , ed. de Wailly, 180; ed. Faral, II, 110; Robert de Clari 97. The question whether Boniface had an ancestral claim to Thessalonica is a complex one and will be discussed in detail elsewhere.Google Scholar

¹⁵ PL 215, 714 (Book VIII, no. 134); Potthast 2574, August 16-September 17, 1205.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Villehardouin, , ed. de Wailly, 298–300; ed. Faral II, 312–314. See also Ceruti, A., ‘Un codice del monasterio cistercense di Lucedio,’ Archivio Storico Italiano, 4th Series 8 (1881) 378 n. 4.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Nicetas, (p. 794) says he extorted money from them ‘as a weasel (or polecat) goes after suet.’ Google Scholar

¹⁸ The sources for the Lombard revolt are de Valenciennes, Henri, Histoire de l'Empereur Henri, ed. de Wailly, N., following his edition of Villehardouin, , 304–420; and a sirventès by the Provençal troubador Elias Cairel. See Jaeschke, H., Der Troubadour Elias Cairel (Romanische Studien, ed. Ebering, E., Heft 20, no. 9; Berlin 1921) 149–156; and de Bartholomaeis, V., ‘Un sirventès historique d'Elias Cairel,’ Annales du Midi 16 (1904) 468–494. See also Paris, G., ‘Hugues de Berzé,’ Romania 18 (1889) 559 n. 5. See addition, note 105 below.Google Scholar

¹⁹ On March 30, 1210, Innocent III confirmed the gift by Henry to Margaret of the Thessalian lands of Vissena, Demetrias, Archontochora, and the two Halmyroses (PL 216, 227 [Book XIII, no. 34]; Potthast 3956). Except for Archontochora all the other places are named in the celebrated Partition Treaty of 1204, by which the successful Latins divided up the Byzantine etrritories, and are there called ‘Pertinentia Imperatricis,’ the private estates of Euphrosyne (T.-Th. I, 467). When Boniface of Montferrat took custody of Alexius III and Euphrosyne in 1204, he sent the Greek Emperor and Empress into temporary retirement on these Thessalian estates (Nicetas 808).Google Scholar

²⁰ de Valenciennes, Henri, ed. de Wailly, 368. See also Chronique d’Ernoul, ed. de Mas Latrie, L. (Paris 1871) 391; de Clari, Robert, ed. Lauer 109. Both Ernoul and Robert have the date wrong.Google Scholar

²¹ PL 215, 1467 (Book XI, no. 152); Potthast 3506, October 4, 1208: ‘… verum etiam Graecis episcopis contra ipsos (quod si verum est grave gerimus et indignum) ne nobis obediant, favorem suum impendere non formidat.’ Google Scholar

²² One of these seems to have been the Bishop of Demetrias, a suffragan of Larissa, who, ‘fultus laicali potentia,’ had refused obedience to his superior. Doubtless the laicalis potentia was Margaret. PL 215, 1505 (Book XI, no. 189); Potthast 3553.Google Scholar

²³ PL 216, 299 (Book XIII, no. 103); Potthast 4031, July 2, 1210. See addition, note 105 below.Google Scholar

