Thomas the Slav

Last updated

Thomas the Slav
Thomas the Slav negotiates with the Arabs.jpg
Miniature from the Madrid Skylitzes version of the chronicle of John Skylitzes depicting Thomas, on horseback and dressed as a Byzantine emperor, negotiating with the Arabs. The rebellion of Thomas is one of the most richly illustrated episodes in the chronicle. [1]
Died823 AD
Allegiance Byzantine army
Years of servicec.803 – 820
Rank tourmarches

Thomas the Slav (Greek : Θωμᾶς ὁ Σλάβος, romanized: Thōmas ho Slavos, c.760 – October 823) was a 9th-century Byzantine military commander, most notable for leading a wide-scale revolt in 821–23 against Emperor Michael II the Amorian (r. 820–829).

Greek language Language spoken in Greece, Cyprus and Southern Albania

Greek is an independent branch of the Indo-European family of languages, native to Greece, Cyprus and other parts of the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea. It has the longest documented history of any living Indo-European language, spanning more than 3000 years of written records. Its writing system has been the Greek alphabet for the major part of its history; other systems, such as Linear B and the Cypriot syllabary, were used previously. The alphabet arose from the Phoenician script and was in turn the basis of the Latin, Cyrillic, Armenian, Coptic, Gothic, and many other writing systems.

Romanization of Greek is the transliteration (letter-mapping) or transcription (sound-mapping) of text from the Greek alphabet into the Latin alphabet. The conventions for writing and romanizing Ancient Greek and Modern Greek differ markedly, which can create confusion. The sound of the English letter B was written as β in ancient Greek but is now written as the digraph μπ, while the modern β sounds like the English letter V instead. The Greek name Ἰωάννης became Johannes in Latin and then John in English, but in Greek itself has instead become Γιάννης; this might be written as Yannis, Jani, Ioannis, Yiannis, or Giannis, but not Giannes or Giannēs as it would have been in ancient Greek. The masculine Greek word Ἅγιος or Άγιος might variously appear as Hagiοs, Agios, Aghios, or Ayios, or simply be translated as "Holy" or "Saint" in English forms of Greek placenames.

Byzantine Empire Roman Empire during Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages

The Byzantine Empire, also referred to as the Eastern Roman Empire or Byzantium, was the continuation of the Roman Empire in its eastern provinces during Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages, when its capital city was Constantinople. It survived the fragmentation and fall of the Western Roman Empire in the 5th century AD and continued to exist for an additional thousand years until it fell to the Ottoman Turks in 1453. During most of its existence, the empire was the most powerful economic, cultural and military force in Europe. "Byzantine Empire" is a term created after the end of the realm; its citizens continued to refer to their empire simply as the Roman Empire, or Romania (Ῥωμανία), and to themselves as "Romans".


An army officer of Slavic origin from the Pontus region (now north-eastern Turkey), Thomas rose to prominence, along with the future emperors Michael II and Leo V the Armenian (r. 813–820), under the protection of general Bardanes Tourkos. After Bardanes' failed rebellion in 803, Thomas fell into obscurity until Leo V's rise to the throne, when Thomas was raised to a senior military command in central Asia Minor. After the murder of Leo and usurpation of the throne by Michael the Amorian, Thomas revolted, claiming the throne for himself. Thomas quickly secured support from most of the themes (provinces) and troops in Asia Minor, defeated Michael's initial counter-attack and concluded an alliance with the Abbasid Caliphate. After winning over the maritime themes and their ships as well, he crossed with his army to Europe and laid siege to Constantinople. The imperial capital withstood Thomas's attacks by land and sea, while Michael II called for help from the Bulgarian ruler khan Omurtag. Omurtag attacked Thomas's army, but although repelled, the Bulgarians inflicted heavy casualties on Thomas's men, who broke and fled when Michael took to the field a few months later. Thomas and his supporters sought refuge in Arcadiopolis, where he was soon blockaded by Michael's troops. In the end, Thomas's supporters surrendered him in exchange for a pardon, and he was executed.

Early Slavs

The early Slavs were a diverse group of tribal societies who lived during the Migration Period and Early Middle Ages in Eastern Europe and established the foundations for the Slavic nations through the Slavic states of the High Middle Ages. The first written use of the name "Slavs" dates to the 6th century, when the Slavic tribes inhabited a large portion of Central and Eastern Europe. By that century, nomadic Iranian ethnic groups living on the Eurasian Steppe had been absorbed by the region's Slavic population. Over the next two centuries, the Slavs expanded southwest toward the Balkans and the Alps and northeast towards the Volga River. It's still a matter of controversy where the original habitat of the Slavs was, but scholars believe it was somewhere in Eastern Europe. In the past not much attention was paid to the origin of the Slavic people.

Pontus (region) region in north-eastern Anatolia

Pontus is a region on the southern coast of the Black Sea, located in modern-day eastern Black Sea Region of Turkey. The name was applied to the coastal region and its mountainous hinterland by the Greeks who colonized the area since the Archaic period and derived from the Greek name of the Black Sea: Πόντος Εὔξεινος, Póntos Eúxeinos, or simply Pontos as early as the Aeschylean Persians and Herodotus' Histories.

Turkey Country spanning Western Asia and Southeastern Europe

Turkey, officially the Republic of Turkey, is a transcontinental country located mainly on the Anatolian peninsula in Western Asia, with a small portion on the Balkan peninsula in Southeast Europe. East Thrace, the part of Turkey in Europe, is separated from Anatolia by the Sea of Marmara, the Bosphorous and the Dardanelles. Turkey is bordered by Greece and Bulgaria to its northwest; Georgia to its northeast; Armenia, the Azerbaijani exclave of Nakhchivan and Iran to the east; and Iraq and Syria to the south. Istanbul is the largest city while Ankara is the capital. Approximately 70 to 80 per cent of the country's citizens identify as Turkish. Kurds are the largest minority at anywhere from 15 to 20 percent of the population.

Thomas's rebellion was one of the largest in the Byzantine Empire's history, but its precise circumstances are unclear due to competing historical narratives, which have come to include claims fabricated by Michael to blacken his opponent's name. Consequently, various motives and driving forces have been attributed to Thomas and his followers. As summarized by the Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium , "Thomas's revolt has been variously attributed to a reaction against Iconoclasm, a social revolution and popular uprising, a revolt by the Empire's non-Greek ethnic groups, Thomas's personal ambitions, and his desire to avenge Leo V." [1] Its effects on the military position of the Empire, particularly vis-à-vis the Arabs, are also disputed.

<i>Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium</i> book

The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium (ODB) is a three-volume historical dictionary published by the English Oxford University Press. With more than 5,000 entries, it contains comprehensive information in English on topics relating to the Byzantine Empire. It was edited by Alexander Kazhdan, and was first published in 1991. Kazhdan was a professor at Princeton University who became a Senior Research Associate at Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, DC before his death. He contributed to many of the articles in the Dictionary and always signed his initials A.K. at the end of the article to indicate his contribution.

