Table of contents introduction

Appendix 1. Maps

Map 1. The position of Byzantine Empire in the Eastern Mediterranean (after P. Magdalino, The Empire of Manuel I Komnenos (1143-1180), map 1)

Map 2. The way to Myriokephalon. After P. Magdalino, The Empire of Manuel I Komnenos (1143-1180), map 2.

Legend:

• 
  the original way of the Army of Manuel according to Kinnamos and Choniates.
  
• 
  Alternative way of Byzantine army to Ikonion.
  

- The fortresses of Dorylaion and Soublaion rebuilt by Manuel in 1175 .

Map 3. The probable place of the battle of Myriokephalon in the neighborhood of the village of Kizil Ören. After Tabula Imperii Byzantini , vol. 7, Phrygien und Pisidien (Vienna: 1990).

N

1

^ F. Chalandon, Les Comnène. Etudes sur l’empire Byzantin au XI^e et au XII^e siècles, vol. 2 , Jean II Comnène (1118-1143) et Manuel I Comnène (1143-1180), Paris: Picard,1912), 504-514 ( hereafter;  Chalandon, Les Comnène).

2. See A. Vasilyev, “Das Genaue Datum der Sclacht von Myriokephalon (1176), ” BZ 27 (1927): 288-290 (hereafter: Vasilyev, “Das Genaue Datum;” A.Vasilyev, “Manuel Comnenus and Henry Plantagenet,” BZ 28 (1929-1930): 233-244 (hereafter: Vasilyev, “Manuel Comnenus”).

3 C. Cahen, Pre-Ottoman Turkey: A Ggeneral Ssurvey of the Mmaterial and Sspiritual Cculture and Hhistory c. 1071-1330, tr. J. Jones-Williams, (New York: Taplinger, 1968) (hereafter: C. Cahen, Pre-Ottoman Turkey); S. Vryonis, The Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor and the Process of iIslamization from the Eleventh through the Fifteenth century,(Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1971) (hereafter: Vryonis, The Decline).

4 R.-J. Lilie, “Die Schlacht von Myriokephalon (1176): Auswirkungen auf das byzantinische Reich im ausgehenden 12. Jahrhundert,“ REB, 35 (1977): 257-75 (hereafter: Lilie, “Die Schlacht”).

5 See N. Mersich“Tzibritze. Zum Austragungsort der Schlacht von Myriokephalon,” in Byzantios. Festschrift für Herbert Hunger zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. W. Hörander, J. Koder, O. Kresten, and E. Trapp, (Vienna: Ernst Becvar, 1970) : 241-247; Michael F. Hendy, Studies in Byzantine Monetary Economy, (London: Cambridge University Press, 1985) 146-157. (Hereafter: Hendy, Studies.)

6 See. P. Magdalino, The Empire of Manuel I Komnenos (1143-1180), (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993) (hereafter: Magdalino, The Empire); R.-J. Lilie, Byzantium and Crusader States, tr. .C. Morris J. C and J.E. Ridings (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994) (hereafter: Lilie, Byzantium).

7 See [A. Kazhdan] А.Каждан. Никита Хониат и его время (Nicetas Choniates and his time) (Saint Petersburg: Dimitriy Bulanin, 2005) (hereafter: Kazhdan, Nicetas Choniates).

8 J. Ljubarskij, “Мануил I глазами Киннама и Хониата.” (Manuel I as viewed by Kinnamos and Choniates), VV 64(2005): 99-110 (hereafter: Ljubarskij, “Manuel I”).

9 The latter is understood here as a special methodological approach applicable in many social sciences, but primarily in history and social anthropology. A good example of the introduction of the concept to history is given by Francois Hartog. See F. Hartog , in The Mmirror of Herodotus: The Representation of the Other in the Writing of History, tr. J. Lloyd (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998) (hereafter: F. Hartog, The Mirror of Herodotus).

10Romoald of Salerno, Annales Romoaldi, ed. W. Arndt, in MGH SS Scriptores, vol. 19, ed. W. Arndt (Hannover: Impensis Bibliopolii Aulici Hahniani, 1866), 387-461 (hereafter: Romoald of Salerno, Annales Romoaldi).