²⁴ PL 216, 302 (Book XIII, no. 112); Potthast 4045, July 10, 1210.Google Scholar

²⁵ PL 216, 229 (Book XIII, no. 41); Potthast 3951, March 29, 1210.Google Scholar

²⁶ Analecta sacra et profana spicilegio Solesmensi parata, ed. Pitra, J. B., (Paris and Rome 1896) VII, 447–462. Analysed in Drinov, M., ‘O nekotorych trudach Demetriya Chomatiana kak istoricheskom materialye,’ Vizantiiski Vremennik 2 (1895) 1–23, and, so far as I know, not referred to elsewhere. For the full list of bishoprics subject to the Greek Metropolitan of Thessalonica, see below, table 3. The Latin Archbishop called ‘Garinos’ in the letter of Demetrios appears as Guarinus in the Latin sources; he was a Fleming named Warin. First appointed to the archbishopric of Verissa, the Greek Vrysis (Bρύσιs), he was later called to that of Thessalonica (Le Quien, M., Oriens Christianus III, 1092–1094). There was some doubt as to whether his election had been canonical (PL 215, 1473 [Book XI, no. 171]; Potthast 3529, November 1, 1208; and PL 216, 213 [Book XIII, no. 13]; Potthast 3934, March 11, 1210). While the appeal was pending, Guarinus supported the Latin Emperor Henry in the struggle with the Lombard rebels in Thessalonica (Henri de Valenciennes, ed. de Wailly, 364–366). He survived the recapture of Thessalonica by the Greeks in 1223, and appears in Italy as witness to a charter of the Emperor Frederick II on March 11 of that year. (Huillard-Bréholles, J. L. A., Historia Diplomatica Frederici Secundi [Paris 1855] II.1 329, who notes [n. 1] that the Archbishop’s name appears as ‘Darius’ in one copy and as ‘Garinus’ in another. He prefers to call him ‘Martinus.’ Of course, ‘Garinus’ is correct.) For gifts of relics sent by Guarinus to the west, see Riant, P., Exuviae sacrae Constantinopolitanae (Geneva 1877–1878) I, clxx; II 104, 124, the last dated June 29, 1239. In that year he returned to the East with Baldwin II (Alberic of Trois-Fontaines, MGH SS 23, 946). Guarinus was the third Latin Archbishop of Thessalonica, the first actually to reside in the see. The first, Nivelon of Soissons, a Frenchman but the personal choice of Boniface of Montferrat for the post, had died in the West in 1207 while recruiting an army to help the Latin Empire, and before he had ever come to Thessalonica. (PL 215, 1035–1037 [Book IX, nos. 197, 198, 199, 200]; Potthast 2927, 2928, 2931, 2929; PL 215, 1082 [Book IX, no. 252]; Potthast 2993; PL 215, 1131 [Book X, no. 38]; Potthast 3069; PL 215, 1174 [Book X, no. 74]; Potthast 3127. The only source that reports Nivelon’s death correctly is the Chronicle of the Anonymous Canon of Laon, Bouquet, , Recueil 18, 713; see also Alberic of Trois-Fontaines, MGH SS 23, 886 and the continuation of Robert de Monte or de Torigni, Bouquet, , Recueil 18, 343.) The second Archbishop of Thessalonica was Peter, Abbot of Locedio in North Italy, a Cistercian, who, like Nivelon, had served as elector in the imperial election of 1204. He was appointed on June 27, 1208 (PL 215, 1425 [Book XI, no. 106]; Potthast 3444). Before he could take his place he was appointed on March 5, 1209 Patriarch of Antioch, where he died in 1217. He had also served as Bishop of Ivrea. (Savio, F., Gli antichi vescovi d’Italia [Turin 1898] I, 210ff; Gabotto, F., ‘Un millennio di storia eporediese, 356–1357,’ Eporediensia, Biblioteca della Società Storica Subalpina 4 [1900] 74ff.) Google Scholar

²⁷ PL 216, 647 (Book XV, nos. 134, 135); Potthast 4563, 4564.Google Scholar

²⁸ Lambros, S. P., Mιχαὴλ ‘Aκομινάτου τà Σωζóμενα (Athens 1879) II, 334.Google Scholar

²⁹ Stadtmüller, , op cit. (note 13 supra) 205.Google Scholar

³⁰ Morozzo della Rocca, R. and Lombardo, A., Documenti del commercio veneziano nei secoli XI-XIII , Documenti e studi per la storia del commercio (Turin 1940) II, 195, no. 658.Google Scholar

³¹ PL 215, 1225 (Book XI, no. 128); Potthast 3187, September 18, 1207.Google Scholar

³² For the papas, see for example de Valenciennes, Henri, ed. de Wailly, 408; the question of the liability of their sons for military service was settled at the second Parliament of Ravennika in 1210, whose acts are preserved in the confirmation issued by Honorius III in 1223: Pressutti 4480; Honorii III Romani Pontificis Opera Omnia , ed. Horoy, (Paris 1878–1880) IV, 409 (Book VIII, no. 10). For discussion see Gerland, E., Geschichte des lateinischen Kaiserreiches von Konstantinopel I: Geschichte der Kaiser Balduin und Heinrich 1204–1216 (Homburg v.d. Höhe 1905) 192–210.Google Scholar

³³ PL 216, 216 (Book XIV, no. 16); Potthast 3933, March 9, 1210.Google Scholar

³⁴ PL 215, 959 (Book IX, no. 140); Potthast 2860; T.-Th. II, 19, no. 170.Google Scholar