Byzantine Iconoclasm two periods in the history of the Byzantine Empire when the use of religious images or icons was opposed by religious and imperial authorities

Byzantine Iconoclasm refers to two periods in the history of the Byzantine Empire when the use of religious images or icons was opposed by religious and imperial authorities within the Orthodox Church and the temporal imperial hierarchy. The "First Iconoclasm", as it is sometimes called, existed between about 726 and 787. The "Second Iconoclasm" was between 814 and 842. According to the traditional view, Byzantine Iconoclasm was started by a ban on religious images by Emperor Leo III and continued under his successors. It was accompanied by widespread destruction of images and persecution of supporters of the veneration of images. The pope remained firmly in support of the use of images throughout the period, and the whole episode widened the growing divergence between the Byzantine and Carolingian traditions in what was still a unified church, as well as facilitating the reduction or removal of Byzantine political control over parts of Italy.

Byzantine Greeks Greek-speaking Christian Romans of the Byzantine Empire

The Byzantine Greeks were the Greek-speaking Christian Romans of Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages. They were the main inhabitants of the lands of the Byzantine Empire, of Constantinople and Asia Minor, the Greek islands, Cyprus, and portions of the southern Balkans, and formed large minorities, or pluralities, in the coastal urban centres of the Levant and northern Egypt. Throughout their history, the Byzantine Greeks self-identified as Romans, but are referred to as "Byzantine Greeks" in modern historiography.

Early life and career

The 11th-century Theophanes Continuatus states that Thomas was descended from South Slavs resettled in Asia Minor by successive Byzantine emperors, while the 10th-century chronicler Genesios calls him "Thomas from Lake Gouzourou, of Armenian race". Most modern scholars support his Slavic descent and believe his birthplace to have been near Gaziura in the Pontus. [2] [3] Hence his epithet of "the Slav", which has been applied to him only in modern times. [4] Nothing is known about his family and early life, except that his parents were poor and that Thomas himself had received no education. Given that he was between 50 and 60 years old at the time of the rebellion, he was probably born around 760. [1] [5]

Theophanes Continuatus or Scriptores post Theophanem is the Latin name commonly applied to a collection of historical writings preserved in the 11th-century Vat. gr. 167 manuscript. Its name derives from its role as the continuation, covering the years 813–961, of the chronicle of Theophanes the Confessor, which reaches from 285 to 813. The manuscript consists of four distinct works, in style and form very unlike the annalistic approach of Theophanes.

Asia Minor Slavs refers to the historical South Slav communities relocated to Anatolia by the Byzantine Empire, from the Balkans. After Maurice's Balkan campaigns, and subsequent subduing of Slavs in the Balkans during the 7th and 8th centuries, large communities were forcefully relocated to Asia Minor as military, fighting the Umayyad Caliphate.

Armenians ethnic group native to the Armenian Highland

Armenians are an ethnic group native to the Armenian Highlands of Western Asia.

Miniature from the Madrid Skylitzes depicting Thomas's supposed flight to the Arabs MadridSkylitzesFol29vDetail.jpg
Miniature from the Madrid Skylitzes depicting Thomas's supposed flight to the Arabs

Two different accounts of Thomas's life are recounted in both Genesios and Theophanes Continuatus. According to the first account, Thomas first appeared in 803 accompanying general Bardanes Tourkos, and pursued a military career until launching his revolt in late 820. In the second version, he came to Constantinople as a poor youth and entered the service of a man with the high court rank of patrikios . Then, discovered trying to commit adultery with his master's wife, Thomas fled to the Arabs in Syria, where he remained for 25 years. Pretending to be the murdered emperor Constantine VI (r. 780–797), he then led an Arab-sponsored invasion of Asia Minor, but was defeated and punished. [4] [6] Classical and Byzantine scholar J.B. Bury tried to reconcile the two narratives, placing Thomas's flight to the Abbasid Caliphate at around 788 and then having him return to Byzantine service before 803, [7] while the Russian scholar Alexander Vasiliev interpreted the sources as implying that Thomas fled to the Caliphate at Constantine VI's deposition in 797, and that his participation in Bardanes's revolt must be discounted entirely. [8] The second version of Thomas's story is explicitly preferred by Genesios and Theophanes Continuatus, and is the only one recorded in 9th-century sources, namely the chronicle of George the Monk and the Life of Saints David, Symeon, and George of Lesbos . Nevertheless, the French Byzantinist Paul Lemerle came to consider it an unreliable later tradition created by his rival Michael II to discredit Thomas, and rejected it altogether, preferring to rely on the first account alone. Most modern scholars follow him in this interpretation. [4] [9]

Bardanes, nicknamed Tourkos, "the Turk", was a Byzantine general of Armenian origin who launched an unsuccessful rebellion against Emperor Nikephoros I in 803. Although a major supporter of Byzantine empress Irene of Athens, soon after her overthrow he was appointed by Nikephoros as commander-in-chief of the Anatolian armies. From this position, he launched a revolt in July 803, probably in opposition to Nikephoros's economic and religious policies. His troops marched towards Constantinople, but failed to win popular support. At this point, some of his major supporters deserted him and, reluctant to engage the loyalist forces in battle, Bardanes gave up and chose to surrender himself. He retired as a monk to a monastery he had founded. There he was blinded, possibly on Nikephoros's orders.

Constantinople capital city of the Eastern Roman or Byzantine Empire, the Latin and the Ottoman Empire

Constantinople was the capital city of the Roman Empire (330–395), of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire, of the brief Crusader state known as the Latin Empire (1204–1261) and of the Ottoman Empire (1453–1923). In 1923 the capital of Turkey, the successor state of the Ottoman Empire, was moved to Ankara and the name Constantinople was officially changed to Istanbul. The city is located in what is now the European side and the core of modern Istanbul. The city is still referred to as Constantinople in Greek-speaking sources.

Bilad al-Sham Wikimedia list article

Bilad al-Sham was a Rashidun, Umayyad and later Abbasid Caliphate province in what is now the Levant. It incorporated former Byzantine territories of the Diocese of the East, organized soon after the Muslim conquest of the Levant in the mid-7th century, which was completed at the decisive Battle of Yarmouk. The term "Bilad al-Sham" means "land to the north", literally "land on the left-hand" relative to someone in the Hejaz facing east. However, the name was most likely coined after Shem or Sam who lived in that area.