11.M. Albert, Annales Stadenses, in MGH SS Scriptores, vol. 16, ed. I. Lappenberg (Hannover: Impensis Bibliopolii Aulici Hahniani, 1858), 442 .

12 Robert de Mont (of Torigny), Cronica , ed. D. L. C. Bethmann, in MGH SS Scriptores, vol. 6, ed. D. L. C. Bethmann (Hannover: Impensis Bibliopolii Aulici Hahniani, 1844), 527.

13 Otto Kresten, “Der ‘Anredestreit’ zwischen Manuel I Komnenos und Friedrich I. Barbarossa nach der Schlacht von Myriokephalon,” Römische Historische Mitteilungen 34-35 (1992-1993): 107-110.

14The most important of these is the evidence of Roger of Howeden, see Epistola Manuelis Constantinopolitani imperatoris in Roger of his Howeden, Chronica, ed. W. Stubbs, vol. 2 (London: Longman, 1868), 102-104, translation A. Vasilyev, “Manuel Comnenus and Henry Plantagenet,” BZ 29 (1929-1930): 237-244 . The same text was reworked in the work of Benedict of Petersborough. Benedict of Pitersborough,in Gesta Regis Henrici Secundi, ed. W. Stubbs, vol. 1 (London: Longman, 1867), 128-30. Vasilyev states that the information about Myriokephalon is also present in the work of Radulf of Diceto, see Vasilyev, “Manuel I Comnenus,” 237 .

15 Nicetas Choniates, Historia, ed. I. A. Van Dieten (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1975), 178 (hereafter: Choniates, Historia); ibid., tr. H. J. Magoulias, O City of Byzantium. Annales of Nicetas Choniates (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1984) (henceforth: Magoulias).

16 Joannes Cinnamus, Epitoma rerum ab Ioanne et Alexio Comnenis Gestarum, ed. A. Meineke (Bonn: Impensis ed. Weberi, 1836) (Henceforthward Kinnamos, Epitoma); ibid, trans. C. M. Brand, Deeds of John and Manuel Komnenus (New York: Columbia University Press, 1976) (hereafter: Kinnamos, The Deeds).

17“The chronicle of Pseudo-Kodine,” in Die Byzantinischen Kleinchroniken, vol. 1, ed. P. Schreiner (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichen Akademie der Wissenchaften, 1975), 121-155.

18 Michael the Syrian, The Chronicle, tr. J. P. Chabot, vol. 3, 20.5 (Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1905), 370-372 (hereafter: Michael the Syrian, The Chronicle, ed. Chabot,).

19 Bar Hebraeus, The Chronicle of Gregory Abû'l Faraj, 1225–1286, the Son of Aaron, the Hebrew Physcian, Commonly Known as Bar Hebraeus; Being the First Part of His Political History of the World, Translated from Syriac, tr. A. Wallis-Budge (London: Oxford University Press, 1932), 306.

20 Smbat Sparapet, Chronique du royaume de la Petite Arménie avec la continuation par un anonyme, in RHC, Documents arméniens 1, ed. E. Delaurier (Paris: Imprimerie Impériale, 1869), 626. I am aware of the existence of a modern translation of the same work by Jean Dedeyan, see La Chronique attribuée au connétable Smbat, tr. J. Dedeyan, (Dijon: Imprimerie Darantière, 1980).

21 Hetoum, Count of Gor’igos, Tables Chronologiques, in RHC, Documents arméniens 1, ed. E. Delaurier (Paris: Imprimerie Impériale, 1869), 477.

22William of Tyre, Willemi Tyrensis Archiepiscopi Chronicon, ed. R. B. C. Huygens, 21.11, (Turnholt: Brepols, 1986), lines 1-21(hereafter William of Tyre, Chronicon). I am aware of the English translation, but unfortunately I do not have it at my disposal. See William of Tyre, A History of Deeds Done Beyond the Sea, tr. E. A. Babcock and A.C. Krey (New York: Columbia University Press, 1943).

