Niketas Choniates Research Articles

The naval reform of Emperor John II Komnenos: a re-evaluation

The eleventh and twelfth centuries have traditionally been interpreted as the era when the Byzantine navy declined, and then was allowed to disappear. Historians often mark the death knell of the Byzantine navy with Emperor John II Komnenos ending the collection of taxes for localized defence fleets. Niketas Choniates describes the act as a money-hungry measure devised by the finance minister John of Poutza, whereby fleet taxes would be collected and spent centrally, leading to the end of localized fleets as funds were diverted to other sectors. This reform has traditionally been interpreted as one that led to losing a war with Venice in the 1120s, provincial insecurity, the eventual outsourcing of the Byzantine navy to the Italians, and finally the sack of Constantinople itself by the forces of the Fourth Crusade when the Italians turned against them.Such an interpretation does not however sit easily with the reign of John II Komnenos, during which on numerous occasions the navy is referenced as playing a crucial part in the emperor’s campaigns, a feature that began in Alexios’ reign and continued into Manuel’s. Though Pryor and Jeffreys have previously expressed doubt that such a centralising naval reform could really spell the end of the Byzantine fleet, and possibly the empire itself, this paper will build upon that doubt with evidence that necessitates a re-evaluation of the traditional interpretation. First, the narrative of John’s war with Venice in the 1120s will be examined, followed by how the subsequent naval reform was shaped by these events, which themselves only confirmed the experiences of the Byzantine Navy in previous decades, and so highlighted the need for reform. This analysis will demonstrate that a centralising reform was a coherent measure undertaken to increase the efficiency of the fleet, and to recognize officially trends in organization that had already emerged under Alexios. Subsequent fleet operations in John and Manuel’s reigns reveal that the role of the navy did indeed change in the early twelfth century, but the narrative of decline is false. Throughout this section it will also be shown that analysis of the Byzantine navy has been overly shaped by use of hostile sources. The second part of this paper will then move on to highlight three major uses of the fleet that have been undervalued by scholars focused on traditional sea battles: its use on rivers as well as the sea, its use for transport and logistics, and its ‘soft power’ diplomatic capacity. The combination of these factors reveal a Byzantine navy that was a crucial part of the Komnenian restoration of Byzantine fortunes in the twelfth century, and that its decline after the death of Manuel must be seen as a product of other factors, rather than a cause of the late twelfth-century imperial decline in itself.

Sacred Plunder: Venice and the Aftermath of the Fourth Crusade by David M. Perry

Reviewed by: Sacred Plunder: Venice and the Aftermath of the Fourth Crusade by David M. Perry Debra Pincus Sacred Plunder: Venice and the Aftermath of the Fourth Crusade. By David M. Perry. (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press. 2015. Pp. xiv, 233. $69.95. ISBN 978-0-271-06507-6.) The conquest of Constantinople by the crusader troops in 1204 is an event that has been much discussed from a number of points of view. David Perry, an ecclesiastical historian, brings forward still another take on the subject. Who besides the Venetians benefited from the takeover of the richly endowed city of Constantinople, and how did they explain themselves? Often excoriated as “the infamous Fourth Crusade,” the crusade was proclaimed by Pope Innocent III in 1198, another attempt to bring lands of the East back into the Christian fold. It has a dramatic history quite unlike that of the others. After a drawn-out series of negotiations that has engendered several books of its own, the original plan to attack Egypt as a step on the way to Jerusalem fell by the wayside. The crusader troops finally set sail from Venice in 1202. Diverted—largely, it has been argued, due to Venetian maneuvering—the galleys went to Zara to secure the Venetian hold on the city, arriving in 1204 at the gates of Constantinople. Here were riches of an almost unimaginable splendor, the most famous relics of Christendom. Perry lays out the stages of acquisition. The first wave of greedy and chaotic pillaging in which churches were ruthlessly stripped of value comes across vividly in eyewitness reports such as the impassioned denunciation by the Greek historian Niketas Choniates. This was followed by a more orderly appropriation and then the slow, steady export of precious relics to the West during the period of the Latin Kingdom of Constantinople, 1204–64. Gifts of relics were made to powerful Western rulers, one major example being the gift of the Crown of Thorns in 1239 by Baldwin II, installed as the Latin emperor of Constantinople, to his cousin, Louis IX, king of France—a relic later to be extravagantly enshrined in the Sainte-Chapelle in Paris. Reactions to the despoiling of the treasures of Constantinople were immediate and harsh, especially on the part of Rome. The core of the book lies in Perry’s discussion of nine narratives that “collectively offer an interpretation . . . that celebrates the very behaviour condemned by the papacy and other critics” (p. 111). The author makes it clear that his work is heavily indebted to Paul Édouard Didier Riant’s two-volume Exuviae sacrae Constantinopolitanae (Geneva, 1877–78), the canonical study of the deployment of the relics of Constantinople and one of the masterpieces of late-nineteenth-century French scholarship. [End Page 391] Perry’s study stands as something of a gloss on Riant, placing key sources collected by Riant within an interpretive framework. The nine texts used by Perry draw from Riant’s three categories: official accounts, contemporary reports, and posterior narratives. After a brief summary, the argument set forth in each text is analyzed and compared from the point of view of an authorized transfer (“translatio only,” p. 111) versus texts that celebrate the acquisition as an act of reverence (“pious-theft,” p. 111 f.) Discrete portions of the texts used are quoted in the book; full references are given in the notes and bibliography. Treating the texts within groups rather than as individual pieces leads to some confusion but serves Perry’s aim of emphasizing the shared goals of the reports in separating their relic acquisition from the wanton behavior of the marauding crusaders. The major beneficiaries of the deployment of the relics of Constantinople were, of course, the Venetians. Two of Perry’s analyzed texts relate to Venetian relic acquisition, and the last section of the book is given over to a review of relic management in Venice before, during, and after the Fourth Crusade. Perry draws skillfully here on an extensive literature devoted to Venice’s skill at myth-making and its use of relics to support a script that made Venice the recipient of a divine plan for success. The study is designed to...