³⁵ Ibid.: ‘… ut eos in suo ritu sustineas, si per te revocari non possint, donec super hoc apostolica sedes maturiori consilio aliud duxerit statuendum.’ Google Scholar

³⁶ [Saulger, R.,] Histoire nouvelle des anciens ducs de l'Archipel (Paris 1699) 11: ‘Sanudo [Venetian lord of Naxos and Duke of the Archipelago]… mit tous ses soins à se gagner l'affection de ses sujets, dont il connoissoit l’antipatie naturelle contre les Latins. Il voulut qu'ils eussent la même liberté qu'auparavant d’exercer leur Religion suivant leur Rite: il confirma l’Archevêque Grec, les Prêtres, et les Religieux, dans tous leurs privilèges: il exempta tous les Monastères de l’Ordre de St. Basile, de tailles et de toutes sortes d’impositions; ce que lui gagna si fort l’esprit de ces schismatiques qu'ils ne pouvoient assez témoigner leur joie de se voir sous la domination d’un Maître si modéré.’ The loyalty of the Greeks to Sanudo was demonstrated by the assistance they loaned him in putting down a Greek revolt on Crete in 1212. Fotheringham, J. K., Marco Sanudo (Oxford 1915) 92 n. 6 and p. 108 for passages from the unprinted source, Daniele Barbaro. Sanudo’s grandson, Marco II, caused a revolt on the island of Naxos by casting down an altar sacred to ‘St. Pachys,’ but in reality a relic of local pagan superstition. Mothers were accustomed to pass thin and ailing children through a hole in this rock in the belief that they would regain weight and health. (Saulger, , op. cit. 65–67). Saulger, a Jesuit missionary to the Greek islands in the seventeenth century, had access to authentic Naxiote materials since lost; he therefore ranks as an independent source. I hope to publish a note on Saulger before long.Google Scholar

³⁷ Pressutti 1586; Horoy I, 176, August 18, 1218.Google Scholar

³⁸ Pressuti 3866, March 17, 1222. For the canonical background of this letter it will be well to remember that the Second Lateran Council had decreed the severe penalty of ipso facto excommunication for the crime of bodily attack against a cleric, reserving the absolution to the Holy See (can. ‘Si quis suadente diabolo:’ Gratian, C.17 q.4 c.29). A great number of papal rulings subsequently dealt with the interpretation of this law, especially with the construction of cases in which the violence could not be considered wrongful or malicious, or in which a relaxation of the requirement of seeking absolution in Rome was indicated; cf. Decretales 5, 39 passim.Google Scholar

³⁹ PL 216, 564 (Book XV, no. 27); Potthast 4424.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Auvray, L., Les registres de Grégoire IX (Paris 1899–1910; hereafter Auvray) 1109, February 23, 1233.Google Scholar

⁴¹ PL 216, 343 (Book XI, no. 172); Potthast 4128.Google Scholar

⁴² Auvray 1638, December 20, 1233.Google Scholar

⁴³ Auvray 4795, March 23, 1239.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Berger, E., Les registres d’Innocent IV (Paris 1884; hereafter Berger) 657, April 29, 1244. For the meaning of the term casale, see William of Tyre’s definition, PL 201, 798f.; tr. Babcock, and Krey, II, 373. See also Tafel, G. L. F., ‘Symbolarum criticarum geographiam Byzantinam spectantium partes duae,’ Abhandlungen der historischen Klasse der k. Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 5 (1848) ii, 82, who equates it with the Greek χωρίον. Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Berger 6431, March 22, 1253.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Miller, W., Essays on the Latin Orient (Cambridge 1921) 77.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ PL 215, 959 (Book IX, no. 140); Potthast 2860; T.-Th. II, p. 19, no. 170: ‘Tua insuper fraternitas postulavit ut, cum in partibus illis nimia sit episcopatuum multitudo, illos, cum nimis sint tenues, ad paucitatem redigere tibi concedere dignaremur. Nos autem ita duximus providendum, ut, cum id necessitas vel utilitas postulaverit, per praedictum legatum, quandiu in partibus illis extiterit, tuo tamen accedente consilio, valeat adimplere, ita videlicet, ut episcopatus non uniat, sed illi, quem fecerit ad unam ecclesiam ordinari, aliquot tales ecclesias, secundum quod viderit expedire, committat, quatenus, si forte pro temporis necessitate de ipsis fuerit aliter ordinatum, quod factum est, facilius valeat immutari.’ Google Scholar

