^∗ For the complex tradition of this chronicle see Moravcsik, Byzantinoturcica, (Berlin 1958) 2nd ed. s. n. Theophanes continuatus, Symeon (Logothetes) and in particular, Georgius continuatus.Google Scholar

As Každan has underlined (XpοΗΚ CΜeοa ΠοΓοΦea, Viz. Vremennik 15 [1959] 125–43), the interdependence of these texts may well escape the reader of these notices (op. cit. 125), although it has been recognised ever since Hirsch's Byzantinische Studien (Leipzig 1876). For the reign of Leo VI in particular, all the chronicles, whether labelled Theophanes Continuatus, Georgius Monachus (Hamartolos) continuatus, Leo Grammaticus, Theodosius of Melitene or (Ps.-) Symeon Magister (Logothete), are merely various editions of one chronicle. At most, one manuscript will have a few interpolations, such as the items on the Phocas family of Vaticanus gr. 173 (see Grégoire, ‘La carrière du premier Nicéphore Phocas,’ Πϱοσοϱὰ εἰς Στ. Π. Kνϱιακίδην = ‘Eλληνιά Παϱάϱτημα 4 [Thessalonica 1953] 232–54), or preserve a detail the others have dropped, e.g. (Ps.-) Symeon Magister (v. infra) 700, 16 ἔνθα καὶ τελεντ. Thus the expression sometimes found, of ‘all the chroniclers,” has no real meaning. There is only one chronicler (Hirsch, op. cit.; Každan, op. cit., Jenkins, ‘The Chronological Accuracy of the ‘Logothete’ for the Years a.d. 867–913,’ Dumbarton Oaks Papers 19 [1965] 91–112; with the author's conclusions I am not, however, in complete agreement, as I propose to show elsewhere).

Written by a partisan of Romanus Lecapenus, the Logothete Chronicle is violently hostile to Leo VI.

Edition used: Theophanes continuatus and Georgius Monachus cont. in Theophanes contimatus rec. Im. Bekker (Bonn 1838).

^† Vita Euthymii ed. de Boor, C. (Berlin 1888) and Karlin-Hayter, P. in Byzantion 25–27 (1955–7) 1–177.Google Scholar

¹ Runciman, S., The Emperor Romanus Lecapenus and his Reign. A study of Tenth Century Byzantium (Cambridge University Press 1929) 25.Google Scholar

² επὶ τ τῶν βουλγάρων σνμβάσει, an anonymous homily on the Bulgarian peace of 927. Ed. Uspenskij, in Letopis istor.-filol. Obščestva pri Imp. Novoross. Universitete 462 Odessa (1894) 48–123. Reprinted in Fontes graeci historiae bulgaricae 5 (Fontes Historiae Bulgaricae 9; Sofia 1964) 82–101 (with Bulgarian translation). The author, sketching the events that led up to the peace, begins: νθει τὰ ἡμέτερα πάλαι … τε τὸ στρατιωτικὸν ἐρρυθμίζετο λέοντι καὶ συνεβούλευεν ‘Aχιτόφελ καὶ δράκων καὶ σόλων ἐθέσπιζον etc. (Fontes 93, 10) — (Cf. Vita S. Theoctistate Lesbiae in insula Paro AA SS. Nov. t. 4, 224–33: λέοντοσ φημὶ τοῦ εὐτνχοῦσ ντωσ βααιλέωσ καὶ τὴν εὐτυχίαν ’ρωμαίων τῷ τάφῳ αυνθάψαντοσ, a remark made in a military context). Jenkins, R. J. H. has translated the most important chapters of this interesting and puzzling document and commented on them (‘The peace with Bulgaria (927) celebrated by Theodore Daphnopates,’ Festschrift Dölger [1967] 287–303). Some of his interpretations seem to me difficult to accept, for instance, the application to Symeon and Peter of the phrase: άλλ' ὁ μέν τὴν εἰρήνην τιμῶν καὶ ὑπ' αὐτῆσ τι τιμώμενοσ, ἀοτασίαστοσ τοῖσ ἀστασιάστοισ ἐφίσταται, καὶ τοῖσ αὐτοῖσ ὁ ἀδελφὸσ χνεσιν ἐπιβὰσ συναποίχεται τῷ παιδὶ τὰ σκῆπτρα λιπών (p. 94), meant, it sees to me, certainly for Leo and Alexander.Google Scholar