The Alliance between Byzantium and Rus’ Before the Conquest of Constantinople by the Crusaders in 1204

The Galician-Volhynian prince Roman Mstislavich became the main military ally of the Byzantine Empire in the early 13th century. The circumstances and the time of Roman’s campaign in Niketas Choniates’ account are the same as in the Russian chronicles reporting the steppe campaigns of the prince. All the Byzantine sources name Roman Mstislavich the “igemon of Galicia”. The term igemon, unlike other Byzantine titles of Rusian princes, meant the Emperor’s ally and relative (or in-law). The alliance between Alexios III and Roman led also to more stable relations with the Rusian population of the Lower Dniester and the Lower Danube. The military aid that Roman rendered to Alexios III was guaranteed by Roman’s marriage to the niece of Alexios III, the elder daughter of the overthrown emperor Isaak II.

The myth of the Byzantine origins of the Osmanlis: an essay in interpretation

The story that gave the Osmanlis a distant Comnenian origin emerges in sixteenth-century Italian and Greek histories, inspired by the twelfth-century accounts of the renegade prince John Komnenos, as related by Niketas Choniates Its invention and propagation might have served the legitimacy of Ottoman rule, in which case, it was addressed to gulams and converts rather than to the Christian subjects of the sultans. It can also be interpreted as fitting the ideals and the imaginations of highly positioned converts in the Ottoman service, who previously belonged to the Byzantine and Balkan aristocracies.

The Cult of St. Daniel the Stylite Among the Russian Princes of the Rurik Dynasty

The influence of Grand Princess Euphrosyne (second wife of Prince Roman Mstislavovitch) explains the appearance among the Galician-Volhynian princes of Christian names which were unusual and unique for the Rurikides. This is the name Daniel, which was later included into the name list of the Moscow princes. This name spread among the princes due to the expansion of the cult of St Daniel the Stylite and the rising interest in the attributes of Stylitism. This can be seen in sphragistics and in the numerous architectural monuments of Galician-Volhynian Rus' of the 13th–early 14th century. Thanks to the family links between the Galician-Volhynian and the Vladimir-Suzdal princes, this cult spread in the North-Eastern Rus' and later to Moscow. The fact that Euphrosyne of Galicia was the daughter of Basileus Isaak II explains the unexpected rise of interest in Stylitism among the princes of Rus' and their milieu. According to Niketas Choniates, Emperor Isaak II especially sympathized with the Stylites and the ascetics and patronized them. Thus he astonished his contemporaries, since the Stylites had lost the influence over the emperors that they had exerted at the time of iconoclasm. The Byzantine hagiography concerning Sts. Daniel the Stylite and Leo the Great Tsar explains the connection between the names of Daniel and Leo among the descendants of Roman Mstislavich. Daniel the Stylite was the spiritual father and the main adviser of Emperor Leo I. Apparently this relationship was reflected in the names of the father and the son, the Galician-Volhynian princes Daniel Romanovich and Lev Danilovich.