⁴⁸ PL 216, 223 (Book XIII, no. 26); Potthast 3944: ‘… mandamus quod in episcopatibus vestris illis contenti terminibus existatis quos Graecos predecessores vestros constiterit ha-buisse. ’ Google Scholar

⁴⁹ PL 215, 1433 (Book XI, no. 114); Potthast 3457, July 14, 1208: ‘… proposuisti … quod cum ad Dimicensis ecclesiae regimen per electionem canonicam evocatus … non possis de ipsius redditibus sustentari, nobilis vir A. comestabulus regni Thessalonicensis … tuae compatiens paupertati, episcopatum Calidonensem tuo contiguum tibi voluit assignare; cujus concessioni acquiescere minime voluisti nisi de nostra licentia speciali … Nos autem … tibi duximus concedendum, quatenus Dimicensem episcopatum tanquam tuum possidens … tandiu episcopatum Calidonensem teneas … donec per apostolicam sedem aut ejus legatum aliud contigerit ordinari….’ For Buffa, see Usseglio, L., I Marchesi di Monferrato in Italia ed in Oriente (Biblioteca della Società storica subalpina 101; Turin 1926) 308.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ PL 215, 1433 (Book XI, no. 115); Potthast 3450, July 14, 1208. For Pescia, see Usseglio, , op. cit. 313.Google Scholar

⁵¹ PL 216, 299 (Book XIII, no. 104); Potthast 4034, July 2, 1210.Google Scholar

⁵² PL 216, 579 (Book XV, no. 48); Potthast 4460, May 18, 1212.Google Scholar

⁵³ PL 216, 582 (Book XV, no. 54); Potthast 4468, 4469, 4470, May 21, 1212.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ PL 216, 899 (Book XVI, no. 97); Potthast 4794, August 24, 1213.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ PL 216, 355 (Book XII, no. 185); Potthast 4140, December 7, 1210.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ On its previous incumbent see note 22 supra. Google Scholar

⁵⁷ PL 216, 596 (Book XIV, no. 62); Potthast 4494, May 25, 1212.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Horoy II, 374 (Book I, no. 307); Pressutti 536, April 24, 1217.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ See table 5 below.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Pressutti 3844, March 11, 1222: ‘… olim fuit sedes cathedralis sed adeo tenuis erat in redditibus quod absque pontificalis dignitatis ignominio proprium non poterat episcopum substentare.’ Google Scholar

⁶¹ Ibid.: ‘… qui Latinorum tempore numquam extitit ordinatus, nec Latini habitant in eodem.’ Google Scholar

⁶² Auvray 4811, March 23, 1239.Google Scholar

⁶³ Later confirmed again by Innocent IV, Berger 1385, July 24, 1245.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Pressutti 3844, March 11, 1222.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ Pressutti 1113, February 24, 1218.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Pressutti 3816, 3833, 3834, February 27 and March 9, 1222.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Pressutti 4134, October 14, 1222. For these Greek victories in Thessaly, see Akropolita, G., Opp. ed. Heisenberg, A. (Leipzig 1903) I, 25; Vassilievsky, V. G., ‘Epirotica saeculi XIII,’ Vizantiiski Vremennik 3 (1896) 244–246 and ff. (letters of John Apokaukos, Greek Metropolitan of Naupaktos); Wellnhofer, M., Johannes Apokaukos (Freising 1913) 25 n. 4. The bishopric of Thermopylae had been in difficulties for many years: PL 215, 1557 (Book XI, no. 252); Potthast 3648.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ Pressutti 4486 and 4508, September 9 and 21, 1223.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Pressutti 4502, September 18, 1223.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Pressutti 4505, September 19, 1223.Google Scholar

⁷¹ Auvray 328, July 20, 1229.Google Scholar

⁷² Auvray 2530, April 27, 1235.Google Scholar

⁷³ Auvray 3618, April 29, 1237.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Auvray 4702, January 4, 1239.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ Auvray 5308, November 16, 1240.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ PL 216, 164 (Book XII, no. 144); Potthast 3844.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ Auvray 1053, January 21, 1233.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ Auvray 4581, October 26, 1238.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ Fabre, P. and Duchesne, L., Le Liber Censuum de l'Église Romaine (Paris 1901–10); the Riccardianus Provinciale is printed II, 3ff.Google Scholar

⁸⁰ Tangl, M., Die päpstlichen Kanzeleiordnungen von 1200–1500 (Innsbruck 1894) 3–31.Google Scholar

⁸¹ Previous editions of the Provinciale will be found listed and discussed in Rattinger, D., ‘Die Patriarchatsprengel von Constantinopel und die bulgarische Kirche zur Zeit der Lateinerherrschaft in Byzanz,’ Historisches Jahrbuch 1 (1880) 77–106; 2 (1881) 3–55, especially 2, 25ff.Google Scholar

⁸² The bibliography on the various problems connected with the Greek Notitiae is very large. A new edition of the entire corpus has been projected, but only the beginnings have appeared. The genesis of the Notitiae from the early conciliar lists has been considered and the published work stops with the Council of Ephesus of 431: Corpus notitiarum episcopatuum Ecclesiae Orientalis Graecae I: Gerland, E., Einleitung (Constantinople 1931) and II: Laurent, V., Les listes conciliaires établies par E. Gerland, revues et completées (Constantinople 1936). The basic edition of the Notitiae thus remains Parthey, G., Hieroclis Synecdemus et Notitiae graecae episcopatuum (Berlin 1866). Parthey was wrong about the date of almost every Notitia he published; many others have been published since, and much work done to correct his errors. De Boor, C., ‘Nachträge zu den Notitiae Episcopatuum,’ Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, 12 (1890) 303–326, 519–544; 14 (1893) 573–599 is important. But by far the most significant work on the subject is the group of studies and new publications by H. Gelzer: ‘Zur Zeitbestimmung der griechischen Notitiae Episcopatuum,’ Jahrbücher für Protestantische Theologie 12 (1886) 337–372, 528–575, hereafter referred to as Zeitbestimmung; ‘Ungedruckte und wenig bekannte Bistumsverzeichnisse der orientalischen Kirche,’ Byzantinische Zeitschrift 1 (1892) 245–282; 2 (1893), 22–72; ‘Ungedruckte und ungenügend veröffentlichte Texte der Notitiae Episcopatuum,’ Abhandlungen der k. Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philos-philol. Klasse 21 (1901) 529–642, hereafter Ungedruckte Texte. Google Scholar

⁸³ Gelzer, H., Analecta byzantina I, Ordo Ecclesiasticus ab Isaacio Angelo Imperatore constitutus (Index Scholarum Hibernarum … in Universitate … Jenensi … habendarum, Jena 1892), hereafter Analecta. Of this list, Gelzer says (p. 3): ‘… urbes relatae sunt quae sedes metropolitanorum et archiepiscoporum autocephalorum fuerunt. Sedum episcopalium singulis metropolitis obnoxiarum descriptio quae ceteris in notitiis adnecti solet hic omittitur.’ Google Scholar

⁸⁴ Ungedruckte Texte 584–589.Google Scholar

⁸⁵ Parthey, , Hieroclis 197–224.Google Scholar

⁸⁶ Zeitbestimmung 556: ‘Notitia X ist Ende des XII. Jahrhunderts unter der Dynastie der Angeloi bearbeitet worden.’ Google Scholar

⁸⁷ Analecta 10: ‘Haud magno temporis spatio praeterlapso [after 1189] ordo sedum immutatus novusque constitutus est, quem Notitia X praebet, isque valuit usque ad id tempus quo Andronici imperatoris ecthesis instituta est.’ The ecthesis of Andronicus is a Notitia dating from about 1300.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ Ungedruckte Texte 594: ‘Damit ist die Zeit für diese Liste ganz sicher nach 1256 und vor Andronicus Ecthesis festgelegt.’ Google Scholar

⁸⁹ Fink, C., ‘Neues zu den Notitiae Episcopatuum und zur kirchlichen Geographie von Byzanz,’ Zeitschrift der Savignystiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, Kanonische Abteilung , 19 (1930) 674–679: ‘… die Notitia sogar vor 1216 zu datieren ist.’ CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁹⁰ Laurent, V., ‘Héraclée du Pont,’ Échos d’Orient, 31 (1932) 318 n. 4: ‘… la Notitia X de Parthey … loin d’être postérieure à 1256, comme le voulait Gelzer, serait antérieure à 1216, aussi que le démontre C. Fink.’ Google Scholar