23 The retelling of the Byzantine report of the battle is present in the art of the Liber Pontificalis decicated to the Alexander III. Another source, which I still did not reach , is mentioned in the main book of Vryonis. The battle is also mentioned in the Life of St. Neophyte the Recluse, see L. Duchesne, Le liber pontificalis. Texte Introduction et commentaire (Paris : 1981), 435-436 quoted in Kresten “Anredestreit,” 79, footnote 58; Histoire des Seldoukides des Asie Mineure par un anonyme, Turkish tr. F. N. Uzluk (Ankara, 1925) quoted in Vryonis, Decline, 125, footnote 234 ; C. Galatariotou, The Making of a Saint: The Life, Times and Sanctification of Neophytos the Recluse (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 214-215.

24 It is important to note the commentary of Brand about the description of Manuel’s march against Ikonion He states that possibly Kinnamos did not participate in expedition himself, but used written or oral evidence from one of the participants, see Kinnamos, The Deeds, 6.

25 An interesting discussion about Kinnamos’ treatment of some events can be found in two articles of Ljubarskij and Kazhdan. See [A.P. Kazhdan] А.П. Каждан, “Еще раз о Киннаме и Хониате” (Once again about Kinnamos and Choniates) in Kazhdan, Nicetas Choniates,: 327-357; [J.Ljubarskij] Я.Любарский “И вновь о Хониате и Киннаме” (Again about Kinnamos and Choniates) in Античная древность и средние века (Antiquity and the Middle Ages), 33 (1992) : 124-127.

26 About the image of the emperors see [J. Ljubarskij], Я. Любарский “Мануил I Комнин глазами Киннама и Хониата,” VV, 64 (2005) 99-110 .

27 Morávcsik was probably the only one, who believed the “total truth” of the military descriptions of this author, see Gy. Morávcsik, Byzantinoturcica. Die Byzantinische Quellen der Geschichte der Turkvolker (Budapest: Kir. M. Pazmany Peter Tudomanyegyetemi Gorog Filologiag Intezeti, 1942), vol. 1, 181. (Henceforth: Morávcsik, Byzantinoturcica)

28 The biography of Choniates is reconstructed on the basis of three works on the topic, see [F.I. Uspenskij] Ф.И. Успенский, Византийский писатель Никита Акоминат из Хон (Byzantine writer Nicetas Acominatus from Chonae) (Saint-Petersburg: S. Balashov Printing House, 1874) (hereafter: Uspenskiy, “Byzantine writer Nicetas Acominatus”); [A.Kazhdan] А. Каждан, “Никита Хониат в византийской литературе” (Nicetas Choniates in Byzantine literature) in [A. Kazhdan] А.Каждан, Никита Хониат и его время (Nicetas Choniates and his time) (Saint Petersburg: Dimitriy Bulanin, 2005), 284-288, (hereafter: [A.Kazhdan], “Никита Хониат в византийской литературе” (“Nicetas Choniates in Byzantine literature”), and Magoulias “Preface” in Choniates, O City of Byzantium!, X- XIII.

29 It would be more correct to call it the “Chronicle,” because the author’s title is “Xronikn dihghsis,” A. Kazhdan, “Nicetas Choniates in Byzantine literature,” 287. Traditionally, however, it is called Historia.

30 Probably the best short description of the distribution of information in Choniates’ books is given by the first and the last monograph dedicated to the writer by F. Uspenskiy, “Byzantine writer Nicetas Acominatus,” 131-135

31 For a discussion about common sources of Kinnamos and Choniates see above, footnote 26.

32The account of the siege and sacking of Thessaloniki was probably written as an artistic retelling of the work of Eusthathios of Thessalonica, one of Nicetas’ teachers, A. Kazhdan, “Nicetas Choniates in Byzantine literature,” 288.

33 See one around Choniates’ “objectivität:” pro: Hunger, Die hochsprachliche profane Literatur der Byzantiner (Munich: C. H. Beck, 1978), 434; contra: Morávchik, Byzantinoturcica, 272.

34 The main points of his narrative clearly coincide with those of the “Letter of Manuel.” Moreover, Choniates himself mentions letters with information about the battle: “Messengers were sent on ahead by the emperor to relate the events that had taken place to Constantinopolitans describing the emperor as the one who had suffered the same fate as Romanos Diogenes…” Choniates, Historia, ed. Van Dieten; ibid., Manuel 6, 191, lines 23-30, (tr. Magoulias), 108

35 See above, footnote 16.

36 Choniates, Historia, ed. Van. Dieten, Manuel 6,191 lines 23-30 (Magoulias, 108).

37One was probably received by St. Neophyte the Recluse, who mentioned the battle several times in his still unpublished writings; see C. Galatariotou, The Making of a Saint: The Life, Times and Sanctification of Neophytos the Recluse (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 214-215. Another letter of the same type was sent to Frederick Barbarossa, and another one to the pope. For the first, see Albert M., Annales Stadenses s.a. 1179, MGH SS Scriptores, vol.16, ed. G.H. Pertz (Hannover: Impensis Bibliopolii Avlici Hahniani, 1858, 349).