³ Byzance et la mer. La marine de guerre, la politique et les institutions maritimes de Byzance aux vii^e-xv^e siècles ( Bibliothèque byzantine 5; Paris 1966) 104–107).Google Scholar

⁴ Leonis Imperatoris Tactica , ed. Meursius, I. (Lugduni Batavorum 1613), id. Opera Omnia. ex. rec. Lami, I. 6 (Florentiae 1745) c. 535–920; crit. ed. Vàri, R., Sylloge Tacticorum Graecorum 3 (prooemium and Constitutions I-XIV 38 only) Budapest 1917–1922; XVIII in l. c., A magyar honfoglalás kútfói, Budapest 1900, 5–89; PG 107, 669–1120; (Moravcsik, op. cit. 404). Some authors suggest that Leo merely ordered it to be composed and took no personal part, but it is too liberally scattered with considerations both imperial and personal not to be really his work. It is the Emperor speaking, not the appropriate department of the War Office.Google Scholar

^4a ‘The town called Hypsele fell by treachery, and all the inhabitants were taken captive by the Agarenes’ (Theoph. Cont. [n. 1 above] 354).Google Scholar

⁵ Theme: mid-Byzantine term designating both a considerable administrative unit and the troops quartered in it. The thematic system was introduced progressively, beginning in the seventh century, to strenghten the defence of the Empire, and is characterised by the subordination of the civil to the military authority. This thematic organisation took a considerable step forward under Leo VI, partly by the incorporation of newly conquered territories, partly by reorganisation. The danger inherent in the system was the enormous power it put in the hands of individual generals as is shown, in Leo's reign, by the revolt of Andronicus Ducas. Bibliography in Ostrogorsky, Geschichte des byzantinischen Staates (3rd ed. Munich 1963) 80 n. 1.Google Scholar

⁶ Even if there were no other evidence, the insistence, after July 920, of Nicolas Mysticus in his letters to the Bulgarian tsar who has invaded the Empire, on the healing of the schism and on the peace which, says he, now reigns in the Church and, by implication, the commonwealth, would be sufficient warrant for this conclusion. (PG 111. 100–101, 112 D, 180 AB). Particularly remarkable is the first of these passages. It comes from the letter (n° 14, loc. cit. 100–105) in which he announces the good news to Symeon. About half the letter is devoted to the event itself and to saying how delighted Symeon will be to hear it: εὐαγγέλια οσ πέπεισμαι τὴν σὴν εὐφρανθῆναι ψυχὴν σον ἐπ' οὐδενὶ λλῳ τῶν ἐν ἀνθρώποισ παρέχειν εὐφροσύνην εδότων (101 A.), … εὐαγγελιζόμεθα σόι, τέκνον μῶν, εὐαγγέλια, ν καὶ σοὶ τὸ ἀκοῦσαι πάντων ἡδύτατον, καὶ ἡμῖν τὸ εὐαγγελίσασθαι πρεπωδέστατον πάντων καὶ οκειότατον. Hνωται ἡ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐκκλησία (100 B).Google Scholar

^6a The other half is devoted to begging Symeon to stop the horrors of war! τὴν πειρον τῶν αμάτων χύσιν καὶ τὴν τοσαύτην ἐρημίαν, ομοι ἐρημίαν ἐκκλησιῶν Θεοῦ, διαιτημάτων παρθένων… μοναστηρίων ἀνδρῶν, ονύκτα καὶ ἡμέραν Θεόσ ὑμνολογεῖτο καὶ ἐδοξάζετο. τί με δεῖ λέγειν πόλεων, χώρασ λλησ, οκων … τὴν λλην συμφοράν … χηρείαν φημί, όρφανίαν, ἀδελφῶν ἀποστέρησιν, αχμαλωσίαν δουλεαν … … Google Scholar