The first tradition relates that Thomas served as a spatharios (staff officer) to Bardanes Tourkos, the monostrategos ("single-general", i.e. commander-in-chief) of the eastern themes, who in 803 rose in rebellion against Emperor Nikephoros I (r. 802–811). Alongside Thomas were two other young spatharioi in Bardanes's retinue, who formed a fraternal association: Leo the Armenian, the future Leo V, and Michael the Amorian, the future Michael II. According to a later hagiographic tradition, before launching his revolt, Bardanes, in the company of his three young protégés, is said to have visited a monk near Philomelion who was reputed to foresee the future. The monk predicted what would indeed happen: that Bardanes's revolt would fail, that Leo and Michael would both become emperors, and that Thomas would be acclaimed emperor and killed. [10] When Bardanes did in fact rise up, he failed to win any widespread support. Leo and Michael soon abandoned him and defected to the imperial camp and were rewarded with senior military posts. Thomas alone remained loyal to Bardanes until his surrender. [11] In the aftermath of Bardanes's failure, Thomas disappears from the sources for ten years. [12] Bury suggests that he fled (for a second time according to his interpretation) to the Arabs, [13] a view accepted by a number of other scholars, such as Romilly James Heald Jenkins. [1] [14] The historian Warren Treadgold, however, argues that Thomas stayed in the empire and that may have even remained in active military service, and explains his obscurity by Thomas's association with Bardanes, which hampered his career. [15]

The spatharii or spatharioi were a class of Late Roman imperial bodyguards in the court in Constantinople in the 5th–6th centuries, later becoming a purely honorary dignity in the Byzantine Empire.

Theme (Byzantine district) Byzantine district

The themes or themata were the main military/administrative divisions of the middle Byzantine Empire. They were established in the mid-7th century in the aftermath of the Slavic invasion of the Balkans and Muslim conquests of parts of Byzantine territory, and replaced the earlier provincial system established by Diocletian and Constantine the Great. In their origin, the first themes were created from the areas of encampment of the field armies of the East Roman army, and their names corresponded to the military units that had existed in those areas. The theme system reached its apogee in the 9th and 10th centuries, as older themes were split up and the conquest of territory resulted in the creation of new ones. The original theme system underwent significant changes in the 11th and 12th centuries, but the term remained in use as a provincial and financial circumscription until the very end of the Empire.

Nikephoros I Emperor of the Romans

Nikephoros I, or Nicephorus I, was Byzantine Emperor from 802 to 811, when he was killed in the Battle of Pliska. Prior to his accession, he had served as genikos logothetēs, whence he is sometimes surnamed "the Logothete" and "Genikos" or "Genicus".

In July 813, Leo the Armenian became emperor and quickly rewarded his old companions, giving them command over elite military forces. Michael received the tagma of the Excubitors (one of the professional guard cavalry regiments stationed around Constantinople), and Thomas the tourma (division) of the Foederati , stationed in the Anatolic Theme. [16]


Background and motives

On Christmas Day 820, Leo was murdered in the palace chapel by officials under the direction of Michael the Amorian, who was quickly crowned emperor. [17] At about the same time, Thomas launched a rebellion in the Anatolic Theme. Sources are divided on the exact chronology and motives of the revolt. George the Monk, the hagiographic sources, and a letter from Michael II to the western emperor Louis the Pious claim that Thomas had risen up against Leo before Michael's usurpation. This chronology is followed by almost all later Byzantine chroniclers like Genesios, Theophanes Continuatus, and Skylitzes, as well as a number of modern scholars like John B. Bury and Alexander Kazhdan. [1] [18] [19] In his study of Thomas and the revolt, Paul Lemerle dismisses this timeline as a later attempt by Michael to justify his revolt as a response to Leo's failure to suppress the rebellion, and to exculpate himself of the early defeats suffered by the imperial forces. [20] Some recent studies follow Lemerle and prefer the account of Symeon Logothetes—generally considered the most accurate of the 10th-century sources [21] —according to which Thomas rebelled a few days after the murder of Leo and in reaction to it. [1] [22] [23]

Two rivals fought for a crown, which one of them had seized, but could not yet be said to have firmly grasped. Michael had been regularly elected, acclaimed, and crowned in the capital, and he had the advantage of possessing the Imperial city. [Thomas] had the support of most of the Asiatic provinces; he was only a rebel because he failed.

John B. Bury [7]

Consequently, the empire became divided in a struggle that was less a rebellion against the established government and more a contest for the throne between equal contenders. Michael held Constantinople and the European provinces, controlled the imperial bureaucracy, and had been properly crowned by the Patriarch, but he had come to the throne through murder, while Thomas gained support and legitimacy through his claim to avenge the fallen Leo, and he won the backing of themes both in Asia and later in Europe. [24] Thomas was a well-known, popular, and respected figure in Asia Minor, where Leo V had enjoyed considerable support. Michael, on the other hand, was virtually unknown outside the capital; his military record was unremarkable, he was uneducated and coarse of manner, his stutter earned him ridicule, and he was reputed to sympathize with the heretical religious sect of the Athinganoi, to which his family had belonged. [25]

Byzantine accounts of Thomas's rebellion state that he did not in fact claim the throne under his own name but assumed the identity of Emperor Constantine VI, who had been deposed and murdered by his mother, Irene of Athens, in 797. [26] Most modern scholars follow Lemerle, who dismisses this as yet another later fabrication. [27] [28] If it contains any truth, it is possible that this story may originate from Thomas choosing to be crowned under the regnal name of "Constantine", but there is no evidence for such an act. [4] The possible appropriation of Constantine VI's identity is linked in some Byzantine sources with the statement that Thomas was a rumoured supporter of iconolatry, as opposed to Michael's support for iconoclasm: it was under Constantine VI that veneration of the icons was restored. Nevertheless, the ambiguous phrasing of the sources, the iconoclast leanings of many themes in Asia Minor, and Thomas's alliance with the Arabs seem to speak against any open commitment to icon worship on his part. [28] [29] Indeed, given Michael II's conciliatory approach during his early reign, the icon worship controversy does not seem to have been a major issue at the time, and in the view of modern scholars most probably did not play a major role in Thomas's revolt. The image of Thomas as an iconophile champion opposed to the iconoclast Michael II in later, Macedonian-era sources was probably the result of their own anti-iconoclast bias. [30] Warren Treadgold furthermore suggests that if true, Thomas's claim to be Constantine VI may have been little more than a tale circulated to win support, and that Thomas pursued a "studied ambiguity" towards icons, designed to attract support from iconophiles. In Treadgold's words, "Thomas could be all things to all men until he had conquered the whole empire, and then he would have time enough to disappoint some of his followers". [31]

The account of Theophanes Continuatus on Thomas's revolt states that in this time, "the servant raised his hand against his master, the soldier against his officer, the captain against his general". This has led some scholars, chiefly Alexander Vasiliev and George Ostrogorsky, to regard Thomas's revolt as an expression of widespread discontent among the rural population, which suffered under heavy taxation. [32] [33] Other Byzantinists, notably Lemerle, dismiss rural discontent as a primary factor during the revolt. [34]

Genesios and other chroniclers further state that Thomas won the support of "Hagarenes, Indians, Egyptians, Assyrians, Medians, Abasgians, Zichs, Iberians, Kabirs, Slavs, Huns, Vandals, Getae, the sectarians of Manes, Laz, Alanians, Chaldians, Armenians and every kind of other peoples". [35] This has led to modern claims that Thomas's rebellion represented an uprising of the empire's non-Greek ethnic groups, [1] [36] but according to Lemerle, this exaggerated account is yet another piece of hostile disinformation. It is almost certain, however, that Thomas could count on support among the empire's Caucasian neighbours, for the presence of Abasgians, Armenians, and Iberians in his army is mentioned in the near-contemporary letter of Michael II to Louis the Pious. The reasons for this support are unclear; Thomas may have made unspecified promises to their rulers, but Lemerle suggests that the Armenians might have in part been motivated by revenge for Leo, their murdered kinsman. [37]