38 The structure and technology of the creation of the Auslandsbriefe are described according to F. Dölger, J. Karayannopulos, Byzantinische Urkundenlehre (Munich: Verlag C. H. Beck, 1968), 90-93 (hereafter: .Dölger and Karayannopulos, Byzantinische Urkundenlehre).

39

40 In 938 Caliph Al-Radi received a letter from the emperor which was written first in Greek, in golden lettering, and later translated into Arabic in silver lettering, see ibid.

41 Another letter sent by Manuel to Friedrich Barbarossa after the battle was for sure written within golden letters as well as other similar documents from the twelfth century. This question is carefully discussed in O. Kresten “Der “Anredestreit“ zwischen Manuel I Komnenos und Friedrich I. Barbarossa nach der Schlacht von Myriokephalon,” Römische Historische Mitteilungen, 34/35 (1992/1993): 75-77. (Henceforthward: Kretsen, Anredestreit.)

42 See C. Cahen. “The historiography of the Seljuqid period” in Historians of the Middle East, ed. B. Lewis, P. Holt (London: Oxford University Press, 1962), 59-79; C. Hilldebrand “Some Reflections on Seljuq Historiography, ” in Eastern Approaches to Byzantium, ed. A. Eastmond (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Ltd, 2001), 87. (Henceforth: Hilldebrand, “Some Reflections.”)

43 Ibid., 82.

44 Ibn Bibi, Die Seltschukengeshichte des Ibn-Bibi, tr. H. Duda, (Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1959).

45 See C. Kafadar, Between Two Worlds: The Construction of Ottoman State (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995), 66-68.

46The biography of Michael the Great is reconstructed here according to [R. A. Gusseynov] Р.А. Гуссейнов, “Михаил Сириец и его хроника” (Michael the Great and his chronicle) in Сирийские источники XII-XIII в. об Азербайджане (Syrian sources of the twelfth-thirteenth century about Azerbaijan) (Baku: Azerbaijan Academy of Sciences, 1960), available online at http://vostlit.info/ Texts/rus4/Mychel_Syr/framepred1.htm (last accessed: 21.03.2007).

47About the history of the text itself and the studies dedicated to it, see the excellent article of Dorothea Weltecke, “The World Chronicle by Patriarch Michael the Great: Some Reflections,” Journal of Assyrian Studies 11 (1997): 6-39. I am aware of the presence of the modern monograph dedicated to Michael the Syrian, but unfortunately do not have it at my disposal. See Dorothea Weltecke, Die "Beschreibung der Zeiten" von Mor Michael dem Grossen (1126-1199): eine Studie zu ihrem historischen und historiographiegeschichtlichen Kontext (Corpus scriptorum Christianorum orientalium 594; Subsidia 110) (Louvain: Peeters, 2003) quoted in Biographiche–Bibliographisches Kirchenlehikon, available at http://www.bautz.de/bbkl/m/michael_syr.shtml (last accessed 24.05.2007).

48 For the genre of the work and its connection with the early Byzantine chroniclers see D. Weltecke, “The Originality and Function of Formal Structures in the Chronicle of Michael the Great,” in Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies 3.2 (2000), available online at http://syrcom.cua.edu/HugoyeVol3No2/HV3N2Weltecke .html#S004 (last accessed 24.05.2007).

49 See, for example, Michael the Syrian, Chronicle, ed. Chabot, vol. 3, 18.1, 309-31.

50 See, for example, the quotation from the book of “venerable Dionysios,” Michael the Syrian, Chronicle, ed. Chabot, vol. 3, 17.13, 301-302.

