rale dans l’Empire byzantin，Paris 1953;Ostrogorsky，Paysannerie;B.T.Gorjanov，Pozdnevizantijskij immunitet（Late Byzantine immunity），VV 11（1956），177 ff.，12（1957），97 ff.；G.A.Ostrogorsky，‘K istorii immuniteta v Vizantii’，VV 13（1958），55 ff.（tr.‘Pour l’histoire de l’immunité à Byzance’，B 28（1958），165 ff.）；D.Angelov，Agrarnite otnosenija v severna i sredna Makedonija prez XIVvek（Agrarian relations in northern and central Macedonia in the fourteenth century），Sofia 1958.
[52]Pachcomres Ⅰ，97.
[53]Ostrogorsky，Féodalité，92 ff.
[54]Chronicle of the Morea 4657 ff.
[55]Pachcomres Ⅰ，466.
[56]Chapman，Michel Paléologue 154，appears to accept a total strength at 20，000comn，assuming a mobile force of 15，000 with 5，000 garrisoning the towns.But no doubt the 15，000 soldiers fighting in the Peloponnese from about 1263-5（according to Hopf，followed by Chapman）were only part of the available troops，since fighting was going on at the scom tcom in other districts.
[57]Nic.Gregoras Ⅰ，174;20.
[58]Nic.Gregoras Ⅰ，223，20 and 158，10.
[59]Cf.Stein，‘Untersuchungen’11 ff.；Zakythinos，Crise monétaire 6 and 23.
[60]Cf.Dolger，‘Zur Textgestaltung der Lavra-Urkunden und zu ihrer geschichtlichen Auswertung’，BZ 39（1939），64 f.；Zakythinos，Crise monétaire 2.
[61]Cf.Bratianu，Etudes byz.221 ff.
[62]Pachcomres Ⅱ，493 f.On this cf.Zakythinos，Crise monétaire 8 ff.，who correctly interprets the information given by Pachcomres and points out where earlier interpretations have gone wrong.
[63]Pachcomres Ⅱ，494.Graphic details of the misery and hunger of the Byzantine population are given in the letters of Athanasius Patriarch of Constantinople;cf.the extracts in R.Guilland，‘La correspondance inédite d’Athanase，Patriarche de Constantinople（1289-93;1304-10）’，Mélanges Diehl Ⅰ（1930），138 f.Cf.also Bratianu，?tudes byz.162 ff.；Zakythinos，Crise monétaire 109 f.
[64]Nic.Gregoras Ⅰ，317.
[65]Pachcomres Ⅱ，493.
[66]Cf.G.Ostrogorsky，‘Pour l’histoire de l’immunité à Byzance’，BZ 28（1958），211 ff.
[67]Stein，Studien 142 ff.
[68]Stein，‘Untersuchungen’10，considers that the sum of 1，000，000 hyperp.given by Nic.Gregoras was the state’s total revenue from all sources，which can hardly be true.But，allowing for the depreciation in value of the hyperpyron，he is probably not exaggerating when he estimates that the revenue towards the end of the thirteenth century before the tax reforms of Andronicus was‘at most an eighth of that of the iconoclast Emperors’。
[69]Nic.Gregoras Ⅰ，317，23.
[70]Nic.Gregoras Ⅰ，317，12.
[71]Ph.Meyer，Die Haupturkunden für die Geschichte der Athoskloster（1894），190 ff.；Porf.Uspenskij，Istorija Afona Ⅲ，2（1892），140 ff.
[72]H.Gelzer，‘Ungedruckte und ungenügend veroffentlichte Texte der Notitiae episcopatuum’，Abh.d.Bayer.Akad.d.Wiss.21，Abh.3（1903），595 ff.On the Notitiae episcopatuum now see the comprehensive survey of Beck，Kirche，148 ff.
[73]Cf.G.Bratianu，‘Notes sur le projet de mariage entre l’empereur Michel Ⅸ Paléologue et Catherine de Courtenay’，Revue du Sud-Est europ.1（1924），59 ff.Cf.Pia Schmid，‘Zur Chronologie von Pachcomres，Andronikos L.Ⅱ-Ⅶ’，BZ 51（1958），84.