Outbreak and spread of the revolt in Asia Minor

Map of the themes of Asia Minor (modern Anatolia) and of Thrace c. 842 Asia Minor ca 842 AD.svg
Map of the themes of Asia Minor (modern Anatolia) and of Thrace c. 842

As commander of the Foederati, Thomas was based at Amorion, the capital of the Anatolic Theme. Although junior to the theme's strategos (military governor), his proclamation received widespread support throughout Asia Minor. Within a short time, all the Asian themes supported Thomas, except for the Opsician Theme under the patrician Katakylas, a nephew of Michael II, and the Armeniac Theme, under its strategos, Olbianos. The Thracesian Theme wavered between the two rivals, but finally threw its support behind Thomas. More than two-thirds of the empire's Asian army eventually aligned with Thomas, while the defection of the provincial tax officials provided him with much-needed revenue. [38] [39]

Thomas's troops defeat the forces loyal to Michael II. Miniature from the Madrid Skylitzes. Thomas the Slav's troops defeat the imperial army.jpg
Thomas's troops defeat the forces loyal to Michael II. Miniature from the Madrid Skylitzes.
Capture of a city in Asia Minor by Thomas's troops. Miniature from the Madrid Skylitzes. MadridSkylitzesFol30vDetail.jpg
Capture of a city in Asia Minor by Thomas's troops. Miniature from the Madrid Skylitzes.

Michael's first response was to order the Armeniac army to attack Thomas. The Armeniacs were easily defeated in battle and Thomas proceeded through the eastern parts of the Armeniac Theme to occupy the frontier region of Chaldia. [40] His conquest of the Armeniac province was left incomplete because the Abbasids, taking advantage of the Byzantine civil war, launched raids by land and sea against southern Asia Minor, where Thomas had left few troops. Instead of returning to face these raids, Thomas launched a large-scale invasion of his own against Abbasid territory in spring 821, either in Syria (according to Bury and others) or in Arab-held Armenia (according to Treadgold). [39] [41] Thomas then sent an emissary to the Caliph al-Ma'mun, who was sufficiently impressed by Thomas's show of force to receive his proposals, especially in view of the Caliphate's own problems with the rebellion of the Khurramites under Babak Khorramdin. Thomas and Ma'mun concluded a treaty of peace and mutual alliance. The Caliph allowed Thomas to recruit men from Arab-ruled territories, and gave leave for him to cross the border and travel to Arab-held Antioch, where he was crowned emperor by the iconophile Patriarch of Antioch, Job. In exchange, Thomas is said to have promised to cede unspecified territories and become a tributary vassal of the Caliph, though the agreement's exact terms are left unclear in the sources. [42] At about the same time, Thomas adopted a young man of obscure origin, whom he named Constantius and made his co-emperor. [31]

Meanwhile, Michael II tried to win support among the iconophiles by appointing a relative of his as Archbishop of Ephesus, but his plan failed when the latter refused to be consecrated by the avowedly iconoclast Patriarch Antony I Kassimates. In an effort to consolidate his hold on the provinces, and especially the two Asian themes still loyal to him, Michael proclaimed a 25 percent reduction in taxes for 821–822. [43]

Thomas and his fleet cross from Abydos to Thrace. Miniature from the Madrid Skylitzes. MadridSkylitzesAbydosFol31v.jpg
Thomas and his fleet cross from Abydos to Thrace. Miniature from the Madrid Skylitzes.

By summer 821, Thomas had consolidated his position in the East, though the Opsician and Armeniac themes still eluded his control. He set his sights on the ultimate prize, Constantinople, the possession of which alone conferred full legitimacy to an emperor. Thomas assembled troops, gathered supplies, and built siege machines. To counter the powerful Imperial Fleet stationed in the capital, he built new ships to augment his existing fleet, which came from the Cibyrrhaeot and Aegean Sea naval themes, and possibly included task forces from the theme of Hellas. [44] Thomas recalled Gregory Pterotos, a general and nephew of Leo V whom Michael had exiled to the island of Skyros, and gave him command of the fleet. By October, the thematic fleets loyal to Thomas had finished assembling at Lesbos, and Thomas's army began marching from the Thracesian Theme towards Abydos, where he intended to cross over into Europe. [45]

At this point, Thomas suffered his first reversal of fortune: before his departure for Abydos, he had sent an army under his adoptive son Constantius against the Armeniacs. Constantius was ambushed by strategos Olbianos and killed, although the army was able to withdraw with relatively few casualties. Constantius's severed head was sent to Michael, who dispatched it to Thomas at Abydos. [46] Thomas was undaunted by this relatively minor setback, and crossed over into Europe some time in late October or early November. There, Constantius was soon replaced as co-emperor by another obscure individual, a former monk whom Thomas also adopted and named Anastasius. [47]

Siege of Constantinople

Constantinople and its walls during the Byzantine era Byzantine Constantinople-en.png
Constantinople and its walls during the Byzantine era

Anticipating Thomas's move, Michael had gone out at the head of an army to the themes of Thrace and Macedonia in Constantinople's European hinterland and strengthened the garrisons of several fortresses there to secure the loyalty of their populace. When Thomas landed, the people of the European themes welcomed him with enthusiasm, and Michael was forced to withdraw to Constantinople. Volunteers, including many Slavs, flocked to Thomas's banner. As he set out towards Constantinople, chroniclers recount that his army swelled to some 80,000 men. [48] The capital was defended by the imperial tagmata , augmented by reinforcements from the Opsician and Armeniac themes. Michael had ordered the city walls to be repaired, and chained off the entrance to the Golden Horn, while the Imperial Fleet further guarded the capital from the sea. Nevertheless, judging from Michael's passive stance, his forces were inferior to Thomas's; Warren Treadgold estimates Michael's army to have numbered approximately 35,000 men. [49]

Thomas's fleet arrived at the capital first. Facing no opposition from the Imperial Fleet, the rebels broke or unfastened the chain and entered the Golden Horn, taking station near the mouths of the Barbysos river, where they awaited the arrival of Thomas and his army. [50] Thomas arrived in early December. The sight of his huge force did not cow the capital's inhabitants: unlike the provinces, the capital's citizens and garrison stood firmly behind Michael. To further encourage his troops, Michael had his young son Theophilos lead a procession along the walls, carrying a piece of the True Cross and the mantle of the Virgin Mary, while a large standard was hoisted on top of the Church of St. Mary at Blachernae, in full view of both armies. [51]

Thomas and his army assail Constantinople. Miniature from the Madrid Skylitzes. Thomas the Slav's troops assault Constantinople.jpg
Thomas and his army assail Constantinople. Miniature from the Madrid Skylitzes.

After subduing the cities around the capital, Thomas resolved to attack Constantinople from three sides, perhaps hoping his assault would impress its inhabitants or lead to defections. His deputies Anastasius and Gregory Pterotos would attack the Theodosian land and sea walls, respectively, while he would lead the main attack against the less formidable defenses protecting Blachernae. All of Thomas's forces were amply supplied with siege engines and catapults, and his fleet fielded quantities of Greek fire in addition to large shipborne catapults. [52] Each of Thomas's attacks failed: the defenders' artillery proved superior and kept Thomas's engines away from the land walls, while adverse winds hindered the fleet from taking any meaningful action. Deciding that operations in the midst of winter were hazardous and unlikely to succeed, Thomas suspended all further attacks until spring and withdrew his army to winter quarters. [53] [54]

Repulse of the attack of Thomas's fleet on the seaward walls of Constantinople. Miniature from the Madrid Skylitzes. The fleet of Thomas is beaten back from the sea walls of Constantinople.jpg
Repulse of the attack of Thomas's fleet on the seaward walls of Constantinople. Miniature from the Madrid Skylitzes.

Michael used the respite to ferry in additional reinforcements from Asia Minor and repair the walls of Blachernae. When Thomas returned in spring, he decided to focus his attack on the Blachernae sector. Before the offensive, Michael himself ascended the walls and addressed Thomas's troops, exhorting them to abandon their commander and promising amnesty if they would defect. Thomas's army viewed the plea as a sign of weakness, and advanced confidently to begin the assault, but as they neared the wall, the defenders opened the gates and attacked. The sudden onslaught drove back Thomas's army; at the same time, the Imperial Fleet defeated Thomas's ships, whose crews broke and fled to the shore in panic. [55] This defeat diminished Thomas's naval strength, and although he continued blockading the capital by land, the loss demoralized his supporters, who began defecting. Gregory Pterotos, whose family was in Michael's hands, resolved to desert Thomas, followed by a small band of men loyal to him. He departed the rebel camp, headed west, and sent a monk to inform Michael of his defection, but the monk failed to circumvent the blockade and reach the capital. Upon learning of this defection, Thomas reacted quickly: with a select detachment, he followed Gregory, defeated his troops and killed the deserter. [54] [56]

Michael's fleet destroys Thomas's ships using Greek fire. Miniature from the Madrid Skylitzes. Greekfire-madridskylitzes1.jpg
Michael's fleet destroys Thomas's ships using Greek fire. Miniature from the Madrid Skylitzes.

Thomas exploited this small victory for all it was worth, widely proclaiming that he had defeated Michael's troops "by land and sea". He sent messages to the themes of Greece, whose support had been lukewarm until that point, demanding additional ships. The themes responded forcefully, sending their squadrons, allegedly numbering 350 vessels, to join him. Thus reinforced, Thomas decided to launch a two-pronged assault against Constantinople's sea walls, with his original fleet attacking the wall of the Golden Horn, and the new fleet attacking the south coast, looking towards the Sea of Marmara. Michael, however, did not remain idle: his own fleet attacked the thematic force soon after it arrived at its anchorage in Byrida. Using Greek fire, the Imperial Fleet destroyed many of the rebel vessels and captured most of the remaining ships. Only a few managed to escape and rejoin Thomas's forces. [54] [57]

Through this victory, Michael secured control of the sea, but Thomas's army remained superior on land and continued its blockade of Constantinople. Minor skirmishes ensued for the remainder of the year, with Michael's forces sallying forth from the city to attack Thomas's forces. Although both sides claimed minor successes in these clashes, neither was able to gain a decisive advantage. [58]

The Bulgarians under Omurtag attack Thomas's army. Miniature from the Madrid Skylitzes. ThomasTheRebelAndMourtagon.jpg
The Bulgarians under Omurtag attack Thomas's army. Miniature from the Madrid Skylitzes.

Michael turned to the empire's northern neighbour, Bulgaria, for help. The two states were bound by a 30-year treaty signed under Leo V, and the Bulgarian ruler, khan Omurtag (r. 814–831), was happy to respond to Michael's request for assistance. A later tradition, reported by Genesios and Theophanes Continuatus, holds that Omurtag acted of his own accord and against Michael's will, but this is almost universally rejected as a version started or at least encouraged by Michael, who did not wish to be seen encouraging "barbarians" to invade the empire. [59] The Bulgarian army invaded Thrace, probably in November 822 (Bury believes that the Bulgarian attack occurred in spring 823), and advanced towards Constantinople. Thomas raised the siege, and marched to meet them with his army. The two armies met at the plain of Kedouktos near Heraclea (hence known as the Battle of Kedouktos in the Byzantine sources) . The accounts of the subsequent battle differ: the later sources state that Thomas lost the battle, but the near-contemporary George the Monk states that Thomas "killed many Bulgarians". Given the lack of Bulgarian activity after the battle, most modern scholars (with the notable exception of Bury) believe that Thomas won the battle. [60]

Defeat and death of Thomas, end of the revolt

Michael II's army defeats Thomas. Miniature from the Chronicle of Constantine Manasses. 55-manasses-chronicle.jpg
Michael II's army defeats Thomas. Miniature from the Chronicle of Constantine Manasses .

Thomas was unable to resume the siege: aside from the heavy casualties his army likely suffered, his fleet, which he had left behind in the Golden Horn, surrendered to Michael during his absence. Thomas set up camp at the plain of Diabasis some 40 kilometres (25 mi) west of Constantinople, spending winter and early spring there. While a few of his men deserted, the bulk remained loyal. [54] [61] Finally, in late April or early May 823, Michael marched with his troops against Thomas, accompanied by the generals Olbianos and Katakylas with new troops from Asia Minor. Thomas marched to meet them and planned to use a stratagem to outwit his opponents: his men, ostensibly demoralized, would pretend to flee, and when the imperial army broke ranks to pursue them, they would turn back and attack. However, Thomas's troops were by now weary of the prolonged conflict, and their submission was unfeigned. Many surrendered to Michael, while others fled to nearby fortified cities. Thomas sought refuge in Arcadiopolis with a large group; his adopted son Anastasius went with some of Thomas's men to Bizye, and others fled to Panion and Heraclea. [62] [63]

The surrender and humiliation of Thomas, as depicted in the Madrid Skylitzes MadridSkylitzesFol37rDetail.jpg
The surrender and humiliation of Thomas, as depicted in the Madrid Skylitzes

Michael blockaded Thomas's cities of refuge but organized no assaults, instead aiming to capture them peacefully by wearing out their defenders. His strategy was motivated by the political and propaganda expedient of appearing merciful—"in order to spare Christian blood", as Michael himself put it in his letter to Louis the Pious—but also, according to the chroniclers, by fear of demonstrating to the Bulgarians that the Byzantine cities' fortifications could fall to attack. [64] In Asia Minor, Thomas's partisans hoped to lure Michael away by allowing the Arabs free passage to raid the provinces of Opsikion and Optimaton, which were loyal to the emperor. Michael was unmoved and continued the blockade. [65] His troops barred access to Arcadiopolis with a ditch. To conserve supplies, the blockaded troops sent away women and children, followed by those too old, wounded, or otherwise incapable of bearing arms. After five months of blockade, Thomas's loyalists were eventually forced to eat starved horses and their hides. Some began deserting by lowering themselves with ropes over the city walls or jumping from them. Thomas sent messengers to Bizye, where the blockade was less close, to arrange a relief attempt by Anastasius. Before anything could be done, however, the exhausted troops at Arcadiopolis surrendered their leader in exchange for an imperial pardon. [62] [66] Thomas was delivered to Michael seated on a donkey and bound in chains. He was prostrated before the emperor, who placed his foot on his defeated rival's neck and ordered his hands and feet cut off and his corpse impaled. Thomas pleaded for clemency with the words "Have mercy on me, oh True Emperor!" Michael only asked his captive to reveal whether any of his own senior officials had had dealings with Thomas. Before Thomas could respond, the Logothete of the Course, John Hexaboulios, advised against hearing whatever claims a defeated rebel might make. Michael agreed, and Thomas's sentence was carried out immediately. [67]

When the inhabitants of Bizye heard of Thomas's fate, they surrendered Anastasius, who suffered the same fate as Thomas. In Panion and Heraclea, Thomas's men held out until an earthquake struck in February 824. The tremor severely damaged the wall of Panion, and the city surrendered. The damage at Heraclea was less severe, but after Michael landed troops at its seaward side, it too was forced to surrender. [62] [68] In Asia Minor, Thomas's loyalists mostly submitted peacefully, but in the Cibyrrhaeot Theme, resistance lingered until suppressed by strategos John Echimos. In the Thracesian theme, Thomas's soldiers turned to brigandage. The most serious opposition was offered in central Asia Minor by two officers, who had possibly served Thomas as strategoi: Choireus, with his base at Kaballa northwest of Iconium, and Gazarenos Koloneiates, based at Saniana, southeast of Ancyra. From their strongholds, they spurned Michael's offer of a pardon and the high title of magistros and raided the provinces that had gone over to him. Soon, however, Michael's agents persuaded the inhabitants of the two forts to shut their gates against the officers. Choireus and Koloneiates then tried to seek refuge in Arab territory but were attacked en route by loyalist troops, captured, and crucified. [62] [69]

Aftermath and effects

Gold solidus of Michael II with his son, Theophilos Michael II and Theophilos solidus.jpg
Gold solidus of Michael II with his son, Theophilos

The end of Thomas the Slav's great rebellion was marked by Michael II's triumph, held in May 824 in Constantinople. While he executed Thomas's volunteers from the Caliphate and perhaps also the Slavs, the sheer number of individuals involved, the necessity of appearing clement and sparing with Christian lives, and the need to restore internal tranquillity to his realm compelled Michael to treat Thomas's defeated partisans with leniency: most were released after being paraded in the Hippodrome during his celebration, and only the most dangerous were exiled to remote corners of the empire. [70] In an effort to discredit his opponent, Michael authorized an "official" and heavily distorted version of Thomas's life and revolt. The document was written by the deacon Ignatios and published in 824 as Against Thomas. This report quickly became the commonly accepted version of events. [71]

Thomas failed in spite of his qualities and the widespread support he had gained, which brought him control of most of the empire. Lemerle holds that several factors played a role in his defeat: the Asian themes he did not subdue supplied reinforcements to Michael; Thomas's fleet performed badly; and the Bulgarian offensive diverted him away from the capital and weakened his army. But the most decisive obstacles were the impregnable walls of Constantinople, which ensured that an emperor who controlled Constantinople could only be overthrown from within the city. [72]

Thomas's rebellion was the "central domestic event" of Michael II's reign, [73] but it was not very destructive in material terms: except for Thrace, which had suffered from the prolonged presence of the rival armies and the battles fought there, the larger part of the empire was spared the ravages of war. [74] [75] The Byzantine navy suffered great losses, with the thematic fleets in particular being devastated, while the land forces suffered comparatively few casualties. [74] [76] This is traditionally held to have resulted in a military weakness and internal disorder which was swiftly exploited by the Muslims: in the years after Thomas's rebellion, Andalusian exiles captured Crete and the Tunisian Aghlabids began their conquest of Sicily, while in the East, the Byzantines were forced to maintain a generally defensive stance towards the Caliphate. [74] [77] More recent scholarship has disputed the degree to which the civil war was responsible for Byzantine military failures during these years, citing other reasons to explain them: Warren Treadgold opines that the empire's military forces recovered fairly quickly, and that incompetent military leadership coupled with "the remoteness of Sicily, the absence of regular troops on Crete, the simultaneity of the attacks on both islands, and the government's long-standing lack of interest in sea-power" were far more responsible for the loss of the islands. [78]

See also

Related Research Articles

Leo III the Isaurian Emperor of the Romans

Leo III the Isaurian, also known as the Syrian, was Byzantine Emperor from 717 until his death in 741 who founded the Isaurian dynasty. He put an end to the Twenty Years' Anarchy, a period of great instability in the Byzantine Empire between 695 and 717, marked by the rapid succession of several emperors to the throne. He also successfully defended the Empire against the invading Umayyads and forbade the veneration of icons.

Anastasios II Emperor of the Romans

Anastasius, known in English as Anastasios II or Anastasius II, was the Byzantine Emperor from 713 to 715.

Constantine V Emperor of the Romans

Constantine V was Byzantine emperor from 741 to 775. His reign saw a consolidation of Byzantine security from external threats. As an able military leader, Constantine took advantage of civil war in the Muslim world to make limited offensives on the Arab frontier. With this eastern frontier secure, he undertook repeated campaigns against the Bulgars in the Balkans. His military activity, and policy of settling Christian populations from the Arab frontier in Thrace, made Byzantium's hold on its Balkan territories more secure. Religious strife and controversy was a prominent feature of his reign. His fervent support of Iconoclasm and opposition to monasticism led to his vilification by later Byzantine historians and writers, who denigrated him as Kopronymos or Copronymus (Κοπρώνυμος), meaning the dung-named.

<i>Tagma</i> (military) Byzantine military unit size designation

The tagma is a military unit of battalion or regiment size, especially the elite regiments formed by Byzantine emperor Constantine V and comprising the central army of the Byzantine Empire in the 8th–11th centuries.

Battle of Bathys Ryax battle between the Byzantine Empire and the Paulicians in 872 or in 878

The Battle of Bathys Ryax was fought in 872 or 878 between the Byzantine Empire and the Paulicians. The Paulicians were a Christian sect which—persecuted by the Byzantine state—had established a separate principality at Tephrike on Byzantium's eastern border and collaborated with the Muslim emirates of the Thughur, the Abbasid Caliphate's borderlands, against the Empire. The battle was a decisive Byzantine victory, resulting in the rout of the Paulician army and the death of its leader, Chrysocheir. This event destroyed the power of the Paulician state and removed a major threat to Byzantium, heralding the fall of Tephrike itself and the annexation of the Paulician principality shortly after.

Battle of Anzen battle in Pontos, Asia Minor, between the Byzantine Empire and the Abbasid Caliphate

The Battle of Anzen or Dazimon was fought on 22 July 838 at Anzen or Dazimon between the Byzantine Empire and the forces of the Abbasid Caliphate. The Abbasids had launched a huge expedition with two separate armies in retaliation for the Byzantine emperor Theophilos's successes the previous year, and aimed to sack Amorion, one of Byzantium's largest cities. Theophilos with his army confronted the smaller Muslim army, under the Iranian vassal prince Afshin, at Dazimon.

Siege of Constantinople (717–718) combined land and sea offensive by the Arabs of the Umayyad Caliphate against the capital city of the Byzantine Empire, Constantinople

The Second Arab siege of Constantinople in 717–718 was a combined land and sea offensive by the Muslim Arabs of the Umayyad Caliphate against the capital city of the Byzantine Empire, Constantinople. The campaign marked the culmination of twenty years of attacks and progressive Arab occupation of the Byzantine borderlands, while Byzantine strength was sapped by prolonged internal turmoil. In 716, after years of preparations, the Arabs, led by Maslama ibn Abd al-Malik, invaded Byzantine Asia Minor. The Arabs initially hoped to exploit Byzantine civil strife and made common cause with the general Leo III the Isaurian, who had risen up against Emperor Theodosius III. Leo, however, tricked them and secured the Byzantine throne for himself.

Leo Phokas was an early 10th-century Byzantine general of the noble Phokas clan. As Domestic of the Schools, the Byzantine army's commander-in-chief, he led a large-scale campaign against the Bulgarians in 917, but was heavily defeated at the battles of Acheloos and Katasyrtai. He then plotted to seize the throne from the young Byzantine emperor Constantine VII, but was outmaneuvered by the admiral Romanos Lekapenos, who managed to become guardian and later father-in-law of the Emperor. After Lekapenos seized control of the Byzantine Empire, Leo led an unsuccessful revolt, and was captured and blinded.

Byzantine Empire under the Isaurian dynasty

The Byzantine Empire was ruled by the Isaurian or Syrian dynasty from 717 to 802. The Isaurian emperors were successful in defending and consolidating the Empire against the Caliphate after the onslaught of the early Muslim conquests, but were less successful in Europe, where they suffered setbacks against the Bulgars, had to give up the Exarchate of Ravenna, and lost influence over Italy and the Papacy to the growing power of the Franks.

Opsikion Byzantine district (theme)

The Opsician Theme or simply Opsikion was a Byzantine theme located in northwestern Asia Minor. Created from the imperial retinue army, the Opsikion was the largest and most prestigious of the early themes, being located closest to Constantinople. Involved in several revolts in the 8th century, it was split in three after ca. 750, and lost its former pre-eminence. It survived as a middle-tier theme until after the Fourth Crusade.

Saborios or Saborius was a Byzantine general who rose in revolt against Emperor Constans II in 667–668. He sought and obtained the aid of the Caliph Muawiyah I, but was killed in a horse accident before confronting the imperial troops.

Alexios Mosele or Mousoulem/Mousele (Μουσουλέμ/Μουσελέ) was a late 8th-century Byzantine general of Armenian origin.

Staurakios was a Byzantine eunuch official, who rose to be one of the most important and influential associates of Byzantine empress Irene of Athens. He effectively acted as chief minister during her regency for her young son, Emperor Constantine VI in 780–790, until overthrown and exiled by a military revolt in favour of the young emperor in 790. Restored to power by Constantine along with Irene in 792, Staurakios aided her in the eventual removal, blinding, and possible murder of her son in 797. His own position thereafter was threatened by the rise of another powerful eunuch, Aetios. Their increasing rivalry, and Staurakios's own imperial ambitions, were only resolved by Staurakios's death.

Sack of Amorium Abbasid plundering and razing of the Eastern Roman city of Amorium

The Sack of Amorium by the Abbasid Caliphate in mid-August 838 was one of the major events in the long history of the Arab–Byzantine Wars. The Abbasid campaign was led personally by the Caliph al-Mu'tasim, in retaliation to a virtually unopposed expedition launched by the Byzantine emperor Theophilos into the Caliphate's borderlands the previous year. Mu'tasim targeted Amorium, a Byzantine city in western Asia Minor, because it was the birthplace of the ruling Byzantine dynasty and, at the time, one of Byzantium's largest and most important cities. The caliph gathered an exceptionally large army, which he divided in two parts, which invaded from the northeast and the south. The northeastern army defeated the Byzantine forces under Theophilos at Anzen, allowing the Abbasids to penetrate deep into Byzantine-held Asia Minor and converge upon Ancyra, which they found abandoned. After sacking the city, they turned south to Amorium, where they arrived on 1 August. Faced with intrigues at Constantinople and the rebellion of the large Khurramite contingent of his army, Theophilos was unable to aid the city.

Manuel the Armenian was a prominent Byzantine general of Armenian origin, active from circa 810 until his death. After reaching the highest military ranks, a palace conspiracy forced him to seek refuge in the Abbasid court in 829. He returned to Byzantine service the next year, receiving the position of Domestic of the Schools from Emperor Theophilos, who had married his niece Theodora. Manuel remained in the post throughout Theophilos's reign, and reportedly saved the emperor's life in the Battle of Anzen in 838. According to one report, he died on 27 July 838 of wounds received during the battle, but other sources record his survival past this date, ascribing him a major role in the regency that governed the empire after Theophilos's death, and report that he died some time around 860.

Constantine (son of Leo V) Emperor of the Romans

Symbatios, variously also Sabbatios (Σαββάτιος) or Sambates (Σαμβάτης) in some sources, was the eldest son of the Byzantine emperor Leo V the Armenian. Soon after the coronation of his father, he was crowned co-emperor and renamed Constantine (Κωνσταντῖνος). He reigned nominally along with his father until the latter's deposition in 820, after which he was exiled to Prote, one of the Princes Islands, as a monk.

Abbasid invasion of Asia Minor (806)

The Abbasid invasion of Asia Minor in 806 was the largest operation ever launched by the Abbasid Caliphate against the Byzantine Empire. The expedition was commanded in person by the Abbasid caliph, Harun al-Rashid, who wished to retaliate for the Byzantine successes in the Caliphate's frontier region in the previous year and impress Abbasid might upon the Byzantine emperor, Nikephoros I. The huge Abbasid army, numbering more than 135,000 men according to Arab sources, raided across Cappadocia unopposed, capturing several towns and fortresses, most notably Herakleia, and forcing Nikephoros to seek peace in exchange for tribute. Following Harun's departure, however, Nikephoros violated the terms of the treaty and reoccupied the frontier forts he had been forced to abandon. Harun's preoccupation with a rebellion in Khurasan, and his death three years later, prohibited a reprisal on a similar scale. Moreover, the Abbasid civil war that began after 809 and the Byzantine preoccupation with the Bulgars contributed to a cessation of large-scale Arab–Byzantine conflict for two decades.

Gregory Pterotos was a Byzantine general and relative of Emperor Leo V the Armenian, who took part in the rebellion of Thomas the Slav against Leo's murderer, Michael II the Amorian.


  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Hollingsworth & Cutler 1991 , p. 2079.
  2. Bury 1912 , p. 11; Lemerle 1965 , pp. 264, 270, 284; Treadgold 1988 , p. 229.
  3. Kiapidou 2003, Note 1.
  4. 1 2 3 4 Winkelmann et al. 2001 , p. 33.
  5. Winkelmann et al. 2001 , p. 34.
  6. Lemerle 1965 , pp. 267–272; Treadgold 1988 , pp. 244–245.
  7. 1 2 Bury 1912 , p. 84.
  8. Vasiliev 1935 , pp. 28–30.
  9. Lemerle 1965 , pp. 259–272, 284; Treadgold 1988 , pp. 244–245.
  10. Bury 1912 , pp. 10–12; Kaegi 1981 , p. 246; Lemerle 1965 , pp. 264, 285.
  11. Bury 1912 , pp. 12–13; Treadgold 1988 , pp. 131–133, 196–197.
  12. Lemerle 1965 , p. 285.
  13. Bury 1912 , pp. 84–85.
  14. Kiapidou 2003, Note 3.
  15. Treadgold 1988 , p. 198.
  16. Bury 1912 , pp. 44–46; Lemerle 1965 , p. 285; Treadgold 1988 , p. 198.
  17. Treadgold 1988 , pp. 223–225.
  18. Bury 1912 , pp. 48, 85.
  19. cf. Afinogenov, Dmitry E. (1999). "The Date of Georgios Monachos Reconsidered". Byzantinische Zeitschrift . 92: 437–447. doi:10.1515/byzs.1999.92.2.437.
  20. Lemerle 1965 , pp. 273, 284.
  21. cf. Treadgold, Warren T. (1979). "The Chronological Accuracy of the Chronicle of Symeon the Logothete for the Years 813–845". Dumbarton Oaks Papers. 33: 157–197. JSTOR   1291437.
  22. Treadgold 1988 , p. 228.
  23. Kiapidou 2003, Chapter 1.
  24. Treadgold 1988 , pp. 228–229, 243.
  25. Bury 1912 , pp. 78–79, 85; Treadgold 1988 , pp. 228–229.
  26. Bury 1912 , pp. 85–86.
  27. Lemerle 1965 , pp. 283–284.
  28. 1 2 Kiapidou 2003, Note 5.
  29. Kaegi 1981 , pp. 265–266; Lemerle 1965 , pp. 262–263, 285; Vasiliev 1935 , p. 23.
  30. Winkelmann et al. 2001 , p. 35.
  31. 1 2 Treadgold 1988 , p. 233.
  32. Ostrogorsky 1963 , pp. 171–172; Vasiliev 1935 , pp. 23–24.
  33. Kiapidou 2003, Note 6.
  34. Lemerle 1965 , pp. 296–297.
  35. Bury 1912 , p. 89; Lemerle 1965 , p. 265.
  36. Ostrogorsky 1963 , pp. 171–172.
  37. Lemerle 1965 , pp. 285–286, 294–295.
  38. Bury 1912 , pp. 86–87; Lemerle 1965 , p. 289; Treadgold 1988 , pp. 228–229, 234.
  39. 1 2 Kiapidou 2003, Chapter 2.1.
  40. Lemerle 1965 , pp. 286–287; Treadgold 1988 , p. 229.
  41. Bury 1912 , p. 87; Treadgold 1988 , pp. 229–230, 232.
  42. Bury 1912 , pp. 87–88; Lemerle 1965 , pp. 287–288; Treadgold 1988 , pp. 232–233.
  43. Treadgold 1988 , pp. 233–234.
  44. Bury 1912 , p. 90; Treadgold 1988 , pp. 234–235.
  45. Bury 1912 , pp. 90, 92–93; Lemerle 1965 , pp. 289–290; Treadgold 1988 , p. 235.
  46. Bury 1912 , pp. 90–91; Treadgold 1988 , pp. 235–236.
  47. Bury 1912 , pp. 90–91; Treadgold 1988 , pp. 236–237.
  48. Bury 1912 , pp. 91–92; Treadgold 1988 , p. 236.
  49. Bury 1912 , pp. 90–91; Treadgold 1988 , pp. 234, 236.
  50. Bury 1912 , p. 93; Treadgold 1988 , pp. 236–237.
  51. Bury 1912 , pp. 93, 95; Treadgold 1988 , p. 237.
  52. Bury 1912 , pp. 93–95; Treadgold 1988 , pp. 237, 239.
  53. Bury 1912 , pp. 93–96; Treadgold 1988 , pp. 237–238.
  54. 1 2 3 4 Kiapidou 2003, Chapter 2.2.
  55. Bury 1912 , pp. 96–97; Treadgold 1988 , pp. 238–239.
  56. Bury 1912 , pp. 97–98; Treadgold 1988 , p. 239.
  57. Bury 1912 , pp. 98–99; Treadgold 1988 , p. 239.
  58. Bury 1912 , p. 99; Treadgold 1988 , pp. 239–240.
  59. Bury 1912 , pp. 100–101; Lemerle 1965 , pp. 279–281; Treadgold 1988 , pp. 240, 425.
  60. Bury 1912 , pp. 101–102; Lemerle 1965 , pp. 279–281, 291; Treadgold 1988 , p. 240.
  61. Bury 1912 , p. 102; Treadgold 1988 , p. 240.
  62. 1 2 3 4 Kiapidou 2003, Chapter 2.3.
  63. Bury 1912 , pp. 102–103; Treadgold 1988 , pp. 240–241.
  64. Bury 1912 , pp. 103–105; Treadgold 1988 , p. 241.
  65. Treadgold 1988 , p. 241.
  66. Bury 1912 , p. 105; Treadgold 1988 , p. 241.
  67. Bury 1912 , pp. 105–106; Treadgold 1988 , pp. 241–242.
  68. Bury 1912 , p. 107; Treadgold 1988 , p. 242.
  69. Bury 1912 , pp. 107–108; Treadgold 1988 , pp. 242–243.
  70. Bury 1912 , pp. 104–105, 107; Treadgold 1988 , p. 242.
  71. Treadgold 1988 , pp. 244–245.
  72. Lemerle 1965 , p. 297.
  73. Ostrogorsky 1963 , p. 171
  74. 1 2 3 Kiapidou 2003, Chapter 3.
  75. Treadgold 1988 , p. 244.
  76. Treadgold 1988 , pp. 244, 259.
  77. Ostrogorsky 1963 , pp. 172–173.
  78. cf. Treadgold 1988 , pp. 259–260.