^6b Kαὶ δ' ἡμῖν εἰσ γνῶσιν κατέστη, οὐδὲ ταῦτα ἀκριβῶσ διεξιέναι σχολή, τῆσ τῶν πραγμάτων οὐκ ἀνιείσησ προστασίασ , Oraison funèbre de Basile par son fils Léon VI le Sage , ed. avec introduction et traduction par A. Vogt et Hausherr, I. (Orientalia Christiana 26 (1932) 40.2; see also 40.20 and 60.20.Google Scholar

⁷ ‘Unter den ausgeschriebenen Quellen nennt er selbst Ailianos, Arrianos und Onasandros. Eine Randnotiz in einer Wiener Handschrift des X. Jahrhunderts nennt ausserdem noch Polyainos, Plutarchos und andere, uns unbekannte Schriftsteller als seine Quellen. Sonderbar ist aber, dass weder Leon noch die genannte Randnotiz die Hauptquelle des Werkes erwähnt, die unter dem Namen des Maurikios oder Urbikios verbreitete Taktik’ (Moravcsik 402). Composed for war waged with infantry, cavalry, the bow, ramparts and siege-machines, they only became really obsolete with the appearance of firearms.Google Scholar

⁸ PG 107.673 BC.Google Scholar

⁹ Michaelides-Nouaros, G., O δίκαιοσ πόλεμοσ κατὰ τὰ τακτικὰ τοῦ λέοντοσ τοῦ σοφοῦ , Mélanges Séfériadés (Athens 1961) 411–434. The author tends, perhaps, to underestimate the reality of imperial φιλανθρωπία. Many of Leo's phrases merely give expression to this fundamental concept and cannot be considered orginal, and above all, cannot be taken as going beyond this concept. Certainly Leo practised this imperial virtue with particular satisfaction, that did not prevent him from being eminently autocratic. The suggestion that he was liberal and egalitarian comes from reading modern ideas into his words.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Vasiliev, A. A., Byzance et les Arabes 2. 2. Extraits des sources arabes , trad, par Canard, M., (Brussels 1950; = Vasiliev-Canard) 216–17.Google Scholar

¹¹ Theoph, . Cont. 356. 14 (revolt of Egion); 356, 19 (defeat of Constantine ὁ ἐπὶ τραπέζησ); 365, 4 (loss of Tauromenion).Google Scholar

¹² Gay, Jules, L'Italie méridionale et l'Empire byzantin depuis l'avènement de Basile I^er jusqu'à la prise de Bari par les Normands (867–1071) (Paris 1904) ch. III, covering the years 883 to 917 (132–163). Re the defeat of Constantine ὁ ἐπὶ τραπέζησ he remarks: ‘Cette nouvelle dut produire à Byzance une vive impression: la défaite des Grecs est un des rares évènements de l'histoire d'Italie mentionnés par les historiens de Léon VI. Mais si l'on s'en tenait à leur témoignage, on pourrait croire que la défaite n'a pas été réparée: il est singulier que dans les mêmes textes aucune allusion ne soit faite à la victoire définitive, par laquelle le prestige de Byzance est rétabli en Italie’ (143). When Gay wrote these lines, the hostile bias of the Logothete chronicler was not yet generally recognized.Google Scholar

¹³ Radelchis, (Gay, , op. cit. 107).Google Scholar

^13a Annales Fuldenses , 410–412 (MGH SS 343–415).Google Scholar

¹⁴ Previté-Orton, C.W., ‘Charles Constantine of Vienna,’ English Historical Review 29 (1914) 703–706.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Drei Deperdita der byzantinischen Kaiserkanzlei in Ohnsorge, W., Abendland und Byzanz (Bad Homburg vor der Höhe 1963).Google Scholar