51 In the modern historiography it was used mostly for the study of factual history. In recent years, the Chronicle has also been regarded as a potential source for economic history, see, M.G. Morony, “Michael the Syrian as a Source for Economic History,” Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies 3. 2 (2000) available at http://syrcom.cua.edu/ Hugoye/Vol3No2/HV3N2Morony.html (last accessed 24.05.2007).

52 On the peace of 1161 see Magdalino, The Empire, 70; Vryonis, Decline, 123, Chalandon, Les Comnène, 499-500; C. Cahen, Pre-Ottoman Turkey, 101. (Henceforthward: Cahen, Pre-ottoman Turkey) ; M. Balivet “Entre Byzance et Konya: l’intercirculation des idées et des homes au temps des Seldjoukides,” in Mélanges Byzantines, Seldjoukides et Ottomans (Istanbul: Isis, 2005), 57 (hereafter: Balivet, “Entre Byzance et Konya”). The father-son relationship between Manuel and Kilic Arslan II is attested by Choniates (see Choniates, Historia, ed. Van Dieten, Manuel 4, 124, line 20 (tr. Magoulias, 70). A good account of the usage of symbolic family relations as an instrument of foreign policy can be found in Franz Dölger, “Die Bulgarenherrscher als geistlicher Son des byzantinische Kaisers,” in Recueil dédié à la mémoire du prof. Peter Nikov (Sofia: 1940), 224-225 (hereafter: Dölger, “Die Bulgarenherrscher”).

53 Cahen, Pre-Ottoman Turkey, 102.

54 The situation on the border is one question is still to be described. Vryonis stated that the reign of Manuel was a period of decline of the defense system and a period of the rise of nomadic pressure. Later on he even suggested a religious background for the supposed Seljuk domination in Anatolia, namely the gaza theory. The situation in fact is not that simple; the main sources are more or less silent on the situation on the east between 1161 and 1173, but this does not mean a “Seljuk advance.” The “twelfth-century gaza theory” meets an even greater problem in the absence of sources – as far as I know there only one forced conversion to Islam mentioned by Kinnamos and Choniates. There are even more points of the views in Vryonis which need to be discussed – I hope to do it at a later date in a separate work, see Vryonis, Decline, 120-126; S. Vryonis, “Nomadization and Islamization in the Asia Minor,” DOP 29 (1975): 41-71.

55Kinnamos, Epitoma, ed. Meineke, 7.3, 299, lines 15-20 (tr. Brand, 224); Nicetas Choniates, Historia, ed. Van Dieten, Manuel 6, 178, lines 1-8 (tr. Magoulias, 100).

56 See F. Makk, The Arpads and the Comneni. Political Realtions between Hungary and Byzantium in the 12^th century (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1989), 113.

57Their presence in the army was later remarked on by Choniates. For the position of Seljuks in the Byzantine army and in society in general see M. Brand “The Turkish element in Byzantium, Eleventh-Twelfth centuries,” DOP 43(1989): 1-25.

58P. Lamma supposed that the Cumans were Russians. See Nicetas Choniates, Historia, ed. I. A. Van Dieten, Manuel 6, 178 , lines 1-5 (tr. Magoulias, 100 ); P. Lamma ,Comneni e Staufer.Ricerche sui rapporti fra Bisanzio e l'Occidente nel sec. XII, vol. 2 (Rome: Istituto Storico Italiano per il Medioevo,1957), 276. (Henceforth: Lamma, Comneni e Staufer.)

59 Magdalino, Empire, 212; [F.I. Uspenskiy] Ф.И. Успенский, История Византийской Империи (History of the Byzantine empire), vol.3 [ (Moscow: AN USSR 1948), 279. (Henceforth: Uspenskiy, History.)

60 See, for example, J. Haldon, The Byzantine Wars (Stroud: Tempus, 2001), 140. (Henceforth: Haldon, Byzantine Wars).

61 See Epistola, ed. W. Stubbs,102, line 20 ( Vasilyev, 237 ); Kinnamos, Epitoma, 7.3,300, lines 1-5,(Brand, 244).

62 This hypothesis was present already in the work of P. Lammo, but Ralph-Johannes is Lilie is the first who followed it thoroughly based it. Following him , P. Magdalino openly states that the whole expedition was a Crusade,see Lamma, Comneni e Staufer, 279; Lilie, Byzantium, 211

63 See Lamma, Comneni e Staufer, 275