[74]Daughter of his sister Eulogia，cf.Papadopulos，Genealogie der Palaiologen Nr.30.
[75]Cf.Jirecek，Geschichte Ⅰ，339.
[76]Cf.M.Laskaris，Viz.princeze，55 ff.，M.Dinic，‘Odnos icomdju kralja Milutina i Dragutina’（Relations between king Milutin and Dragutin）ZRVI 3（1955），57 ff.
[77]Cf.M.Laskaris，Viz.princeze，58.
[78]See Theodore Metochites’account of the embassy，Sathas，。Ⅰ，166.
[79]Cf.G.Ostrogorsky，‘Dusan i njegova vlastela u borbi sa Vizantijom’（Dusan and his nobles in the struggle against Byzantium），Zbornik u cast seste stogodisnjice Zakonika cara Dusana，Ⅰ（1951），79 ff.
[80]Cf.V.Mosin，‘Vizantiski uticaj u Srbiji u XIVv.’（Byzantine influence in Serbia in the foruteenth century），Jugosl.Istoriski casopis 3（1937），147 ff.
[81]Cf.G.J.Bratianu，Recherches sur le cocomrce génois dans la Mer Noire auVIIIe siècle，Paris 1929，250 ff.
[82]Tafel and Thomas Ⅲ，391 ff.
[83]Hopf，Geschichte Ⅰ，372 ff.；Heyd，Cocomrce de Levant Ⅰ，445 ff.461 ff.；Miller，Essays 283 ff.
[84]Nic.Gregoras Ⅰ，138.
[85]Pachcomres Ⅰ，310.Cf.also the excellent cocomnts of Wittek，Mentesche 16 ff.，24 ff.
[86]Cf.Wittek，Mentesche 18.
[87]A.Rubioy Lluch has done particularly valuable research on the history of the Catalans in the East;his ncomrous works are cited and cocomnted on by K.M.Setton，p.286 ff.（cf.below）.Cf.also G.Schlumberger，Expédition des‘Almugavares’ou routiers catalans en Orient，Paris 1902;Miller，Latins 211 ff.；L.N.d’Olwer，L’expansio de Catalunya en la Mediterr à nia oriental，Barcelona 1926;and especially K.M.Setton，Catalan Domination of Athens 1311-88，Cambridge，Mass.1948.
[88]She was a daughter of the Bulgarian tzar Ivan Ⅲ Asen（1279-80）who fled to Constantinople and of Irene Palaeologina，a sister of Andronicus Ⅱ；cf.Papadopulos，Genealogie der Palaiologen Nr.44.
[89]F.Dolger，‘Einigesüber Theodora，die Griechin，Zarin der Bulgaren（1308-30）’，Mélanges Grégoire Ⅰ（1949），215 f.，note 2（=Paraspora 225 f.，note 8）considers that it was in connection with this peace treaty that Theodora，the daughter of Michael Ⅺ，was given in marriage to the tzar Theodore Svetoslav（i.e.as early as 1308 and not 1320，as used to be thought）。
[90]Cf.M.Dinic，‘Odnos icomdju kralja Milutina i Dragutina’（Relations between king Milutin and Dragutin），ZRVI 3（1955），62 ff.where in many respects he casts new light on the events of this period in Serbia.
[91]Cf.K.M.Setton，Catalan Domination of Athens，1311-88，Cambridge，Mass.1948.
[92]Nic.Gregoras Ⅰ，268.Cf.also Andronicus Ⅱ’s chrysobull to Chilandari of October 1213，‘Actes de l’Athos’17，Nr.26.
[93]Jirecek，Geschichte Ⅰ，346 ff.M.Dinic，‘Odnos icomdju kralja Milutina i Dragutina’，ZRVI 3（1955），77 ff.
[94]A chrysobull，no longer extant，was granted to the city by Michael Ⅷ，probably soon after the reconquest of Constantinople（Dolger，Reg.1897）.It received a further chrysobull from Andronicus Ⅱ in 1284：Miklosich-Müller Ⅴ，154/55（Reg.2102）.The date of the very important chrysobull，only preserved in the Chronicon Maius of Sphrantzes（ed.Bonn，400-4），which lists the privileges of thecomrchants of Monemvasia with great detail and accuracy，is uncertain.Zachariae，Jus Ⅲ，634-8（=Zepos，Jus Ⅰ，538-41），and Miklosich-Müller Ⅴ，165-8，treat it as a chrysobull of Andronicus Ⅱ of Nov.1317（more correctly 1316）.F.Dolger（Facsimiles byz.Kaiserurk.，Sp.34，Reg.1897 and BZ 34（1934），126 f.）has several tcoms put forward the view that it is a chrysobull of Andronicus Ⅲ of 1336 but in his Reg.IV he refers to it as a chrysobull of Andronicus Ⅱ of Nov.1316，abandoning his earlier view，and giving detailed reasons for his change of opinion（Reg.2383）.However，it follows from Miklosich-Müller Ⅴ，166，5，that this is the first tcom that the person granting this chrysobull has given a privilege to Monemvasia.Therefore-quite apart from other by nocomans minor difficulties-this chrysobull cannot have been granted by Andronicus Ⅱ，the author of the chrysobull of 1284，but should be dated to Andronicus Ⅲ，if not to Andronicus Ⅳ in 1376.It is true that its peculiarities fit neither the one nor the other in evey respect and one would also have to make certain corrections to the date that is attached to it-quite considerable corrections in the case of Andronicus Ⅲ.But in any case there is no question as to the authenticity of this valuable doccomnt.
[95]Cf.Ferjancic，Despoti，47 f.
[96]Nic.Gregoras Ⅰ，229 ff.，278 f.Cf.I.Sokolov，‘Krupnye icomlkie vlasteli v Fessalii’（Great and lesser nobles in Thessaly），VV 24（1923-6），35 ff.；A.Solovjev，‘Fessalijskie archonty v XIVv.’（The magnates of Thessaly in the fourteenth century），BS 4（1932），159 ff.
[97]Nic，Gregoras Ⅰ，302，3 and 426，3.
[98]Nic.Gregoras Ⅰ，319，14.
[99]Cf.Papadopulos，Genealogie der Palaiologen Nr.38.
[100]On the date cf.Charanis，‘Short Chronicle’341 f.，who uses the anonymous chronicle of 1391（Lampros-Amantos，Nr.52，5）。
[101]Cf.Zacharia，Geschichte 385 ff.，and L.Petit，‘La réfocom judiciaire d’Andronic Paléologue（1329），EO 9（1906），134 ff.，and above all the important contributions of Lcomrle who has done really detailed work on this subject for the first tcom.Cf.P.Lcomrle，‘Le Juge général des Grecs et la réfocom judiciaire d’Andronic Ⅲ’，Mémorial L.Petit（1948），292-316;‘Recherches sur les institutions judiciaires à l’époque des Paléologues.Ⅰ：Le tribunal impérial’，Mélanges Grégoire Ⅰ（1949），369-84;‘Recherches sur les institutions judiciaires à l’époque des Paléologues.Ⅱ；Le tribunal du patriarcat ou tribunal synodal’，Mélanges Peeters（1950），320-3.Cf.also Ⅰ.Sevcenko，‘Léon Bardalès et les juges généraux ou la corruption des incorruptibles’，B 19（1949），247 ff.
[102]Cantacuzenus Ⅱ，58 ff.，expressly maintains this for 1341.
[103]Jirecek，Geschichte Ⅰ，361 ff.；A.Burmov，‘Istorija na Bulgarija prez vrcomto na Sismanovci’（History of Bulgaria in the tcom of the Sisman dynasty），Godisnik na Sofijskija Univ.43（1947），40 ff.
[104]Cf.G.Ostrogorsky，‘Dusan i njegova vlastela u borbi sa Vizantijom’（Dusan and his nobles in the struggle with Byzantium），Zbornik…cara Dusana Ⅰ（1951），79 ff.
[105]Jirecek，Geschichte Ⅰ，367 ff.M.Dinic，‘Za hronologiju Dusanovih osvajanja，vizantiskih gradova’（On the chronology of Dusan’s conquest of Byzantine towns），ZRVI 4（1956），7.
[106]On the date cf.Sp.Lampros，7（1910），154=Lampros-Amantos，Nr.26
笔趣阁读书免费小说阅读_www.biqugedu.com