¹⁶ See Hartmann, L. M., Geschichte Italiens im Mittelalter ; Dölger, F., Byzanz und die europäische Staatenwelt ; Ohnsorge, W., Abendland und Byzanz. Google Scholar

¹⁷ The Byzantine term for the Byzantine or Eastern Roman Empire.Google Scholar

¹⁸ PG 111. 65A; 84A; 108B; 121D; 125B (εἰ δ' παξ οτοσ ὁ λογισμὸσ τὴν σὴν κατέχει καρδίαν, ὡσ ἐν τῷ θρόνῳ τῆσ 'ρωμακῆσ ἱδρυνθήση βασιλείασ, καὶ τοιαύτην δοξασ (οὐκ οδα θεν) τὴν πληροφορίαν λαβεῖν τι τοῦτο δοξε τῷ Θεῷ …); 128AB; 144B; 144C; ibid. (σννείδομεν τὴν τοῦ γράμματοσ ὑμῶν πολυλογίαν πρὸσ να καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν σκοπὸν συντείνουσαν, νπερ ἀπ' ἀρχῆσ καὶ μέχρι τοῦ νῦν ἀνεδέξασθε); 165C.Google Scholar

^18a See n. 21 infra. Google Scholar

¹⁹ Theophanes cont., 359.12–16; 702.1–2; 854.4–7.Google Scholar

²⁰ Kolias, G., Léon Choerosphactès, magistre, proconsul et patrice , Athens 1939 (Texte und Forschungen zur byzantinisch-neugriechischen Philologie 31) 113.8.Google Scholar

^20a Vasiliev-Canard 2.2, 11–12. Professor Marius Canard has been kind enough to communicate to me the passage of the forthcoming revised edition of Vasiliev, Byzance et les Arabes 21 (Bruxelles) dealing with this question in which he examines both the evidence and the comments of the numerous modern scholars who have dealt with it. He does not consider that any of the arguments invoked seriously shake the authority of Tabari. For the releasing of Moslem prisoners to fight for the Empire, he notes that Michael Syrus (3. 37) and Abû'l Faraǧ (Chronography 129; Chron. syr. 150) tell of a similar episode when Michael II armed Arab prisoners against the rebel Thomas (Vasiliev-Canard 2. 1. 120).Google Scholar

²¹ Tactica PG 107. 976 D.Google Scholar

²² MGH Scriptores 1 (Hannover 1826) 599–600.Google Scholar

²³ Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De administrando Imperio , ed. Moravcsik-Jenkins, 2 Comm. 144.Google Scholar

²⁴ Kαί τίσ τὰσ ἐνθυμήσεισ τε καὶ προτάσεισ, τίσ δὲ τὰσ ἐπιβουλὰσ ἐκείνου ἐξαριθμήσαιτο; οδα, φησὶν ὁ μῦθοσ, ψάμμου τ' ἀριθμὸν καὶ μέτρα θαλάσσησ, ἀλλὰ καὶ ὡσ εἰδέναι τὰ ἐκείνου ἀμήχανον οσ καὶ δίχα σιδήρου διὰ βίου τὸν αδερ ὑπεκράτει τε καὶ ἀνέστελλεν-— op. cit (n. 2 above) 94, Jenkins, , op. cit (n. 2) 291. 295.Google Scholar

²⁵ John, , a contemporary († 931) was, as Catholicus of Armenia, close to Smbat and not only a witness but an actor in the events he records in the latter part of his History of Armenia. Unfortunately he describes them with studied imprecision. I have used the translation by Saint-Martin, J. ( Histoire d'Arménie par le patriarche Jean VI dit Jean Catholicos trad, par Saint-Martin, M. J., Paris 1841. Relations with Leo: 144–7, 147, 189, 225 ['Basil' but in reality Leo]. Appeal to Baghdad for help against Yusuf: 226). Its inaccuracy does not affect the principal information I draw from it: that diplomatic exchanges were sustained and cordial.Google Scholar

²⁶ Constantine Porphyrogenitus De administrando imperio ed. by Moravscsik, Gy. with English translation by Jenkins, R. J. H., (Budapest 1949) 43 11. 39 and 47 and chs. 45–46.Google Scholar

²⁷ Letters XLVI (PG 111.236C) and LI addressed to the exusiast of Abasgia, in particular; 'ανεμάθομεν γὰρ … ὡσ μετά γε Θεὸν πολλὴν τὴν πρόνοιαν κατεβάλον εσ τε τὸν φωτισμὸν τοῦ τῆσ λανίασ ρχοντοσ καὶ εἰσ τοὺσ σοι σὺν αὺτῷ κατηξιώθησαν τοῦ ἁγίον βαπτίσματοσ. τῆσ δὲ χρηστότητοσ τῶν τρόπων … τίσ λλη περιφανεστέρα σται ἀπόδειξισ; τίσ ν λλο ἐπιζητήσ μαρτύριον; ἀρκούσησ τῆσ ξενοδοχίασ, τῆσ θεραπείασ, τῆσ λλησ ἐν πσι παραμνθίασ, ση δννατὴ χορηγεῖσθαι, ν εἰσ τὸν θεοφιλέστατον ἀρχιεπίσκοπον, τὸ τέκνον ἡμῶν, λ προαιρέσει καὶ λ ψνχ ὥφθησ ἐπιδεξάμενοσ (PG 111. 241 CD).Google Scholar

²⁸ PG 111, 80 (end Letter X), 152 A. 153 A.Google Scholar

²⁹ Jenkins, , Laourdas, and Mango, , ‘Nine Orations of Arethas from Cod. Marc. gr. 524’ Byzantinische Zeitschrift 47, (1954) 13.Google Scholar

³⁰ Thomas, Arcruni not only relates these events from a different point of view but gives two separate accounts of them (Brosset's translation in Collection d'historiens arméniens 1 [St. Petersburg 1874] 189, 218).Google Scholar

³¹ Tactica PG 107. 981 A, confirmed by Arethas, see ‘Nine orations’ 31 and 32, comm. p. 13–15.Google Scholar

³² Vasiliev-Canard, 13–14.Google Scholar

³³ Ibid 16.Google Scholar

³⁴ Cameniata, Ioannes, De excidio thessalonicensi in Theophanes Continuatus ex recogn. Immanuelis Bekkeri (Bonnae 1838) 487–600. Passage quoted, 508–19. The translation is slightly condensed.Google Scholar

³⁵ See Grégoire, H. op. cit. Preliminary note, supra ^∗ .Google Scholar

³⁶ Theophanes cont. 368. 21.Google Scholar

^36a For editions see Halkin, F., Bibliotheca Hagiographica Graeca , 3^rd ed. (Bruxelles 1937) 93. Reference to Tougard 42–44.Google Scholar

³⁷ Mas'udi in Vasiliev-Canard 2.2. 43.Google Scholar

³⁸ Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De ceremoniis aulae byzantinae 2 44.Google Scholar

³⁹ The Russian Primary Chronicle, Laurentian Text. Translated and edited by Cross, S. H. and Sherbowitz-Wetzor, O. P. (Mediaeval Academy of America [Cambridge, Mass., no date] 64).Google Scholar

⁴⁰ See Ostrogorsky, G., L'expédition du prince Oleg contre Constantinople en 907 (Seminarium Kondakovianum 11 [(1940)]; Vasiliev, , ‘The second Russian attack on CP,’ (Dumbarton Oaks Papers 6 [1951]). The Russian chronicle, naturally enough, makes the most of the incident. To what extent the details it gives, as against the raid itself, are legendary is discussed in the works quoted.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Grierson, Ph. and Jenkins, R.J.H., ‘The Date of Constantine VII's Coronation,’ Byzantion 32 (1962) 131–8.Google Scholar