ΒΥΖΑΝΤΙΟ ΚΑΙ ΣΕΡΒΟΙ: ΤΟ ΖΗΤΗΜΑ ΤΩΝ ΕΚΣΤΡΑΤΕΙΩΝ ΤΟΥ ΙΩΑΝΝΗ Β΄ ΚΟΜΝΗΝΟΥ ΕΝΑΝΤΙΟΝ ΤΩΝ ΣΕΡΒΩΝ

The aim of this paper is to examine the number of campaigns conducted against the Serbs by John II Komnenos (1118-1143). Until recently, scholars believed that there was only one campaign against the Serbs, because they failed to take into account a third source, distinct from Niketas Choniates and Ioannes Kinnamos, that of the Chronicle of the Priest of Dioclea. After examining all three sources, I reached the conclusion that there were actually two campaigns. The other problem pertaining to the campaigns is chronology. Ferdinand Chalandon, who was the only one to support the theory of two campaigns, was wrong on the matter of their chronology. He believed that Choniates was mistaken and adopted Kinnamos’ chronology (1129-1130), placing the second campaign in 1137. I have tried to show that both Byzantine historians were correct in their chronology, as they refer to two separate campaigns, so the correct chronology would be 1122 for the first and 1129 for the second.

The political problem of internal "ἀσφάλεια" in Niketas Choniates' Chronikè Diéghesis: a contributing factor to the Constantinople's fall in 1204

In this essay I analyze the idea of aspháleia (safety) in the political thought of the Byzantine historian Niketas Choniates (1150-55/1217 ca.), as it appears in his Chronikè Diéghesis. This historical work covers the period 1118-1206 and is a very significant source about the history of Byzantine Empire in the XII century and about its fall in the 1204. Particularly I focus on three aspects of the idea of aspháleia in the “second class aristocracy”, as Paul Magdalino defined it in his works. According to Niketa’s thought, the lack of safety in the Empire competes to create in the XII century some preconditions of the Constantinople’s fall in 1204.

Provincial Sebastoi from the end of 12th to mid 13th century

According to the news by Niketas Choniates, at the time of Alexios III Angelos the sebastos title was sold at a low price to everyone who wanted to buy it. That news has been connected to the fact that at the end of the 12th and in the early 13th century there was a noticeable emergence of the local aristocracy members holding the title of sebastos. The work casts a special emphasis on the analysis of the sebastoi mentioned in the writings of Demetrios Chomatenos, the archbishop of Ohrid.

Considérations concernant la fin du pouvoir des Petchénègues du Bas-Danube

Considerations on the end of the Pechenegs’ power at the Lower Danube. This study addresses the political and military context of the last great invasions of the North-Danube Pechenegs in the Byzantium Empire, from 1091 and 1122-1123 and their political and military consequences. Basic information was provided by a series of Byzantine chronicles such as those of Ioannes (John) Skylitzes, Ioannes (John) Zonaras, Ioannes (John) Kynnamos, Anna Comnena, Niketas Choniates and others, or Heimskringla of the Icelandic chronicler Snorri Sturluson. The Pechengs of Turanian race entered the Lower Danube in the 10th century, laid the bases of a large “steppe empire” – Patzinakia – bounded by the lower course of the Danube and Volga. Their invasions in Byzantium, started in the third decade of the 11th century, led to some gaps of the Byzantine rule on Thema Paristrion or Paradounavon, in 1046/ 1047-1053, 1059, 1072-1091. Defeated by a categorical manner by the Emperor Alexios I Comnenos, allied with the Cumans, at Lebunion, on April 29, 1091, the Pechenegs gave them the main place of military factor in the Lower Danube. Three decades later, with their military potential restored they take their last great invasion in the Byzantine Empire, advancing to Thracia (fall 1122). In the spring of 1123 they take are, however, crouched by the Byzantine forces commanded by Emperor Ioannes (John) II Comnenos, close to Berroe. The suffered military disaster caused the permanent end of their power at the Lower Danube.

Getting Away with Murder: Runciman and Conrad of Montferrat’s Career in Constantinople

In the second volume of his History of the Crusades (1952), Steven Runciman claimed that Conrad of Montferrat arrived in Tyre in 1187 after involvement in ‘a murder’ in Constantinople. This alleged murder was Conrad’s defeat in battle of the rebel general Alexios Vranas, described by Niketas Choniates and other chroniclers. Runciman’s use of sources is examined, together with possible reasons for misrepresenting the incident. Questions are raised about the relationship between academic and popular historiography through the uncritical repetition of the murder accusation in later popular works, and Conrad’s stereotyping in English-language fiction.