⁹¹ Ungedruckte Texte 592–593: ‘Indessen der Codex Lipsiensis welchen Parthey abdruckte ist unvollständig, eine viel bessere Recenzion enthält der Genevensis Helvet. XXIII.’ Google Scholar

⁹² Benešević, B., ‘Monumenta Vaticana ad ius canonicum pertinentia, No. 4, Vatic. 640,’ Studi Bizantini 2 (1927) 131–135: ‘… invenitur notitia patriarcharum, metropolitanorum, archiepiscoporum, episcoporumque quam totam hic transcribere juvabit, cum recensionem singularem ejusdem notitiae praebeat, quae ad notitiam X (ed. Parthey …, ) componendum deservivit, cumque editio princeps haec multis mendis scateat; est haec supplementum ad edit. H. Gelzer.’ (p. 130).Google Scholar

⁹³ Parthey, , op. cit. 94–131.Google Scholar

⁹⁴ Zeitbestimmung 556: ‘… (Not. II—III) ist so wie sie uns vorliegt in den Tagen des Komnens Alexis (nach 1084) entstanden.’ Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Fabre, , Liber Censuum, II, 6A n. 3.Google Scholar

⁹⁶ Above, text and note 76.Google Scholar

⁹⁷ PL 215, 1559 (Book XI, no. 256); Potthast 3654, February 13, 1209.Google Scholar

⁹⁸ PL 216, 555 (Book XV, no. 18); Potthast 4422, April 7, 1212.Google Scholar

⁹⁹ PL 216, 584 (Book XV, no. 56); Potthast 4472, May 22, 1212.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁰ PL 216, 586 (Book XV, no. 58); Potthast 4478, May 22, 1212.Google Scholar

^100a See addition, note 105 below.Google Scholar

¹⁰¹ Kretschmer, E., Die Italienischen Portolane des Mittelalters (Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Meereskunde des geographischen Instituts an der Universität Berlin; Berlin 1909) 650ff. for a list of places on the Asiatic coast of the Sea of Marmora.Google Scholar

¹⁰² Tomaschek, W., ‘Zur historischen Topographie von Kleinasien im Mittelalter,’ Sitzungsberichte der Wiener Akademie der Wissenschaften 124 (1891) 15.Google Scholar

¹⁰³ See, for example, Akropolita, George, Opera, ed. Heisenberg, A. (Leipzig 1903) I 12, 20–21, 36, 84.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁴ Rattinger, , loc. cit. (note 81 supra) 44–45.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁵ Three new publications which appeared while this article was in the press warrant the following supplementary references: (to n. 10 supra): See now Longnon, J., ‘L’organisation de l’église d’Athènes par Innocent III,’ Mémorial Louis Petit (Archives de l’orient chrétien I; Bucharest, Institut français d’études byzantines 1948) 336–346. (to n. 18 supra): For de Valenciennes, Henri, Histoire de l'Empereur Henri, see now the new edition, which will be authoritative, by Longnon, J., Documents relatifs à l'histoire des croisades II (1948). The passages referred to in the course of this article are found on the following pages of the new edition: (n. 20) ed. de Wailly, 368: ed. Longnon 79; (n. 26) de Wailly 264–366: Longnon 76–77; (n. 32) de Wailly 408: Longnon 111. (to n. 23 supra): For Nazoreska, the Greek ’E ερá, a village inhabited by Vlachs as early as the eleventh century, see Gyóni, M., ‘Egy Vlách Falu Neve Anna Komnene Alexiasában,’ Egyetemes Philologiai Közlöny (Archivum Philologicum) 71 (1948) 22–30, in Magyar with French summary. The relevant passage is Comnena, Anna, Alexias V, 5 (ed. Reifferscheid, , Leipzig 1884, I, 169; ed. Leib, , Paris 1943, II, 24) where the place appears as ’Eεβá. (to Table 2, n. 100a): Longnon, , L'organisation 339 remarks only that the list of Innocent III corresponds ‘à peu de choses près aux listes grecques des siècles antérieurs.’ He does not examine the Greek lists. Fabre, P., ‘Un Vidimus de Conrad archevêque d’Athènes,’ Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire 15 (1895) 74 notes the addition of Salona and Aigina to Innocent’s list by the Provinciale, and Longnon follows him (p. 344).Google Scholar