Andronikos I Komnenos: A Greek Tragedy

<span style="line-height: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; color: black; font-size: 12pt">The Annals of Niketas Choniates depict Emperor Andronikos I Komnenos (1183-1185) in certain aspects of his lifestyle as a mirror image of his first cousin, Emperor Manuel I Komnenos (1143-1180). The life and death of Andronikos I Komnenos provide us with a window into the aesthetic, moral, intellectual, religious, economic and emotional world of Byzantine society in the 12th century. It was thanks to the Byzantine empire that the ancient texts were preserved and transmitted. Ancient Greek culture and reason, in particular, continued to inform Christian values while, at the same time, both could be in radical conflict. The tragic reign of Andronikos as presented by Niketas Choniates conforms to Aristotle's principles of classical drama, but there is a fundamental disagreement between the author of the Poetics and the historian as to what constitutes tragedy, which underlines this conflict.</span>

Penthesilea on the Second Crusade: Is Eleanor of Aquitaine the Amazon Queen of Niketas Choniates?

Penthesilea on the Second Crusade: Is Eleanor of Aquitaine the Amazon Queen of Niketas Choniates?

The data on Serbian history of the 13th century in the chronicle of Ephraim from Ainos

Ephraim from Ainos wrote a chronicle (Chronik? Istoria), in the twelve-syllable verse, which covered the history of the Old and New Rome from the 1st century A.D. to 1261, i.e. the period covering twelve centuries. While writing this chronicle, he predominantly relied on the world chronicle by John Zonaras and the historical works by Niketas Choniates and George Akropolites. In regard to Serbian 13th century history, it should be pointed out that Ephraim mentioned three pieces of information. Chronologically speaking, the two of them, the first and the third, are well known from other sources as well. The first one was the information that Eudokia, daughter of the Byzantine emperor Alexios III Angelos, had been married to Stefan, son of Nemanja, and the third one was about the well-known and well-documented event, the Serbian invasion into the European territories of the Empire of Nicaea, in the vicinity of towns Kicevo and Prilep, in 1257. The second news in order, and controversial to certain degree, spoke about the alleged occupation of the part of Serbian territories by the ruler of Epiros Theodore I Angelos during the first years of his rule. The contemporary historian George Akropolites, who was much closer to these events, did not list the Serbian territories among those conquered by the ruler of Epiros.

Relics, miracles and furta sacra: A contribution to the study of Serbo-Bulgarian relations in the 1230s

Relics, miracles and furta sacra: A contribution to the study of Serbo-Bulgarian relations in the 1230s

Niketas Choniates and Ioannes Kinnamos: the poisoning of Stephen IV of Hungary (13 April, 1165)

Article Niketas Choniates and Ioannes Kinnamos: the poisoning of Stephen IV of Hungary (13 April, 1165) was published on September 1, 2008 in the journal Byzantinische Zeitschrift (volume 101, issue 1).

Domestic opposition to Byzantium's alliance with Saladin: Niketas Choniates and his Epiphany oration of 1190

The alliance between Isaac II Angelas and Saladin at the time of the Third Crusade has received much attention from Western and Islamic contemporaries, yet the Byzantine sources are oddly silent. This article teases out a negative reaction in Byzantium to the alliance, a reaction found in an oration delivered by Niketas Choniates on 6 January 1190. The article concludes that Choniates opposed the alliance and tactfully urged Isaac II to turn his attention towards redeeming Jerusalem, then under Saladin's control. The conclusion is set within the larger framework set by other scholars, such as Magdalino, Angold, and Hamilton, who see the Holy Land as an important factor in Byzantine policy before 1176.

Domestic opposition to Byzantium's alliance with Saladin: Niketas Choniates and his Epiphany oration of 1190

The alliance between Isaac II Angelas and Saladin at the time of the Third Crusade has received much attention from Western and Islamic contemporaries, yet the Byzantine sources are oddly silent. This article teases out a negative reaction in Byzantium to the alliance, a reaction found in an oration delivered by Niketas Choniates on 6 January 1190. The article concludes that Choniates opposed the alliance and tactfully urged Isaac II to turn his attention towards redeeming Jerusalem, then under Saladin's control. The conclusion is set within the larger framework set by other scholars, such as Magdalino, Angold, and Hamilton, who see the Holy Land as an important factor in Byzantine policy before 1176.

Greek: A History of the Language and its Speakers (review)

Reviews 253 However, his introductory discussion of masturbation as 'a specific sexual activity, shown in the process of becoming psychologically fraught' (p. 246) again asks the reader to assent to either a brilliantly transhistoricist Lacan, or a precociously modern Early Modern mindset. Also, while the extended intertextual examination of the use of the owl in Early Modern texts shows an admirable attention to detail and intertextual breadth, it unfortunately offers thin proof for Hillman's contentions. Like much of this book, Hillman's enthusiasm and flair for close textual and intertextual reading (evident in his previous books) are often weakened by the obligatory theoretical gloss. Still, those w h o are very well versed in either Lacan, or any (or all) of the texts Hillman focuses on should find this book useful to some degree. Christine Couche Scarborough Western Australia Horrocks, Geoffrey, Greek: A History of the Language and its Speaker (Longman Linguistic .Library), L o n d o n and N e w York, Longman, 1997; pp. xxi, 393; 1 map; R.R.P. £19.99. This is a fascinating volume which gives a thorough overview of the history of developments in the Greek language within their cultural context from the Mycenaean period until the present day. Each section is illustrated by one of more passages from selected texts, which are given in the original, translated into English, and transcribed in the pronunciation of their time with a further literal translation following the word order of the original. Furthermore, detailed historical summaries introduce the reader to the civilisations of Byzantium and Modern Greece and the factors 254 Reviews within them which influenced linguistic change. Though there are sections of some technical complexity, the work as a whole is extremely readable. The brief summary of the prehistory and early development of Greek is followed by a look at the official and literary 'standards' of classical Greek and the rise of Attic as a literary standard and administrative language. Horrocks then continues with an in-depth study of Greek in the Hellenistic world, not omitting a discussion of the ancient Greek dialects, including Macedonian. Inscriptions from the Hellenistic and R o m a n worlds, such as IG VII 3352, IX.ii.517, and SIG 11.646, illustrate dialectical" variation within the koine, sound changes, and morphological developments. The Septuagint is also discussed as an example of the koine as a literary dialect. Private documents of the relatively uneducated provide valuable information about the evolution of the spoken koine in the R o m a n period, while Epictetus, the N e w Testament and later Christian literature are used as examples of 'colloquial' literature and different stylistic levels. The passages studied under the heading of 'Byzantines belles lettres', illustrating the 'centrality of the ancient Greek literary tradition in high Byzantine culture', comprise the three rather obvious examples of Procopius, Psellos, and Anna Komnene. (Niketas Choniates, that master of Byzantine prose writing, is not even in the index.) The chapter on 'Middle Styles in Byzantium', however, is far more imaginatively constructed, and sections from Malalas, Theophanes Confessor, Moschos, St Germanos (Patr. 71530 ), Constantine Porphyrogennetos' De administrando imperio, and Kekaumenos are used to demonstrate the characteristic features of the chronographic and hagiographic style. Further in-depth knowledge of Byzantine civilisation is shown by the appearance of a passage from the Palaiologan 'metaphrasis' of the Alexiad, in Reviews 255 which Anna Komnene's work was rewritten into a more readerfriendly register, thus demonstrating the return of a wider reading public in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries w h o were unable to cope with the intricacies of archaising literature. Academic Greek in the late period is here represented by Maximos Planudes and official Greek of the later empire by a decree of Andronikos II ( M M VI, 248). Horrocks argues that the range of middle-register writing in Byzantium was 'not the product of more or less incompetent archaizing, but rather reflected a continuously evolving tradition that was subject to conventions controlling the mix of ancient and modern according to period, register, and style' (p. 204). A key theme of this work is the development of the koine into a single standard language...

Providentialism in Niketas Choniates, Nikephoros Gregoras and other medieval writers

Providentialism in Niketas Choniates, Nikephoros Gregoras and other medieval writers

Aspects of Twelfth-Century Byzantine Kaiserkritik

The History of Niketas Choniates, covering the period of Byzantine history from 1118 to 1206, is one of the acknowledged masterpieces of medieval Greek historiography.1 Not the least masterly of its features is its full and nuanced portrait of the emperor Manuel I Komnenos (1143-80). In itself, the appraisal seems neutral, for the author has both good and bad to say about Manuel and his policies. However, in comparison with the other literary sources for Manuel's reign the histories of John Kinnamos and William of Tyre, and the numerous prose and verse encomia celebrating the emperor's achievements Choniates is highly critical. Whether this criticism is as accurate or as fair as most modern scholars, seduced perhaps by Choniates' sophistication, seem to have assumed2 must be disputed elsewhere. My present concern is with the general principles on which Choniates' disapproval is based. These principles are apparent in three passages of his work. Firstly, in Book I of his section on Manuel, in pointing out that Manuel's early generosity did not last, he observes: when he came to manhood, he ruled more autocratically (archikoteron), treating his subjects not as free men, but as if they were servants who belonged to him by inheritance.3 Later, in Book IV, after describing how two of the emperor's cousins fell foul of him, Choniates launches into a tirade against the envy of rulers in general, who feel themselves threatened if any of their subjects excel: