<%BANNER%>

The Medieval Town in Bulgaria, Thirteenth to Fourteenth Century

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0024053/00001

Material Information

Title: The Medieval Town in Bulgaria, Thirteenth to Fourteenth Century
Physical Description: 1 online resource (354 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Murdzhev, Pavel
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2008

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: archaeology, bulgaria, byzantium, economy, urban
History -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: History thesis, Ph.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: My study attempts to reevaluate the reigning historiographical concepts of pre-modern models of economic development in Southeastern Europe. It is a cross-national and cross-regional survey attempting to include the Byzantine/Bulgarian economic model in the ongoing debate about the transition from feudalism to capitalism. Through an examination of urban social structure, economy, and population growth, I demonstrate that the late medieval town in the Balkans well beyond the end of the fourteenth century followed the main trends of economic growth that are typically represented by the Italian city-states and formed thus part of a common socio-economic environment with the rest of the European Mediterranean. In my study, the town in late medieval Bulgaria is conceptualized as an 'explanandum,' not as an 'explanans,' as part of the social and economic environment rather than some distinctive entity. Therefore, the rural environment is an essential component for understanding urban socio-economic development. The town and its hinterland are conceptualized as two elements of the same structure rather than two opposing and separate entities. The survey is also cross-disciplinary. It integrates written sources with archaeological data: urban and rural settlement morphology, household structuring, pottery, as well as coin production and circulation.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Pavel Murdzhev.
Thesis: Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Florida, 2008.
Local: Adviser: Curta, Florin.
Electronic Access: RESTRICTED TO UF STUDENTS, STAFF, FACULTY, AND ON-CAMPUS USE UNTIL 2009-12-31

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2008
System ID: UFE0024053:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0024053/00001

Material Information

Title: The Medieval Town in Bulgaria, Thirteenth to Fourteenth Century
Physical Description: 1 online resource (354 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Murdzhev, Pavel
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2008

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: archaeology, bulgaria, byzantium, economy, urban
History -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: History thesis, Ph.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: My study attempts to reevaluate the reigning historiographical concepts of pre-modern models of economic development in Southeastern Europe. It is a cross-national and cross-regional survey attempting to include the Byzantine/Bulgarian economic model in the ongoing debate about the transition from feudalism to capitalism. Through an examination of urban social structure, economy, and population growth, I demonstrate that the late medieval town in the Balkans well beyond the end of the fourteenth century followed the main trends of economic growth that are typically represented by the Italian city-states and formed thus part of a common socio-economic environment with the rest of the European Mediterranean. In my study, the town in late medieval Bulgaria is conceptualized as an 'explanandum,' not as an 'explanans,' as part of the social and economic environment rather than some distinctive entity. Therefore, the rural environment is an essential component for understanding urban socio-economic development. The town and its hinterland are conceptualized as two elements of the same structure rather than two opposing and separate entities. The survey is also cross-disciplinary. It integrates written sources with archaeological data: urban and rural settlement morphology, household structuring, pottery, as well as coin production and circulation.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Pavel Murdzhev.
Thesis: Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Florida, 2008.
Local: Adviser: Curta, Florin.
Electronic Access: RESTRICTED TO UF STUDENTS, STAFF, FACULTY, AND ON-CAMPUS USE UNTIL 2009-12-31

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2008
System ID: UFE0024053:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

1 THE MEDIEVAL TOWN IN BULGARIA, THIRTEENTH TO FO URTEENTH CENTURY By PAVEL MURDZHEV A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2008

PAGE 2

2 2008 Pavel Murdzhev

PAGE 3

3 In Memory of my Father

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I thank the brilliant teachers of my di ssertational committee, Dr. Nina Caputo, Dr. Anthony Oliver-Smith, Dr. Frederick Gregory and Dr. Ho ward Louthan. I especially thank my committee chair, advisor and mentor, Dr. Fl orin Curta. I thank my friends from Archaeological Museum of Veliko Turnovo, Bulgaria, Ivan Tsurov and Stoyan Michailov. I especially thank to my first teacher and friend Dr. Plamen Pavlov.

PAGE 5

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................... 4 LIST OF TABLES ...........................................................................................................................7 LIST OF FIGURES .........................................................................................................................8 ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................... .............11 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 12 2 ECONOMIC HISTORIOGRAPHY OF LATE MEDIEVAL BALKANS. PROBLE MS AND TENDENCIES .............................................................................................................. 24 Byzantine Economy in the light of Historical Materialism .................................................... 24 The Development of Bulgarian Mediev al Historiography and Archaeology ......................... 34 Western Historiographical Approach es to Late Byzantine Economy .................................... 40 3 THE COUNTRY ....................................................................................................................54 Macedonia, Moesia and Northern Thrace: De mo graphic and Landscape Characteristics. .... 54 Rural Settlements. Physical Characteristics ........................................................................... 70 Dialectics of Village and Estate .............................................................................................. 82 Organization of Production .....................................................................................................97 4 THE URBAN ARENAS ....................................................................................................... 117 Toward (Not) Defining Town ............................................................................................... 117 Semantics of Byzantino-Slavic Settlement Terminology .....................................................122 Towns (re) Formation in Medieval Bulgaria ....................................................................... 134 Urban Morphology ...............................................................................................................143 Patterns of Fortified Nuclei ...........................................................................................153 Urban Public Space .......................................................................................................165 Urban Private Dwellings ............................................................................................... 175 Urban Social and Institutional Topography ..........................................................................183 Horizontal Social Structures ..........................................................................................185 Vertical Social Structures ..............................................................................................193 5 REGIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE ................................................................ 235 Trade and Politics in Late Medieval Bulgaria ...................................................................... 238 Coin Production and Circulation ..........................................................................................259 Money Circulation, 1082-1185 .....................................................................................262 Money Circulation, 1185-1203 .....................................................................................264

PAGE 6

6 Money Production and Circulation, 1204-1256 ............................................................265 Money Production and Circulation, 1257 1400 .........................................................279 6 CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................... .299 APPENDIX: TEMPLATES ........................................................................................................ 317 LIST OF REFERENCES .............................................................................................................325 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .......................................................................................................354

PAGE 7

7 LIST OF TABLES Table page 3-1 Coin circulation in Kovachevo and the village on the top of ancient Sevtopolis .............. 82A-1 Hoards 1082-1185 .......................................................................................................... ..318A-2 Hoards 1185-1203 .......................................................................................................... ..318A-3 Hoards 1204-1218 .......................................................................................................... ..319A-4 Hoards 1241-1257 .......................................................................................................... ..320A-5 Hoards 1257-1400 .......................................................................................................... ..321A-6 Urban coin finds ...............................................................................................................323

PAGE 8

8 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 3-1 Old Roman Provinces in th e Balkans and Asia Minor .................................................... 111 3-2 Fourteenth-century Northeastern Balkans ....................................................................... 111 3-3 Geographical location of the arch aeological sites under consideration ........................... 112 3-4 KovachevoPlan of investigations ..................................................................................112 3-5 Investigational plan of the medieval village on the top of the ruins of ancient Sevtopolis .................................................................................................................... .....113 3-6 Hotnitsa. Excavation plan ................................................................................................113 3-7 Single-room above-ground house .................................................................................... 114 3-8 Two-room house. Wood, stone and wa ttle-and-daub construction. ................................114 3-9 Type of plow with coulter and plowshare ........................................................................114 3-10 Plowshares and coulters from the me dieval village on the top of Sevtopolis ................. 115 3-11 Painted sgraffito pottery. ..................................................................................................115 3-12 Sgraffito pottery from the vi llage on the top of Sevtopolis ............................................. 115 3-13 Bracelets from the village on the top of Sevtopolis.. ....................................................... 116 3-14 Rings and glass bracelets from th e village on the top of Sevtopolis ............................... 116 4-1 Plan of the citade l of Strezov Grad .................................................................................. 216 4-2 Pliska .................................................................................................................... ............217 4-3 Ra, reconstruction ....................................................................................................... ....217 4-4 Towns design.. ........................................................................................................... .....218 4-5 Late Medieval Turnovo ....................................................................................................218 4-6 Tsarevets. The main gate system and patriarchal church of Holy Ascendance at the top of the hill. .............................................................................................................. .....219 4-7 Mesembria.................................................................................................................. ......219 4-8 Lovech..................................................................................................................... .........220

PAGE 9

9 4-9 Cherven ................................................................................................................... .........221 4-10 Fortress masonry. ....................................................................................................... .....221 4-11 Cherven. The main tower at the western entrance of the town ........................................ 222 4-12 The fortress of Shumen and its first suburban fortification ............................................. 222 4-14 Rila Monastery with its defense tower in the center ........................................................ 223 4-15 Emperors palace in Tsarevets, Turnovo, ........................................................................ 224 4-16 Patriarchal Palace in Tsarevets, Tur novo, with the church of Holy Ascension. .............. 224 4-17 Turnovo, the fortress on the hill of Tsarevets. ................................................................. 225 4-18 Fortress of Lovech ...........................................................................................................225 4-19 Fortress of Cherven. .........................................................................................................226 4-20 Street network of Tsarevets and of part of the New Town. ............................................. 226 4-21 Western Main Street of Tsarevets.. ..................................................................................227 4-22 Church of St. Demetrius in Tu rnovo, located in the New Town. ................................. 227 4-23 Urban monastery, located on the northernmost point of Tsarevets .................................228 4-24 Fortified well at the south eastern angle of Tsarevets ....................................................... 228 4-25 Draining ditch in the fortress of Lovech ..........................................................................229 4-26 Location of the Bath House within the New Town in Turnovo ................................... 229 4-27 Plan of the Bath House. .................................................................................................. .230 4-28 Urban houses from Turnovo. ........................................................................................... 230 4-29 Semi-dugout house from Momina Krepost Hill.. ............................................................231 4-30 House-plans............................................................................................................... .......232 4-31 Boyars House from Tsarevets.. ................................................................................... 232 4-32 Boyars House in Melnik. ............................................................................................233 4-33 Boyars House in Melnik. Decoration on the facade .......................................................233 4-34 Plan of the Boyars House ............................................................................................... 233

PAGE 10

10 4-35 Private dwelling in Mistra ................................................................................................234 4-36 Wealthy (boyars) house in Turnovo ...............................................................................234 5-1 Road network .............................................................................................................. .....295 5-2 Area of circulation of Bulg arian silver coins, 1300-1331. ...............................................296 5-3 Area of circulation of Bu lgarian silver coins 1331-1400. ................................................ 296 5-4 Most popular type of silver coin, Iva n Alexander with his son Michael Asen ............ 297 5-5 Area of circulation of Venetian imitatives. ...................................................................... 297 5-6 Venetian grossi and their imitations. ............................................................................... 298 5-7 Bulgarian imitation of the c opper coin of John II Orsini. ................................................ 298

PAGE 11

11 Abstract of Dissertation Pres ented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy THE MEDIEVAL TOWN IN BULGARIA, THIRTEENTH TO FOUR TEENTH CENTURY By Pavel Murdzhev December 2008 Chair: Florin Curta Major: History My study attempts to reevaluate the reigning historiographical concepts of pre-modern models of economic development in Southeaste rn Europe. It is a cr oss-national and crossregional survey attempting to include the By zantine/Bulgarian economic model in the ongoing debate about the transition from feudalism to cap italism. Through an examination of urban social structure, economy, and population growth, I demonstrate that the late medieval town in the Balkans well beyond the end of the fourteenth century followed the main trends of economic growth that are typically represented by the Italia n city-states and formed thus part of a common socio-economic environment with the re st of the Europ ean Mediterranean. In my study, the town in late mediev al Bulgaria is conceptualized as an explanandum, not as an explanans, as part of the social and economic envi ronment rather than some distinctive entity. Therefore, the rural envi ronment is an essential component for understanding urban socioeconomic development. The town and its hinterla nd are conceptualized as two elements of the same structure rather than two opposing and se parate entities. The su rvey is also crossdisciplinary. It integrates written sources with archaeological data: urban and rural settlement morphology, household structuri ng, pottery, as well as coin production and circulation.

PAGE 12

12 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION By analyzing the Byzantine socio-economi c m odel from the viewpoint of urban development in late medieval Bulgaria, this di ssertation claims that the Byzantine World did not remain detached from wider Euro pean socio-economic trends of the late middle ages. The towns in Bulgaria, just like their By zantine and Dalmatian counterparts followed the main trends of economic growth and social changes that are typi cally represented by the Italian city-states and formed thus part of an inseparable socio-econom ic environment with the rest of the European Mediterranean. Therefore, this study claims that the debate about the la te medieval Bulgarian town belongs to the broader discourse of the European urban development. In recent years, the histori ographical debate about the av enues of economic growth and capitalism and the role of towns in this process in European West has reached the interdisciplinary level of combining anthr opology, ecology, social geography, and psychology together with the application of modern and pos t-modern market theories. However, the scholars working on late Byzantium remain locked within the Weberian opposition between the generative and consummative type of town. What is at stake is not the real Max Weber, who conceptualized towns as arenas in which the struggle for power and resources go far beyond the limits of the urban perimeter. Rather, it enga ges a caricature of Weber, built upon the Marxist drive of finding a uniform explanatory model of socio-economic development that presents the towns as exemplars of an autonomous urban reality. Indirectly, it is also Richard Tawneys view of Weber that manifests Western European exceptionalism as a result of its superior receptiveness to the virtues of capitalism.1 11 Richard Tawney, Religion and the Rise of Capitalism ( New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co, 1926)

PAGE 13

13 This dissertation, in keep ing with the real Weber, endeavors to read The City not as a separate unit, but as a chapter of Economy and Society .2 Weberian categories, such as consumer city and producer city, function in the present study to identif y a particular historical function of the city in relation to the question of power in society, not to produce a general theory about the city. While Marx held that individuals are determined by their class-consciousness founded in the material realities of their lif e, Weber viewed the whole societ y as a social category, sharing a common set of values and ideas that transcends th e class or economic status. Therefore, while in Marx (or in the Braudelian interpretation of Marx ) the city is a generic agent of progress and a city-country distin ction has a definite class-economic characte r, Weber displays it as a part of the entire socio-cultural environment. The distortion of the Weberian thesis, however combined with the enticement of Edward Gibbon to ascribe the liquidation of the By zantine World to its backward economy and decadent culture, constitute one of the main reasons for the theoretical challenges of economic history of Byzantium and Eastern Balkans.3 Since the time of the Enlightenment, the Byzantine Empire was viewed as a decayed fragment of th e Roman Empire, static in time, stagnant in technology, culturally conservative, and ruled by perfidious and tyrannical regimes. The Byzantine legacy even today is perceived as a main reason for certain blockages for developing normal civil institutions in the Balkans, hence the interchangeable values of Byzantinism and 2 M. Weber, Economy and Society: an outline of interpretative sociology (New York: Bedmin ster Press, 1968) 3 The term Eastern Balkans (or its equivalents, su ch as Byzantinized Balkan s or Orthodox Balkans that may substitute it further in this study) is comprehended here as a subdivision of Byzantine Commonwealth, a term coined by Dmitry Obolensky that most precisely defines the basi c characteristics of the Byzantine World: an international community, which was bounded by the creed of Orthodox Christianity, accepted the principles of RomanoByzantine law, and held that the cultural standards of Byzantine Empire were universally valid models. In geographic terms it comprises the present day territories of Bulgaria, Greece, Macedonia, Serbia, Albania, Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Southeastern Romania, and the European part of Turkey

PAGE 14

14 balkanization.4 From Gibbon through Fallmerayer a nd from Burckhardt to Jenkins, Longworth, and even Mango, notions of Byzantium and the Byzantine legacy have always been a standard for measuring the deviation from nor mal development and have always served the expediency of politico-cultural doctrines and strategies. Not surprisingly, the notion of Byzantinism was pushed as far as to claim that th e Ottoman Empires failure to modernize must be blamed on the Byzantine decadent social system inherited by the Ottomans.5 This reductionist approach to Byzantium a nd the Byzantine legacy, applying analytical categories from Western historic al reality, resulted in the co nstruction of a certain GibbonTawney logic of historical proces ses. Since the Byzantine World was culturally deprived from progressing towards modernity, then, Byzantine Studies should be considered as a field of exotic peripheral studies, sometimes grudgingly included in the appendix of European history and preserved only for local Eastern European consumption and for a small group of Western eccentric scholars. Surprisingly, this is stil l the prevailing attitude toward Byzantium, the Byzantine legacy and, consequently, toward the importance of Byzantine Studies. All this is not to say that Byzantine studies lack erudite scholars to le ad the field, but that the lack of a critical mass of scholars involve d in Byzantine studies in general, and Byzantine economic history in particular, has resulted in re tarded and limited discourse and, quite naturally, in theoretical stagnation. To the best of my knowledge, no se rious study exists examining the urban economy of late Byzantium and the East ern Balkans outside the box of historical materialism. Little wonder, then, that David Nicholsons map of European towns circa 1300, for instance, marks only three towns in the Balkan Peninsula, two of which are Constantinople and 4 Philip Longworth, The Making of Eastern Europe, from Prehistory to Post-Communism (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1992). 5 George Young, Nationalism and War in the NearEast (Oxford: Oxford UP, 1915).p.40.

PAGE 15

15 Thessalonike.6 At the same time, when examining the same historical period the Bulgarian historian Nikolai Todorov identifies 400 towns in Byzantium and the Balkan countries.7 On the other hand, local East European By zantinists came under the grip of theoretical impediments imposed by Marxist class-determinis m that reigned over the Soviet, Bulgarian, and Yugoslav historiography. Unfortunately historic al materialism, the manifestation of MarxismLeninism in historiography, does not facilitate discourse ; rather, it just imposes imperatives for total mobilization for a class st ruggle. While the consumption a nd demand of food supply of the big cities were considered by most economic historians in the West as encouraging the growth of the regional economy, the cities in late Byzantiu m and Bulgaria were still viewed by native Marxists as parasites.8 Franklin Mendels proto-industrialization ,9 when detected by Marxist historians, was therefore regard ed as an indication of underdevelopment and not complete division of labor between the town and country.10 Considering any attempt for new interpretations of the development of Byzantin e and Bulgarian economy as a political challenge to Marxism in general, up to the end of the Cold War the advocates of historical materialism remained distant from the neo-Marxist, Foucau ldian, structuralist, a nd postmodernist thinking 6 David Nicholson, The Urban Europe 1100-1700 (New York: Palgrave, 2003). 7 Nikolai Todorov, Society, City and Industry in the Balkans, 15th 19th centuries (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 1998).p.28. 8 Daniel Waley, The Italian City-Republics (London, New York: Longman Group, 1988) pp 69-88.; L. Maksimovi Grad u Vizantii [Byzantine town] (Belgrade: Plato, 2003). 9 Proto-industrialization, conceptualized by Mendels as i ndustrialization before industrialization, has been defined as development of the rural regions in which a large part of the population lived entirely or to a considerable extent from industrial mass production for inter-regional and international markets. See for details Franklin Mendels, Proto-Industrialization: the First Phase of Industrialization Process? Journal of Economic History Vol. 32 (1972) pp. 241-61. 10 Str. Lishev, Bulgarskiat Srednovekoven Grad [Bulgarian Medieval Town] (Sofia: BAN, 1970); B.T. Gorianov Pozdevizantiiskii Feodalism [Late Byzantine Feudalism] (Moscow: AN SSSR, 1962); Al. Burmov, Feodalismat v Srednovekovna Bulgaria Istoricheski Pregled Vol 2 (1946/47).pp.151-171. A. Kazhdan Derevnia i Gorod v Vizantii IXX vv. [Village and town in Byzantium, 9th-10th centuries] (Moscow: AN SSSR 1960).

PAGE 16

16 that have swept across the field of Urban Studies in recent decades. Regrettably, almost two decades after the collapse of the bipolar world or der, the theoretical gap left by the discredited historical materialism has still remained unbridged for Bulgarian as well as for former Soviet and formerYugoslav Byzantinists. For generations of orthodox Marxist historians the question of economic growth in the concluding centuries of Byzantine civilization was grounded in the idea of a late development of feudalism. For advocates of historical materialism, as shown in Chapter 1 of the present study, the combination of economic growth and politic al polycentrism in the Eastern Balkans was simply impossible, despite the sporadic signals of single monogra phs and archaeological investigations for revising this concept. Th e town and country have been perceived, in accordance to Marxist theory, as two antagonistic worlds, not as two elements of the same structure. Therefore, while economic historia ns of the West agree that the most basic characteristic of a town is heterogeneity the Byzantine socio-economic m odel, an integral part of which are the Bulgarian lands, has been drawn up to the end of th e twentieth century in terms of Marxs politeconomy, an incompleted division of labor between town and country, and class struggle. If there was any debate within the framework of historical materialism, it was the fruitless debate about the degree of feudalization of the Byzantine Empire that mechanically imported socio-property relati ons of western experience, such as serfdom and feudal immunity, into Byzantine society. Inspired by a tide of change in Byzantine Studies, best detectable in the synthetic collection of studies of The Economic History of Byzantium,11 the following study, by offering a new understanding of the Byzantine socio-economic mode l, has as its goal the desire to eliminate 11 The Economic History of Byzantium: from the Seventh through th e Fifteenth Centuries Ed in chief A. Laiou (Washington, D. C: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 2002).

PAGE 17

17 the ideological impediments of historical mate rialism and conceptual constraints of the GibbonTawney logic that form the notion of the Byzantine World as a deviation from normality. By integrating written records with archaeol ogical data, this dissertation demonstrates that the late medieval Bulgarian town, just like its Byzantine, Dalmatian, and Italian counterparts was far from being a mere center of consumption and an epitome of socio-economic decline. It was neither predominantly agricultural, as the proponents of the hi storical materialism claimed, nor it was a capitalist island surrounded by the feudal sea, accor ding to a Braudelian understanding of urbanity. It was a minimi zed and intensified c opy of its surrounding institutional and socio-economic ordera spatial concentration of the faculties of its larger system. It was a concentration of landowners an d wealthy people, but also of clerics, merchants and artisans, paroikoi12 and wage laborers, individual and collective foreign dwellers, and mere vagrants. It was center of trad e activities and non-agr icultural production and if there was any difference with its Western European counterparts it was rather of degree than of kind. However, while the collapse of the communist regimes in Eastern Europe discredited and stultified historical materialism, the Marxist anal ytical category division of labor still imposes constraints on the understanding of the role of to wns in social development. The main argument of this dissertation is, therefore, directed against the dead ends of the Western dualistic approach to historical economy, which is based on the Ma rxist assumption that th e fundament of socioeconomic progress the division of labor was objectified by the separation of town and country, therefore considering the town as main agent for social change. On the contrary, in the 12 Byzantine term (literallry those, who lived beside the house) designating both peasants economically dependent upon a tax-exemption holder, and peasants in general.

PAGE 18

18 present dissertation the town is treated, as Philip Abrams puts it, as an explanandum, not as an explanans, as part of the social and economic environm ent rather than some distinctive entity.13 The socio-economic relationships concentrated spatially within towns are thus examined in relation to the system in which they occur and not as exemplars of an autonomous urban reality.14 Therefore, special atten tion is directed throughout Chapter 2 to the socio-economic relationships in the country, whic h together with towns formed an organic social system. The impressive scale of non-agricultu ral, market-oriented activities in the country, as further demonstrated by the archaeological evidence, unambiguously supports Abrams thesis and disputes the validity of the Marx ian category division of labor. The failure of most Western historians to ut ilize the rich archeol ogical data collected by Balkan researchers has resulted in the long-st anding assumption that Byzantine agriculture was underdeveloped. However, as Chapter 2 demonstrates, neither the agra rian tools nor the agrarian productivity of the Byzantine World differed from those of Western Europe. The scarcity of written sources is perhaps the most important barrier for the development of Byzantine economic history. It is an axiomatic truth that the smaller the amount of source materials for a certain culture, the greater the proliferation of clichs and myths, reductionism and simplifications. On the other hand, the surviv ing sources from the monastic libraries, mainly at Mount Athos, the Ottoman archives, and Wester n travelogues, provide a large enough corpus of sources to reveal various aspects of late By zantine agriculture and le gal practices. However, because there is nothing comparable for the urba n economy and society, the tendency has been to view Byzantium in exclusively agrarian terms. 13 Philip Abrams, Towns and Economic Growth: Some Theo ries and Problems, in P. Abrams and E. A. Wrigley, eds., Towns in Societies: Essays in Economic History and Historical Sociology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978),pp. 9-33; S. R. Epstein, Freedom and Growth ( London, New York: Routledge, 2000).pp. 6-10. 14 Philip Abrams, Towns and Economic Growth p.30

PAGE 19

19 The dearth of sources is also the main obs tacle to applying modern economic models in explaining the late Byzantine economy. The attempt of Ccile Morrisson to apply Fishers Equation15 to explaining the character of Byzantine nomisma debasement in the eleventh century is a well-known example.16 Two out of the four variables of Fishers Equation, velocity of money circulation and the number of transactions, cannot be f ound in our sources, which turns its application into a somewhat informed guess.17 Indeed, this is not a problem only for Byzantine economic history, but also for the enti re field of European medieval economy. Yet Byzantine economic historiography is more affected by the lack of adequate sources. For example, there is no surviving Byzantine source comparable to the Florentine Catasto of 1427 that provides data for taxes, property, and hous ehold structures in Fl orence and the surrounding territory. Unfortunately, sources for the late medieval Bulgarian town are even scarcer. If the reference sources for the political histor y of Second Bulgarian Empire are enough for constructing certain general frame, written sources concerning late medieval Bulgarian urban life are almost non-existent. This makes the task of examining the Bulgaria n town tantalizing. The information for Bulgarian urbanism has to be ga thered piecemeal from dispersed and isolated texts, both documentary and narra tive. Without the help of arch aeology it is doomed to turn any conclusion simply into a speculative assumpti on. To write a history of urban economy on the basis of Bulgarian written sources alone is thus an impossible venture. The comparative analysis 15 Fishers Equation estimates the relationship between nomina l and real interest rates under inflation. In economics, this equation is used to predict nominal and real interest rate behavior. 16 Ccile Morrisson, La Dvaluation de la Monnaie Byzantine au XIe sicle: Essai dInterprtation. Travaux et Memoires 6 (1976): pp. 68. 17 For a critique of Morrissons approach see M. Hendy, Studies in the Byzantine Monetary Economy, c.3001450 (Cambridge New York: Cambridge University Press, 1985).pp. 3-6; 233-237 and Alan Harvey, Economic Expansion of the Byzantine Empire, 900-1200 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989).p.89.

PAGE 20

20 of written and archaeological sources is, therefor e, not only the preferred, but also the only possible approach to late me dieval Bulgarian urbanism. It is well recognized in histori ography that the ini tiative of the Byzantine state became crucial for the economic change that started in the el eventh-twelfth centuries. The introduction and spread of the pronoia system of privileges led to more efficient modes of production in agriculture and to a liberalizati on of the state economy. Given th at privilege-holders now were paying less tax and still less in cash, the state ceased to be the most important motive power behind the circulation of money. This, in tur n, resulted in the infusion of more money, distributed among more people, and, accordingly, in an accelerated money circulation that signaled the growth of market importance. The far-reaching implications of this proce ss for urban development in Byzantium and in the Bulgarian lands that in 1185 s eceded and formed a separate political unit are demonstrated in Chapter 3 by analyzing the spa tial representation of the socio-economic relations within the urban arenas. Towards the end of the twelfth century, the in crease of agricultural productivity resulted in intensification of tr ade activities, growth of the market centers and thus to a spontaneous transformation of the towns. Ma ny of the settlements located within the provincial fortresses, especially the administrative and ecclesiastic centers, expanded outside their defensive walls and formed adjacent suburbia. This change of the urba n structural tissue reflec ted the change of the basic functions of towns from administrative and ecclesiastic centers with solely defensive function into productive and trade centers with more definite urban way of life. The state administration of Byzantium (and later of the newl y restored Bulgarian state) did not interfere with the organic growth of provincial urban centers. The use of space as well as the regulation of

PAGE 21

21 urban life, in general, was left to the self-regulatory balance of power between the formal and informal provincial authorities. Although distinctive in its appearance, the medi eval town in Bulgaria did not display any unique social order different from that of its environment. Qualitatively, its social structure consisted of the same elements as those presen t in the countryside, albeit in intensified and concentrated proportions: landowners and merchants, tax-privilege holders and paroikoi artisans and agriculturists, monasterie s and churches, wealthy dynatoi,18 and a large number of people belonging to the middle ( mezoi ) and lower classes ( mikroi ). It was a community headed by a clerical leader (bishop) and/or by a political ruler ( kephale ), appointed by the central power, and dominated by a small group of aristocratic familie s. The social structure of the late medieval Bulgarian town, as examined throughout Chapter 3 did not differ from that of the Italian and Dalmatian cities either in terms of concentration of landowners and wealthy people or in terms of predominance of artisanship over the agricultural activities. The shift of the function of the towns, ma nifested through the change of their physical appearance, led to additional e xpansion of the urban centers, attracting now significant numbers of the population from the country, a nd to the primary concerns of the Chapter 4 : the shift from a land-based, state-commanded economy to a public economy of exchange; the formation of a regional trade network; and of the crfeation of a local mercha nt class, concentrated in urban centers and unrelated to agriculture and stat e offices. Two main avenues of approach are undertaken throughout the Chapter 4 for the fulfillment of this task: an analysis of the driving forces behind Balkan policy-making and an examination of the coin pr oduction and circulation in Bulgaria. 18 Formally and informally powerful people.

PAGE 22

22 The analysis of the paradigm of regional Balk an politics in the course of thirteenth and fourteenth century offers a revaluation of another long reigning assumption in Byzantine historiography that the Byzantine socio-economi c model did not perpetua te the interest and involvement of its political lead ership in mark et activities. Quite the opposite, Chapter 4 proves that the eleventh cen tury aristocratic maxima, articulated by Kekaumenos, to live off ones own, had disappeared by the opening of the fourteenth century. The study of the motivation behind regional policy-ma king discloses not only the complete dominance of the ambition of political leadership to capture trade centers for the purpose of extending their control over merchants and over routes of inland and maritime trade in regional policymaking, but also the personal participation of political authority at the highest level in market activities. The local markets of goods, land, capital, and la bor started to manifest their integrational role in the economy. Byzantium, Bulgaria and th e Balkan inlands, in general, become thus part of the much broader open economy that marked the end of the medieval period. Second, the analysis of coin production and circulation thro ughout the observed period demonstrates that the involvement of Bulgaria in the intercontinental trade that was run and dominated by the Italian maritime city-states was a natural realization of the aggregated surplus in agriculture at the local level, in the context of a highly monetized and market-oriented regional economy. In its turn, the participation in international trade gave further impetus to domestic economic growth. The examination of monetary vol ume and turnover in thir teenth-to-fourteenth century Bulgaria reveals that the domination of copper coins of small denomination, the means of exchange for petty local trade, was gradually giving way to the silver coins that were more suitable for long-distance trade.

PAGE 23

23 The shift from a state-commanded, landbased economy to a public economy of exchange and the growth of a lo cal social group of trade actors had its culmination towards the end of the fourteenth century. It is manifested through the participation of the local merchants in money production that complemented the states inadequate supply of a means of exchange in order to safeguard their business interests by reducing the scale of barter. The economic power of this social group matched and even exceeded the resources of the state. The process of decreasing th e role of state in economy, however, had its negative implications. It constantly w eakened the state, which had now difficulty in maintaining its traditional centralism, not only in Bulgaria, but also in the entire Balkan region. It was unable to impose its will on those to whom, of its own free will or by coercion, it granted privileges or a status of semi-independence. By means of a solely fiscal instrument, priv ileges became a factor for economic polycentrism that finally resulted in the dissolution of the stat e. Towards the end of the fourteenth century, th erefore, the political map of the Ba lkans, just like that of Germany, became a patchwork of numerous independent and semi-independent political units. Yet, as this study ultimately calls for, it is important to distinguish between the economy on the ground, as it was, and that of an organized political unit. Quite apart from the political collapse of the Byzantine World at the end of the fourteenth and in the course of the fifteenth centuries, its towns continued the trend of economic growth that started from the end of the twelfth century onward.

PAGE 24

24 CHAPTER 2 ECONOMIC HISTORIOGRAPHY OF LATE MEDIEVAL BALKANS. PROBLE MS AND TENDENCIES Byzantine Economy in the light of Historical Materialism The debate about feudalism and feudalizatio n of the Byzantine Em pire became a central issue for Byzantinists after 1945. It started with the attempt of Ge orge Ostrogorsky to establish a clear basis for comparison between Byzantium and the West and to surmount the reigning Western perception of Byzantine social development as unalterable and stagnant.1 Published first in 1940, in German, Ostrogorskys History of the Byzantine State would remain authoritative text for decades. The drive of Ostrogorsky to adjust Byzantium to the Western typology and terminology had roots stemming from the nineteen th century debate re garding the Byzantine legacy and affected the methodological approach of generations of Soviet, Balkan and Western Byzantinists. The understanding of the Byzantine legacy in Impe rial Russia expressed by the idea of the Third Rome went far beyond the perime ter of politics since th e beginning of the era of Herzen, Chernishevskii and Dobroliubov. However, out of its apocalyptic context it had little political realization. The notion of Byzantine responsibility for Russian autocratism, serfdom, and backwardness shared by th e Western-oriented Russian intelligentsia reflected the Western European liberal negativism regarding Byzantium a nd its legacy, culminating in the writings of Jacob Fallmerayer and Jacob Burckhardt. Th e former depicted Byzantinism as the polar opposite of the German Volksgeist, the latter, as an antithesis to the spirit of Renaissance.2 Later it became part of the propagandistic armament of the Bolsheviks and their enthusiasm for breaking the fetters of the past. One can im agine the perspectives opened by the Stalinist 1 George, Ostrogorsky, The History of The Byzantine State ( Oxford: Blackwell, 1968) 2 J. Ph. Fallmerayer, Rom und Byzanz in Europa zwischen Rom und Byzanz (Bozen: Athesia, 1990); J. Burckhardt, The Age of Constantine the Great, tr. M. Hadas (New York: Pantheon Books, 1949)

PAGE 25

25 regime for the scholars interested in Byzantium, the demiurge of such retrograde Russian institutions as Orthodoxy and Absolutism. The reign of Proletcult (Proletarian Culture) after the October Revolution resulted the elimination in 1928 of the main journal of Byzantine studies, Vizantiiskii Vremennik. Writing Byzantine studies in Stalinist Russia became a lonely and risky endeavor, especially during the 1930s. Cosmopolitism, a term narrowly linked with Byzantium and Byzantinism and considered as treason to the Proletarian Revol ution, could easily be transferred from the object (Byzan tium) to the subject (historian). In a political conjuncture in which history was understood as part of the politi cal propaganda, it could co st the career, or even the life of a scholar. History was constructed co nveniently and in service to Marxism-Leninism: Barbaric invaders at the end of Antiquity were considered the progressbearers, who destroyed slavery in decaying Roman Empire. Continuity became a forbidden term, fabricated by the bourgeois historians. Although Vizantiiskii Vremennik reappeared in 19 47 and continuity was re-introduced in the late 1960s into the vo cabulary of Soviet schol ars, Byzantine Studies remained an intolerant field, strictly supervis ed by the regime, always suspicious of any expression of nostalgia for the pre-Revolutionary past. Thus, the development of the Soviet Byzantine Studies would always remain in the realm of inevitability claimed by the Marxist theory. More importantly, Sovi et Byzantinsts would affect th oroughly the development of the Byzantine Studies within the Soviet satellites, especially Bulgaria. This does not mean, however, that Marxism-Leninism and its manifestation in historiography, historical material ism, turned all efforts of the Soviet Byzantinists into smoke. Although their general conclusions we re doomed to be always in c oncordance with the historical materialistic concept of feudalism, their invest igations, translation a nd interpretation of the source material would remain very useful for furt her researches. G. G. Litavrins analysis, for

PAGE 26

26 instance, of the survived tax register of the town of Lampsakos in the beginning of the thirteenth century reveals a small provincia l town of approximately 1000 dw ellers that had seven water mills, leather, textile, ceramic and boat building industry.3 Understandably, Litavrin was reluctant to generalize about urban development, but his survey provides an open avenue for synthesis: the so-displayed characteristics of La mpsakos are similar, for instance, to those of many small provincial towns in Germany at the time. Unlike Litavrin, Anthony Bryer, who has nothi ng to do with historical materialism, gives a strikingly different perspectiv e of Lampsakos. Having referred to the same document examined by Litavrin, Bryer presents Lampsakos as a pred ominantly agricultural town with 163 taxpayers, 113 of which were involved in agriculture.4 Unlike Litavrin, Bryer is free to generalize: The Byzantine city is a concept that ha rdly survives the seventh century.5 Bryer and Litavrin look at Lampsakos as if through the opposite ends of the same telescope. However, few years later, in his survey on Trebizonds Matzouka Valey Bryer softened his previ ously biased concept of Byzantine urbanism. He already detected distin ctive urban economic development in Trebizond, the towns self-governance and even a late medieval Byzantine bourgeoisie.6 Unfortunately, Litavrins synthesis, as dem onstrated in Bulgaria and Byzantium in XIXII centuries is not only helpless but also harmfu l. In his attempt to stress the importance of class struggle for socio-economic development, he presented the reestablishment of the Second 3 G.G. Litavrin, Provincialnyi Vizantiiski Gorod na Ru beje XII-XIII vekov [ The provincial Byzantine town on the border of the 12th-13th centuries] in Vizantiiskii Vremennik. Vol. 37. (1976). pp.19-20, 25. 4 Anthony Bryer, The Late Byzantine Monastery in Town and Countryside in Derek Baker, ed. The Church in Town and Countryside ( Oxford: Blackwell, 1979).p. 221. 5 Ibid. p.221. 6 Anthony Bryer, Continuity and Change in Trebizonds Matzouka/ Mauka Valey in Continuity and Change in Late Byzantine and Early Ottoman society (Washington: Dumbarton Oaks Re search Library and collection, 1986).pp. 51-91; 261-281.

PAGE 27

27 Bulgarian Empire (1185-1393) as a result of the anti-feudal (anti-Byzantine) class struggle, a concept that catalized the ble nding of the traditional nation-ba sed Bulgarian historiographical discourse with the new, class-deterministic theory.7 It should be noted here that the studies of the Soviet By zantinists were not pioneering works, but continued the work of pre-Revolutio nary Russian Byzantinists concerned with the nature of the Byzantine state and its economic de velopment: V. Vasilevskii, F. Uspenskii, P. Jakovenko, B. Panchenko and P. Bezobrazov. However, in general, the typical manner of research during the formative period of the Byzantine studies (1870-1917) was translation of primary texts from Greek, without any definite fe rvor for synthesizing a nd linking the politics to economy. Yet, L. Petits monastic typika the translations of S. Ptrids, A. PapadopoulosKerameus, V. Beneevi and A. Dmitrievsky, published th rough the Russian Archaeological Institute in Constantinople or Vizantiiskii Vremennik, still remain the best current editions of original Byzantine documents and basic texts for research the Byzantine economic history. This first generation of Russian Byzantinis ts explained the peculiarities of Byzantine economic development through the state protectionist poli cy on the smallholders in the context of flourishing towns.8 For the first time a serious effort for explaining the peculiarities of Byzantine economic development was attempted. The zeal of the Russian Byzantinists was matched in the West largely by German historia ns. The translations and editions of Byzantine texts by Fr. Miklosich and J. Mlle r, Ph. Meyer, A. Heisenberg a nd W. Nissen, just like those of 7 G. G. Litavrin, Bolgaria i Vizantia v XI-XII vv [Bulgaria and Byzantium, 11th12th centuries] (Moscow, 1960); Krestianstvo Zapadnoi i Iugozapadnoi Bolgarii, XI-XII vv. [Peasantry in West and Southwest Bulgaria, 11th-12th centuries] in Zbornik Instituta Slavianovedenii AN S.S.S.R. Vol. 14. (1956). 8 A. Kazhdan Derevnia i Gorod v Vizantii IXX vv. [Village and town in Byzantium, 9th-10th centuries] (Moscow: AN SSSR, 1960).p 12.

PAGE 28

28 their Russian counterparts, are still indispensabl e sources for researches in Byzantine history today. For Sjuzumov, Gorianov and other Soviet Byzantinists and their followers, feudalism originated in free peasant communities and was firmly established in the tenth-eleventh centuries.9 From this time onward, the social develo pment of Byzantium was determined by the class struggle of gradually enserfed peasan try and marginalized elements against their oppressors. The Ottoman conquest, accordingly, wa s conceptualized as a failure of the central powers in the Eastern Balkans to employ the ec onomic and human resources of the towns, which, due to belated feudalism, did not succeed to develop autonomous political structures. In sum, the concept of historical materialists for the nature of state a nd direction of social development of Byzantium is embodied in the title of M. Siuziumovs article Borba za Puti Razvitia Feodalnyih Otnoshenia v Vuzantii (Struggle for direction of development of feudal relations in Byzantium).10 Siuziumov stressed the importance of the growth of the commercial and artisanal activities, linking this question to the extension of feudal social relations. Focused mainly on urban development between the seventh and the el eventh centuries, Siuziumov denied the link between economic decline and depopulation of the urban centers in Byzantium in seventh century and rejected any similarity regarding the guild organizations between Byzantium and Western Europe. Loyal to the strict and punctu al Marxist axiom of the dependence of the 9 B. T. Gorianov, Pozdnevizantiiskii Feudalism [ The Late Byzantine Feudalism] ( Moscow: AN SSSR., 1962) 10 M. Siuziumov, Borba za Puti Razvitia Feodalnyih Otnoshenia v Vuzantii [Struggle for direction of development of feudal relations in Byzantium] in M. Siuziumov, Vizantiiskie Etiudyi (Ekaterinburg: Izdatelstvo Uralskogo Universiteta, 2002).pp. 305-326.

PAGE 29

29 political superstructure upon the economic base he linked too closely the economic decline in eleventh century to the political crisis of Manzikert.11 According to Boris Gorianov, whose field of specialization wa s the late Byzantine feudalism and town, the economy of Byzantium in the concluding centuries shrank in agriculture, trade and urban industry. In his earlier works, he clai med that the peculiarities of Byzantine feudalism were expressed through the c ontinuity of the urban industry and trade throughout the entire Byzantine history.12 To the best of my knowledge, he never came back to this idea. He detected a decline in the Byzantine urban industry and trade, but he admitted certain progress in development of some crafts and monetization of economy. This partial progress, however, did not lead to an emergence of pre-ca pitalistic relations in industry: craft guilds and trade organizations. Quite naturally, according to him, the political expression of this decline resulted in the Ottoman conquest of the Byzantine Empire.13 Alexander Kazhdan is a special case among So viet Byzantinists. Because of his personal struggle with historical materialism resulting in his departure from both Soviet historical theory and the Soviet Union (1978), it is difficult to summarize his concep tualizing of Byzantine economy. However, in his Soviet period he broug ht a new general view on the progressing of Byzantine feudalism.14 He represented the seventh century as a critical period for the development of medieval soci ety, one of profound economic decline, accelerated by the 11 M. Siuziumov, Kniga Eparcha [Book of the Eparch] (Sverdlovsk: Izdatlstvo Gosudarstvenyi Uchebno Pedagogicheskii Instituta, 1949); idem Rol Gorodov-Emporiev v Istorii Vizantii [The role of emporia in Byzantine history] Viz. Vremennik Vol. 13, (1958); Ekonomika Prigorod ov Vizantiiskih Krupnyih Gorodov [ The suburban economy of the Byzantine big cities] Viz. Vremennik Vol. 11 (1956). 12 B. T. Gorianov, Vozstanie Zilotov v Vizantii 1342-1349, Izvestia Akademyi Nauk SSSR Vol. 3. (1947), p. 93. 13 B. T. Gorianov, Pozdnevizantiiskii Feudalism [Late Byzantine feudalism] (Moscow: AN S. S. S .R, 1962) 14 Alexander Kazhdan, Derevnja i Gorod v Vizantii, IX-X vv [ Village and Town in Byzantium, 9th -10th centuries] ( Moscow: AN S. S. S .R., 1960)

PAGE 30

30 contraction of towns, with a subsequent reviva l in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. Kazhdan used a wide range of literary sources to counter the view that the Comnenian period was a time of steady decline. Instead, he ar gued that the twelfth century was a period of prosperity of both urban and agricultural economy. Constantinople lost its monopol y in the production of luxury goods and especially silk and there appeared to be an economic shift away from Constantinople to the provinces, although the capital still retained the cont rol of production of luxury goods.15 This process, according to Kazhdan, did not br ing up a new type of town economy or ideology. Cautious attitudes to the market prevailed and, in contrast to the West, provincial towns failed to develop their own bourgeois iden tity. Instead, they were dominated by local magnates and administrators. Kazhdans treatm ent of feudalization of Byzan tine society produces confusing signals. His combination of economic growth an d increased tendency towards bigger dependence of the peasants demonstrates the complete theo retical perplexity of his transitional period of departure from historical mate rialism. Although his views rema ined within the frame of theoretical Marxism, he completely abandoned hist orical materialism. It is hard to believe, however, that his statement after his departure from the Soviet Union that the growth of the towns of the Byzantine World, starting from the tw elfth century on, was not in conflict with the feudal system,16 was not influenced by the outgoing deba te in the West about the role of the twons in socio-economic development. It seems that Kazhdan opposed the theory of M. M. Postan and Maurice Dobb concerning the medieval towns as non-feudal islands in a feudal sea or outposts of capitalism that pulled up be hind them the social changes and economic advance, and accommodated the idea, more clearly expressed by Philip Abrams, that the towns 15 A. Kazhdan, People in Power in Byzantium. An Introduction to Modern Byzantine Studies (Washington: Dumbarton Oaks, 1982); idem, Change in Byzantine Culture and Literature of the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries .( Berkeley: UC Press, 1985). 16 A. Kazhdan, Change in Byzantine Cu lture in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries (Berkeley: UC Press, 1985).p.17.

PAGE 31

31 are actually concentrated and intensified reflections of their larger socio-economic environment.17 As for the agricultural socio-property relations, he had never reviewed his previous concepts expressed in Derevnja i Gorod v Vizantii and Agrarnyie Otnoshenia v Vizantii .18 Kazhdan remained silent about the shift in the economic structure of the Byzantine society, illustrated by Paul Lemerle and, later, by Gilbert Dagron, Jack Lefort, Anegeliki Laiou and Nicholas Oikonomides.19 The shift in the management of rural economy substituted one manager, the state, with another, the large-esta te owner, with evidentl y better results. For the agricultural economy in ge neral it brought out bigger surplus that fueled trade and industry. On the other hand, the protection from the secondary taxes ( exkoussia ) of a privileged estate, (corve and other services to the state) presumably covered also its paroikoi who in fact did manage to use it to escape some of the extraordinary fi scal obligations. This enabled the landowner who held an exkoussia to offer better tax conditions to his tenants, and he c ould, thus, attract to his estate the workforce he wanted and accelerate th e economic growth. Unfortunately, at this early moment of his scholarly development Kaz hdan still maintained the view of defining paroikoi as practically bound to the land despite his avoidance of dir ect usage of Western medieval terminology. 17 M. M. Postan, The Medieval Economy and Society ( Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1975).p.212; Maurice Dobb, Studies of the Development of Capitalism ( London: Routledge, 1946); Philip Abrams, Towns and Economic Growth: Some Theories and Problems, in Ph. Abrams and E. A. Wrigley, eds., Towns in Societies: Essays in Economic History and Historical Sociology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978),pp. 9-33 18 A. Kazhdan, Derevnja i Gorod v Vizantii, IX-X vv ; idem, Agrarnyie Otnoshenia v Vizantii XIII-XIV vv, [Agricultural relations in Byzantium 13th-14th centuries] (Moscow: A.N. SSSR, 1952). 19 Jacques Lefort, The Rural Economy, SeventhTwelfth Centuries; A. Laiou, The Agrarian Economy, ThirteenthFifteenth Century. N. Oikonomides, The Ro le of the Byzantine State in Economy; G. Dagron, The Urban Economy, Seventh-Twelfth centuries in The Economic History of Byzantium: from the seventh trough the fifteenth centuries Ed in chief A. Laiou (Dumbarton Oaks Resear ch Library and Collection, Washington, D. C, 2002).

PAGE 32

32 The intra-historical materialistic discourse about characteristics of the late Byzantine/ Balkan town was centered predom inantly on two problems. The first was the fruitless attempt to create some Marxist instrumental town typology, by which, according to V. Hrochova, the Byzantine/ Balkan town could be scientifically explored.20 Almost every authors introduction to studies concerning Byzantine/Balkan town reveals an at tempt for typologizing, usually employing only geographic or demographic criteria. The other main problem attracting scholars attention was the towns guild as an indication of socio-political emancipation of the urban popula tion. The hypothesis that guilds existed (although in some modified form) in the late Byzantine/Balkan ec onomies was discussed mostly within the circle of the Soviet scholar s grouped around the Univer sity of Sverdlovsk and the journal Antichnaja Drevnost i Srednie Veka For the Western Byzantinists the question of whether the guild existe d in late medieval Byzantium was never raised. The main proponent of guild existence was V. Smetanin, who based his claim on two weak pieces of evidence: Georgii Akropolits mention of producing for payments, and the letters of Demetrius Kydones, who refers to some discontent of the artisanal wage laborers in Constanti nople in 1372 that created disorder in the city.21 His opponents in the debate were I. Medvedev and V. Zavrazhin, who criticized Smetanins thesis.22 Unfortunately, the debate focu sed on the political unit called Byzantine Empire, and the evidence of guild manu factures in neighboring Bulgaria and Serbia, with their probable analogues in the Byzantine legal sy stem was ignored. The strongest evidence 20 Vera Hrochov, Bizantska Mest ve 13-15 stoleti (Prague: Universita Karlova, 1967).p. 9. 21 Smetanin. V. A, Osobenosti Gorodskogo Remesla v Vi zantii XIII-XIV vekov i Vozstanie naemnyh Rabochih v Constantinipole [ Peculiarities of By zantine urban craft production and the rebellion of the wage laborers in Constantinople] in Srednevekovyi Gorod ( Saratov; Izdatelstvo Saratovskii Universitet, 1981) 22 V. Zavrazhin, K Voprosu o Pozdnevizantiiskoi Manifakture [ About the question of late Byzantine manufacture] in Srednevekovyi Gorod (Saratov; Saratov: Izdatelstvo Saratovskii Universitet, 1981); I. Medvedev, K Tak Nazyvaemaja Vizantiiskaia Manifaktura [ About the so-called Byzantine manufacture] in Ibid.

PAGE 33

33 is contained in the Law for the Mining of Stefan Lazarevich and in its Bulgarian copy.23 Some additional evidence was brought up for Bulgaria by St. Lishev, V Giuzelev and S. Georgieva about the organizational forms of the production of sgraffito pottery, iron making, building industry and trade.24 Morevover, the existence of guilds is indisputably attested in the Ottoman period. The main information about the guilds, their organizational st ructures, prices and practices is contained in the registers of the sheriat courts and the Ottoman kanunname from the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.25 Being aware of the degree and extent to which the Ottomans borrowed and applied Byzantine lega l practices, the existence of fur-tailor and shoemaker guilds in Sofia in 1520, cloth-maker guilds in Plovdiv in 1570, or iron makers in Samokov in 1572 could hardly be explained as Ottoman innovation s. In other words, the sources unequivocally reveal a historiographical problem, according to which the guild manufactures in Byzantium ceased to exist after the liquida tion of the Byzantine government of Constantinople in 1204 and disappeared for almost three centuries. In the la te fifteenth century, they emerged again in the economic context of the Ottoman Empire. The lack of a politically active guild ma nufacture, however, was not an exclusively Byzantine phenomenon. Quite similar was the role and behavior of the guild manufactures in Castiles urban social structure, where political rights were granted to urban dwellers according 23 Zakon o Rudnicima Despota Stefan Lazarevicha [Mining Law of Stefan Lazarevi ] ed. by N. Radojci (Belgrade: Nau no Delo, 1962). 24 V. Gjuzelev, Novi Dokumenti za Turgoviata na Sred novekovna Bulgaria [ New documents for the trade of medieval Bulgaria] in Srednovekovna Bulgaria v Svetlinata na Novi Izvori ( Sofia: Narodna Prosveta, 1986); S. Georgieva, Za Keramichnoto Proizvodstvo v Srednovekoven Preslav [ The ceramic production in medieval Preslav] in Istoricheski Pregled Vol.6 (1953) pp. 6-18; Strashimir Lishev, Bulgarskiat Srednovekoven Grad [The medieval Bulgarin town ] ( Sofia: BAN, 1970) 25 Zdravko Pliakov, Za Reglamentaciata na Gradskoto Za naiatchiisko Proizvodstvo v Bulgarskite Zemi, XV-XVII vek, [ Regulations of urban guild manufactures in Bulgaria, XV-XVII centuries] Izvestia na Instituta po Istoria pri BAN Vol. 21 ( 1970).pp. 87-148

PAGE 34

34 to their obligations to the fisc, as tax-exempti ons, privileged individuals but not as producers.26 The Zealot Revolution in Thessalonike in 1342-49 also attained th e attention of the historical materialists but its class struggl e was conceptualized as part of the intra-feudal civil war in Byzantium between the economically empowered pr ovincial aristocracy a nd central power in Constantinople, completely different in char acter from the Ciompi uprising in Florence.27 The Development of Bulgarian Medi eval Historiography and Archaeology Bulgarian historiography in general was highl y po liticized well before the entering of the country into the Soviet orbit. Fr om its beginning in the late nine teenth century historiography in Bulgaria was developed in concordance with the idea reigning among nationalist-liberal states in Europe that history is an activ e ideological, political, and cultural instrume nt in social life. Therefore, the periodization of Bulgarian historiogr aphy reflects the stages of political life in the country. The reigning irredentism in the preWorld War II period centered historic al attention on the medieval period in an attempt to build st rong national consciousness and self-esteem based on historical evidences.28 Influenced by the German School, Bulgarian historiography followed the dominant positivist and romantic trends in constructing a general tr eatment of Bulgarian history, although some marginal Marxist, psycho logical, and racist vi ews existed as well. The change of political conjuncture after the World War II was, naturally, followed by the imposition of Marxist methodology in histori ography, which brought about more intensive 26 Pablo Sanchez Leon, Castile, 1400-650 in Town and Country in Europe, 1300-1800 ed. by S. E. Epstein (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2001).p. 287. 27 Ihor Sevcenko.The Zealot Revolution and the Supposed Genoese Colony in Thessalonica in Society and Intellectual Life in Late Byzantium. Essays by Ihor ev enko ( London: Variorum Reprints. 1981). 28 V. Zlatarski Istoria na Bulgarskata Durjava prez Srednite Vekove in 3 Vol.[ History of the Bulgarian State in the Middle Ages] ( Sofia: Durzhavna Pechatnica, 1927 1940) ; Iv. Snegarov, Istoria na Ohridskata Arhiepiskopia [ History of the Ohrids Archbishopric] 3 Vols. ( Sofia: Gutenberg, 19241932); J. Ivanov Bulgarski Starini iz Makedonia [ Bulgarian Antiques in Macedonia] ( Sofia: BAN, 1931) P. Mutafchiev, Istoria na Bulgarskia Narod[ History of Bulgarian people] in 2 Vols. (Sofia: BAN, 1940-43); N. Mushmov, Monetite i Pechatite na Bulgarskite Tsare [Coins and seals of the Bulgarian Tsars] (Sofia: Izdanie na NM., 1924).

PAGE 35

35 researches on social and econom ic history, underestimated in the pre-World War II period. As in other Soviet satellites, the purity of historical materialistic dogma was c ontrolled not only by the Bulgarian Communist censorship, but was also b rotherly supervised through the constructive critiques of the Soviet Byzantinists. In hi s first scholars steps in exploring Byzantine feudalism, for instance, D. Angelov was rebuked by A. Kazhdan for the formers deviations towards a certain idealization of Byzantine society, th e lack of stress on the centrality of the class struggle and inappropriate associ ations between the concept of feudalism and the growth of urban economy.29 That resulted in establishing a strict se nse of self-censorshi p by Angelov in his scholars career, a sense, reproduc ed not only by the Bulgarian hist orians but also by the entire national intelligentsia. The combination of the pre-Communist nationali st historiographical tr adition with imposed class-based Marxist methodology resulted in pr oducing confusing signals in the general treatment of late medieval Bulgarian history. The period of Byzantine rule in the Bulgarian territories (1018-1185), was conceptualiz ed as opposition between two notions: Byzantine/feudal/reactionary and Bulgarian/ anti -feudal/progressive elements. Byzantine rule was, therefore, depicted as a yoke, whos e rejection furthered class struggle against feudalism.30 Litavrins concept of the anti-feudal character of Bulgarian uprising in 1185 was, respectively, adopted by the majority of the Bulgarian leading medievalists.31 The Bogomils 29 A. Kazhdan, Agrarnye Otnoshenia v Vizantii, XIIXIV vv [ Agricultural relations in Byzantium, 13th -14th centuries] (Moscow: AN SSSR., 1952).p. 19 30 P. Petrov, Vazstanieo na Peter i Asen [ The uprising of Peter and Asen] ( Sofia: Nauka i Izkustvo., 1970) 31 P. Petrov, Vazstanieto na Ivalio, 1277-1280 [ The uprising of Ivailo ] Godishnik na Sofiiiskiat Universitet vol.49 ( 1956).pp. 173-260; Al. Burmov, Feodalismat v Srednovekovna Bulgaria [ Feudalism in Medieval Bulgaria] Istoricheski Pregled No2 ( 1945-46).pp.157-171; L. Ionchev, Za Haractera na Manastirskoto Zemevladenie v Macedonia [The character of the m onasterial landowning in Macedonia] Izvestia na Instituta po Istoria No 22 ( 1972).pp 121-182. B. Primov, Bugrit:, Kniga za Pop Bogomil i negovote posledovateli [ The Buogres: a book for priest Bogomil and his followers] (Sofia: OF, 1970).

PAGE 36

36 heresy, despite its anti-state (hence anti-Bulgarian) character, was interpreted as progressive since it was directed against feudalism and Orthodoxy.32 The portraying of Bulgarian people as bearers of the progress against Byzantin e feudalism was solidified additionally by the interpretation of the 1277-8 uprisi ng in Bulgaria as the first an ti-feudal uprising in the world.33 The invention and usage of inflated qualif ications as first an d earliest by Bulgarian Marxist historiography was indisp ensable in constructing and va lidating socialist mythology. But the ultimate sanction for the artifacts of glorification was held by archaeology. Thus, if history became an important ideological weapon in th e class struggle against capitalism, archaeology would be the ultimate arbiter providing the mate rial artifacts to legi timate historiographical concepts. The nationalist charac ter of pre-Communist cultural-hi story archaeology became easily integrated into the new class-centered demands of historical materialism. The main ideological clichs in medieval historiography were built, thus, around two major themes: the history of the antiorthodox and anti-state (i.e. progressive and anti-feudal) sect of Bogomils and of the successful uprising of the swineherd (therefore anti-feudal) Ivajlo in 1277, both glorifying Bulgaria as a cradle of progress in contrast to the reactionist Byzantine Empire. The symbiosis between nationalism and historical materialism re sulted, therefore, in c onstructing th e general view that the existence of medi eval Bulgarian state, as sugges ted by Litavrins lead in the subject, was as a response to the aggression of Byzantine feudalism and perfidy. The period of Byzantine rule in the Bulgarian lands (1018-1185) was considered, accor dingly, as a period of economic decline and feudal oppression: an asser tion, sanctioned by the proper analysis of 32 D. Angelov, Bogomisltvoto v Bulgaria [ Bogomils movement in Bulgaria ] ( Sofia: BAN, 1969); B. Primov, Bugrite, Kniga za Pop Bogomil i negovote posledovateli [ Buogres. A book for priest Bogomil and his followers] (Sofia: OF, 1970). 33 P. Petrov, Vyzstanieto na Ivalio, 1277-1280 [The upris ing of Ivailo] Godishnik na Sofiiiskia Universitet vol.49 (1956).pp. 173-260.

PAGE 37

37 archaeological artifacts. S. Geor gieva and R. Peeva, for instance, supported this ideological construction by analyzing the decline in quality of the bronze necklaces found together with coins of Manuel I (1143-1180) in the necropolis of medieval town of Lovetch.34 To the same correct outcome came, M. Stancheva and L. DonchevaPetkova, who analyzing the pottery and urban architecture of Sofia from the eleventh century, concluded that during the period of the Byzantine yoke the building activity and towns population declined. Surprisingly, the authors did not take under consideration the pottery and architecture from the 1100s, but only that from the eleventh century. 35 The role of socialist archaeol ogy as an ideological arbiter coul d be viewed, as well, in the priorities of the large-scale inve stigations: medieval capitals instead of regular prov incial towns, citadels instead of suburbs. The exploration of the towns hint erland was exclusively accidental work. Even the best-studied capital Turnovo lacked any adequate trea tment of its physical boundaries, while its internal fo rtified part was fully investigated. The medieval rural settlements, often built on the top of the ancient towns, were neglected in order to reveal the more promising cultural lay of antiquity. Pa linology was a method never applied by socialist archaeology; therefore, the ratio between agricu ltural and nonagricultural activity of towns population cannot be estimated. However, Bulgarian archaeologists, as Bulgarian historians, did not constitute a homogenous group of scholars. Although in concor dance with the official interpretation of Bulgarian feudalism as independently developed, G. Cankova-Petkova insisted upon the lack of 34 Sonia Georgieva and Raina Peeva, Srednovekoven Bulgarski Nekropol krai Lovetch i Nakitite Namereni v Nego. [ Medieval Bulgarian necropolis near Lovetch and the adornments found there] Izvestija na Arheologicheskia Institut Vol. 20 (1955).pp. 511-556. 35 Maria Stancheva, Sofia au moyen ge la lumire de nouvelles tudes archologiques, in Byzantinobulgarica No. 5 (1978).pp. 215; M. Stancheva an d L. Doncheva Petkova, Sur la su rface habite de Sredec au XI-XIVes, Izvestia na Arheologicheskiat Institut Vol. 35 (1979).pp. 124-133.

PAGE 38

38 judicial immunity in the legal pract ices of the Second Bulgarian Empire.36 Her conclusion, however, was intended as a critiq ue of the feudal theory of Ostrogorsky and in agreement with Kazhdans confusing concept of defining paroikoi as practically if not also legally, bound to the land.37 Contrary to the official line of interpreting the period of Byzantine rule in the Bulgarian lands, St. Lishev, supported by written and numisma tic data, was the first to demonstrate the significant growth of urban and agricultural economy in the Balkans at the time, suggesting that the Byzantine rule rather facilitated than deter the economic deve lopment in the territories under its governing.38 A decade later, Lishevs assumptions were proved by not a few monographs exploring the main Bulgarian urban centers in the thirteenth to fourteenth centuries that displayed a tendency of attracting considerable amount of rural populations. Fortresses turned into trading towns with expanding suburbs, market zones, and industry ac tivities. Unfortunately, since the indications for urban economic growth in the context of polit ical polycentrism could not get an adequate explanation by historical materialism, Lishev had to compromise with the official historiographica l dogma by resorting to the Marxs my stical division of labor between town and country. After presenting serious evid ence for the change of the function of late medieval town, from an administrative and militar y fortress into a market and productive center, he concluded that the late medieval Bulgarian town remained somewhat underdeveloped because of uncomplete division of labor between town and country. 36 G. Tsankova-Petkova, Za Agrarrnite Otnoshenia v Srednovekovna Bulgaria, XI-XIIIv [Feudalism in Medieval Bulgaria, 11th -13th centuries] ( Sofia: BAN, 1964). 37 A. Kazhdan, Agrarnye Otnoshenia v Vizantii, XIIXIV vv [Agricultural relations in Byzantium, 13th -14th centuries; idem, Derevnja i Gorodv Vizantii, IX-X vv [ Village and Town in Byzantium, 9th -10th centuries]. 38 Str. Lishev, Bulgarskiat Srednovekoven Grad [The medieval Bulgarian town] ( Sofia, BAN, 1970).

PAGE 39

39 Along with trusted authorities that provide d the Party-line in ar chaeology, there were numerous regular archaeologists, mostly from provincial archaeological museums, that built a rich corpus of archaeological data. The cri tical mass of evidence re sulted in the 1980s in numerous monographs on various towns and th e emergence of numismatics as a separate discipline. Coinciding with the mora l crisis of socialism that started in the la te 1970s, this corpus of new archeological data contri buted to altering the relations between hist ory and politics as well. Historical materialism continued to be the only theoretical instrument; the culture-historical paradigm in archaeology remained untouched by processual and post-pr ocessual trends in Western archaeology. History, however, ceased to be an assistant in the class struggle against capitalism. Allegiance to the political doctrine b ecame superficially manifested in lip service introductions after which the remainder of the works consisted most often of solid studies uncontaminated by ideological clichs. Unfortunatel y, this silent resistance to the Party demands for being more politically engage d did not facilitate the emer gence and adoption of some new theoretical views. The reflex for ideological isolation dr ove archeology in late socialist Bulgaria towards a descriptive and athe oretical manner of work; e.g. the survey of M. Kharbova on development of urban planning and spatial morphol ogy of the late medieval Bulgarian town or the multivolume collection of descriptive, almost travel-guide type articles on the same subject edited by V. Giuzelev.39 Political isolation became so deeply rooted that even the collapse of Communism did not bring any substantial change. If the lifting of the ideological barri ers and opening of the archives for the so-called zones of silence in histor iography brought about an explosion of works 39 M. Kharbova, Ukrepeniat Bulgarski Srednovekoven Grad, XIII-XIV v [ The fortified Blgari an medieval town, 13th -14th centuries] ( Sofia: Tekhnika, 1979); V. Giuzelev, ed, Bulgarski Srednovekovni Gradove i Kreposti [ Bulgarian medieval towns and fortresses] ( Varna: Georgi Bakalov, 1981)

PAGE 40

40 reevaluating the concepts of historical mate rialism, archaeology would remain stagnant and isolated. Overwhelmed by a deep financial cr isis and post-Communist social turmoil, archaeology in Bulgaria, besides some accidental piece-meal works (largely sponsored from abroad) ceased to carry out larg e-scale projects. Unfortunately, the financial hindrance for practical archaeology did not redirect the intell ectual energy to new theoretical searches. Even today Bulgarian archeology remains in a deep th eoretical vacuum and isolation from the main currents in the field. Western Historiographical Approaches to Late Byzantine Economy Ostrogorskys concept of feudalism was an object of criticism not only by historical materialists but also by Western Byzantinists. Hi s model was based on two institutions, to which he later devoted special studies: the pronoia and feudal immunity.40 He regarded pronoia as the Byzantine equivalent of the Western fief and it was only with the widesp read adoption of this institution by Alexis I Comnenus (1081-1118) that Byzantine society became fully feudalized. In Ostrogorskys view, Byzantium survived the crisis of the seventh and eight centuries owing to the greater importance of communities of independent peasants in this period and to the formation of a new category of military lands: peasants farms with an obligation to provide soldiers for the state. By the tenth century the ri se of the provincial feudals threatened the social balance achieved by the central power. According to him, the increasing subordination of the peasants by the large landowners undermined the strength of the central authority and, accordingly, much of Asia Minor was lost to the Seljuks in the eleventh century. Viewing feudalism as a negative process, Ostrogorsky assu med that independent peasants disappeared by 40 G. Ostrogorsky Pronjia. Prilog Istorii Feudalizma u Vizantii i Iujnoslavjanskim zemliama [Pronia. Applying history of feudalism in Byzantium and Southern Slavic lands] (Belgrade: Posebna izdanja Srpska Akademija Nauka, 1951); idem K Istorii Imuniteta v Vizantii [About history of immunity in Byzantium] Viz. Vremennik Vol. 13. (1958). Pp.55-106.

PAGE 41

41 the end of the eleventh century. They became de pendants either of the state or of the large landowners. Ostrogorskys theory was seriously challe nged by Paul Lemerle, whose arguments became a cornerstone for a new interpretation of the Byzantine legal and economic history.41 Lemerle, first questioned the similarities between pronoia and the fief and found them to be very superficial. According to him, many im portant features associated with the pronoia such as vassalage and the oath of fealty, did not occur with the pronoia, which was a simple attribution of fiscal revenues and temporary ownership of th e land in return for military service. The major objection to Ostrogorskys in terpretation was that the pronoia was a much more marginal phenomenon in Byzantium than th e fief in Western Europe. The pronoia grant involved only fiscal revenues, not jurisdictional rights over paroikoi and although there is evidence for the existence of aristocratic retinues, the pyramid al effect of sub-infeudation was absent in Byzantium. Further, in his counter-argumentatio n Lemerle notices that the difference between state paroikoi and independent peasant is somehow blurre d, an assertion that later was confirmed and developed by Jacques Lefort and Angeliki Laiou.42 However, regarding the eleventh century as a period of demographical decline after th e first decades of economic expansion, Lemerle defined it as a transitional period of agricu ltural economy preparing the shift in the land management that gathered momentum dur ing the course of twelfth century. 41 Paul Lemerle, The Agrarian History of Byzantium from the Orig ins to the Twelfth Century: the sources and problems (Galway, Ireland : Galway University Press, 1979); However, this book is not a new work but a new version of Lemerles previous seri es of articles that appeared in Review Historique (1958) and Cahiers de Civilization Mdivalle ( 1959). 42 Jacques Lefort, The Rural Economy, SeventhTwelfth Centuries. in The Economic History of Byzantium: from the seventh trough the fifteenth centuries Ed in chief A. Laiou ( Dumbarton Oa ks Research Library and Collection, Washington, D. C, 2002).pp. 231-314; A. Laiou, The Agra rian Economy, ThirteenthFifteenth Century in Ibid. pp. 311-375.

PAGE 42

42 The main problem with the concept of feudalism in Byzantium and the Eastern Balkans is the question of the peasants proper ty rights and their place in the sy stem of large estate and state land management. Assuming bondage as a per se condition for the feudal surplus extraction, the advocates of feudalism and feudalization in Byza ntium often simplified the source interpretation. The frequent evidence of paroiki not dwelling on the land given to them by their landlords was simply omitted or explained as exclusions, or ambiguous and unclear information. Evidence for individuals of various social ra nk and profession, who voluntarily chose to become paroikoi were explained as an evidence for exerted extraecono mic coercion not as an economically incentive recruit. The relation between th e peasant and the state was long accepted as opposing the relation between the pronoia holder and peasant. Thus, the transmission of the fiscal responsibilities for collecting revenues, th e basic character of pronoia, from the state to private individuals was treated as feudalization of Byzantine economy. It was a victor y of the large landowners over the peasantry and the state power. Furthermore, th e advocates of the late feudalization of the Byzantine World never realized that the Byzantine state treated equally th e property rights of the states and large estates peasants. The confusion ar ises from the fact that no little part of the large estate peasants did not possessed enough or any land and were, therefore, compelled to rent in exchange for money or labor, a piece of land from the estate owner. Even more, while the pronoia was never granted with the right to be perm anently transmitted to another individual, the rights of the peasan t over the land, be they states or pronoia s peasants, to be sold, were never questioned. Not only that, but the state never abandoned its role of arbiter between the pronoia holder and its paroikoi controlling the taxes and labor services of the latter not to exceed the prescribed amount. It is important to notice for the debate abou t Byzantine feudalization that another basic characteristic of the concept of feudalism, the corve, along with the military

PAGE 43

43 service, was allowed to be converted into cash payments from the middle of the eleventh century or, in other words, since the appearance of pronoia Quite naturally, not examining the essence of the landlordparoikoi relation and since the system of tax privileges was adopted comparatively late in Byzantine economy as a widespread fiscal instrument (eleventh-twelve centuries), th e development of feudalism was explained as a late phenomenon that demonstraed the underdeveloped and stagnant character of the Byzantine economy in comparison with its Western counterparts. The evidence for the underdevelopment of Byzantine economy was found also in the insignificant scale of the trade as part of the entire economy expressed through the dominant role of the foreign merchants in Byzantium and its neighboring Orthodox countries during the thirteenth to fifteenth centuries. The beginning of the 1970s marks the start of employing numismatics as an instrument for analyzing the trends of Byzantine economy th at would change most of its misconceptions. The concurrence, in a relatively short period, of important changes in the structure of the Byzantine state, agriculture, and army with th e drastic debasement of the Byzantine nomisma during the reign of Constantin e IX Monomachos ( 1042-1055), followed by the catastrophe at Manzikert in 1071, made the eleventh-twelfth ce ntury central for the understanding of late Byzantine economy. Not a little contribution to the shift in the attention of Byzantnists towards eleventh-twelfth centuries was played by the existe nce of a rich corpus of sources, both primary and secondary, for the period. Therefore, M. A ngold, who considered the coinage the soundest guide to the Byzantine economy, would exclaim that the debate about the character of

PAGE 44

44 debasement of the Byzantine gold coin was the most important historio graphical debate on the Byzantine economy during 1970-1980.43 Philip Grierson was the first to attract scholarly attention to the importance of debasement in the eleventh century.44 According to him, the ground for debasement was the unreasonable fiscal policy and extravagancy of Constantin e IX. Unlike Grierson, Cecile Morrisson proposed another explanation: that debasement was caused not by a budget deficit caused by the policy of Cons tantine IX but as resu lt of an increase in the volume of monetary transactions in the empire.45 The causes that led to this increase were grounded in the significant extension of the Byzantine territory during the reign of the Macedonian dynasty and to the transformation of the military and fiscal organization, and probably to a certain growth in production even though for certain reigns, such as those of Theodora or Isaac Comnenus, the immediate financial needs of the imperial finances were the determining factor.46 The main argument of Morrison was that economic gr owth at the time made debasement a devaluation of expansion rather than a devaluation of crisis and justified by the comparison with debasement of the silver penny in Western Europe and Iraqi dinar where the economies also experienced expansion at the time.47 Although the economic growth, detected from the eleventh century onward, was admitted by the majority of the economic Byzantinis ts, M. Hendy, M. Angold and W. Treadgold 43 M. Angold, The Byzantine Empire, 10251204 (London, New York: Longman, 1985) .pp. 9-10. 44 P. Grierson, The Debasement of the Bezant in the Eleventh Century. Byzantinische Zeitschrift Vol.47 (1954).pp. 37994. 45 Ccile Morrisson, La Dvaluation de la Monnaie Byzantine au XIe sicle: Essai dInterprtation. Travaux et Memoires 6 (1976): pp. 68. 46 Ccile Morrisson, La Dvaluation de la Monnaie Byzantine au XIe sicle: Essai dInterprtation. Travaux et Memoires 6 (1976): pp. 68. 47 Ibid.

PAGE 45

45 questioned how consciously the imperial govern ment was manipulating the currency as an instrument of economic policy.48 Michael Hendy, a major specia list in Byzantine coin production and circulation, was one of the first to openly claim that the economic hi story of Byzantine Empire lacked an adequate general treatment. According to Hendy, the general economic development of Byzantium between the ninth and thirteenth century, in all aspects of ru ral and urban economy, followed the trend of economic expansion visible in Western Europe.49 On the other hand, he portrayed the Byzantine economy as always dominated by factors that can be termed non-economic.50 Up to the radical monetary and administrative changes in the eleventh century, the Byzantine state acted as a primary agent in collecting the surplus in the form of taxes and redistributing it to the army and the civil administration, which on its turn, gave it back to the state as a payment for the offices that the state administrators hold (rogai ). Trade in Byzantium was always very limited and the market had just a marginal significance. Thus, contrary to the idea that the privileges in trade granted to foreigners were crucial for drying off the Byzantine economy, Hendy offered a different interpretation. The fore igners advantage over the local merchants seems considerable when comparing the two merchant classes.51 However, compared to the economic weight granted to local pronoia holders, within the whole system of privileges, the concessions given to the foreign merchant by the Byzantine state seem ed insignificant not exceeding the figures of the tax exemptions of a half -a-dozen Byzantine magnates.52 48 M. Angold, The Byzantine Empire, .p.9 49 M. Hendy, The Economy, Fiscal Administration and Coinage of Byzantium .( Northampton: Variorum Press, 1989).p.9. 50 Hendy, Studies in the Byzantine Monetary Economy, c.3001450 (Cambridge New York: Cambridge UP, 1985) 51 Hendy, The Economy, Fiscal Administration and Coinage of Byzantium. p. 26.

PAGE 46

46 The cities are considered to have been centers of consumption rather than of production and the economy was marked by a very low degree of monetization. Money fulfilled only the needs of the state, being distributed in a noneconomic manner. Accordin gly, debasement in the eleventh century could not be regarded as a conscious manipulation motivated by reasons of economic expansion because of the lack of economic understanding by the rulers in Constantinople. A clear example of the ambiguous signals of Hendys general treatment of Byzantine economy is, for instance, his interpretation of the investment policy of the Bachkovo Monastery.53 After achieving certain amount of money reserve (10 lb gold = 720 hyperpyra) the monastery authorities immediately invested it in purchasing of land.54 Hendy disregards it as an evidence for existence of a land market and an ag ricultural entrepreneurship but treats it as a sample for market-aversion and a trend to self-s ubsistence. Unfortunately, Hendy fails to detect the tendency of increased involve ment of the monasteries in nona gricultural mark et activities, the real-estate market in the towns or in some industry and trade activities, demonstrated later by the studies of M. ivoinovi and M. Poliakovskaia.55 Perhaps A. Bryer is right in his skepticism that no one has ever been able to make a th eme out of Orthodoxy and th e rise of Capitalism,56 52 Hendy, The Economy p. 26 53 M. Hendy, The Gornoslav Hoard, the Emperor Frederick I and the Monastery of Bachkovo in The Economy, Fiscal Administration and Coinage of Byzantium. pp. 179-191. 54 M. Hendy, Studies p. 568 55 M. ivojinovic, The Trade of Mount Athos Monasteries, ZRVI 29/30 (1991): 101116; M. A. Poliakovskaia, Monastyrskie Vladenia v Fessalonike i ee Prigorodom [ Monastery possessions in Thessalonike and its suburbs] in idem Vizantia, Vizantiicyi, Vizantinisti [ Byzanium, Byzantines, Byzantinists] (E katirinburg: Izdatelstvo Uralskogo Universiteta, 2003) pp. 249-272. 56 Anthony Bryer, Continuity and Change in Trebizonds Matzouka/ Mauka Valey in Continuity and Change in Late Byzantine and Early Ottoman society ( Washington: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and collection, 1986).p.277

PAGE 47

47 but this is due largely to the ambiguity of the term capitalism, not to some restraints of the Orthodox monastic foundations from the market. Michael Angold has a similar position to Hendy s interpretation of th e general trends of Byzantine economy. Although he detects distinctiv e economic advance in all aspects of the Byzantine economy, he suspects that Byzantine empe rors were not interested in either economy or commerce.57 This claim, shared initially by A. Laiou in her article about the Byzantine economy in the Mediterranean trade system was disproved with an appendix to the same article that she added during the time when the ar ticle was submitted for publishing. New sources became available that changed Laious view In my opinion, however, not only were the Byzantine emperors involved and interested in trade, but also their example was followed by Bulgarian and Serbian rulers as it is discussed in Chapter IV. Furthermore, Angolds position regarding debasement in Byzantine monetary history, as an economic instrument, strangely changes. In 1975, in his authoritative study about the Nicaean Empire, analyzing the debasement of the gold coin by John III Dukas Vatatzes (12221254), he firmly concluded that devaluation of the hyperpyron was made despite the availability of state gold reserves and the growth of agricultural economy and trade. No t only it was a solution to a l ack of a ready cash, (deflation in the context of e xpanding market) but also it may have ever been one of the conditions for agricultural economic expansion. 58 Interestingly, Angold denies similar interpretation for the debasement of the Byzantine gold coin in the eleventh century.59 Based on Hendys analysis and inspired by subt le understanding of Marxism, Alan Harvey attempted a new and quite eclectic approach to the Byzantine economy between 900 and 1200 by 57 M. Angold, The Byzantine Empire, p.9 58 M. Angold, A Byzantine Government in Exile ( Oxford: Oxford UP, 1975), p.119 59 M. Angold, Byzantine Empire .p.9

PAGE 48

48 offering the idea that the economic growth was not incompatible with the contraction of political power. Harvey claim that the political collapse at the end of the twelfth ce ntury was not the result of an economic decline, but quite the opposite: it came from increasing re venues that facilitated the political emancipation of the pr ovincial aristocracy. The other goa l of Harvey was to reinstate the authority of Marxism as universal explanat ory instrument through broadening the concept of feudalism for explaining the economic developm ent of both Byzantine and Western Europe. Instead of the fruitless attempts of the Soviet Byzantinists, wh o were desperately looking for signs of Western-type feudalism (t he strict hierarchical system of fief, the feudal immunity and serfdom), Harvey placed the state within the role of a main su rplus extractor. Theoretically, Harvey simply loosed the ties between the ma in categories in Marxis t social construction, base and superstructure, allowing mutual primacy of both elements. Not always economy (base) affects superstructure (politics) but also th e opposite. His definition of feudalism is also so dubious that it could be equally applicable for defining agricultural capitalism. The direct producers of land were exploited by the state or by the landowning aristo cracy through applying some sort of compulsion.60 His understanding of Byzantine agricultural economy is a combination of Dlgers gloomy notion of Byzantin e agriculture, as a society overwhelmingly consistent of peasants with elements of R. Brenners idea that peasants production was targeted to self-subsistence and, without a pressure from the outside, they had little incentive to participate in the market. Due to his theoretic al adherence to class-centered model, Harvey argued that the highly monetized Byzantine economy had very few means to coerce the peasant into the market. Peasants appeared on the market only to satisfy their minimal needs to obtain cash for fiscal obligations. Money circulation, fo r Harvey, was some extra-economic issue used 60 A. Harvey, Economic Expansion of the Byzantine Empire, 900-1200 ( Cambridge, 1989).p.7

PAGE 49

49 by the state only to make its necessary expe nditure, which was predominantly military and administrative.61 Even the commutation of the corve into cash was not considered economically stimulating. He refered only to three cases in which peasants dealt with cash until the twelfth century and understandably refered to them as exclusions that coul d only prove the rule.62 Harvey, however, is one of the few Byzantinists who devoted a chapter in his writings to the town-country relation. Towns, although suspected of a certain growth during the last two centuries of Byzantium, just like the rural econo my were arenas of activity of landowners, who, due to their privileges, signifi cantly outnumbered the merchant class and dominated the market. Thus, the development of the towns is depicted as a function of the rural economy, which besides making a greater supply of food for the towns, le ads to an increase of the revenues of both the state and private landowners and consequent ly stimulated demand for industrial goods. An indispensable key for unde rstanding the Byzantine/Balkan socio-economic urban development and its similarities and differences with Western Eur ope is offered by the studies of Dalmatian coastal towns. The field has been led by Baria Kreki whose expertise on his native Dubrovnik remained authoritative for more than fifty years.63 Kreki displayed Dubrovnik or, Ragusa, as a town having always paid tribute to its neighbors in the ma inland and the dominant powers in the Adriatic Sea, in order to main tain the supply of goods. However, exactly this political vulnerability became th e main source of citys wealt h. The citys economic progress, according to Kreki was due to its equal proximity (or its remoteness) and political balance 61 Harvey, Economic Expansion p.80 62 Ibid.118 63 Baria Kreki Dubrovnik (Raguse) et le Levant au Moyen Age Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes (Paris: Mouton, 1961); idem, Dubrovnik in the 14th & 15th Centuries: A City Between East and West (Norman, Oklahoma University Press, 1972); idem, Dubrovnik, Italy and the Balkans in the Late Middle Ages, (London Variorum Reprints, 1980); idem, Urban Society of Eastern Europe in Premodern Times (editor), (Berkeley-Los Angeles, University of California Press, 1987); idem, Dubrovnik: A Mediterranean Urban Society 1300-1600, (Aldershot: Variorum, 1997)

PAGE 50

50 between the dominant powers at certain mome nts: Byzantine Empire and Venice, Hungary and the Balkan Slavic states and, later, the Ottomans and Austrians. In terms of concentration of landowne rs and wealthy people, Dubrovnik, as Kreki demonstrated, displays a social structure quite analogous to that of Byzantine and Italian towns. Kreki called the citys social m odel patrician democracy, in which the social hierarchy reflects the economic power of the aristocratic families.64 It was a model that became an ideal for the Byzantine provincial nobility dur ing the fourteenth-century civi l strife. The aristocracy of Dubrovnik was presented not within the classica l Western notion of aristocracy as a landowning hereditary group that monopolizes the links with the central power, but rather in Byzantine terms, as a function of the state, as citys executive officers, having characteristics not of a hereditary, but of a corporate group. This group had the ability to absorb new men and lacked the rigid and inaccessible Western st ructures of personal dependen cies. The parallels with the Byzantine society go even further. The profession al organizations of Physicians, Barbers and Pharmacists in Dubrovnik, portrayed as city-state officers whose professional activities were regulated and paid by the government, are quite reminiscent of the Book of the Eparch The only difference in social terms, noticeable between Dubrovnik and fourteenth-c entury Thessalonike, for instance, was regarding the political governing of the towns. While the Conislium Rogatorum or Senate of Dubrovnik that consisted of thirty to forty prominent patricians had the sovereignty to elect their own ruler, the Senate of Thessalonike had to accept as their governor an appointee of the emperor. 64 Kreki Dubrovnik in the 14th and 15th centuries. p.39.

PAGE 51

51 Another specialist on the Dalmatian coastal towns, Ilija Sindik, focused on the coastal towns around Bay of Kotor.65 Sindik provides secure evidence th at by the time of their conquest by Stefan Nemanja, 1184-1186, the coastal cities of Bay of Kotor ha d already developed communal organization and they had been gran ted autonomy by the ByzantineEmpire. Of all coastal towns of Nemanji state, Kotor was the most privil eged one, according to the surviving Kotors Statute and its public notary registers, the main documents for the town.66 According to Sindik, Kotor enjoyed greater autonomy under th e Serbian rule than did Dubrovnik under the Venetian rule.67 Kotor was exempted from land and custom taxes and had no obligation for providing military forces for the army of the Serbian king. Like Dubrovnik, Kotor had similar organs of government and principal officials. The social structure of Kotor, as illustra ted by the more recent analysis of city by Nevenka Bogoevi -Glu evi was similar to that of Dubrovniks patrician democracy: a hundred interrelated nobles ruled over ten thousand people in th e city and its hinterland. 68 The treatment of newcoming peasants into the to wn invokes some parallels with the Byzantine practices. Even paroikoi would have obtained a civil status if they had had a real estate on towns territory or they had spent more th an a half year within the town.69 65 Ilija Sindik, Komunalno uredjenje Kotra od druge polovine XII do po etka XV stole a [Municipal organization of Kotor from the second half of the 12th century to the opening of the 15th century] (Belgrade: Nauc na knjiga, 1950); idem, Odnos grada Budve Prema Vladarima iz Dinastie Nemanicha [Relationship between the town of Bidva and the first rulers of the House of Nemanji ] Istoriski Chasopis No 7 (1957). Pp 95-114. 66 S. Mijukovi "Statuta et leges Civitatis Cathari" Godinjak Pomorksog Muzeja u Kotoru, No. 1-2, (1954), pp.116. 67 Sindik, Komunalno uredjenje Kotra Pp. 89-108 68 Nevenka Bogoevi -Glu evi Svojinski Odnosi u Kotoru u XIV vijeku [Porperty relations in the fourteenthcentury Kotor] (Niki : n. p., 1992), p. 31. 69 Ibid. p. 58; For analogical case in Constantinople see pg. 90

PAGE 52

52 Besides Kotor, Budva was the only other c ity given any degree of autonomy among the coastal towns of the Bay of Kotor. However, the town was obliged to pay land and custom taxes. It did not have juridicial autonomy and was obliged to supply the Serbian king, (later, emperor) with an armed squad of horsemen.70 Uncomparable to Kotor, Budva, however, suggests a level of autonomy comparable to what is demonstrated by the Byzantine towns during and after the campaign of restoring the Byzantine government in Constantinople. Similar military obligation, for instance, is registered in Pactum Adrianopolitanum between the Venetian podest of Constantinople and representatives of the city of Adrianople in the spring of 1206. According to the document, the Latin conquerors of Cons tamtinople recognized the rights of the Adrianopolitan archontes and the autonomy of the city under its capitaneus Theodore Branas in exchange of military service for the 500 horsemen.71 While the urban studies of Dalmatian coas tal towns epitomize the important and often neglected bridge between West ern and Eastern European urban studies, the recently published Economic History of Byzantium finally offered the appropriate context for the Byzantine/Balkan urban studies. Its message was inspired by th e Weberian idea that (the Byzantine) economy could not be understood out of its institutional an d cultural context and therefore the reductionist approach, which conceptualizes Byzantium thr ough the application of analytical categories derived from Western historical experience must be abandoned. The Economic History of Byzantium represents the culmination of the Byzantine scholarly achievement, built on already significant corpus of sources and freed from conceptual 70 Ilija Sindik, Odnos grada Budve Prema Vladarima iz Dinastie Nemani cha [Relationship between the town of Bidva and the first rulers of the House of Nemanji ] Istoriski Chasopis No 7 (1957). Pp 95-114. 71 G. L. F. Tafel and G. M. Thomas, Urkunden zur ltern Handels und Staatsgeschichte der Republik Venedig Vol II. (Vienna: Hofund Staatsdruckerei, 1856-1857), pp. 17-19.

PAGE 53

53 and ideological constrains. This synthetic coll ection of general, them atic and case studies by leading Byzantinists became thus the most se rious attempt for re-wri ting the Byzantine economic history that was long in coming a nd that, as in the present case, would inspire further researches in the field.

PAGE 54

54 CHAPTER 3 THE COUNTRY Macedonia, Moesia and Northern Thrace: De mographic and Landscape Characteristics. In the present study, Moesia, Northern Th race and Macedonia, comprising the territory under consideration, are comprehended broadly in their geographical understanding that comes after the Roman administrative division (fig.3-1). Moesia, s ubdivided during the reign of Dometian (85-86) into Upper and Lower Moesia was bounded by Danube River to the north and the Balkan and Shar Mountains to the south; Drina River to the west and Black Sea to the east. In the present study, however, under Moesia will be understood as the territory of the Roman Lower Moesia comprising the territory of the plain on the southern bank of Lower Danube ( Danube Plain) and the transitiona l hilly zone between the plain and th e Balkan Mountains that has been a nucleus of the Bulgarian state since the seventh century. Northern Thrace is a region enclosed between the Sredna Gora Mountains to the north and west; the Rhodopes, Sakar and Strandzha Mountains to the south and the Black Sea to the east. Historica lly, Northern Thrace was an arena of constant rivalry between Bulg aria and the Byzantine Em pire and often changed its political adherence. Macedonia roughly comprises the territo ries between the Adriatic Sea to the west, Rila and Pirin Mountains to the east, the watershe d of the Vardar, Struma and Drin Rivers to the north and Thessaly and Epirus, re spectively, to the south and southw est. Being part of the Roman Empire since the second century B.C., the territory of Macedonia was conquered by the Bulgarians in the ninth century and became a cultural center of the First Bulgarian Empire. It fell again under the Byzantine rule in the eleventh to thirteenth centu ries as well as did the entire Balkans. During the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries Macedonia change d often its political affiliation. It had been ruled by Western European, Bulgarian, Byzantine and Serbian administrations until its conquest by the Ottomans at the end of the fourteenth century (fig.3-2).

PAGE 55

55 Macedonia, Thrace and Moesia do not display any significant difference in their climates. The southern parts of Macedonia and Thrace are characterized by Medite rranean climate with hot and dry summers and mild winters, while their northern parts are placed into the transitional zone between the continental a nd Mediterranean climatic types with harsher but brief winters and hot and long summers. The seasons of intensive rainfalls in the thr ee regions occur at the same time, during the spring and the fall. The most fertile soils in the Balkans, known as chernozems, are located within the Danube Plain and formed in about one third of Moesian soil coverage. The rest of Moesia consisted of almost equally represented brown and lithosol soils. The Thracian Plane is dominated by the cinnamon and brown fo rest soils as well as the modified chernozems, known as chernozem-Mediterranean black soils, which is a zonal soil with a deep and rich humus horizon. In about 64 percent of the territories of Macedonia are covered by mountain shallow soils: lithosols, rankers and brown forest soils. The mo st fertile area of Macedonia consisting of alluvial soils is located along the valleys of lo wer Vardar and Struma Rivers and the bay of Thessalonike. In the regions under consideration, as well as in the entire Balkans, the agricultural economy was characterized by polyculture and po lyactivity. Wheat and barley were the main crops determining not only the se lf-sufficiency but also the dyna mics of the market in the Balkans. However, several regions were specialized exclusively in grain cultivation and trade: the Danube Plain, especially its no rtheastern part that formed in the fourteenth century the despotate of Dobrudja, Aegean Macedonia, the Black Sea coastal inland south of the Balkan Mountains between Mesembria and the Tundzha Valey, and Southern Thrace between Adrianople and Constantinople. Besides wheat a nd barley, the land produced rye, millet, vetch

PAGE 56

56 and oats. Legumes were widespread as part of the two-field system. Viticulture, the mulberry and olive trees played an important role in ag ricultural economy and were the best cash crops. Fruit trees were common for almost the entire region of the Balkans. Only the citrus and olive trees have restricted zone of vegetation around the coastlines of Marmara, Southern Adriatic and Aegean Sea. The gardens produced cabbage, leek s, carrots, garlic, onion, zucchini, melons and cucumbers. Alongside agriculture, the peasants were engaged in sericulture, pasture, fishing, and beekeeping. Besides the traditiona l spinning and weaving, often, as it will be demonstrated further, an additional craft was involved in th e daily activities of the Balkan countryside. The wide range of factors contributing to diversity in agriculture includes landscape, demographic developments, soil fertility, settlements patterns, institutional context, regional customs and family relations. Although it is not a simp le task either to differentiate the historical causes explaining the fluctuations of these indi cators or to ascribe a rank ordering to their importance, historians have tended to grace th e demographic factor with a primary role. There is a general agreement among the By zantinists that the overall increase of population that started in the eleventh century Byzantine Empire, in both its Anatolian and Balkan parts, continued steadily up to the middl e of the fourteenth century, even though there were some restricted areas displaying reverse trends. Although it is crucia lly important to study the demographic development, the most important economic variable in pre-modern societies, this field of study has been barely an object of serious scholarly consider ation. Most of leading Byzantinists restrained from es timation of the population figures in the late medieval Byzantium and Balkans due to the lack of reliable data. The scholars tendency of avoiding the study of demographic movements in late medieval Balkans is one of the main blockages for an unbiased assessment of its agricultural production and economic development in general. The

PAGE 57

57 demographic growth in the West brought in the tenth century th e socio-economic and technological changes that George D uby called the agricu ltural revolution.1 The population crisis, caused by the Black Death in the mid-fourteenth century, was considered by the economic historians as one of the main factors for erodi ng serfdom and, consequently, in contributing to the advance of capitalism.2 Yet, lacking secure grounds, th e majority of the Byzantinists accurately avoid the topi c of the ratio of men to land in late Byzantium and, accordingly, to its Balkan provinces, but are in general agreement th at unlike Western Europe, in the late medieval Balkans the availability of land had always exce eded the availability of labor force. Some attempts are not absent for estimating the demo graphic trends in the Balkans, however, but, largely the estimations, such as that of J.C. Russell and W. Treadgold, were based on unjustified assumptions for undefined territories.3 A. Laiou also attempted an estimation of population density of Macedonia, but her calculations were based on the misleadingly high figures of the most populated area of southern Macedonia inhab iting the biggest villages that could not be applied for the rest of Macedonia.4 In this respect, the demographic studies of L. Barkan and N. Todorov are quite contrasting, but, unfortunately, are not util ized by the economic historians dealing with late Byzan tine and Balkan economy.5 Although their studies were directed to the 1 Georges Duby, Rural Economy and Country Life in the Medieval West (London: Edward Arnold, I968), pp. 44-48. 2 M. M. Postan and John Hatcher, Population and Class Relations in Feudal Society, in T .H. Aston and C. H .E. Philpin, The Brenner Debate (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985); David Friedman, Florentine New Towns ( New York: MIT Press, 1988); Philip Scholfield, Peasant and Community in Medieval England, 1200-1500 ( New York: Palgrave-Macmilian, 2003); David Herlihy, Cities and Society in Medieval Italy ( London: Variorum, 1980).p.23.; Bas van Bavel and Jan Luiten van Zanden, The Jump Start of the Holland Economy During the Late Medieval Crisis, 1350-1500. The Economic History Review Vol. LVII, No 3 (2004), pp. 50332. 3 J. C. Russell, Late Ancient and Medieval Population (Philadelphia, 1958).pp. 99, 148 ; W. T. Treadgold, The Byzantine State Finances in the Eighth and Ninth Centuries (New York: Columbia Univer sity Press, 1982).pp. 54 55. 4 Angeliki Laiou, Peasant Society in the Late Byzantine Empire ( Princeton: Princeton UP, 1977).pp. 42-43. 5 L. Barkan, Essai sur les dones statistiques de recensement dans lEmpi re Ottoman au XV-XVI sicles [Essay on the statistics of the census registers of the Ottoman Empire in the 15th16th centuries] Journal of the Economic and social History of the Orient Vol 1. ( 1957); Research on the Ottoman Fiscal Surveys. Studies in the Economic

PAGE 58

58 period of Ottoman rule in the Balkans that con tinued up to the nineteenth century, their earliest source, the Ottoman cyzie ( poll tax collected from non-Musl ims) register of 1489-93, offers a good basis for estimating the population trends in the fourteenth century. Having in mind that the population recovery from the Bl ack Death did not occur before the late fifteenth and the beginning of the sixteenth centuries in most regi ons of Europe, it is safe to accept the population figures from the second half of the fifteenth centu ry, if not as absolute at least as generally representative figures for the s ituation on the eve of demographic crisis of the mid-fourteenth century. It is important to note, however, th at the fifteenth-century population figures, as provided by the Ottoman tax register of 148993, should be accepted very cautiously as representative for the mid-fourteenth century. They are applicable only to those Balkan regions, which were demographically unaffected by the Ottoman conquest Eastern and Central Macedonia. Both Macedonian subregions could serve as demographic models for comparing the population movements within the neighboring regions Therefore, in addition to the Ottoman tax register of 1489-93, the fifteenth and sixteenth-centuries regional tax registers for the regions (sancaks)6 of Nicopol Vidin and Kiustendil, overlapping with the existing pre-Ottoman political units, will be used in the present chapter as ma in sources for analyzing the population trends in fourteenth-century Moesia and Macedonia.7 History of the Middle East from the Rise of Islam to the Present Day ( London, 1970) ; Nikolai Todorov, Za Demografskoto Sustojanie na Balkanskiat Poluostrov prez Xv-XVI vek [ The demographic situation of the Balkan peninsula during 15th -16th centuries] Godishnik na Sofiiski at Universitet Vol.2 ( 1959-1960); Society, The City and Industry in the Balkans, 15th 19th centuries (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 1998). 6 An administrative unit within the Ottoman Empire with a relatively constant territory representing as well a military unit. The extension of the rights of the military chiefs, who used to assume administrative charges found its expression in the adoption of the power symbol, the flag (sancak) as a name of a territorial unit. 7 Duanka Bojani Luka and Vera Mutafchieva, Vidin and Vidinski Sancak, XV-XVI vek [Vidin and Vidin sancak, 15th -16th centuries] (Sofia: Nauka i iz kustvo, 1975); Hristo Matanov, Vyznikvane i Oblik na Kiustendilski Sandjak, XVXVI vek [ Kiustendil sancak. Genesis and Outlook] (Sofia: IF-94, 2004); Rumen Kovachev, Nikopolskiat Sancak prez Poslednata Chetvart na XV vek [ The Nicopol sancak during the last quarter of the 15th century] (Sofia: National Library Press, 1997)

PAGE 59

59 The representativeness of the Ottoman cen sus data is confirmed by the demographic records of the village of Radolibos (Radolivo, Radilofo) as examined by F. Dlger, Svoronos, J. Leffort and H. Lowry8 and by the general demographic trends in Western Europe in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.9 It is not surprising that no survey of the late medieval history of Macedonia could avoid a discussion of Radolibos. The village has deta iled written documentation, preserved in the archives of the monastery Iveron, at Mont h Athos, revealing its socio-economic and demographic expansion from the late eleventh to the late fifteenth centuries. The documents reveal that the number of inhabitants along with their fields grew steadily until reaching a peak of 1060 inhabitants on the eve of the civil strife in By zantium, in 1341. The Ottoman cyzye registers from 1465 and 1478 show that the populati on of Radolibos still did not attain its preplague level, but contracted to 606 inhabitants in 1465 and only 631 in 1478.10 Several factors suggest that the demogra phic change exemplified by Radolibos, was a general trend, not only for Macedon ia but also for the Balkans as a whole. The growth of Radolibos that ceased on the eve of the Black Death is confirmed by the growing number of 8 The case of Radolibos was in the focus of historiographical research since 1948 when F. Dlger, published his Aus den Schatzkammern des Heiligen Berges ( Munich, 1948) It has been an object of research of S. Vryonis Jr, The Will of a Provincial Magnate Eusthathios Voilas Dumbarton Oaks Papers Vol. 11 ( 1957), pp 263-277; G. Ostrogorski,Radolivo Sbornik Radova Vizantoloshkog Instituta Beograd Vol. 7 ( 1961).pp.67-70 ; G. TsankovaPetkova, Feodlanaia Renta v Bolgarskyh Zempliah pod Vizantiiskim Vladichestvom Vizantiiskii Vremmennik Vol. XIX ( 1961).pp.10-12.; J. Lefort, P opulation and Landscape in Eastern M ecedonia during the Middle Ages: The case of Radolibos in A. Bryer and H. Lowry eds., Continuity and Change in Late Byzantine and Early Ottoman Society ( Birmingham Washington D.C: University of Birmingham, 1986)., pp. 11-23; Heath Lowry, Changes in Fifteenth Century Ottoman Peasant Taxation: Th e case of Radilofo, in Ibid. pp 23-37. 9 J. C. Russell, British Medieval Population (Albuquerque: University of Ne w Mexico Press, 1948); W. Abel, Die Wstungen des ausgehenden Mittelalters ( Jena: G. Fisher, 1943).pp. 24-30; M. M. Postan, Some Economic Evidence of Declining Population in the Later Middle Ag es The Economic History Review, New Series Vol.2 No3 ( 1950).pp. 221-246. 10 Heath Lowry, Changes in Fifteenth Century Ottoman P easant Taxation: The case of Radilofo in A. Bryer and H. Lowry eds., Continuity and Change in Late Byzantine and Early Ottoman Society (Birmingham Washington D.C.: Birmingham University, 1986)pp. 23-37.

PAGE 60

60 newly founded villages in Eastern Chalki dike, as surveyed by Jacques Lefort11 and the number of households per village, as demonstrated by A. Laious survey of the villages of the Xenophon, Iveron and Zographou Monasteries: Stomion, Psalidofourna-Neakit ou, Kato Volvos, Melintziani Gomatou and Ierisos.12 Furthermore, the population growth is displayed through the continuous large-scale land reclamation as displayed by the char ters of the Serbian rulers to the ecclesiastic foundations in Western and Northern Macedonia: the monasteries of Konchani, Hilandar, and of St. George (near Skopje), as well as to the bishopric of Prizren.13 The same pattern of demographic growth appears in Asia Minor, wher e following the fall of Constantinople in 1204, the population increased because of the refugees from the areas occupied by the Latins and because of the large body of Cumans that settled in the Meander Va lley and in Phrygia.14 In contrast, the territory of Northern Thrace, between Philipopolis and Adrianople, a territory of traditional rivalr y between Bulgaria and Byzanti um, shows a steady depopulation trend starting from the Bulgarian uprising of 1185 to the climax of the Byzantine civil war of 1341-1347. The Catalan and Mongol raids, the su bsequent Black Death and the Turkish incursions left deserted the most fertile lands of the Balkans. The Ottoman cizye registers for Macedonia, and, especially, for the Kiustendil sancak, between 1490 and 1518/31, display striking differen ces in total numbers and coefficient of population density, when compared to either Nort hern Thrace or the Da nube Plain, (Moesia). The Kistendil sancak was located in Northeastern Macedoni a and comprised the territory of the 11 Jacques Lefort. Villages de Macedoine Vol. 1, La Chalcidique occidentale. (Paris: Diffusion de Boccard 1982); J.Lefort, Rural Economy and Social Relations in Coutryside Dumbarton Oaks Papers Vol. 47. (1993).pp.101-113; J. Lefort, Population and Landscape in Eastern Mecedonia during the Middle Ages: The case of Radolibos. 12 A. Laiou, Peasant Society in the Late Byzantine Empire ( Princeton: Princeton UP, 1977) 13 Stoyan Novakovi Zakonski spomenici Srpskih Drjava Srednega Veka [ Legal documents of the Serbian state during the Middle Ages] (Belgrade: Drz avnoj s tampariji 1912) 14 Michael Angold, Byzantine Government in Exile .pp.103-105.

PAGE 61

61 former despotate of Constantine and Ivan Drag a. The despotate of Draga emerged after the battle of Chernomen in 1371 from the ruins of the Principality of Vulkain and Uglea. In the summer of 1395, after Constantine Draga died at Rovine fighting on the Ottoman side against the Walachian princes, his principality fell unde r the Ottoman rule. According to an already established tradition, the ne w Ottoman district was named after its former ruler Kiustend-illi (The land of Constantine). At the opening of the third quarter of the fourteenth century, the Bulgarian Empire was already divided in three mutually related, but autonomous, units. The heir of Ivan (John) Alexander (1331-71), Ivan (John) Shishman (13711395) continued to rule in Turnovo over the largest and most urbanized zone of central Moesia, the region of Sofia (Sredec, Serdica) and the zones in Northern Thrace, around Plovdiv (Philipopolis), Yambol (Diampol) and Nesebar (Mesembria), a territory known from the fourteen th-century sources as Zagora.15 The western part of Moesia, which had initially been given as an appanage to the princes of the ruling dynasty in Turnovo, became after 1371 an independent principa lity, centered in Vidin (Bdin). The eastern part of Moesia, comprising the Northeastern Moesian plateau the lands along the Black Sea coast and between Danube delta and the Eastern Balkan Mountains, formed the despotate of Dobrudja. The Ottomans renamed the newly con quered Bulgarian territories according to the sequence of their acquisition. The region of Sofia fell first under the Ottoman rule and became the Sancak of Sofia The Vidin Principality became the Sancak of Vidin while the Despotate of Dobrudja was registered in th e Ottoman documents as the sancak of Silistra The central territory of Bulgarian Empire, with the old capital Turnovo, became the Sancak of Nicopol All of these 15 See the map in fig. 2-2.

PAGE 62

62 territories, together with the la nds along Maritza and Tundja valleys in Northern Thrace (part of the Ottoman Pasha Sancak), belonged to medieval Bulgaria. The area of the Kiustendil sancak was approximately 20,000 sq/km, while that of Nicopol and of Vidin sancaks was 36, 000 sq/km and 11, 000 sq/km, respectively.16 The cizye register of 1490-91 gives a total number of 43, 441 non-Muslim households for the Kiustendil, 18, 208 for the Nicopol and 10,639 for the Vidin sancaks.17 Undoubtedly, to these figures should be a dded the number of unr ecorded non-Muslim households, as well as the number of even tual Muslim colonists. In frontier sancaks such as Vidin and Nicopol, a significant percen t of the Christian population, known as voynuks, performed border duties in exchange for fu ll tax exemption. Voynuks were, therefore, not mentioned in tax registers. In addition to the voynuks, there were also derbencis (about 1000 families in the entire Rumelia) that acted as guardians of mountain passes, bridges and other strategic locations and, dogancis (hunting hawk breeders in the serv ice of the Sultan). However, for the sake of clarity, we can assume equal pr oportions of Muslim colonists and privileged groups of Christians, which went unrecorded by cyzie registers, as well as widow families and bachelors. The population de nsity of the Kiustendil sancak may, therefore, have been approximated at 11 per sq/ km, with 2.5 a nd 5.5 inhabitants for Nicopol and Vidin sancaks 16 Hr. Matanov, Vyznikvane i Oblik na Kiustendilski Sandjak, XVXVI vek [Kiustendil sancak. Genesis and Outlook] (Sofia: IF-94, 2004) pp. 111-115. 17 Matanov, Vyznikvane i Oblik .p. 112; R. Kovachev, Nikopolskiat Sancak prex Poslednata Chetvart na XV vek [ Nikopol sancak during the last quarter of the 15th century] (Sofia: National Library Press, 1997).p. 91; Duanka Bojani Luka and Vera Mutafchieva, Vidin and Vidinski Sandzak, XV-XVI vek [ Vidin and Vidin sancak, 15th -16th centuries] ( Sofia: Nauka i Izkustvo, 1975).p.29.

PAGE 63

63 respectively. The population density for the former Dobrudja Despotate (the Silistra sancak ) shows the striking re sult of 1.5 per sq/km.18 The figure of 11 people per sq/km in Kiustendil sancak is relatively close to an estimate of 9 per sq/km given by V. Panayiotopoulos for the population density in Peloponnesus in 1530.19 In his attempt for estimating the entire pop ulation under the Ottoman rule in the Balkans at the end of the fifteenth century, N. Todor ov gives the same approximation, 9-10 per sq/km.20 Indeed, a demographic trend delineated by the case of Radolibos, between 1341 and 1478, is not quite secure ground for defining the population move ment of an entire region. The variations of the Black Death tolls from settlement to settleme nt are additionally complicated by the variable of intra-regional migration caused by the interaction of multiple factors, from political and economic insecurity, to natural disasters and ep idemics. However, assuming that the region of the Kiustendil sancak was not an exception to the gene ral trend delineate d by the population movement in Europe and that the region rema ined demographically unaffected by the Ottoman conquest, than, in general, the am ount of population of Kiustendil sancak and, respectively, its density population coefficient must have been in the fifteenth centu ry close to its mid-fourteenth century figures. If so, then the population dens ity of the Balkans was, undoubtedly, one of the lowest in Europe. Not even the most populated ar eas of Macedonia can approach the lowest level of population density (16 per sq/km) in Eastern England in the midst of the demographic crisis of 18 N. Todorov, Society City and Industry in the Balkans, 15th 19th centuries (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 1998).p.30 19 V. Panayiotopoulos, Plithismos kai oikismoi tis Peloponnesou, 13-18 aionas [Population and settlements in the Peloponnesus] (Athens, 1985). pp. 118 and 170. His estimations are cite d and accepted by A. Laiou, The Human Recourses in The Economic History of Byz antium, from the Seventh to the Fifteenth Centuries (Washington D.C. : Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 2005).p.50 and N. Todorov, Society, The City and Industry in the Balkans, 15th 19th centuries (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 1998).p. 155. 20 N. Todorov, Society City and Industry in the Balkans, 15th 19th centuries .p. 29.

PAGE 64

64 1380.21 Compared with the highest estimations for Tuscany in 1250 (50 per sq/km) and Netherlands on the eve of the Bl ack Death (75 per sq/km), the lands of the Eastern Balkans look almost deserted.22 But how can the striking divergences between the Kiustendil sancak and the Nicopol and Vidin sancaks be explained? Were they the result of catastrophic (external) or of some economic (internal) factors? At the first glance, it might seem that th e demographic disproportion between Macedonia and Moesia was a consequence of the widespread of estates in the Macedonian countryside. The impression comes from the surviving praktika depicting the Macedonian countryside as made up of an almost unbroken network of estates that had replaced the former complex of village communities. Because of uneven documentation, this notion for a long time determined scholarly views of the trend of Byzantine socio-economic development towards greater feudalization, supposedly contrary to that of increasing so cial and economic freedom in Western Europe. Relying on existent documents and assuming the undi sputed role of the es tates for offering better economic conditions in rural economy, it is not ha rd to arrive at the conclusion that the disproportions of population betw een Macedonia and Thrace and Moesia are due to some higher degree of development of the estate network. Yet, it is important to note that the majority of the surviving praktika concern the property of monasteries or of foundations that later became monastic and most of them have been preserve d in the archives of the monasteries of Month Athos. Only a very small number of praktika refer to layman possession and these have only survived because such possessions were later inco rporated to monastic estates. For the petty peasant landholdings, which were in direct relation to the fisc, there is no information at all. The 21 Philip Scholfield, Peasant and Community in Medieval England, 1200-1500 ( New York: Palgrave-Macmilian, 2003).p.58. 22 David Herlihy, Cities and Society in Medieval Italy ( London: Variorum, 1980).p.23.; Bas van Bavel and Jan Luiten van Zanden, The Jump Start of the Holland Economy During the Late Medieval Crisis, 1350-1500 Economic History Review Vol. LVII,No 3 (2004), pp. 50332.

PAGE 65

65 predominance of the monastic documentation within th e entire corpus of sour ces is rooted in the fact that the church was the only institution accep ted by the Ottomans as a representative of the conquered Christian population. This was the legal basis for preserving the ecclesiastic possessions, although severely re duced by the new masters. Ho wever, since the Ottomans recognized only the Patriarchate of Constantinople as a legitimate Christian institution, all other churches in the Balkans not only lost any legal basis for land possession, but were also physically exterminated. As a result, despite th e well developed network of monastic foundations in the Second Bulgarian Empire, there is not a single monasterial building or archive that survived the Ottoman invasion. Unfortunately, the Ottoman timar registers (tahrir defters ) from the second half of the fifteenth century that could be used as representa tive for the mid-fourteen th century situation, are not very helpful for estimating the ratio between peasants paying taxes to their estate lords and those paying directly to the fisc. Although, there are no signs that the Byzantine agricultural structures suffered any major ch ange under the early Ottoman rule or that the village-estate dichotomy ceased to be the economic determinan t in agriculture, it is well known that pronoia as well as its Ottoman analog, timar, could be of different size a nd held by different number of holders. For instance, two villages could compose a timar/pronoia held by eleven holders.23 The Ottoman tahrir defters were not intended to list all the taxe s that the peasants paid, but only those that provided the revenues of the timar holders. They had no record of the villages belonging to the estates of the Islamic religious institutions ( vakif) or of the higher Ottoman administration (hass ), and no mention of villages paying taxes directly to the fisc In addition, wherever figures for the taxes collected by the Sultans hass existed, they were in combination with taxes 23 Duanka Bojani Luka and Vera Mutafchieva, Vidin and Vidinski Sancak pp.23-24.

PAGE 66

66 collected from various sources such as commerce taxes, harbor taxes and other miscellaneous taxes. The surviving sources are, thus, unfort unately, irrelevant for comparing the regional economic structures of Macedonia and Moesia. It is important to note, that the firs t significant power dare d to oppose the Ottoman invasion of the Balkans in open battle was the Principality of Vulkain and Uglea Murniav evi comprising at the time all of Macedonia. This fact, indeed, suggests the probability that Macedonia had economic and human resources that Bulgaria and Byzantium lacked. However, although enticing, this assumption is not supported by the existing sources. The Byzantine rebound culminating in the r ecapture of Constantinople led to the reoccupation of Macedonia from the Bulgarian Empire that was weakened by the Mongol incursions and internal problems. In the early fourteenth century, Macedonia became again an arena of military confrontations. The Catalan incursions of 1308-9 were followed by Serbian expansion, which, by exploiting th e civil strife in Byzantium (1341-47), succeeded in bringing entire Macedonia under its sway. It is important to note, however, that the Serbian conquest of Macedonia was accompanied by an eager policy of repopulation of abandoned settlements and by rebuilding the economic structures in agricu lture through granting numerous villages to monastic and lay estates. After the partitioning of the Serbian state that followed the premature death of Tsar Stefan Duan in 1255, this policy was continued by the local despots and magnates. Soon after the battle of Chernom en in 1371, Macedonian principalities came into the pincers of the North Thracian and South Thracian Ottoma n forces. Ivan and Constantine Draga in Velbuzhd (Kiustendil) and Marc o in Prilep, former vassals of Vulkain and Uglea, became Ottoman vassals. Loyal to their principles, the Ottomans spared their lands from plundering and levied only tributary duties. Constantine and Marc o appeared as Ottoman allies in battles against

PAGE 67

67 Christian forces and, as such, they perished at Rovine in 1395. In the summer of 1395, without any social cataclysms, their political domains be came part of the Ottoman administrative system. A large part of their military units, accustomed to serve in the Ottoman ranks, went over to direct Ottoman service. The transitional period of changi ng the political power is marked by a lack of apocalyptic tone in sources from the lands of Marco and Draga. The Ottomans are mentioned with loyalty and respect instead of the usual qua lifications employed by the Christian writers as evil forerunners of the end of the world.24 Unlike Macedonia, Northern Thrace and Easter n Moesia were regularly devastated by the Mongols, who in 1341, according to Nicephorus Gregoras, took 300,000 captives.25 Although the obvious exaggeration of Gregoras (this fi gure exceeds two times the entire population of Moesia in the late fifteenth cen tury), his testimony is suggestive for the kind and scale of losses that the region suffered. While the Ottoman conquest of the lands of Constantine and Marco obtained the characteristic of gra dual annexation, Moesia remained an arena of resistance against the Ottomans until the 1450s. The Ottoman attack of 1388 on Ivan Shishmans realm had as a main goal to plunder and destroy its human and economic resources, as indicated by the Chronicle of Archbishop Vasile of Bra ov.26 The author reports an influx of Bulgarians into Transylvania for 1390, no doubt as a consequence of the famine that followed the Ottomans devastation. The subsequent abortive crusades of Sigismund in 1396 and Vladislav III Jagiello in 24 Two marginal notes from Macedonia are quite indicative for those two tendencies. The loyal tone dominates in a marginal note from the Monastery Zarze near Prilep (King Marcos land). The apocalyptic tone was a characteristic of a marginal note from the Monastery Slepce near Bitola (the devastated lands of Andrei Gropa). For details see L. Stoianovi Stari Srpski Zapisi and Natpisi [Old Serbian records and inscriptions] (Belgrade Sremski Karlovci: Srpska akademija nauka i umetnosti, 1902-1926).p.63. 25 Nicephorus Gregoras, Byzantina Historia ed. by L. Schopen Vol. 1-3 (Bonnae: Impensis Ed. Weberi, 18251855); also in also in Grucki Izvori za Bulgarskata Istorija (GIBI) [Greek Sources for Bulgarian History] Vol. 7 ed. by M. Voinov, Str. LIshev V. Tupkova-Zaimova. (Sofia: BAN, 1968). 26 Plamen Pavlov, Ivan Lazarov and Ivan Tiutiundzhiev, Dokumenti za Politicheskata Istoria na Bulgaria, XIIXIVvek [Documents for the political history of Bulgaria, 12th 14th centuries] (Veliko Turnovo: Asta, 1993) p. 128.

PAGE 68

68 1444, the frequent incursions of the Walachian ruler Mircea the Ol d, as well as and the uprising of the Bulgarian princes Cons tantine and Fruzin (1408-13), ca used more damage to the demographic structure of Moesia. In the afterm ath of the Varna crusade, a Burgundian fleet, supported by the Walachian Prince Vlad epe entered the lower Danube. With their withdrawal, 12,000 left the Bulgarian lands from the region between Nicopol and Silistra and settled in Walachia.27 The continuing warfare and anarchy of the firs t half of the fifteenth century caused heavy population losses in the Danubian Plane. The register of timars in the sancak of Vidin (1454) describes 421 villages, 377 of which consiste d of up to 20 households, while the average of households per village wa s of 3040 households.28 The picture, delineated by the timar register of the Vidin sancak, of 55 villages consisted of only 3 households and 59 of no more than 5 households, reveals the scale of devastation in the region.29 The comparison with the sancak Kiustendil is striking: There more than 60 per cent of 1508 villages consisted of more than 30 households. In addition, villages with more than 100 households constituted 5 percent (75) of the total number of villages. The demographic losses that Moesia suffered, therefore, turn any attempt for estimating its population in the mid-f ourteenth century into a guess. The de ath tolls of the Black Death were seriously overshadowed by thos e of the Ottoman invasion and the following mass emigration. The incomplete character of the fifteenth century Ottoman census documents, which left 27 Jean de Wavren, La campagne des croises sur le Danube, 1445 ed. N. Iorga ( Paris: J. Gamber, 1927); Also in Plamen Pavlov, Ivan Lazarov and Ivan Tiutiundzhiev, Dokument i za Politicheskata Istoria na Bulgaria, XIIXIVvek [Documents for the political history of Bulgaria, 12th 14th centuries] ( Veliko Turnovo: Asta, 1993).pp 137-140. Also in Bistra Zvetkova, Frenski Putepisi za Balkanite XVXVI vek [French travel notes for the Balkans 15th 16th centuries] (Sofia, 1975).pp. 7580. 28 Duanka Bojani -Luka and Vera Mutafchieva, Vidin and Vidinski Sandzak, p.30. 29 Ibid.

PAGE 69

69 significant proportions of the populations out, add itionally obstructs calculation. However, if using an average population density of 9-10 per sq -km for the region of Moesia, especially for the sancak of Nicopol, the result of 288,000 would exceed more than twice the approximations made by using late fifteenth cen tury Ottoman census documents. There is no evidence that the higher population density of Macedonia in the late fifteenth century was result of different institutional contexts predating the Ottoman conquest. Macedonia, as part of the Serbian state, and Moesia, as part of Bulgaria, had similar institutions, as did the rest of the Eastern Balkans. The sancak of Sofia, formerly part of the Bulgarian Empire, displays coefficient of population densit y that is closer to the neighboring Kiustendil sancak than to Moesia. According to the cyzie register of 1490, the sancak of Sofia had 19, 226 non-Muslim households for a territory of 12, 000 sq/k m, which gives 8 people per sq/km. This is not too far from the estimated population densit y of the Balkans proposed by Todorov. Further examination of the data from the cyzie register of 1490 shows that the sancaks with the lowest population density form a belt stretching from the southeastern Bulgarian territories in Thrace, through the border of Danube and co inciding with the front of the Ottoman advance: Silistra (1.5 per sq/km), Nicopol (2.5) ,Vidin (5) and, later, Smederevo ( 2.5), Bosnja ( 3.2) and Scodra (5). This belt wrapped a zone of mu ch higher population density: the sancaks of Pasha ( 8 per sq/km), Sofia ( 8), Kiustendil ( 11), Vucitrun( 2 3.5), Prizren (10), Ohrid( 11), Janina(12), Trikala (9), Morea(7) and Euboea(6.5).30 Two conclusions stem from the comparison of demographic situation in the Eastern Balkans that have to be kept in mind when a ssessing the late medieval Byzantine and Balkan economy. First, the population picture of the Easter n Balkans, one of the lowest in medieval 30 N. Todorov, Society, the City and Industry in the Balkans .Table 3.

PAGE 70

70 Europe, displays low availability of labor fo rce for the existing land resources. Second, the demographic differences between Macedonia and the rest of the Eastern Balkans were not result of some structural distinctions, but were the product of external catastrophic factors, especially, the devastating Ottoman invasion. Rural Settlements. Physical Characteristics Since no ade quate written sources exist for the late medieval rural settlements in the Eastern Balkans, especially those of Moesia and Northern Thrace, archaeology plays a major role in the study of their physical social and economic structures On the other hand, one has to keep in mind that, for reasons explained in th e Chapter 2, rural archaeology, especially that concerning the period of Byzantine rule (10181185) and the Second Bulgarian Empire (11851393) has never been particularly favored by Bulg arian scholars. To the best of my knowledge, only three rural settlements of the Second Bulgarian Empire peri od have been so far the object of comparatively detailed archaeological research. Their examination will follow according to the chronological order of their foundation. The medieval village near presen t-day Kovachevo was located on the Via Militaris, between the right bank of Maritsa River and the nor thern slopes of Rhodopes some 15 km to the west from Pazardzik and in about 13 km to th e northeast from the medieval town of Batkun (fig.3-3). Judging form the coins found on the site the excavator proposed the idea that the village was in existence for about 100 y ears, after which the site was abandoned. 31 Among the ten copper coins found in Kovachevo, the earliest were struck for John II Comnenus (1118-43) and the latest, for Andronicus I Comnenus (1183 -85). The excavations revealed 34 above-ground houses, 18 stables and 69 silos (fig.3-4). 31 P. Gatev, Srednovekovno Selishte i Nekro pol pri selo Kovachevo, Pazardzhishki okrug [Medieval village and Necropolis at Kovachevo, region of Pazardzhik] Razkopki i Prouchvania Vol. 12 (1985) pp. 5155.

PAGE 71

71 A good part of the adjacent cemet ery was destroyed before exca vations, mainly by construction works on the site.32 The remaining part produced 134 burials. The village was in existence from the late eleventh century to the late twelfth or early thir teenth century. The abandonment in the late 1100s coincides with the passage of the Third Crusade when, as it is well known, the neighboring town of Batkun was tw ice besieged by the crusaders.33 The archaeological record reveals typically agrarian settlement: the amount of silos suggests that tilling the land was the main economic activity. Cattle and sheep breeding is betrayed by discovered parts of pitchforks, scyt hes (both used for maki ng hay) and by tools for processing wool.34 Household crafts and bee keeping complemented land tilling and husbandry, as indicated by the discovered spindle whorls and apiarian spatulas, while the Maritsa River occasionally supplied the villagers diet with fish.35 The village, as indi cated by the finds of more than 100 pieces of slag, may have had its own smithy, most likely hosted in house No 19 of the excavation plan, where along with slag piece s a semi-processed iron piece (for making a hoe, perhaps) was found.36 The pottery of the village was typical for the eleventh-twelfth centuries. All assemblages contained pots, the universal cookw are at the time. Only a few sherds of sgraffito pottery have been found in the village, which suggests that at the end of the twelfth century such wares were still a luxury in the countryside. 32 P. Gatev, Srednovekovno Selishte I Nekropol pri selo Kovachevo. p.5 33 For the passage of the Third Crusade see S. Lishev, Tretia Krustonosen Pohod i Bulgarite [The Third Crusade and the Bulgarians] Izvestia na Instituta za Bulgarska Istoria No7 (1957) pp. 205-240; Historia Peregrinorum. Transl. and ed. by Str. Lishev and B. Primov in Latinski Izvori za Bulgarskata Istoria ( LIBI)[ Latin sources for the Bulgarian history] Vol. 3.( Sofia: BAN, 1965). p.241. 34 P. Gatev, Srednovekovno Selishte i Nekropol pri selo Kovachevo. pp. 101-102 35 Ibid. p. 99 36 Ibid. p.10

PAGE 72

72 The organized abandonment of the settleme nt did not leave much of anything behind. However, certain information about daily practices and the quality of life could be obtained from the burials. The commonest pieces of jewelry were the glass (36) and bronze (31) bracelets, followed by bead necklaces and ir on or bronze rings and earrings.37 The grave goods and coin finds, although not numerous, suggest that peasants were engaged in monetary exchange on the market to secure the cash needed for their re nts or taxes but, perhaps on a regular, although limited basis. The best archaeological record of a late me dieval village in Bulgaria came out of the salvage excavations instigated by the building of the Koprinka Dam near the present-day Kazanluk (fig.3-3). The excavation brought to light the massive architectural remains of ancient Sevtopolis, the capital of the Odri ssian Kingdom of Seuthos I (5th cen tury B.C.). An ancient site superposed by a medieval village was discovere d. The archaeological team, led by Jordanka Changova, strove to remove and de scribe as soon as possible the medieval remains in order to get quickly to the much more promising and sensa tional finds of Odrissian town. As a result, the monograph of the medieval settle ment is little more than a cat alogue of finds with drawings and a plan of the site.38 Regrettably, the poor quality of prin ting makes the enclosed photographs completely useless. Even the number of the featur es (40-43) is not given, but has to be derived from the site plan (fig.3-5). Ne vertheless, despite the lack of any conceptu alization and attempt at interpretation (or perhaps, because of th at), the record of Sevtopolis excavation and, especially, the numismatic analysis provide d by Vl. Penchev offers, a good opportunity for interpretation. 37 P. Gatev, Srednovekovno Selishte. pp. 105147 38 J. Changova, Srednovekovnoto Selishte nad Sevtopolis XI-XIV vek [ The medieval settlement above Sevtopolis, 11th14th centuries] (Sofia: BAN, 1972)

PAGE 73

73 Another late medieval rural settlement with comparatively detailed archaeological records was discovered in 1972-4 dur ing road construction in the Turnovo region and was further investigated by Jordan Aleksiev.39 The site is located 12 km to the north from Turnovo on the eastern edge of the present-day village of Hotnits a (fig.3-3). The site is divided by a small creek into an eastern and a western part. The eastern part bears the signs of occupation from Late Antiquity to the tenth century with a definite interruption be tween the sixth and the eight centuries.40 This part of the archaeolog ical site reveals a settlement consisting of sunken-floored buildings and a small church. The ceramic assembla ge displays a striking continuation of late antique practices: an ancient kiln produced rema ins of ninthand tent h-century pottery. After being abandoned, the site was reoccupied in the la te twelfth century, but this time to the west from the small creek. The village at this lo cation remained until the Ottoman onslaught of Turnovo in 1393, when the site was abandoned again. A portion of the western half of the late medieval village is superposed by the contemporar y buildings of present-day Hotnitsa. The late medieval village consisted of 35 above-ground h ouses, 8 kilns, 6 granary pits and a small cemetery (fig. 3-6).41 The organized abandonment of the village left behind fewer artifacts than in Kovachevo. Metal artifacts incl ude just one sickle, scissors, several knives, while household crafts are signaled by spindle whorls and a few needles for leather sewing.42 In the largest house 39 Jordan Aleksiev, Srednovekovno Selishte krai Hotnitsa[Medieval settlement near Hotnitsa] in Veliko Turnovo, Iubileen Sbornik Ed. J. Andreev, K. Totev, and K. Dochev. (Sofia: Abagar, 2005),pp. 34 -89 40 B. Sultov, Novotkrit Keramichen Centar of Rimskata I Starobulgarskata Epoha [N ewly discovered ceramic Roman and Protobulgarian center] Arheologia, Vol 11 (1969).pp. 12-24. 41 Only three of the kilns are completely excavated by Aleksiev. The other five, although clearly detected, are only indicated on the plan. 42 Aleksiev, Srednovekovno Se lishte krai Hotnitsa.p.60

PAGE 74

74 in the village, a small hoard of 25 copper coins struck for Iv an Shishman (1371-1396) gives the terminus a quo for the abandonment of the late medieval village.43 While the last phase of occupation on the site at Hotnitsa coincided with the Second Bulgarian Empire (1185-1393), the medieval set tlement on the top of Sevtopolis ruins must have been in use from the elev enth to mid-fourteenth century. The last coins discovered at the site were struck for Andronicus III (1328-1341), wh ich suggest that the village was abandoned in the circumstances of growing an archy in the region caused by th e Byzantine civil war of 1341-47 and the incursions of the Bulgarian ruler Ivan Al exander. The rich catalogue of finds, as well as the 800 coins, suggests that, unlike Hotnitsa, the medieval village on the top of Sevtopolis was abandoned in panic caused by some urgent circum stances: the village was destroyed by fire, in which a female found her death.44 The body was found within the bounda ries of one of the clayplastered dwelling floors turned by fire into grey -black spots, delineating the size and location of the burned dwellings. The three villages display settlement and house structures similar not only to each other, but also to those in late medieval Serbia, in the sites of Kostola Gamzigrad and Hadjiska Vodenica.45 Hotnitsa, Kovachevo and the village on the top of Sevtopolis were settled on an open space and on highly fertile alluvial lands. All of them were unfortified and were composed mostly of single-room houses (fig. 3-7). In the case of Sevtopolis, spolia from the ruins of the ancient settlement were used for building stone walls, to which the fireplace was attached (fig.38). In the other two cases, stones were not used at all. The floor area of the excavated houses 43 Aleksiev, Srednovekovno Se lishte krai Hotnitsa. p. 38. 44 Changova, Srednovekovnoto Selishte nad Sevtopolis XI-XIV vek pg. 24, quadrant O.6 of the site map. 45 Gordana Miloshevich, Stanovanje u srednjovekovnoj Srbiji [Housing in Medieval Serbia] (Belgrade: Arheoloski Institut, 1997).

PAGE 75

75 varies between 9.5 and 20 square meters and corresponds to the needs of a nuclear family with four or five members. Two-room houses appear in isolated cases in Hotnitsa and Kovachevo, while the village on the top of Sevtopolis produced two such cases. Each house had an area of appr oximately 50 square meters. Si nce the larger roof area of the two-room house necessitates stronger supporting c onstruction, it is quite likely that its outer walls were made of wood instead of the usua l wattle-and-daub construction. This is further supported by the nails discovered in Kovache vo and Sevtopolis, as well as by the elaborate carpenter tools from Sevtopolis: adzes, chisels, woodcutters, augers, borers, axes and planes.46 The houses in the three villages were ground-leve l dwellings as suggested by the stones spread around the contours of the cl ay-plastered floors. Such stones we re used to press the covering of the roof, rush, or straw, laid above a thick humus layer, where they fell after the crumbling of the house constructions. The walls of most houses were built in wattle and daub within a wooden frame that supported the roof construction. The total width of the wattle-and-daub construction was approximately 15-18 cm. The seemingly hasty abandoning of the village on the top of Sevtopolis is responsible for the rich artifact inventory left behind, the analysis of which demonstrates the dominant agricultural character of the village economy. The plowshares found on the site indicate that the type of plow to which they belonged was more elaborate than the soleard type known from the graffiti from Pliska and the illustrations in the Tetraevangelia of Ivan Alexander (1331-71) (fig. 3-9.).47 The shares found in Sevtopolis correspond to a type common in the Eastern Balkans (17 cm, long, 8-9 cm wide). Their asymmetrical shape was designed to turn the soil aside, which was 46 Changova, Srednovekovnoto Selishte nad Sevtopolis XI-XIV vek pp. 98-99 47 Ekaterina Dimitrova, The Gospels of Tsar Ivan Alexander (London: British Library, 1994), p. 54, fig. 56.

PAGE 76

76 enforced by a wooden moldboard. Vertically, though at certain angle, to the plow was attached a coulter to cut the soil horiz ontally (fig. 3-9 and 3-10). The size of the coulters found in Sevtopolis varies between 31 and 38 cm. They all have tempered edges, 9 10 cm. long. The size and shap e of the plow implements found in Sevtopolis are in sharp opposition with the reigning historiogr aphical myth of the Byzantine/Balkan plow as a device that barely scratched the ground and, was therefore, unable to produce any significant yields.48 Rather, the plow type found in Sevtopol is was perfectly suitable for the Balkan regional climatic and soil characteristics. Unli ke the much more humid Western Europe, the Balkans hot and dry summers, its soils mineral characteristics and water holding capacity, necessitate shallower tilling in or der to preserve the soils wate r content, accumulated during the winter and spring precipitations. Unsurprisingly, the depth of mode rn soil tilling in Bulgaria is not different than that of its medieval period: 10 -15 cm. Quite the opposite, the increasing of soil productivity in Western Europe necessitates eliminati ng of the soils excessive water content through deeper tillage. Therefore, the widespre ad application of the heavy plow in Western Europe, in contrast to the Balkans, should be explained not by some more dynamic social and economic processes in the West, as some historians suggest, but simply by the regional climatic and soil differences. Further, the suitability and produc tivity of the plow type used in medieval Balkans is well demonstrated through the calculations of yields pe r unit of seed (yield ratio) made by Angeliki Laiou.49 Based on monastic praktika Laiou advances an average yield ratio for Thrace, 48 See A. Bryer, Agricultural means of production in The Economic History of Byzantium from Seventh to Fifteenth Century, ed. by Angeliki Laiou Vol. 1. (Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collections, 2002).pp.101-113 49 A. Laiou, The Agrarian Economy, 13th -15th centuries in The Economic History of Byzantium from Seventh to Fifteenth Century, pp. 346-7

PAGE 77

77 Macedonia and Thessaly of 1:4 for the land of se cond quality and of 1:5,6 for the land of first quality. This is comparable to the estimates for the agricultu ral productivity of Winchester, Merton College and Grantchester in England, in the period fro m thirteenth to fifteenth centuries.50 The plowshares and coulters found in the village on the top of Sevtopolis are not unique. Similar plowshares and coulters are uncovered w ithin the archeological sites of Preslav, Ovech, Shumen, Pliska, Pernik, Varna, the villages of Chelopech (region of Sofia), Glufizhevo, (region of Sliven) and Dolno Levs ki,(region of Pazarddzhik).51 It should be mentioned, however, that such shares, as found in the village on the top of Sevtopolis, were known ev er since the ninth and the tenth century.52 Cowbells and cattle bones, found on the site of Sevtopolis show that land tilling was accompanied by cattle breeding. The majority of an imal bones, found on the site were of pigs, the main source of meat in the medieval diet Bee keeping and fishing were supplementary occupations of the inhabitants, the former proved by the found ap iarian spatulas, the latter assumed by the location of the villag e on the bank of Tundzha River. Along with the agricultural activities, Hotn itsa and the village on the top of Sevtopolis display an impressive scale of household crafts. The inhabitant s of the thirty-five houses Hotnitsa, located in a traditionally ceramic producing site, possessed only six silos but eight kilns for making earthenware and sgraff ito pottery. Having in mind that one of these kilns needed the 50 B. H. Slicher van Bath, The Agrarian History of Western Europe, 500-1850 (London: Edward Arnold, 1963).p.176. 51 Jordanka Changova, Srednovekovni Orudia na Tr uda v Bulgaria [Medieval tools in Bulgaria] Izvestia na Arheologicheskia Institut Vol.25 (1961).pp.19-55. 52 Joachim Henning, Sudosteuropa Zwischen Antike und Mittelalter [Southeastern Europe between Antiquity and Middle Ages] (Berlin: Akademie Ve rlag, 1987). P.66. Table 8;

PAGE 78

78 constant labor of at least two persons to produce even earthenware and perhaps more for sgraffito pottery, it is safe to assume that po ttery-making was the main economic activity of the villagers of Hotnitsa. The comparison between Kovachevo having 69 silos and Hotnitsa is striking. The remains of the ceramic production be ar the signs of standardization and marketoriented production. The pottery-makers from Hotnits a strove to imitate the tones, graphics and the shape of sgraffito pottery made in Tur novo. Hotnitza, was, undoubtedly, a pottery production center in the hinterland of the capital. (fig. 3-11). The production of glazed pottery had alrea dy been known in most parts of the Roman Empire, but became widely spread in the Easter n Mediterranean from the ninth century onward. In Bulgaria, the beginning of glazed pottery making was in close relation with the rise of the First Bulgarian Empire in the late ninth centu ry and the increasing de mand of the Bulgarian noble class for luxury goods as part of their effort s to imitate the ways of life of the Byzantine elite in Constantinople. The production of fine Preslav white ware, therefore, hardly had any economic significance. It was limited within the sp ace of the Bulgarian cap ital and served mostly the ceremonial needs of the Bulg arian court. With the conquest of Bulgaria by the Byzantines the production of the fine white ware ceased. What made the glazed pottery production direct ed towards the wealthier social class was its costly manufacturing in comparison with the regular earthenware. Unli ke the regular pottery, glazed ceramics needs double firing and, accordingly, a double amount of labor and energy consumption, namely for firing the ceramic body of the vessel and then for applying and firing the lead oxide glaze. In addition, more sophistic ated equipment and skilled labor were required for the process. The thin glassy layer, formed after the firing, seals the porous clay and makes the vessel suitable for containing liquids. In addition, the glaze adds more aesth etical appearance to

PAGE 79

79 the vessel. The lead glaze may be additionally colored by other metallic oxidants, usually copper to produce a green color, or iron for a yellow-brow n tone. The sgraffito-making is a technique of decorating pottery, which includes si milar steps. The first step is to cover the vessel with a white or pale rose engobe. When it drie s, the desired motifs and orname nts are engraved in the engobe and the vessel is fired. Finally, an outer slip is made of transparent or colored glaze and the vessel is once again fired in the kiln. Unlike the first firing, which requires a temperature of 400500 C, the firing of the glaze implies raising the temperature to 800 C. The archaeological investigations reveal that in the twelfth centur y the glazed pottery production in Bulgaria started agai n and within the course of thir teenth and fourteenth century it became a widespread activity.53 It became part not only of th e urban production, as demonstrated by the growth of producing centers in Preslav, Turnovo, Cherven, Sofia and Varna, but also of life in the countryside. This boom of sgraffito pottery making in Bu lgaria thus raises the question of what caused this phenomenon. Was it a result of an expandi ng market, stemming from the increasing consumer demand or of some lower production cost that made this pottery accessible to wider social strata? The solution, however, is offered by the cas e of the village on th e top of Sevtopolis. Unlike Hotnitsa, it lacks evidence of sgraffito pot tery production The small kiln, discovered by the excavations, produced only ear thenware and spindle whorls, according to th e sherds found around it.54 Nevertheless, there was significant amount of glazed pottery sherds (144 specimens, 53 S. Georgieva,Keramikata ot Dvoreca v Turnovo [Ceramics from palace of Turnovo] in Tzarevgrad Turnov Vol.2 ( Sofia: BAN, 1974).pp.12-205: M. Stancheva, Srednovekovna Sgraff ito Keramika ot Sofia [ Medieval sgraffito ceramics from Sofia ] in Serdika Vol. I (Sofia: BAN, 1964), pp.169-193; J. Changova, Kum Prouchvaneto na Sgraffito Keramika v Bulgaria [About studying of sgraffito ceramics in Bulgaria] Arheologia No.1. (1962).pp. 25-33; D. Dimitrov, Rabotilnica za Trapezna Keramika vuv Varna [Workshop for tableware in Varna] Izvestia na Varnenskoto Arheologichesko Drujestvo No 11 (1960) pp.111-128. 54 Changova, Srednovekovnoto Selishte nad Sevtopolis XI-XIV vek pp. 73-74

PAGE 80

80 fine painted, or sgraffito) in the ceramic asse mblage, which high quality, (defined by the leading archaeologist, J. Changova, as Byzantine) indicates a quite large perimeter of the villagers market activities. (fig. 3-12). Although it is hard to estimate to what degree the changes of the t ype and appearance of tableware are related to the changes of dini ng habits, several outcomes are signaled by the widespread of glazed pottery. First, the widespre ad use of glaze indicates liquid food that could not be eaten by hands. Second, the fact that the most sherds of sgraffito and painted pottery findings came from plates implies that the larg e bowl, which everyone shared at the table, was now replaced by a individual plate. Finally, the mo re aesthetical appearance of glazed pottery suggests that dining had by now become more than just food consumption. Showing off by means of glazed pottery implies that peasants ex istence went beyond the line of securing food: it became a center of spectacle, ceremonial and co mmunicative. It became a sign of civility and affordable splendor, the trad emark of a middle class. The signs of the bettering the peasants life are not limited to the changes in tableware. The village on the top of the ancient Sevtopolis had five smelting furnaces and three smithies, whose production, as witnessed by the signifi cant amount of slag found around the furnaces, went well beyond the needs of the villagers.55 Obviously, not a small part of the iron made was meant for sale on the market. The closest market place of the village might be sought in Krun some 8 km to the east, which was the center of an appanage, held by Eltemir, brother of the Bulgarian Emperor George I Terter (1280-1292). A key fortress, guardin g the pass through the Balkan Mountains from Adrianople to Turnovo and perhaps, a regional distributive center, Krun might well have facilitated the market activities of its neighboring villagers. Furthermore, in 55 Changova, Srednovekovnoto Selishte nad Sevtopolis XI-XIV vek pp. 74-85

PAGE 81

81 support of the sgraffito indications of peasants commercial activities and along with the welldeveloped metallurgy comes the evidence of je welry making, as identif ied according to the bronze and iron bracelets, found together with jewel-making tools (fig.3-13).56 Rings and earrings were also among the accessories of the inhabitants of the village (fig.314). It is important to note the character of th e jewels found in the vill age. The metal ones were made of cheap material, bronze or iron and of rudimentary decorati on, obviously designed and targeted to low class consumers. Perhaps, the commonest artifact in the village, as well as elsewhere in the territory of medieval Balkan s, was the colored gla ss bracelet (fig.3-14). The archaeological record of the medieval village on the top of Sevtopolis mentions 271 specimens of various colors and shapes.57 The abcense of archaeological signs of glass production in th e village leaves us with the possibility that the bracelets were acquired from the outside, through trade. The type of metal jewelry found in Sevtopolis as well as the colored gl ass bracelets along with the significant amount of single coins of small denominations sugge st the existence of one or more markets that served not only the need for obtaining cash fo r paying the land taxes or the demand of luxury goods, but also, to facilitate the appearance of the costly glazed pottery production at the tables of both peasants and townsmen, a market, in which, among the bigger actors, petty producers interacted with petty buyers. The comparison of the three villages de lineates a trend towards bigger market involvement of the countryside in the course of th irteenth and fourteenth centuries. This trend is well attested by the coin finds, which in the case of the village on the top of Sevtopolis amount to 56 Changova. Srednovekovnoto Selishte nad Sevtopolis .pp.107-110. 57 Ibid. pp. 122-123.

PAGE 82

82 800 specimens. A comparison of the coin finds in the villages of K ovachevo and Sevtopolis suggests that both villages followed the same rates of monetization up to the end of the twelfth century, when Kovachevo ceased to exist. Due to the organized abandonment of the village of Hotnitsa, its 25 hoarded coins are unrepresentative for the fluctuat ions of its economic activity. Table 3-1. Coin circulation in Kovachevo and the village on the top of ancient Sevtopolis villages Up to 1143 1143-1204 1204-1230 1230-1261 1261-1341 1341-1393 Kovachevo* 3 6 Sevtopolis58 5 18 660 135 17 *One of the coins of Kovachevo is undated, due to its complete attrition The most productive period of the village on th e top of Sevtopolis app eared to have been the first half of the thirteenth century, when the region of the village enjoyed relative peace and prosperity. During the time of e xpansion of the Byzantine Empire that followed the recovery of Constantinople, the village was on the border between Bulgaria and Byzantium, a situation that lasted until the Ottoman conquest. This has to be the reason for the obvious economic decline of Sevtopolis, as suggested by the decreasing coin circulation af ter 1261. While the village of Kovachevo displays an economic profile that is typical for the pre-th irteenth century rural economy, that of Sevtopolis demonstrates the shif t that started from the end of the twelfth and the opening of the thirteenth cen tury towards increased marketiz ation of the ru ral production. More money and more people with money were the permissive causes for greater demand and market expansion. Dialectics of Village and Estate The capacity of the Byzantine state to in tervene in the sm allest niche of economy, function of its tributary nature and patrimonial ideology, was we ll adopted and continued in the 58 Vl. Penchev, Moneti ot Srednovekovnoto Selishte nad Sevtopolis [Coins from the settlement on the top of Sevtiopolis] in Sevtopolis Vol.2 Antichni i Srednovekovni Moneti ed. by D. Dimitrov ( Sofia: BAN, 1984),pp. 137159

PAGE 83

83 restored Bulgarian state. The legacy of the By zantine rule in the Eastern Balkans, formed a region in which the uniform so cial, economic and cultural structures remained unaffected by political cataclysms. The Ottoman conquest, in deed, changed fundamentally the social and cultural structures in the regi on. However, the economic organiza tion in agriculture kept its Byzantine legal foundation until the seventeen century. At the basis of the Byzantine codification concerning the agricultural production were two main notions: the notion of linking the land with manpower and the notion of commuting the duty services into money. The Byzantine subjects without land, eleutheroi (free), as well as land without labor force, kliasma (fragment), were not a source of revenues and, thus, a permanent concern of the state authorities. In Byzantium, as well as in Bulgaria and Serbia, the modes of production in agriculture were arranged around two poles, generally called estate and village, al though the imprecise and frequently ambiguous nature of those terms. Th e most widespread form of an estate was pronoia normally assumed as a grant of revenues to an indi vidual previously owed to the state. It appears to have been of two kinds: the grant of a zeugelateon and concession of a ktema The former was essentially a grant of a demesne block of land; th e latter was a grant of state revenues and rights owed by certain services. Quite often the sources reveal pronoia of a combined type. Although not always specifying the type of pronoia the sources often witness a pronoia over a river, monastery or a seapronoia.59 The holders of pronoia represented a wide social spectrum: They ranged from the members of the emperors family to people from the lowest ranks of society. The Byzantine notion of village was always more than a sum of landholdings clustered together. It was perceived as a social organism, a commune, wh ich administered its hinterland, 59 A. Kazhdan, Agrarnyie Otnoshenia v Vizantii, XIIIXIV vv [Agrarian relations in Byzantium, 13th -14th centuries] (Moscow: AN SSSR, 1952).pp.202-224.

PAGE 84

84 marked by boundary stones and described by the fiscal delineations of property (perioirismoi). Some part of its land, mostly pastures and forests, was owned collectively by the villagers; some were periodically redistributed for usage am ong the members of the village commune while others could be alienated by the collectiv e owner as was the case of selling 104 modiai vineyards by the villagers of Pinson to some citizens of Th essalonike in the beginning of the fourteenth century.60 By arranging the communal rights between two villages, The Farmers Law and, respectively, its Bulgarian copy from the nint h century, made the village a legal entity de jure and de facto.61 Recognized by the law as collectively res ponsible tax unit, the village commune had also the right to sell or ac quire property. The village of Staro Zelino, for instance, owned a mill, which together with its other properties, rights and obligations was granted by King Millutin (1282-1321) to the Monastery of Htetovo.62 The late medieval village community ha d heterogeneous social and professional structure. It coincided with the parish community which was organized around the community church. The Law for Judging the People, the oldest Bulgarian legal code from the ninth century, explicitly enacted that ev ery individual had to belong to a particular parish.63 The leadership of the village community was composed of the mo st respectable individuals. Due to its high adaptability to the economic and political e nviroment, Byzantine, Serbian, Bulgarian or Ottoman, the terms denoting the leader of the vi llage community greatly varied from region to region and from period to period. The vast nomencl ature of the village leadership includes terms 60 Actas de Lavra Vol III ed by Paul Lemerle, A. Guillou, N. Svoronos and Denise Papachryssanthou. (Paris, 1979). No 109, lines 945; 952-3; Genoveva Tsankova-Petkova Agrarnite Otnoshenia v Srednovekovna Bulgaria [Agricultural relations in medieval Bu lgaria] (Sofia: BAN, 1964).p. 72-4. 61 Zemedelski Zakon [Farmers Law], Article 7 in Grucki Izvori za Bulgarskata Istoria [Greek sources for the Bulgarian history] Vol.6 eds. M. Voinov, V. Tupkova-Zaimova, L. Ionchev. ( Sofia: BAN, 1965).p.212. 62 St. Novakovi Zakonski Spomenici p. 659. 63 Venelin Ganev, Zakon Sudenje Liudem [Law for Judging People] (Sofia: BAN, 1959).pp.14-23.

PAGE 85

85 like Kmet, Knjez, Ban, Kehaja, Muhtar, Primikjur etc. Often, the village communities were managed by its priest. The priest, according to tradition, was elected by the flocks among the heirs of the previous priest. Usua lly, the priest was elected for a life term, but if it was necessary, he could be dismissed by the decision of the community.64 The overlaping of the parish community with the village territorial community na turally distinguishes the priest of the parish as a leader, whose functions went far beyond the re ligious sphere. The prie st acted as a notary, a practice widespread in Western Eu rope as well, and as a main responsible figure for collecting taxes from his herd. Often, the priest acted as a representative figure of the community before the court and other administrative authorities. Thus in 1366, priests from Emona and Nesebar were appointed for collecting the reparation imposed on the communities there by Amadeus VI of Savoy during his incursions on the Black Sea coast.65 It seems that on th e top of the other responsibilities, priests were often charged with organizing th e communal police functions. The accountant of Amadeus, Antonio Barberrius report s that a certain Kondro, priest from Sozopol, was fined 100 florins for the misdemeanors of his people in neighboring Emona, where he guarded the mentioned village.66 The Byzantine expansion over the entire Ba lkans in the beginning of the eleventh century placed the village in the center of si gnificant social and economic transformations resulting in a complete dominan ce of the estate in agricultural economy. For fiscal purposes the peasantry was divided in different categories, according to the means of production at their 64 D. Polivjannii, Srednovekovniat Bulgarski Grad XIII-XIVv; [The medieval Bulgarian Town] Sofia: Nauka i Izkustvo, 1989). p. 127 65 L.V.Gorina, Meterialyi Dnevnika Antoniusa Barberius po Istorii Bolgarii I Vizantiiv XIV v. [Materials provided by the accounting book of Antonius Barberius to the histor y of Bulgaria and Byzantium], in Byzantinobulgarica Vol. 4, (1973).pp. 232; 234. 66 Ibid.p.234

PAGE 86

86 disposal. The z eugaratoi was a tax unit of a peasant household possessing land, which size roughly corresponded to the amount of land that coul d be cultivated by a pa ir of oxen. Since the amount of cultivated land depended not only on the amount of draft an imals but also on the quality of land, the size of a tax land unit varied greatly between 40 and 160 modiai. The second group, voidatoi was a tax unit with land twice less than that of zeugoratoi which could be cultivated by a single ox. Aktemones or pezos were those, who had no oxen, and which amount of land was four times less than the amount possessed by the zeugaratoi. The fisc also recognized people who were not housed and had neither land, nor oxen. This group, called eleutheroi (free), because they were free of obligations to the fisc or to a landlord, consisted the main category peasants, from which the paroikoi of an estate were recruited. The members of the village community had the right of preempti on, the first right to buy land sold by their nei ghbors and other villagers.67 In addition, as a commune and a fiscal unit, the village managed the land that had fa llen into escheat and would eventually be reattributed to a village r in order to meet the taxes due to the fisc. The village had also distinctive judicial self-regulati on over its intra-communal disputes and petty crimes. The claims and disputes of land were proceeded in a local cour t composed by members of the community, as it was precisely the case of the village of Mant eon in 1280 and 1235, mentioned in the acts of the monastery of Leimvotissa.68 In the middle of the thirteenth century the village of Panaretos near Smyrna formed a part of the pronoia of Irene Vranaina. A dispute involving two of her peasants 67 Zemedelski Zakon [Farmers Law], Articles 3-5. 68 Kazhdan, Agrarnyie Otnoshenia v Vizantii, XIIIXIV vv, p.89.

PAGE 87

87 was brought before her to be settled. She sent the case to the village court for judgment. The guilty party was threatened with a fine payable not to her but to the state.69 When a dispute exceeded the prerogatives of the communal jurisprudence, as in the cases involving individuals not belonging to th e village commune the process was to be brought before the local judge, residing in the administra tive center, to which the village belonged. Such a case is described in the letters of Michael Psellus.70 Psellus, an estate holder, set up a claim against certain Patricius, a paroikos of him, before the regional judge to prevent the intended departure of Patricuis from his es tate. The court decided that not only Patricius was free to leave, but also had Psellus to pay off the improvements made by Patricius.71 Even after a village had b een granted by an imperial chry sobull to a certain landlord for eternal times, it preserved its communal rights. The right of a village to receive settlers on its territory is demonstrated in the case of the village Chostiani (Chostiana, Hvostene), the region of Muglen, southwestern Macedonia. In 1086, it was granted as hereditary to the strategos Leon Kephalas for his military victories against the Franks of Boemund. After listing the tax exemptions of the village, the document asserts: t his chrysobull had to be used for the relief of the villagers neither to abandon the village nor to receive other settle rs if they want to keep their privileges.72 In the eyes of the fisc the village di d not cease to exist as a collective unit even after it was divided between different large estate holders. The monasteries of Iveron, Xeropotamou, Xenophon, Zographou Hilanda r and Larva all held lands and paroikoi in the 69 M. Angold, A Byzantine Government in Exile, 1204-1261 (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1975). p. 127.; A. Kazhdan in Agrarnye Otnoshenia v Vizantii, XIII-XIVvv ., p. 98. 70 Ja. N. Liubarskii, Mihail Psell: Lichost i Tvorchestvo [ Michael Psellus: Personality and Creativity] (Moscow: AN SSSR, 1978).p. 102. 71 Ibid.p.102 72 G.Tsankova-Petkova, Agrarnite Otnoshenia v Srednovekovna Bulgaria, pp.36-37; 84-87

PAGE 88

88 village of Ierissos. However, the fiscal delineations of property in the neighboring villages Develikeia, Kato Daimonon and Pr oavlax mention clearly the ri ghts of the men of Ierissos.73 The Vatopedi (Lavra) Charter of Bulgarian Emperor John II Asen (1218-1241) regarding the concession of the village of Sema lto to the monastery denotes clea rly that the village is granted with all its inhabitants, rights, properties and revenues.74 The same is suggested by the grants made by Serbian King Millutin concerning the concessions of the villages Staro Zelino and Radobuzda to the monasteries of Htetovo and Traskavec in Macedonia.75 Even deserted villages were granted with their common lands and rights preserved for the future settlers. That was precisely the case of granting the villages of Zurce, Pitic, Kuckovene, Techovo, Lepce and many others, by the Serbian kings, Milutin and Duan, to various monasteries in Macedonia. 76 Whether on an estates or states land the communal organization preserved its administrative and fiscal self-gove rning that outlived the Christian states in the Balkans. Under the Ottoman rule the communal organization of the village, as well as of the town, still remained the main social unit.77 The Farmers Law ascribes to the village community the right to exploit the deserted lands of their members. This ri ght was well adopted by the Ottoman codification until the end of the seventeenth century. In 1550, the delegation of the village Kremikovci led by their priest appeared before the sheriats court in Sofia in an attempt to avoid the compensation 73 Laiou, Peasant Society in the Late Byzantine Empire (Princeton, Princeton UP: 1977). p.52. 74 Laskaris, Vatopedskata Gramota na Tsar Ivan Asen II [Vatopedi Charter of John II Asen] (Sofia: Du rzhavna pechatnitsa, 19 30).pp. 6365. 75 Novakovi Zakonski sponenici pp. 670, 659, 672. 76 St. Novakovi Selo (Belgrade: Srpska knjiz evna zadruga, 1965).p. 144. 77 Elena Grozdanova, Bulgarskata Selska Obshtina XV XVIII v [Bulgarian village community XV XVIII cc.] (Sofia, BAN, 1979).

PAGE 89

89 of the taxes of a certain peasant, who fled the village wit hout buying off his share of taxes.78 The delegation pleaded on behalf of th e village community before the judge for permission to sell the house of the refugee in order to cover the mi ssing sum in the total of the collective tax.79 Almost hundred years later, in 1635, the records of the c ourt of Bitola registered similar case. By the approval of the community of v illage of Popoljani, a vineyard of their fellow, who fled the village without buying off the tax to the state, was sold to anothe r inhabitant of the village, in order to cover the taxes due to the state. The cost of the vineyard was fixed to equal the tax due by the runaway peasant.80 The preserving of villages communal rights indicates that the grant of a village ( or part of it) to a certain landlord, lay or ecclesiastic, was a grant of the right to exploit the physical and human resources of that village, not of possessing it. A transfer of the right of the tributary state to collect revenues to an i ndividual could have a temporary ch aracter as it was in the case of pronoia or it could be hereditary ( for eternal times), in which case an imperial chrysobull would be enacted. In both cases, however, it does not mean that the villagers who were granted were losing their hereditary rights or becam e legally bound to the land. Nor that the act of granting was irreversible. The supreme right of dominium eminens, of possession of the entire land by the state, personified by the emperor, remained unimp aired as it was before the grant. As it is well known, the properties granted by an im perial chrysobull could be also expropriated by the emperor. Isaac I Comnenus (1057-9) was particularly notorious for this practice.81 Accordingly, the practice of expropria ting properties previously given by a chrysobull was 78 Grozdanova, Bulgarskata Selska Obshtina XV XVIII v. p. 90. 79 Ibid. 80 Ibid. p. 91. 81 Michael Ataliata. Historia. Ed. I Bekker. Bonn: Ed. Weber, 1853; also in Grucki Izvori za Bulgarskata Istoria [Greek sources for the Bulgarian history] Vol. 6, (Sofia: BAN, 1965). pp 109-197.

PAGE 90

90 common in Bulgaria and Serbia. In his Charter fo r the monastery of St. George the Fast near Skopje, King Millutin mentioned the transfer of the properties of his officer Verihna, who was accused of treason, to the monastery.82 In fact, dominium eminens constituted the legal basis of the state to intervene and control the relations between the paroikoi and their landlord. Therefore, the state collected the fines for vi olating the privileges granted to an estate even if the trespasser was a paroikos of the selfsame estate. The eventual tres passer of the rights of the monastery St. George The Fast, thus, had to pay six hyperpyra not to the monastery but to its granter and supreme owner, in this case the Bulgarian state.83 The inhabitants of granted villagers pres erved their individual hereditary rights over their properties. The charter granted to the St Nicholas monastery (Mrach Charter) by the Bulgarian Emperor John Alexander in 1347 banned the sale of property of the monasterial paroikoi outside the estate: neither a paroikos to give a dowry out of the estate (of the monastery) nor to sell a cornfi eld or vineyard out of it.84 However, as the codification of the Serbian Tsar Duan clarifies it, this li mitation should not be taken literally.85 What the Charter demanded was that the outside purchaser of property of a paroikos should assume the latters fiscal responsibilities to the estate owner. This does not mean that the purchaser became dependent to the estate owner otherwise than he had to pay the equivalent of the rent (morte ) and due labor services owed by the previous ow ner. The new, substituted rent was called epithelia .86 82 Novakovi Zakonski spomenici .p.613. 83 Ivan Dujcev, Iz Starata Bulgarska Knizhnina [Old Bulgarian literature] Vol. 2. (Sofia: Hemus, 1944).p.62 84 For the full text of the Mrac h Charter see Jordan Ivanov, Bulgarski starini iz Makedonia [Bulgarian historical monuments in Macedonia], (S ofia: BAN, 1931).pp.43-47. 85 St. Novakovi Zakonnik Stefana Duana Tzara Srpskog 1349 i 1354 [Codification of Stefan Duan, Tzar of the Serbs of 1349 and 1354]. (Belgrade: Drz avnoj s tampariji, 1898), Article 174. 86 Angold, A Byzantine Government in Exile, 1204-1261 p.137

PAGE 91

91 Although neither the paroikos a head of tenure could avoid his ob ligations to the landlord, nor could his heir, the rest of the peasants family was not tied to the land. This assertion is verified by the census documents of the fourteenth century where many families of paroikoi disappeared from one census to the next: ev en if the households records continued over time most of the children of the origin al household cannot be found on the record.87 Another affirmation comes from the chrysobull of Nicephor us Votaneiates of 1079 that added to the grant of Lavra, previously given by Consta ntinos X Doukas, another one hundred paroikoi.88 The fact that the chrysobull explicit ly points out that the new paroikoi should be recruited from the original families means that these descendants do not automatically became paroikoi In the eyes of the fisc the obligations of the paroikoi to their landlord were purely economic and not personal. In granting to a landlord entire or part of a village or just a few paroikoi the emperor transferred to the land lord the state tax ( telos ), which the paroikoi owned on their landed property and their animals and the labor serv ices due to the state for maintaining its infrastructure or for military and administrative purposes. However, there is no evidence that the personal status of the paroikos, his condition as a free man and Roman citizen was affected by this economic status. Nothing prevented the paroikos a head of a tenure, not to live on the land, cultivated by him. The paroikoi of the bishop of Muglen tilled the land of the monastery of Lavra.89 The monks of Zographou monastery had the permission for exempting their paroikoi from additional tax ( sitarkia ) when working on different lands.90 Three paroikoi of the 87 Laiou, Peasant Society in the Late Byzantine Empire p.151 88 P. Lemerle, The Agrarian History of Byzantium (Galway: Galway University Press, 1979).p.246. 89 Kazhdan, Agrarnyie Otnoshenia v Vizantii, XIIIXIV vv .p.114. 90 Actes de Zougraphou ed. by Ed. Regel, E. Kurtz and B. Korablev in Vizantiiskii Vremennik Vol.13 St. Petersburg, 1907. pp 1-190. Cited in D. Angelov, and Peter Tivcev, Izvori za istoriata na Vizantija [ Sources for the Byzantine history] ( Sofia: Nauka i Izkustvo, 1974).p. 147

PAGE 92

92 monastery Leimvotissa, who had lands in the village Vari (Bares) were living at the same time in the town of Smyrna.91 A certain parioikos, called Serb, listed, according to the praktika of Hilandar, as living in the v illage Nisia had a vineyard in the village of Handack.92 In 1316, in Radolibos, 29 out of 255 households were possession of paroikoi who paid taxes there but lived somewhere else.93 The list of samples is long and there is no need to enumerate all of them in order to arrive to the conclusi on that only in economic terms the paroikos could be regarded dependant. Except for being objects of concession by th e state to a landlord the peasants had the option to settle on an estate land of their ch oice. This option, however, was not limited only to peasants. In 1242, the head of a local important family Maximos Planites gave the monastery of Leimvotissa the family estate. In return to the sought protection from th e monastery his mother and brother had to pay a rent ( morte ) of a 1,5 hyperpyra.94 The choice for settling on estate land was determined by the estimation of the eventual benefits that the estate holder, grante d with privileges of tax exemptions ( excussia ), would provide for its paroikoi First, on an estate land the paroikoi acquired a patron who would support them in their quarrels with neighboring villages and th e encroachment of the powerful landowners. In 1235, the inhabitants of the village Potamou near Smyrna, paroikoi of pronoia holder Sergyros were represented by him in the court in their dispute with Leimvotissa monastery. A similar case is described by Michael Psellus. The villagers of Atzkome approached 91 Kazhdan, Agrarnyie Otnoshenia. p.114 92 Ibid. p.114. 93 J. Lefort The Population and Landscape in Eastern Macedonia: the Case of Radolibos in Continuity and Change in Late Byzantine and Early Ottoman Society p. 14. 94 Angold, A Byzantine Government in Exile, p.133

PAGE 93

93 him, asking him to become their patron. In return they agreed to provide him with agricultural services.95 Second, the paroikoi of an estate obtained a mana ger who would supply the labor with necessary means of production that peasan t often missed: draft animals, sowing seed, agricultural inventory an d, of course, land. According to the grant of the right to settle on monastic lands twelve paroikoi given by the chrysobull of Alexis I Comnenus, the monastery of Patmos recruited twelve eleutheroi, settled them on its lands and made of them zeugaratoi Finally and most importantly, the settling on estate land was motivated by the desire to avoid the increasing burden of supplementary taxes and corv e, which from the second half of the eleventh century onward not only well exce eded the basic land tax but also became an unpredictable and, thus, an unmanageable problem. Under the patronage of excussia the paroikoi founded safer living conditions. Two documents from 974 and 975, issued by an offici al, Theodore Kladone, referred to villagers in Macedonia who had sought refuge on lay or ecclesiastical estates to avoid their fiscal obligations.96 The process of looking for protection and avoiding the state tax continued in the later Middle Ages. The charter of King M ilutin for the monastery of St. George near Skopje of 1300, for example, had quite appealing conditions for recruiting settlers on the monasterial land: anybody who loves th e Church and voluntarily became its paroikos would be exempted from all due taxes to the state in ex change for three days labor per year for the monastery.97 Little wonder, then that paroikoi of the monastery became not only regular peasants but also pronoia holders. Such were the cases w ith Manota and Hrancha, who took advantage of the offer and together with their pronoiai became monastery soldiers.98 95 Liubimskii, Mihail Psell .p.108 96 Actes de Lavra, ed. P. Lemerle, A. Guillou, N. Svoronos, and D. Papachryssanthou, Archives de lAthos, 4 vols. (Paris: P. Lethielleux, 197082) Cited by J. Lefort Agrarian Economy sixth to twelfth centuries p. 239. 97 St. Novakovic, Zakonski Sponemici p. 619 98 Novakovic, Zakonski Sponemici, p.619

PAGE 94

94 The reverse situation is frequently wi tnessed by the documents as well. If the conditions of labor offered by th e landlord were depriving, the paroikoi would find their way out of the estate. By 1244, for instance, the paroikoi on the Lemviotissa monastery abandoned their holdings in seeking refuge in neighboring towns a nd villages. In the years after the recovery of Constantinople they began to withhold re nt and labor services to the monastery.99 The estate owner did not attempt to get back its paroikoi : they started to pay telos to the state. Through its fiscal and judicial officials, the state always re tained the right to determine and control in smallest deta ils the obligations of the paroikoi to their landlord estimated in money. Yet, there was a niche in the relations between the paroikoi and their patron, which was out of the scope of state regulations and wh ich constituted the main base for both economic growth in agriculture and economic dependence of the paroikoi on their landlord. The majority of the grants of land, either under certain conditions, such as pronoia, or for eternal times estates, usually c onsisted of two parts. The first was the right to collect the whole or part of the land tax, previously due to the state by the paroikoi according to the means of production on their disposal. Th e second part consisted of sec ondary taxes and rights (e.g., on fishing, collecting woods, labor services previously due to the state etc.), but above all, of land, on which, the whole tax or part of it was exempte d. However, there were estates, small pronoia holdings, which were not exempted for paying the land tax, but had only the excussia of paying the supplementary taxes and corve, exemp tion, which was also transmitted to their paroikoi The paroikoi of the village, granted to an estate, paid to their lord rent (morte ) in which their previous land ta x due to the state ( telos ) was transformed. In a ddition, as part of the morte 99 Angold, A Byzantine Government in Exile, p.133.

PAGE 95

95 they furnished with corve labor the domanial la nd of the estate, or paid its money equivalent. The morte and its corve part depended on the m eans of production possessed by the peasants: draft animals and land. Anything above the labor services ascribed to the estate by the grant of privileges was a matter of bargaining between the paroikoi and their lord and since it affected the efficiency of agricultural pr oduction of the domanial land it de serves special attention. In the case when an estate was granted full exemption from land tax, the estate holder could withdraw from direct cultivating of the domanial land and by delegating the management to his stewards to collect only the la nd tax conceded by the state of his paroikoi and the incomes of the lease of his land paid by his paroikoi or by some third party. Although it was a possibility in theory, it was a rare case in the thirteenth fourteenth centurys estate organization of production. In reality, the revenue extracted by di rect cultivating of the domanial land exceeded many times the incomes of tax exemptions. As is demonstrated by the approximations of A. Laiou regarding the revenues of th e monastery of Lavra, if only th e land of the monastery in the theme Thessalonike (1/3 of all its possessi ons) was cultivated, presumably, only by sharecropping, (giving in about 1/ 3 of the total production to th e landowner), it would give a revenue exceeding 8 times the total of the fu ll tax exemptions that monastery was granted.100 Actually, this ratio should be much higher sin ce a significant part of the land (between 24-29%) was cultivated by corve labor, which would leave the entire revenue to the landlord. In fact, an estate was organized by a combination of various modes of production. Part of its domanial land, unsuitable for cultivation, such as forests and water resources, yielded incomes that supplemented the morte of its paroikoi on their land and animals. Another part of the estates domanial land was cultivated by corve labor, prev iously due to the state. How significant were 100 Laiou, Agrarian Economy, ThirteenthFifteenth Centuries in The Economic History of Byzantium, from the Seventh to the Fifteenth Centuries p. 335

PAGE 96

96 the secondary taxes, part of wh ich was corve labor, is appare nt by its money equivalent as mentioned by the Latin praktikon of Lampsakos and that of some lands near Retina, Macedonia. While the basic land tax for zeugaratoi in Lampsakos was 10 hyperpyra, and the equivalent of corve was estimated as 4 hyperpyra, the basic tax for the lands near Retina was specified between 4 and 8 hyperpyra ( depending on the qual ity of the land) and the corve replacement was calculated as 4 hyperpyra, almost doubling the basic tax.101 The cash replacements for Lampsakos were based on 48 labor days, an am ount close to the maximum of 52 labor days reported by the sources. The practice of cash repl acement of the corve had been imposed since the widespread of pronoia as a model for repayment by the state military service. As it is well known, the military duties of pronoia holders could be bought out by the money equivalent of 45 nomismata In the eyes of the fisc, therefore, the value of all special taxation and corves could be assessed at about 4 nomismata per year. In fact, that was the va lue of the corves of the villagers of Lampsakos in 1219. However, the rest and, according to the surviving praktika, the largest part of the estates land was leased either into fixed cash rent or into a sharecropping arrangements, which revolved in about 1/3 to 1/2 of the production to the landlord.102 Both models of tenancy, sharec ropping and cash rent, have their positive and negative impacts on economic growth and their comparison was object of intensive scholarly interest. While some scholars view the sharecropping as hampering the economic advance, since it discourages the investments, and thus the maximization of the profits, others consider it a good equilibrium for long-term agricultural efficiency because of its risk-sharing element. It seems that where the 101 Laiou, Agrarian Economy, ThirteenthFifteenth Centuries. 102 While 1/3 was the average production due to the landowner for cereals, was the usual rent for vineyards and orchards. See for details A. Laiou, Agrarian Economy, ThirteenthFifteenth Centuries.

PAGE 97

97 labor force was abundant there was no hesitation to use wage laborers in the field. Did you withhold a payment to a misthios ? was a question from the Ort hodox confessional practices in the fourteenth-century Bulgaria, sugges ting widespread usage of wage labor.103 At the same time, undoubtedly, the usage of a wage laborer s hould be more typical for the urban economic landscape, where wage labor would find more consistent employment, rather than in the seasonal service in agriculture. The costly supervising of hired labor in agriculture was also a factor for geographical adherence of the wage labor to the urban landscape. As for the cash rent, it combined the worst features of both, shar ecropping and wage laboring and it was dully acknowledged by the Byzantine intellect uals at the time as unfair.104 The stand of the latest economic theories regarding the cash rent is not much different. It is considered to have hampered the economic advance since its ri sk-aversion affected only the landlord and discouraged further investment. Organization of Production Although there were no legal lim itations a bout who could enter into sharecropping arrangements, and given the permanent shortage of labor, the most probable leaseholders of a certain estate were its own paroikoi The organization of produc tion of a peasant household, either on state land or in an estate was marked by polyculture and pol yactivity. The paroikoi possessions were composed by land, animals and artisanal activity. The land consisted of hereditary plots and/or hired fields among which the majority was arable land producing grain. A small piece of land, usually located around the house was designated as a garden, which supplemented the diet of the household with legumes, vegetables and fruits. The documents 103 A. Almazov, Tainaja Izpoved v Pravoslavnoi Tzerkvi [The Secret Confession in the Orthodox Church] Vol 3. (Odessa: Tipografiii shtaba odesskago voennago okruga, 1894).p.92 104 Gemistos Plethons letter to the Emperor Manuel II Palaeologos. See details in C. M. Woodhouse George Gemistos Plethon, The Last of the Hellenes ( Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986).pp. 92-107

PAGE 98

98 denote that between 74 and 96 % of the peasants possessed vi neyards, mostly for selfconsumption, but there are fr equent indications of paro ikoi possessing 20 and more modiai vineyards, the production of which was definitely market oriented.105 Viticulture was one of the best cash crops: The price of the land of a vineyard was much higher than that of the arable, despite that vineyards did not need equipment like oxen. Yet, a newly-planted vineyard needs substantial labor inputs for 2-3 years before it star ts giving any returns. Be sides draft animals, the peasants had flocks of sheep and goats, which so metimes were of considerable size. In 1300, the villagers of Gomatou possessed approximately 1200 sheep 770 of which were owned by only four families of paroikoi .106 The great variation in the num ber of sheep owned by peasant households, as well as the existen ce of some large flocks, sugges ts that this was an activity whose products were also commercialized. Sometimes a paroikos could even posses a mill, as did some paroikos, Krits, from the village of Akrotirios.107 The practice of building a mill by paroikoi had to be a common endeavor, since most of the charters issued by the Serbian monarchs to the monasteries in North and We st Macedonia banned especi ally this initiative within the limits of the monastic estates.108 Although, there is little evidence in the written sources abou t rural artisanal activity, the archaeological finds for the growing scale of cr aft production in the coun try is undisputable. As it was demonstrated above, in the cases of Hotn itsa and the village located on the top of the 105 Laiou, Peasant Society .p.172-174; Idem, The Agrarian Economy Thirteenth Fifteenth Centuries p. 364; n.234. 106 Laiou, Peasant Society p. 174. 107 Actes de Chilander ed. L. Petit and V. Korablev, Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1975. Phototype copy of the edition in Vizantiiskij Vremennik, Vol. 17, (Saint Petersburg, 1911) article No 124 of 1327. 108 The Charter of the Church of St. Ni cholas at Kozle by Stefan Duan and The Charter of the Holy Archangels Monastery at Prizren by Stefan Duan in St. Novakovic, Zakonski Spomenici pp. 692; 703.

PAGE 99

99 ancient Sevtopolis, market-oriente d craft production was of an impressive level. It might look hazardous to drag conclusions for the entire regi on of Eastern Balkans only by examining two or three villages. However, the trend of growth of the rural industry that became quite noticeable towards the opening of the thirteenth century is confirmed as well by the examination of peasants surnames denoting crafts in Macedonia by Jacques Lefort.109 His analysis of monasterial praktika suggests that rural cr afts were still poorly de veloped in the tenth and eleventh centuries. Among 32 paroikoi in the Hierissos, region of Chalkidike, in the late tenth century, only two names indicated crafts (mas on and blacksmith), and none have been found at Drobrobikeia, among 24 peasants, at the beginning of the eleventh century.110 By the beginning of the twelfth cen tury, a list of 122 paroikoi at Radolibos included five craftsmen (carpenters, potters, a barrel maker, and the widow of a blacksmith); four could be found at Dobrobikeia (potter, miller, mason, marble worker), one at Bolbos (cobbler), but none in the five other villages and hamlets owned by Iveron.111 Lefort concludes that until the beginning of the twelfth century, no more than 4% of peasants possessed artisan surnames. However, according to him, significant change occurred in Macedonia during the twelfth centu ry and the first half of the thirteenth when 8% to 10% of peasants bore the names of trades.112 The appearance of social group of rural craftsmen is witnessed as well by the Mrach Charter of John Alexander of 1342, where they are mentioned separately form the other groups of peasants.113 109 J. Lefort, The Rural Economy Seventh -Twelfth Centuries in The Economic History of Byzantium .p.309 110 Ibid. pp. 309-310 111 Ibid. p.310 112 Ibid. 113 Iv. Dujcev, Stara Bulgarska Knizhnina, p. 130-134

PAGE 100

100 Indeed, the diffusion of artisanal activities among the rural population could be interpreted differently: It may be a sign of growing peasants poverty combined with increasing dependence on the landlord as a result of decrea sing land availability and the encroachment of the peasant property by the esta te. Yet, although a favorite inte rpretation for generations of historical materialists, if anywhe re, that cannot be the case of th e village on the top of Sevtopolis. Its location in a border zone in a very scarcely populated region eliminates the options of land shortage or intensive landlords pressure upon the peasants. Although it s unfavorable location and distance from the main trade roads, the village seems quite well involved in trade, according to its imported Byzantine sgraffito pottery and glass bracelets. Therefore, it is safe to conclude that the growing involvement of the village in artisanal activitie s is an indication of an increasing market orientation of the rural production, a tre nd usually attributed to expanding pre-modern economies. The organization of production of large estates, mainly monastic, was not composed only of different types of agricu ltural production, but also, as the surviving documents specify, of large-scale involvement in processing and tradin g the agricultural products. Given that the Latin occupation after 1204 and the period of the first Palaiologan emperors do not seem to have introduced any great changes in th e rules of landownership, it is likely that the large estates economically outweighed the small pronoia holdings during the course of the thirteenth century. The large estates of Macedonia produced grain, wine, olive o il and products of animal husbandry. They possessed mills and workshops for iron and pottery production and collected rents not only from the arab le land leased to their paroikoi, but also from their urban real estates. The monasterial foundations with their vast land possessions were not only producers and traders but they also played an essential role for structuring economic micro-regions. By their regular

PAGE 101

101 fairs turning into permanent market places they established the regional trade infrastructure between the town and country. The large estate s role in land management, thus, became determinant in the course of th irteenth and fourteenth centuries : they provided better economic and, often, political security than the state. Their comp etent staff, the propensity to invest and improve with the aim of maximizing the profits and, above all, their flexible structure, responding to the markets demands made the estate a real bearer of economic advance in agriculture. The example of Rado libos, is the best support for this assertion. The documents reveal that Radolibos was a small community of landowners and an estate of Simbatios Pakourianos, which in 1098 consisted of 13 households paying telos in about 9 nomisma.114 After the death of Simbatius wi fe, Kali, the estate was bequeathe d to the monastery of Iveron. In 1316 the village of Radolibos, located entirely on the monasterial estate land, already consisted of 255 households, who paid telos of 520 hyperpyra, 320 of which were collected by Iveron and 200, by the fisc.115 The positive effects of transmitting the right of exploiting the land and human resources from the state to an individual or collective es tate holder became quite noticeable towards the second half of the twelfth centur y. Since land in the Balkans always exceeded the availability of labor, the main economic problem of the region was how to make the labor most effective. However, the efficiency of agriculture labor de pended entirely on the pos session of draft animals and supplementary equipment, the lack of which turned the manpower into a useless social burden. Therefore, the idea of dele gating the right of extracting surplus by the tributary state to the estate holders was the best solution to turn the human potential (eleutheroi) into an effective 114 G. Tsankova-Petkova, Za Agrarnite Otnoshenia v Srednovekovna Bulgaria, p.43. 115 Ibid.p.44

PAGE 102

102 manpower (zeugeratoi or boidatoi ). From this economic construction any party was beneficial. The fisc, although sharing its rights and income s with a private party, (estate) gained more from the taxing of the turned into zeugeratoi previously nontaxable eleutheroi. The estate gained the privilege of reduced tax, land and manpower for production. The peasants gained more effective protection, economic security and means of producti on. Therefore, the advantages of the estate management were well acknowledged by the state au thorities and often the initiative for granting villages to the monasteries came from the cen tral power. The process of delegating economic functions to monastic institutions was, however not a monopoly of the political rulers. It was well paralleled by the private sector as well. The private religious f oundations were the best possible insurance against various misfortunes: social poli tical legal and fiscal, which threatened the integrity of a household. The f oundation and endowment of a family monastery, or church, was a sound economic investment, capable of bringing material, as well as spiritual benefits to the founder and his heirs. The social role of monastic institutions, thus, went well beyond their religious, ideological and educational functions. Due to the collective character of ownership and lack of political aspirations they became the best economic instrument of the central power. It even seems that they started to play some modifi ed bank role in agriculture: to turn the abandoned (excessive and economically ine ffective) lands into pr ofitable enterprises and to storage the financial reserves of the central power, which could be used according to the political expediency. The strive of Serbian Tsar Duan to grant villages to the monasteries in Macedonia, thus, reached such a magnitude that it obtained the characte ristics of colonizing campaign. The central power provided not only the legal basis for recruiting peasants on monastic lands, but also it institutionalized and financed the proce ss of recruit. In 1337, a special missionary was charged by Duan with the recruitm ent of peasants for the abandoned village of

PAGE 103

103 Yastrebec, granted to the mona stery of St. Demetrius at Ko ani.116 In 1348, the villages of Brest, Suho Gurlo, Leskovica, Vitce and Drenok were inha bited by peasants by order of Duan, before they were granted to the monastery of Hilandar.117 The same policy, although at smaller scale due to its earlier time is ascribed to the Bulgarian Emperor John II Asen by Borils Synodicon .118 The Serbian expansion starting in the second quarter of the fourteenth century towards the Aegean seacoast was accompanied by granting v illages to the monasteries in Northern and Western Macedonia as well as of the Athonite Monasteries, especially Hilandar and Panteleimon. The survey of St. Novakovic on Ma cedonian villages estimates the number of the villages granted, or confirmed of being granted by the Serbian monarchs to monasteries at the beginning of the expansion in about 35 vill ages in Northern and Western Macedonia. 119 By the eve of the Ottoman conquest of Macedonia (1393-5) the number of the villages exceeded 200.120 The expansion of the agricultural economy was signaled as well by the growth of local trade. The surviving documents record systematic attempts of the large estates to acquire possessions as close as possible to the regional markets and, t hus, to reduce the transportation costs. The eleventh century aristocratic maxima articulated by Kekaumenos, to live off ones own, was not the dominant one during the thirteenthfourteenth centuries. The great landowners massively directed th eir production to the market. The end of the thirteenth and the opening of the fourteenth century were marked by significant intere st in obtaining urban 116 Novakovi Zakonski Spomenici pp. 662-663 117 T. Taranovski, Istorja Srpskog Prava u Nemanji koj dravi [History of Serbian jurisprudence in the state of Nemanici] Vol.2. (Belgrade: Sluz beni list SRJ, 1996). p.39 118 Also known as The Synodicon of Bulgarian Church. See M. G. Popruzenko Synodik Tsarja Borila [Borils Synodicon] Bulgarski Starini No 8 (1928) pp. 83-84. 119 Novakovi Selo. pp. 116-126 120 Ibid.

PAGE 104

104 properties and land in the vi cinity of the cities. Especially active in this endeavor were, of course, the monastic foundations, the biggest landowners. The large esta tes, both, monastic and lay, possessed workshops and groceries, bakeries an d wine shops, water and windmills, which were rented out or directly exploited by their owne rs. Almost all of the documented monasteries possessed properties in and near th e cities. Especially desirable were the properties in the big towns. In Thessalonike, no less than 17 monasteries possessed properties.121 The monastery of St. George possessed in Skopje several houses two palaces and a warehouse for grain.122 Hilandar owned 18 shops and groceries in Serre s, 15 in Nicopolis, 20 in Sofia, and 30 in Thessalonike.123 Stefan Duan granted a metallurgical and blacksmith complex of Trilision to the monastery of Lavra.124 In Thessalonike, the monastery of Xenophon had five grocery stores and three large houses, which, in 1419, had been turned by their tenant into a huge and prosperous wine shop.125 The concentration of 500 modiai vineyards owned by Vatopedi in the vicinity of Serres suggests that the suburban lands, planted with olive groves, vineyards and orchards were very profitable and desirable investments.126 Once their presence at the local markets was stabilized, the large estates made the next step into the inter-regional and international markets. In 1356, the monks of Vatopedi ob tained the right to possess a ship by which they transported 121 L. Brhier, Les Institutions de lEmpire Byzantin: Le Monde Byzantin ( Paris: ditions Albin Michel 1948).p.574 122 Novakovi Zakonski Spomenici pp. 611; 613 123 A. Solovjev and V. Moshin, Grcke Povelie Srpskih Vladara [Greek novels of the Se rbian rulers] (Belgrade: Kresti 1936).p.116-123. 124 T. Florinskii, Afonskie Aktyi [ Athonite Acts] ( Saint Petersburg: V.S. Balashev, 1880).pp. 98-100 125 Laiou, The Agrarian Economy Thirteenth Fifteenth Centuries .p.352 126 A. Solovjev and V. Moshin, Grcke Povelie Srpskih Vladara. p.142

PAGE 105

105 their products on the market in Constantinople.127 Similarly, the monastery of John Chrysostom of Patmos Island owned four ships for commercial purposes.128 Further evidence for the growing sector of commerce is provided by the monastic documents suggesting proliferation of the local fa irs, organized by the monasteries in the first half of the fourteenth century. Combining market activities and religious festivities celebrating the patron saints, the monastic foundations used these occasions to raise revenues from the market dealings and levied commercial taxes and stall fees. The developmen t of fairs network in the Balkans seems to resemble the two waves of fair expansion in Western Europe during the ninth and then over the course of the eleventh and twelfth centuries.129 The first wave could be placed within the context of spread of Christia nity among the Bulgarians during the ninth century and the following proliferation of monastic foundations, eager to emulate the Byzantine monastic practices such as the prominent panegyreis (fair) of St. Demetrius in Thessalonike. However, the early fairs emphasized on the religious compone nt and hardly had any economic significance. The reasons for the second wave of growing the number of fairs in the beginning of the eleventh century should be sought in the Byzantine expans ion over the Balkans and their integration into the Byzantine economic system. The economic signi ficance of the fairs at this time scarcely exceeded their role as a source of obtaining cash by the peasants for paying their taxes. However, the country fairs did not wane within the course of growth of the urban markets during the 127 Regel, W., E. Kurtz and B. Korblev, Actes de Philothe Vizantiiskij Vremennik, No 20 (1913), appemdix 1. 128 Ibid. 129 For the development of the fairs in the Western Europe see St, Epstein, Regional Fairs, Institutional Innovation and Economic Growth in Late Mediavl Europe. The Economic History Review New Series, Vol 47, no 3( Aug. 1994). 459-482

PAGE 106

106 thirteenth and fourteen th centuries, but witnessed a para llel expansion, a phenomenon analogous to that in Western Europe.130 Being part of the long lasting debate in the West about the avenues of transition from feudalism to capitalism the fairs attracted significant scholarly attention. Yet, this is not the case with the Byzantine historiography. Although th eir importance was recognized by not a few Byzantinists, the study of fairs and their econom ic significance still awaits its adequate treatment. The theme of the mark ets role in economic developmen t has been always foreign to the proponents of the historical materialism.131 The Western Marxist historians, focused on the class-deterministic approach to economic devel opment, view the feudal economic institutions, such as the markets and fairs, primarily as a means to redistribute wealth, rather than economyshaping institutions. Unlike the free urban market s, the country fairs were only an extension of the seigniorial control in trade, a manipulative by the feudal class interest instrument, extracting additional surplus from the peasants and facilita ting the supply of peasants with cash, only to be gained back as a tax payment. This view, howev er, is part of a broader thesis emphasizing the crucial importance of class relations and class struggle to socio-economic development most powerfully represented by Robert Brenner.132 He linked the emergence of capitalist relations in agriculture with weak property rights of the peas ants, a stipulation necessary for the emergence 130 St, Epstein, Regional Fairs, Institu tional Innovation and Economic Growth.. 131 C. Lishev, Za Stokovoto Proizvodstvo vuv Feodalna Bulgaria [ About industrial production in feudal Bulgaria] (Sofia: BAN, 1957).pp. 88-112; A. P. Kazhda n, Rezenzia Vurhu Knigata na S. Lishev, Za Stokovoto Proizvodstvo na Feodalna Bulgaria [ Review of S. Lishev, About industrial production in feudal Bulgaria] in Srednye Veka Vol 13(1958).p. 128.; L. Gorina, Voprosy Socialno-Ekonomicheskogo Razvitia Vtorogo Bolgarskogo Tzarstva v Sovremennoi Bolgarskoi Isotriografii [Questions about the socio-economic development of the Second Bulgarian Empire in contemporary Bulgarian literature] in Slavjanska Istoriografia ( 1961).p. 104 132 Robert Brenner, Agrarian Class Structure and Economic Development in pre-Industrial Europe.; and The Agrarian Roots of European Capitalism. in Ashton T.H. and C.H.E. Philpin. The Brenner debate. (Cambridge, Cambridge UP, 1976).; R. Brenner, Property Relations and the Growth of Agricultural Productivity in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe. In Economic development and agricultural productivity ed. By Bhadury, Armit and Rune Skarstein. ( Lyme, Norway: Edward Elgar Publishers, 1997).

PAGE 107

107 of large estates. Claiming that this English model of large estates with the three-tiered hierarchical system of lords, tenants, and wage laborers was th e only provider of a path for higher productivity and market orie ntation, Brenner doubted the abilit y of peasants to involve in market economy autonomously and proposed that they need to be pushed, that is, coerced, through asymmetrical power relations into the markets. As one may expect, Brenners views were adopted by some leading Byzantinists and became dominant during the 1970s-1980s. Both M. Angold and A. Harvey regarded the scale of peasant involvement in market as peripheral to the dominant self-subsistence in agriculture.133 This understanding, however, was seriously questioned by the latest works of ClausPete r Matchke, Ccile Morrisson and Ageliki Laiou.134 Yet, while the role of the esta te for facilitating economic advan ce is now undisputable, peasants market activities still need further research. Since the surviving sources, as one could expect, elucidate only the peasant activity for selling pr operty, the level and character of their market activities might be provided onl y by archaeological evidence. To the degree to which the wage labor in Brenners model (large estates with three-tiered hierarchical system with weak p easants property rights in the context of la ck of bondage to the land,) is not taken literally, but in a modified and often complex form (sharecropping, rent, lease or the combination of these) Brenners thesis has certain validity in Byzantine agriculture. On the one hand, as it was proven within the wide historiogr aphical debate which Brenners thesis stirred, it is quite impossible to find an ideal case in the hybrid nature of agriculture where peasants did not supplement their wage labor wi th other activities. On the other hand, it might 133 Angold, Byzantine Government in Exile, .pp. 130-137; Harvey, Economic Expansion of the Byzantine Empire, p.118. 134 Klaus Peter Matchke, Commerce, Trade Markets and Money: ThirteenthFifteenth Centuries. in The Economic History of Byzantium, from the Seventh to the Fifteenth Centuries p. 781.; A. Laiou, Exchange and Trade, Seventh Twelfth Centuries. in Ibid p.754-756.; Ccile Morrisson, Byzantine Money: Its Production and Circulation in Ibid, pp.909-966.

PAGE 108

108 seem that the economic importance of the corve in the Byzantine model makes the parallel with English model questionable at first glance. In fact, the corve in the Byzantine model lacks the characteristics of the Western labor services that turn the economic dependence on a landlord into personal dependence and bondage to the land. It was converti ble in money and thus, should be regarded only as a modified tax. Indeed, that was exactly how the corve was regarded by the Byzantines at the time: as a servi le and onerous form of taxation.135 What Brenners model claims, is that the roots of cap italism should be sought precisely in the combination of weak property rights of the peasants in the context of lack of bondage to the land for the emergence of labor market, supplying both the rural and urba n economy. However, the failure of the classcentered explanations of Brenner to recognize the equal importan ce of pre-capitalist institutional constellations for creating and c oordinating the markets are quite palpable in the case of the Byzantine model. In addition, his assumptions about the inefficiency of peasant farming because of its lack of capital inputs, engendered by the se lf-subsistent mentality, seem to be the weakest point of his theory. Labor markets, and even more so, tenancy i.e. lease hold-markets were at least as important for subjection of peasants to economic competition as the weak property rights. If the peasants lacked cap ital input they would provide la bor input, which were crucial for industrial crops such as flax, silkworm breed ing, olive trees growi ng, viticulture, dairying, horticulture. Such assets, as well as mills, pastures, brick and pottery kilns, iron making furnaces and saltpans were called by the Byzantines autourgia, that is, properties that, after their establishment produced on their own, without furthe r input, except labor. It is not surprising that viticulture in the Balkans had ec onomic importance equal to that of the cereals. The relationship between peasants arable land and vineyards embodies, in fact the continuum between self135 Gemistos Plethons letter to the Emperor Manuel II Palaeologos in C. M. Woodhouse George Gemistos Plethon, pp. 92-107

PAGE 109

109 sufficiency and the marketing of agricultural products. Although not to lerated by Islam, in 1540, the wine production yielded 30 % of th e total revenues of the fisc in the nahya 136 of Turnovo.137 It seems quite unlikely that this ratio was esta blished after the impositi on of the Ottoman power. The Byzantine model, thus, combined feat ures of both coercing the peasants through class-based asymmetrical power relations towa rds the market and pulling them into trade by economically efficient institutions: highly mone tized tax system and price incentives of temporary markets, such as fairs. The transfor mation of peasant subsistence, therefore, into market involvement could be considered as result of the state intervenism. It led to polyactivity as entering in tenancies and land leases ma rkets and searching for incomes outside the agriculture, which, eventually, turned into a specialization and commercialization of the production as in the cases of Hotnitsa and the village on the top of Sevtopolis. The expanding commerce in the country led in turn to additional growth of the fairs, a development similar to that in the Latin West. It is important to note, ho wever, that while it was one of the main peasant demands in the revolt of 1381 in England to gain free access to the urban markets, such restrains did not exist in the Byza ntine socio-economic model.138 The weak indications by the written sources about trading peasants should not be ta ken as an evidence of weak involvement of the peasants in the market. Trading peasants are denot ed in the Latin possessions of Romania as well as by the treaty between despot Ivanko (Dobrudj a despotate) and the community of Genoa in 1387.139 Peasants involvement in rapidly growing co mmerce of wheat are also well attested in 136 Ottoman regional-administrative unit, subdivision of sancak responding to the Byzantine katepanikon 137 Str. Dimitrov, ed. Istoria na Veliko Turnovo [History of Veliko Turnovo] Vol. II (Veliko Turnovo: Abagar, 2000).p.33. 138 C. Oman, The Great Revolt of 1381 ( Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1906).p.64 139 David Jacoby, The Venetian Presence in the Latin Empire of Constantinople (12041): The Challenge of Feudalism and the Byzantine Inheritance, Jahrbuch fur sterraichische Byzantinistik Vol 43 (1993): p.179 n. 124;

PAGE 110

110 Bosnia.140 However, the main argument of peasants market activities is provided by archaeology: More money and mo re people with money signal th e unarguable advance of the late medieval rural economy in the Balkans. In many respects this advance was based on the complementarity between the village, which provid ed the bulk of the production, and the estate, which ensured the better management. The main role, however, in this model of economic development was exercised by the state, the crea tor and regulator of the relations between the peasants and estate holders. The consequences of this tri-partite system are the saturation of the rural environment to the limits of its technical capacity for expa nsion, the proliferation of the estate and the following transformation of its production from self-subsistent to market oriented and the drive of the peasant, deficient in proper farming equipment for searching for additional incomes outside agriculture: in artisanal production and specializa tion, and in commuting between the village and the regional market center. Once the nonagricultural activities of the peasant secured his self-subsisten ce, it was only a matter of time for him to become a permanent townsman. Vasil Giuzelev, Dogovor na Ivanko Terter s Genoa ot Mart 23, 1387[Treaty of Ivanko Terter with Genoa of March 23, 1387] in his Ocherci vurhu Istoriata na Bulgarskiat Severoiztok i Chernomorieto, XII-XV v ( Sofia: Borina, 1995).pp. 126-139 140 Bogumil Hrabak Izvoz itarica iz Bosne i Hercegovine u Primorje od kraja XIII do pooetka XVII veka [Grain export from Bosnia and Herzegovina to Primorie: the end of 13th the opening of 17th centuries] in Godinjak Drutva Istori ara Bosne i Herzegovine No 14 (1963), pp.121-203.

PAGE 111

111 Figure 3-1. Old Roman Pr ovinces in the Balkans and Asia Minor Figure 3-2. Fourteenth-century Northeastern Balkans.

PAGE 112

112 Figure 3-3. Geographical location of the ar chaeological sites under consideration Figure 3-4. KovachevoPlan of investigations [Reprinted with permission from Peio Gatev, Srednovekovno Selishte i Nekropol pri se lo Kovachevo, Pazardzhishki okrug Razkopki i Prouchvania Vol.12 (1985) Appendix, fig.1]

PAGE 113

113 Figure 3-5. Investigational plan of the mediev al village on the top of the ruins of ancient Sevtopolis [Reprinted with permission from J. Changova, Srednovekovnoto Selishte nad Sevtopolis XI-XIV vek, p.21, fig.8] Figure 3-6. Hotnitsa. Excavation plan [Adapted from J. Aleksiev, Srednovekovno Selishte krai Hotnitsa in Veliko Turnovo, Iubileen Sbornik, p.75, fig.2]

PAGE 114

114 Figure 3-7. Single-room above-ground house [Reprinted with permission of Gordana Miloshevich, Stanovanje u srednjovekovnoj Srbiji p.72] Figure 3-8. Two-room house. W ood, stone and wattle-and-daub construction. ([Reprinted with permission of Gordana Miloshevich, Stanovanje u srednjovekovnoj Srbiji p.72] Figure 3-9. Type of plow with coulter and plowshare [Adapted from Changova, Srednovekovni Orudia na Truda v Bulgaria Izvestia na Arheologicheskia Institut Vol.XXV (1961).p.23]

PAGE 115

115 Figure 3-10. Plowshares and coulters from the medieval village on the top of Sevtopolis [Courtesy of Muzeum of Kazanlak] Figure 3-11. Painted sgraffito pottery from A) Hotnitsa and B)Turnovo. [Courtesy of the Archaeological Museum of V. Turnovo] Figure 3-12. Sgraffito pottery from the villag e on the top of Sevtopolis [Reprinted with permission from J. Changova, Srednovekovnoto Selishte nad Sevtopolis XI-XIV vek pp. 65; 68, figs.52; 54] A B

PAGE 116

116 Figure 3-13 Bracelets from the village on the top of Sevtopolis. A) Bronze. B) Iron. [Reprinted with permission from J. Changova, Srednovekovnoto Selishte nad Sevtopolis XI-XIV vek pp..107;108, figs.87;89] Figure 3-14. Rings and glass bracelets from the vi llage on the top of Sevt opolis [Reprinted with permission from J. Changova, Srednovekovnoto Selishte nad Sevtopolis XI-XIV vek pp.110;123, figs.90; 98] A B

PAGE 117

117 CHAPTER 4 THE URBAN ARENAS Alas! The unfortunate empire was in great poverty; where th e archontes were rich and the emperor was a pauper. Anonymous Greek Chronicle of the Turkish Sultans, 16th century. Toward (Not) Defining Town The ancient Greeks used the word polis with no fewer than eleven general meanings ranging from citadel and state to community and legal embodiment of public law.1 The first signs of overlapping the meanings of a settlement below a citadel and a state are denoted in Odyssey After Hesiod (end of the 8th the beginning of the 7th century B.C.), however, the designatin g of a particular polis as a state was transfor med from particular to general: polis became synonymous of state. From the use of polis denoting a settlement below a citadel evolved its further use indicating the inhab itants of such a settlement. Another step led to the inhabiting of the notion of polis with the meaning of assembl y. Therefore, the history of the meaning of the term polis may be summed up in two phases. The first phase ranges from the initial meaning of the term polis as naturally strong site, citadel to the meaning of state. The semantic changes thereafter occurred within the conceptual field of state and politics. Behind each shift in meaning lies the pe rception of the Greeks of some semantic relationship between two notions. Thus, initially, the citadel specified in their mind a category of settlements. At the time of the Stoics this category of settlements speci fied already a category of societies: the use of term polis was extended to its settlers their popular assembly and the notion of their public life. 1 M. B. Sakellariou, The Polis-State. Definition and Origin.( Athens: Research Centre for Greek and Roman Antiquity 1989).pp. 208-213; G. Glotz, La cit grecque ( Paris: Le Renaissance Du Livre, 1928) pp. 108-109; W. Gawantka, Die Sogenannte Polis (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag Wiesbaden GmbH, 1985) pp. 190-193.

PAGE 118

118 According to the Stoics, the polis was an organization of people dwelling together and ruled by a common law.2 For Aristotle, as for Plato before him, the polis arose out of the in capacity of the two prior forms of human association, the household a nd the larger kinship group to satisfy all the legitimate needs of their members.3 Self-sufficiency, autarky was the objective and a properly constituted polis should be able to attain that goal, in order to avoid the lack of essential natural resources, for which the foreign trade was admissi ble. However, Platos and Aristotles idea of autarky took city and hinterland, town and country, together as a unit, not as distinct variables in competition or conflict: even those farmers, who lived outside of the town, were integrally in the polis For Strabo, writing in the be ginning of the Christian era, the urbanization was a process that would settle down the newly conquered barbar ians to agriculture an d, therefore, to the urban life.4 However, neither Strabo, nor anybody afte r him defined adequately any autonomous social or economic urban f actor that makes a town town Most of the modern social and historical scholars defined the town either accordi ng to its functions or to its size of population. Yet none of those approaches could point out any distinctive urban f actor, which would not disintegrate under a close analysis. The followers of Marxs political economy and, especially, the zealots of historical materialism took it for granted that the fundament of socio-economic prog ress, the division of labor, was objectified by the separation of town and country, neglecting the fact that despite 2 J. Von Arnim, Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta ( New Haven: Yale Press, 1986).pp. 528; 1130 3 Aristotle, Politics Ed. by David Keyt (Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1999); Plato, The Republic transl. by Benjamin Jowett ( New York: The Modern Library, 1941). 4 Kathryn Lomas, Introduction in Urban Society in Roman Italy (New York: St.Martins Press, 1995).p.5.

PAGE 119

119 Marxs promise to give a close analysis to the labor separation, as a theoretical instrument for analyzing socio-economic changes, he in fact, had never dared to do it.5 The dualistic approach to historical economy, dividing the town from its country was continued by H. Pirenne, M. Postan, M. Dobb and not a small group of their followers, for whom the medieval towns were non-feudal islands in a feudal sea or outposts of capitalism that pulled up behind them the social changes and economic advance.6 Yet the later historiography proved both theses wrong. The medieval towns were neither isolated socioeconomic entities nor they were the only social agents of progress. Braudel entered the same th eoretical trap by attempting to treat the town by itself, as an isolated entity from its environment (or, in fact, since towns cannot exist independently of other towns, as a network of entities), in which all towns have the same characteristics.7 Failing to find the common urban factor, which would define the town, finally, he gave up, concluding rather with an aphorism th an with a definition: a town is whatever the society, economy and politics allow it to be.8 In an attempt to avoid the dead ends of dualistic approach to hi storical economy, the present study adopts the views, most clearly expressed by P.Abra ms and S.Epstein, in which the medieval town was not an isolated social a nd economic order but a spatial concentration and intensification of the social and economic relations that were part of a far larger system, generally called, desp ite the ambiguity of the term, feudalism.9 The medieval town in the 5 K. Marx, Capital ( London: Lawrence & Wishart 1970).p. 352 6 H. Pirenne, Medieval Cities: Their Origins and Revival of Trade (Garden City: Doubleday, 1925); M. M. Postan, The Medieval Economy and Society (Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1975); Maurice Dobb, Studies of the Development of Capitalism (London: Routledge, 1946). 7 F. Braudel, Capitalism and Material Life, 1400-1800 (London: Harper and Row, 1973).pp. 373 8 Ibid. pp. 439-40 9 Philip Abrams, Towns and Economic Growth: Some Theories and Problems, in Ph. Abrams and E. A. Wrigley, eds., Towns in Societies: Essays in Economic History and Historical Sociology (Cambridge: Cambridge University

PAGE 120

120 Byzantine World and in Bulgaria, in particular, was not an exclusion. It was a physical locus where the social instituti ons: political, economic, judicial and cultural were concentrated. Indeed, it is quite tempting to as cribe the little physical distinction between urban and rural in the Byzantine World to the underdeveloped process of labor separation between town and country, but the mirage of labor division, never became a consistent criterion for the separation of town from its country and thus, for defining any distin ctive and autonomous urban factor. As it is well known, heterogeneous, agricultural and non-agricu ltural economic activities coexisted within both medieval towns and villages and if ther e was certain dominance of the non-agricultural activities within the towns, it w ould be a matter of degree and not of kind. For the intrusion of urban capital into the co untryside had begun simultaneously w ith the emergence of capitalist relations. There was not a town in Europe, whose money did not spill out on to the neighboring land and examples for that come from Paris and Augsburg,10 Antwerp and Florence,11 Novgorod, 12 Thessalonike13 and Dubrovnik.14 Towns and cities, thus, have never been distinguished from other forms of settlement in a nonarbitrary way. Even if there really is some urban distinctiveness, it can only be signified locally and demonstrated comparatively, by recourse to nonurban evidence. Press, 1978),pp. 9-33; S. R. Epstein, Freedom and Growth ( London, New York: Routledge, 2000).pp. 6-10; S.R. Epstein, Cities, Regions and The Late Medieval Crisis: Sicily and Tuscany Compared, Past and Present, No 130 (Feb., 1991), pp. 3-50. 10 Fernand Braudel, The Wheels of Commerce: Civilization and Capitalism 15th-18th Century 2 Vols. ( New York: Harper &Row, 1979).pp. 249-250 11 David Friedman, Florentine New Towns ( New York: MIT Press, 1988) 12 Nevra Necipolglu, Archontes of Thessalonike in Symposium of late Byzantine Thessalonike (Washington: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 2004) 13 Symposium of late Byzantine Thessalonike ed. by Alice-Mary Talbot and Jean-Michel-Spieser (Washington: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 2004) 14 Barisa Kreki Dubrovnik in the 14th and 15th Centuries :a city between East and West ( Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1972)

PAGE 121

121 Both Philipopolis and the late medieval vi llage on the top of the ancient Sevtopolis, examined in the previous chapter, for instance, had their defensive fortifications and both display differences of a scale. Both were productive centers, more agricultural in the latter and less agricultural in the former, and both displayed monetized economy, (undoubtedly, of different degree), signifying market orientation of their production. There were no qualitative differences between the inhabitants of the village and those of the town in te rms of their social or legal status either. The social elite, and thei r wealth, indeed, was concentrated within Philipopolis, but that is, again, a difference of a scale: it does not mean that the country was void of powerful and wealthy figures. Nevertheless, it was Philipopolis, wh ich was considered by its contemporaries a polis,15 undoubtedly, because of its institutional importance, lay and ecclesiastic, that grew out of the concentration of population there. Exactly this concentration of population formed the critical mass, which transformed its quantitative differences with the country into cultural and political qualitative distinctions: its ow n political and economic rationa le, its specific language and culture. It was the leadership of the community of Philipopolis, as well as those of the other towns in Thrace and Macedonia, which after the s ack of Constantinople by the Latins in 1204 articulated clearly their emancipation through auc tioning their political allegiance in exchange for communal tax privileges from the Latin, Bulg arian and later, Byzantine sovereigns. It was Philipopolis, which was viewed by its midtwelft h century bishop, Michael Italicus, as a place where the nine muses and the three graces live.16 As any other town of the Byzantine Empire, Philipopolis adopted the structural and functional model, exemplif ied by Constantinople and just 15 Nicetas Choniates, Historia English trans. by Harry J. Magoulias as O City of Byzantium: Annals of Niketas Choniates (Detroit: Wayne State UP, 1984) p. 345). Hereafter, all references to Choniates Historia will be to this particular edition; Ar noldi Lubecensis Chronicon in MGH. SS., XXI p.172; Gisleberti Chronicon in MGH. SS., XXI, p.566.; R. Browning, "Unpublished Correspondence between Michael Italicus, Archbishop of Philipopolis and Theodore Prodromos," Byzantinobulgarica No 1 (1962), pp. 279-97 16 R. Browning, "Unpublished Correspondence between Michael Italicus, Archbishop of Philipopolis and Theodore Prodromos," Byzantinobulgarica No 1 (1962), pp. 279-97.

PAGE 122

122 like the Byzantine capital, it was no t a distinctive from its countr y, social order, but rather a concentrated and intensified reflection of it a microcosm, a minimized model of the universe, as interpreted by the Byzantine theologo-political ideal. Semantics of Byzantino-Slavi c Settlement Terminology Af ter the crisis of the seventh century, the Byzantine polis lost its ancient semantics of state and public life and the implication of certain institutional and economic autonomy. Synonyms such as kastron and phrourion evolved from this point forward stressing the exclusively defensive aspect of the towns th at contracted within fortified enclosures and withdrew into the safety of na turally protected locations. The towns appearance impoverished and the urban way of life and social institutions such as city councils, baths, stadiums, and hippodromes came to an end. The rules of urban life were abandoned, as demonstrated by the intra muros burials, and the urban public space was re-structured by privatization and rapid redistribution of the urban public property. Instead, the town limite d its functions to ensuring the security of its residents and the surrounding ru ral population. The former Byzantine towns in the territories that came into the sway of the newly formed Bulgarian state, such as Serdica, Dorostorum or Bononia, continued to show some signs of habitati on but they lost their former social, economic and cultural function. Many of the former curial functions were continued by the offices of the bishops and their vicars and the communal life was reduced, thus, to a mere function of the Church. The Byzantine settlements terminological intricacy reflected the dynamics of urban development in a long term: The crisis of the se venth-eighth centuries resulting in contracting of the urban population and in iden tification of the former urban zones with their now solely defensive functions and the following revers e trend, the transforma tion of the fortified ecclesiastic and administrative centers into urban zones. In the Alexiad for instance, due perhaps

PAGE 123

123 to the different earlier sources used for he r work, Anna Comnena re fers to Tzouroulon, a fortified town in Thrace, sometimes as polichnion (small town) in one passage, kome (village), in another, and finally as polis .17 Tzouroulon, in fact, was an epis copal and small administrative center in the eightninth centuries, which, perh aps, as many other towns during and after the crisis of seventh-eighth centu ry, contracted to a fortre ss hosting the ecclesiastic and administrative offices ruling over the towns hinterland.18 With the revival of towns in the Balkans, which started in the ninth century, but obtained more noticeable features towards the second half of the twelfth centur y, the complexity of settlement terminology also grew. The late medieval sources often termed even settlements with considerable size and importance such as Janina, Serres, Monemvasia or Smyrna, as both kastron and polis.19 The reasons for that ranged so widely, from rhetorical methods and personal attitudes to thema tic emphases of the texts and landscape peculiarities of the described settleme nt that any attempt for delineating a general trend of the settlement terminol ogy within the sources is ill fated. However, a closer scrutiny of any particular case supported by archeological ev idence reveals that the changes of settlement 17 Anna Comnena, Alexiad Ed. Diether Roderich Reinsch. (Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 2001); in Grucki Izvori za Bulgarskata Istorija (GIBI) [Greek Sources for the Bulgarian History] Vol. 8 ed. by M. Voinov, L. Jonchev, V. Tupkova-Zaimova. (Sofia: BAN, 1972), pp. 73; 81; 123 18 Ihor Sevcenko, Inscription Commemorating Sisinnios, Curatorof Tzouroulon (A.D. 813), Byzantion No 35 (1965),pp.56474. 19 For Janina see Miklosich Mller, Acta et diplomata graeca medii aevi sacra et profana. Vols 1-6 (Vienna: Scientia Verlag, 1860-1892),Vol. 5, pp. 80-84; For Serres see Actes de Kutlumus ed. Paul Lemerle, (Paris, 1946). No 8; Actes de Chilander ed. L. Petit and V. Korablev, Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1975. Phototype copy of the Addenda of Vizantiiskij Vremennik, Vol. 17 and 19, (1911-12); for Monemvasia see Miklosich Mller, Acta et diplomata Vol. 5, pp. 165; 170; For Smyrna see H. Ahrweiler, Lhistoire et la gographie de la rgion de Smyrne entre les deux occupations torques ( 1081-1317) in, Centre de recherche d'histoire et civilization byzantines. Travaux et mmoires Vol. 1. (Paris, 1955), pp. 31-36. Also, see the extensive bibliography provided by L. Maksimovi The Byzantine Provincial Administration under Palaiologoi (Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1988).pp. 249253.

PAGE 124

124 terminology seem surprisingly accurate. The same is valid, as well, for Slavic settlement terminology translated or calqued from Greek.20 The Greek term kastron denoting a citadel was refl ected by the Slavic term (tvurd), which signifies, both a faculty of an object that is stony hard and unbreakable and an object itself: a safe place, a shelter, a fortre ss. Having a common root with state: ( ; tvurd tvurdjave/ state/), tvurd in fact, rehabilitates the an cient synonymy of citadel and state and at the same time it implies the symbio tic act of ruling and dwelling, which in fact is the Stoics synthesis for a polis Thus, quite interestingly, th e Slavic settlement terminology reestablishes the notion of polis and state as not distinctive, bu t identical social orders of a different scale. The Slavic analog of the Greek term polis, grad, also bore the connotation of both a citadel of something built in stone ( grad ; from graditi (to build by means of masonry) and of a protected yard (gradina /garden) or fenced locus. The semantic relation between town and state was represented not only linguistically but also spatially: any town (grad, polis) had its ruling and defensive center ( kastron, tvurd ) hosting physically the stat e/towns administration and epitomizing, thus, the prime faculties of the state, orde r and defense. Often, in the late medieval Slavic and Byzan tine sources the citadel is presented by the term koula, a term, which while of Turko-Arabic orig in (meaning, again, both citadel and town), is first attested in Kekaumenos eleventh century Strategikon .21 In Anna Comnenas Alexiad, 20 This language is variously termed as Old Church Slavoni c, Old Slavic, or Old Bulgarian. To put it simply, it was the Slavic language, into which the Bible wa s translated in the 9t h century Bulgaria. 21 Kekaumenos, Strategicon in Sovety i rasskazy Kekavmena ed. G. Litavrin (Moscow: AN SSSR, 1972).pp. 37;43

PAGE 125

125 koula is also attested and the term is calqued later by the Slavic vernacular.22 A settlement that expanded outside the fortifications was named ( prigrad i.e. attached to grad, or suburb), often used interchangeably in th e sources with both Hungarian term varo transmitted in the late fourteenth century th rough Serbian and by the Byzantine emporion calqued as yamboria Traces of the latter are detectable in the name of todays city of Yambol. It might seem at the first glance that the semantic transfusion of the terms grad, tvurd koula state ruling and dwelling with all their nuances, evident even in the contemporary SerboCroatian language, are result of the complexity of Greek-Slavic acculturation manifested in the lexical borrowings. A more careful analysis, howev er, reveals that the shift of the meaning in settlement terminology in most of cases reflec ted, in fact, nothing but the change of their reification. The term kastron was never applied to the two fi rst cities of the Byzantine Empire, Constantinople and Thessalonike: they were always referred as poleis or megalopoleis. Their inhabitants, respectively, were na med by the sources exclusively as politai, while other towns residents not rarely we re designated also as kastrinoi (residents of a fortress). The last term, however, throws some light on the physical charact eristics of the towns in the Byzantine Empire in their transitional period from fortresses with solely defensive functions, containing only lay and ecclesiastic administrative offices to resi dential and productive centers, quartered now at their enclosures. Some Byzantinists, mainly historical materialists, argue that kastrinoi is a term 22 Charalmbos Bakiritzis, The Urban Community and Size of Late Byzantine Thessalonike in Allice-Marry Talbot ed. Symposium on Late Byzantine Thessalonike (Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 2004).p.28; N. Ovcharov, Perperikon i Okolnite Tvurdini prez Srednovekovieto [Perperikon and its hinterland during the Middle Ages] (Sofia: Tangra, 2003).pp. 16-17.

PAGE 126

126 denoting specifically the feudal landowners class ( pronoia holders) centered within a fortress,23 others considered kastrinos any person living within a fortress regarding their social or fiscal status.24 Both claims, as we will see further through the light of archaeological evidence, had their grounds, valid, however, for diffe rent phases of urban development. Stenimachos, a typically provincial town near Bachkovo Monastery and center of ketepanikon Stenimachos-Tsepena grew out of a small road-guarding kastron Petric, established in the eleventh century.25 The chronicler of the Th ird Crusade called it either castellum (small fortress) or oppidum (fortified town).26 Geoffroi de Villehardouin refe rs to it as castle (chastiaux Stanimac)27 while Nicetas Choniates describes it as phrourion (small stronghold).28 At the concluding decades of the thirteen ce ntury, the site is called by Ephraim polichnion (small town).29 In the midfourteenth century, it was considered polis according to John Cantacuzene and (grad), according to th e Bulgarian inscriptions discovered on the site .30 23 G. G. Litavrin, Bolgaria i Vizantia v XI-XII vv [Bulgaria and Byzantium, 11th12th centuries] (Moscow: AN SSSR, 1960),pp. 129-131; Peter Tiv ev, Sur les cits Byzantines aux XI-XII sicles, ByzantinoBulgarica, Vol.1. (1962) p. 174. 24 L. Maksimovi The Byzantine Provincial Administration under Palaiologoi (Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1988), p. 251. 25 V. A. Arutiunova-Fidanyan, Typik Gregoria Pakuriani [Typicon Gregory Pakourianos] (Erevan: n.p. 1978).pp. 1; 10; 13. 26 Historia Peregrinorum, ed. by A. Chroust, Quelen zur Geschichte des Kreuzzuges Kaiser Friederich I in Monumenta Germaniae historica. Scriptores (MGH SS); also in Latinski Izvori za Bulgarskata Istoria ( LIBI) [Latin sources for Bulgarian history] Vol.3. ed. by M.Voinov, Iv. Dujcev, St r. Lishev (Sofia: BAN, 1965),pp. 221244. 27 Hronikata na Geoffroi de Villehardouin. Zavladjavaneto na Tzarigrad [The chronicle of Geoffroi de Villehardouin, The conquest of Constantinople] ed. and tr ansl. by V. Nikoleav (Sofia: n.p. 1947). p. 254 art.346. 28 Nicetae Choniatae Historia, p. 286. 29 Ephraim, Chronographia ed. I. Bekker ( Bonn: Ed. Weber, 1840). Vers. 8510. 30 Ioannes Cantacuzene imperatoris historiarum libri Vol.1-3. ed. L. Schopen (Bonn: Ed. Weber, 1828-1832). Vol. 1. pp. 135; 177.; D. Tzonchev and St. Stoilov, Asenova Krepost [ Asen fortress] ( Plovdiv: Narodna biblioteka Iv. Vazov, 1960), pp. 5-24

PAGE 127

127 Archeological investigations of Stenimac hos reveal that the changes of terminology applied to the site quite correctly reflected the physical changes of the settlement through time. With the introduction and spread of the pronoia system, the small fortress, Petric, designed as a guardian of the access to the Bachkovo Monaster y became a residential space of the local pronoia holders, charged with guarding the fortress and, consequently, the monastery. During the second half of the twelfth centu ry, according to the archeological analysis, the fortress was renovated and expanded, as well as the number of its kastronoi now including certain craftsmen and their families, charged with auxiliary f unctions for the needs of the fortress and its garrison.31 The so-formed settlement nuclei, during the thirteenth and fourteenth century, continued to attract population, which after exhausting the limited space of the fortress, expanded outside its walls, occupying thus, the entire slope at the f oot of the fortress. Due to the peculiarities of the terrain, the so-formed suburbium was not structured right next to the fortifications, but 300-400 meters to the northwest, on a territory suitable for dwelling. A similar spatial situation, with a certain distance between the fortress and its suburbia is evident also in Melnik, Pergamon, Krun, Pros ek and elsewhere. A case similar to Stenimachos is Serres. In Nicetas Choniates History the fortress is named as akros (citadel at the top of the hill).32 A hundred and fifty years later, in the midfourteenth century, John Cantacuzene described the acropolis of a great and marvelous polis .33 Choniates description of Serres is neither arbitrary, nor inaccurate. For Corinth, he clearly distinguished the parts of the town according to their functions: an emporion with its two harbors 31 Tzonchev and St. Stoilov, Asenova Krepost pp. 41;45. 32 Nicetae Choniatae Historia, p. 257 33 Ioannes Cantacuzene Vol. II, p. 329 and Vol. III, p. 55.

PAGE 128

128 and a kastron .34 The fact that two to three decades afte r him George Akropolites refers to Serres as kome (village) suggests that at the time of Chon iates Serres was, indeed, nothing more than a citadel, but now an adjoined se ttlement appeared at its foot.35 Towards the middle of the thirteenth century, Serres is identified by Nicephorus Gregoras already as a polichnion.36 The terminological nuances in the sources between the opening of the thirteenth and mid-fourteenth centuries, therefore, were not products of some semantic confusion, but noticeably resembled the gradual physical transformation of Serres from a fortified nuclei attracting a kome at its foot, into a great and marvelous polis The risk of interpreting the changes of settlement term inology without resorting to archeological evidence is exemplified by the case of Prosek. At the opening of the thirteenth century the author of The Life of St. Sava, Theodosius, refers to the citadel of Prosek as to grad.37 Nicephorus Gregoras called Prosek polichnion during the first half of the fourteenth century.38 John Cantacuzene, several decades after Gregoras, refers to Prosek as kastron .39 Yet, the different terms applied to Prosek are due not to it s decline, as it could be easily assumed, but to its specific location. The town and its fort ress were located on two different hills, Markov Grad and Strezov Grad that raise up almost vertically at 220 meters and separated by the Chelovecka River at its confluence with th e Vardar River (fig.4-1). Because of its exclusive strategic 34 Nicetae Choniatae Historia pp. 43-45 35 George Acropolites, Historia ed. A. Heisenberg, Georgii Acropolitae Opera Vol. 12. (Lipsiae: In aedibus B.G. Teubneri, 1903), p. 74 36 Nicephorus Gregoras, Byzantina historia Vol. 1-3 ed. L. Schopen ( Bonn: Weber, 1829-1855) Vol. 1, p. 288. 37 Theodosius, The Life of St. Sava in J. Ivanov, Bulgarski Starini iz Macedonia [Bulgarian monuments in Macedonia] (Sofia: BAN, 1970).pp. 476-477. 38 Nicephorus Gregoras, Byzantina historia Vol. 1, p.155. 39 Ioannes Cantacuzene, Vol. 1, pp. 288-290.

PAGE 129

129 position, controlling the road from Pannonia a nd Belgrade through the heart of Macedonia towards the bay of Thessalonike, the site had be en inhabited since pre-hi storical times. During the Roman Empire the settlement was located on a terrace on the right bank of the Vardar, but the barbarian invasions of the fourth to sixth centuries move d it on a more protected location, around Markov Grad located on the left bank of the Vardar. The site was abandoned during the crisis of th e seventh century and was reoccupied again in the late ninth century. At the opening of the eleventh centu ry, Prosek became a parochial center within the diocese of Moglen, according to the chrysobull of Basil II of 1019.40 At the beginning of thirteenth century, Prosek was the ce nter of a Bulgarian appanage, which, after the death of Kaloyan in 1207, seceded from Bulgaria.41 The ruler of the new semi-independent principality, sebastocrator Strez, located its palace on the higher and more inaccessible of the two hills, which was named after him, Strezov Grad Since, as Choniates explicitly mentions that on the hill of Strez there was no water,42 the settlement remained on the more suitable for dwelling Markov Grad Although both parts, the residential area in Markov Grad and the fortress on Strezov Grad were part of the same stru cture, their locations and for tifications disguised them as two separated sites. Since the military campaign of Cantacuzene was interested with the fortress, not with the settlement, accordingly, the settlement was not mentioned in his chronicle. Finally, in opposition to decline suggested by the wri tten sources comes the archeological evidence, pointing out to a quite even dist ribution of the coin material from twelfth to fourteenth century.43 40 J. Ivanov, Charters of Basil II Bulgaroctonus (Bulgaroslayer) in his Bulgarski Starini iz Macedonia [Bulgarian monuments in Macedonia] (Sof ia: BAN, 1970), pp. 550-562. 41 Nicetae Choniatae Historia, p.277 42 Ibid. 43 I. Mukul ik Srednovekovni Gradovi i Tvurdini vo Makedonia [Medieval towns and fo rtresses in Macedonia] (Skopje: Makedonska akademija na naukite i umetnostite, 1996), pp. 230-237.

PAGE 130

130 The terminological complexity that characteri zed all the aspects of late Byzantine history was, accordingly, well expressed in the relation between the town and its hinterland. With many of the Byzantine provinces lost and deurbanized dur ing the crisis of the seventh-eighth centuries, Constantinople became a concentration and symbol of the imperial wealth and power, and of the empire itself. The Late Roman provinces were replaced by four large districts, known as themata Soldiers of a particular theme army were se ttled in that province and expected to meet most of their expenses out of the revenue from their property granted by the emperor. By the middle of the ninth century, thema meant both, administrative-military district and military unit. The general of a thema a strategos also acted as a supervisory aut hority over fiscal and judicial officials. With the economic revival of the empire that started with the end of the iconoclastic controversy, the number and size of the military units increased as did the administrative units. The strategoi were relieved of many of their civil duties as judge s were appointed in every province. Furthermore, the practice of redeemi ng military service in cash blurred the military meaning of the thema By the end of Manuel Is reign, the Byzantine thema a word that now meant simply a province, had no more military implications.44 This gave rise to a lack of precision in Byzantine administrativ e terminology and from this period onward terms such as katepanikon chora, topos, ge and eparchia entered the lexicology to de note administrative units. The claim of Hlne Ahrweiler that at the be ginning of the thirteenth century the Byzantine thema became simply a fiscal unit comprising a town with its dist rict, quite undefined geographically, could be corrected only in terms of time.45 It seems that the term thema ceased to 44 Leo VIs Tactica, repeating the formulation in the Strategikon of Maurice, describes each army corps, thema, as consisting of three tourmai, each under a tourmarches ; each tourma was then divided into three drouggoi, and each drouggos into a number of banda or tagmata. 45 H. Ahrwiler, Etudes sur le Structures Administratives et Sociales de Byzance (London: Variorum Reprints, 1971).pp. 86-87

PAGE 131

131 exist before the restoration of the Bulgarian state since it cannot be found either in Bulgarian or in Serbian administrative terminology, massively borrowing from the Byzantines. Instead, the calques of chora = ; ge = (land); eparchia = (region); topos = ( place) are interchangeably used in the Bulgaria n and Serbian sources. Th e Byzantine perplexity in administrative terminology was, accordingl y, duly transmitted into Bulgarian and Serbian administrative systems. Unfortunately, neither the Byzantine nor the Bulgarian and Serbian sources allow precise understanding of the principles governing th e organization and work of the administrative terms. According to Michael Angold, for instance, whose proposal is based mostly on Ahrweilers survey, the chief administrative and fiscal division of a thema during the time of late Comneni was the katepanikon which replaced the older subdivision of diocese.46 Further, Angold regards that thema at the time of the Nicaean Empire was often disguised under the term chora .47 Katepanikon, on its turn, was also divided into chorai coinciding with the ecclesiastical divisions known as enorai (parishes). 48 Angold, as earlier O. Tafrali and E. Stein, was a captive of the idea to regard katepanikon as part of some strict three-tired hierarchical scheme thema katepanikon chora/topodesia/ periochi, 49 where katepanikon was the heir of the former sub-theme administrative units, bandon and tourma. 50 Paul Lemerle even arrived at the conclusion that the late Byzantine administra tive terminological perple xity was due to some 46 M. Angold A Byzantine Government in Exile p.243. 47 Ibid. 48 Ibid. 49 Both terms topodesta and periochi denote a territory in a wide sense of the word without having any technically administrative meaning. Both terms could designate the area of a whole village, villages, several estates, part of a village or part of a town. 50 O. Tafrali, Thessalonike au XIV sicle (Paris: P. Geuthner, 1913).p.57; E. Stein, Untersuchungen zur spatbyzantinischen Verfassungs und Wirt schaftgeschichte, Mittelungen zur Osman Geschichte II (Reprinted Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1962).p.22

PAGE 132

132 collapse of the Byzantine state machine.51 However, there is no support in the sources for either Lemerles opinions or for the idea of three-tire d administrative hierarc hy. The lack of precision in administrative terms was due to the interchangeability of the terms, stemming from the administrative and economic changes, in which the geographical concepts were not strictly differentiated from the administrative and territori al titles. Because the ba sic information was the name of the place or the territory, which was clear enough for the contemporaries, there was no need for the medieval authors to define it more precisely. For it is well known that the richly documented katepanikon of Smyrna was often designated in the thirteenth century as chora The same is valid for the katepanikia of Strymon, Zichna, and Zabaltia in the 1420s, Popolia in the 1430s and Kassandria in the 1440s. In addition, the katepanikon of Kassandria as well as these of Kalamaria, Jerissos and Ermelia we re often described by the sources as periochi and topodesia at the same time.52 The conclusions of Ahrweiler and Maksimovi sound quite plausible, considering the late Byzantine administ rative unit consisting of a town ruling over its adjacent territory, no matter of how precise term for its designation was: thema katepanikon, eparchia, periochi, topodesia or chora. Just like Michael VIII Pal aeologos, who in one of his charters of 1277 opposed Constantinople ( polis ) to the province ( chora ) without any other explanations, the Dubrovnik Charter of Ivan II Asen given to th e merchants of Ragusa used the term chora, as a general term for a province, for a territory, which is not urban.53 51 P. Lamerle, Philippes et la Macdoine orientale lpoque chrtienne et byzantine (Paris: E. de Boccard 1945).p.222. 52 See the extensive supporting documents provided by L. Maksimovic The Byzantine Provincial Administration p.72. 53 G. A. Ilinskii, Gramotyi Bolgarskih Tsarei [Charters of Bulgarian emperors] (Moscow: Sinodalnaia tipografiia, 1911), pp. 13-14

PAGE 133

133 However, what the precise name of the ad ministrative units was matters little for the present study. What is far more important is the relationship be tween town and country implied by the surviving charters of the late medieval Byzantine, Bulgarian or Serbian rulers: the notion of clear and intentional distinct ion between the elements of the administrative units, the towns and their applied territories. In the Dubrovnik Charter, the merchants of Dubrovnik (Ragusa) were granted free access for trading in all the chorai and in all the towns of my empire.54 Literaly the same expression is used in the Virgina Charter of Constantine Asen (1257-1277) and in the Mrach Charter of Ivan Alexander (1331-1371).55 The Dubrovnik Charter is usually accepted as the main document witnessing the number and names of the administrative subdivisions of the Second Bulgarian Empire, which, like the late Byzantine Empire, was structured in a way that endowed its cities with priority in ever y respect. Thus, as the document reveals, the administrative units of Bulgaria are named after their administrative centers, Preslavs chora Bdins chora Skopjean chora etc. It is not surprising that in most cases the administrative centers of the provinces coincide d with the episcopal ones. The same situation could be observed in Serbia, whose regional units were named after their bishops centers: Ras, Srem (ancient Sirmium), Brani evo and Prizren.56 During the fourteenth century, the notion of country, chora, in the tutelage of Bulgarian appanage holders, is already ta ken by its center, the town, a shift undoubtedly signaling the increasing importance of the towns: Ana, despina of Krun, Michael, ruler of Bdi n, Balik, ruler of Karvuna.57 54 G. A. Ilinskii, Gramotyi Bolgarskih Tsarei pp. 13-14 55 Ibid. pp 18; 25. 56 Sima irkovi The Serbs (Oxford: Blackwell, 2004). p30 57 A. Burmov, Kum Istoriata na Krunskata Oblast [ About the history of Kruns appanage] in Idem Selected Writings Vol. 1 ( Sofia: BAN, 1968).pp. 217; Ivan Bozhilov, Familiata na Asenevci: Ge nealogia i Prosopografia [ Asen family : Genealogy and prosopography] ( Sofia: BAN, 1985).p.119; V. Giuzelev, Ochertsi vurhu Istoriata na

PAGE 134

134 Unlike the ancient perception of polis according to which the actual intramural urban space was organically connected to its hinterland, the late medieval documents suggest certain notion of opposition between the town and its governed territory. The towns in late medieval Bulgaria were perceived and pres ented through the sources as center s of their provinces, as their symbol and, most importantly, as their antithes is. The peasants, who lived outside the town, now were not integrally in the polis They had to build their adjacent temporary settlements to the fortified nuclei in order to part icipate more regularly in the ur ban market and social activities. Gradually, as these temporary adjacent settleme nts became more and more permanent parts of their fortified nuclei, their inhabi tants became permanent townsmen. Towns (re) Formation in Medieval Bulgaria As it is well known, the territory north of the Balkan Mountains and south of Danube River was d e facto deurbanized before it became a core territory of the First Bulgarian Empire, at the end of the seventh century. The hiatus of urban life is indi sputably confirmed by archaeological finds: thousands of sixth-century coins found in th e territory of the Danube Plain and only a few from the seventh to ninth centuries.58 With the exception of the capital Pliska and, later, Preslav, only few remains of the early Byzantine-late Roman fortresses were re-used by the Bulgars, mostly as strongholds guarding the borders and passe s through the Balkan Mountain, while the inland urban sites of antiquity remained largely deserted. The first indications of re-occupation of the former urba n sites in Bulgarian territory came from the archaeological evidence of coin circulation towa rds the end of the ninth and the opening of the tenth centuries in Dorostorum, as well as in the ca pitals Pliska and later, Preslav a trend similar Bulgarskiat Severoiztok i Chernomorieto, XII-XV v [Essays about the history of Bulgarian Northeast and Black Sea region] ( Sofia: Borina, 1995).p.101. 58 Strashimir Lishev, Bulgarskiat Srednovekoven Grad [The medieval Bulgarian town] (Sofia, BAN, 1970).p.13-14.

PAGE 135

135 to that of Corinth and Athens, although on a much smaller scale.59 In the course of the tenth century, signs of habitation came from the in land towns of Moesia, Macedonia and Thrace. Pottery, coins and written sources, where available, suggest reanimation of the occupancy in Serdica, Lovetch, Verroia ( Stara Zagora), Pe rnik, Turnovo, Bdin, Philipopolis, Ohrid, Skopje, Bitola, Voden, Muglen and some others. Undoubted ly, the Christianization of Bulgaria in 865 and the following reestablishment of the former episcopal centers played crucial role to accelerate this process. Nevertheless, the signs of reanimation of the former urban centers should not be understood as a revival of some urban way of life. The new-old episcopal centers, although attracting more people to the former urban sites, conti nued to function as nothing more than command centers of the military and ecclesiastic structures of the state in the context of an economy based on natural exchange. The capitals, Pliska and, later Preslav, were the only exclusions. Quite large, indeed, they both were fortified residenc es of the ruling elite and had only marginal economic functions serving the needs of this elite. The economy of the First Bulgarian Empire was marked by self-subsiste nce, reciprocity, and natural exchange or administered trade. Money, mainly gold, was an in strument of states inte rnational trade/politics and diplomacy, but not of regular market activities.60 Becoming part of the political space of the Byzantine Empire Bulgarian territories also joined its more advanced money economy. In about two decades after the conquest of Bulgaria by Basil II in 1018, the taxes in the former Bulgarian territories were co llected already in cash and how foreign was money for everyday life in Bulg aria was signified by the serious resistance 59 For Dorostorum, Pliska, Preslav, Corinth and Athens see Ernest Oberlnder-Trnoveanu, Monnaies Byzantines des VII-X sicles Dcouvertes a Silistra et le Proble me du Commencement de lconomie Monetaire dans le Premier Royaume Bulgare. Dobrudja No 12 (1995).pp. 137171. Fo r Serdica and Bdin see J. Ivanov, Bulgarski starini iz Makedonia [Bulgarian historical monuments in Macedonia], (Sofia: BAN, 1931) .pp. 550-553; 557. 60 IoannesScylitzes Georgius Cedrenus. Historia. in Grucki Izvori za Bulgarskata Istoria (GIBI) [Greek Sources for the Bulgarian History] Vol 6. ed. by M. Voinov, Iv. Dujcev and V. Tupkova-Zaimova, (Sofia: BAN, 1965). pp 198-340.

PAGE 136

136 of the population there manifested thr ough the uprising of Peter Delian in 1040.61 In the course of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, the incr eased money circulation, inspired by the Byzantine monetary tax system, the steady demographic growth, and the consequent increase of cultivated land under the better management of pronoia system led to higher agricultural production and to a general leveling of the economy parameters betw een the different regions of the Balkans under the Byzantine rule. The chronicles of William of Tyr and of Ansbert throw some light on the increased role of the market between the First and Third Crusades in Serdica.62 In 1096, Alexius I Comnenus, supplied the army of Walter the Penniless with cash and allowed them to obtain food in just price from the market in Serdica, delegating, thus, to the crusaders the state right of synone one of the heaviest obligati on on the producer to sell his produ ct to the state at a fixed price.63 Given the level of economy of the Bulgaria n lands, the compulsory sales of food and animals to the state, combined with producers need to obtai n cash in order to pay their taxes, played a formative role in Bulgaria for establishing market relations. In 1189, however, the chronicle of Ansbert reveals a li ttle bit different situ ation. There was an agreement between Isaac II Angelus and Frederick Barbarossa, charging the Byzantines with organizing markets for supplying the crusaders and the right of synone was again delegated to the crusaders.64 This time however, the market in Serdica was destroyed ou t of the conflict erupting around the prices. The crusaders did not like the prices, by which the locals, obviously, resisted the synone, and started 61 Ioannes Scylitzes, Synopsis historiarum, ed. I. Thurn (BerlinNew York: De Gruyter 1973),p. 412. 62 Willelmi Tyrensis Archiepiscopi Chronicon, ed. R. B. C. Huygens. (Turnholt: Brepols 1986).p 49; Ansbert, Historia de expeditione Frederici imperatoris, in Latinski Izvori za Bulgarskata Istoria ( LIBI) Vol.3 ( Sofia: BAN, 1965).pp. 245-296. 63 D. Angelov, Prinos kum Pozemlenite Otnoshenia vuv Vizantia [About the land property relations in Byzantium] Godishnik na Sofiiskiat Universitet No2 (1952).p.43. 64 See details for the treaty between By zantium and Frederick Barbarossa in Str. Lishev, Tretia Krustonosen Pohod i Bulgarite [The Third Crusade and Bulgarians] Izvestia na Instituta po Istoria (1957).pp. 205-240.

PAGE 137

137 to plunder. While the co mpulsory character of synone was crucial for the emergence of sporadic proto-markets with special functions in the el eventh century (obtaining cash for taxes, for instance), it was already incompatible with the established regular mark et activities during the next century. The increased market orientati on of production was one of the most important factors for reanimating the urban life that mani fested itself towards the end of the twelfth century. More evidence for urban growth during the twelfth centu ry comes from Philipopolis. According to the first hand information, provi ded by the crusaders Arnold of Lbeck and Gizlebert in 1189, Philipopolis had an impressive size. Although the entire army of Frederick Barbarossa was billeted in the town, abandoned by the local population, half of the town was still empty ( vix alterne domus inhabitate sunt ).65 However, much more important information is offered by another chronicle for the Third Crus ade, according to which, the local Paulician colony, dwelling in the suburbia of Philipopolis, immediately retook the market vacuum after the flight of the towns population and organized an abundant market supplying the knights with everything they needed ( mercatum abundantissumum in omnibus ).66 The market, obviously, was no longer a place where the producer was sporadically pushed by the necessity to obtain cash for his taxes, but a locus of daily activities and a source for maximization of the available surplus. The increased role of urban economy towards the end of the twelfth century is signaled, as well, by the new agreement between Alexius III Angelus and the Venetian Republic in 1199, 65 Arnoldi Lubecensis Chronicon in MGH. SS., XXI p.172; Gisleberti Chronicon in MGH. SS., XXI, p.566. It is not clear, however, what part of the 20, 000 knights, as reported by Gizlebert, stayed in the abandon ed Philipopolis, nor the manner of their billeting. It has not to be forgotten, however, that any knight had his own retinue of servants. 66 Annales Colonienses maximi, MGH SS, XVII, p. 798.; Ansb ert, Historia de expeditione Frederici imperatoris, in Latinski Izvori za Bulgarskata Istoria ( LIBI) Vol.3 ( Sofia: BAN, 1965).pp. 245-296.

PAGE 138

138 where the previous privileges of Venetians were confirmed and extended to the inland towns of Macedonia: Ohrid, Prilep, Kostur, Muglen, Larissa, Skopje, Strumitsa and Naissus.67 An additional factor, however, should not be neglected for the acceleration of urban growth, especially for the smaller towns in Thrace and Paristrion: the side effects of the administrative reforms undertaken by Manuel I Comnenus. The reason for restructuring the Byzantine administrative system under the reign of the Comneni was rooted in the imperial reaction to the threat of Pechen egs, Normans and Seljuk Turks in the eleventh century, realized in the context of decreasing gold reserves. The response of Alexius I, John II and, especially, Manuel I, therefore, to change the long-standing and fruitless stra tegy of defense-in-depth into a new, more aggressive policy through activating the frontier zones for expansion was without alternative.68 However, the strengthening of the border zones in the context of sharp deficit of gold reserves could be achieved only through the widespread of pronoia system by granting privileges to the local archontes often of nonGreek, barbarian, (as Nicetas Choniates complains) origin, in order to secure their loyalty and to direct their ambitions towards external expansion and not to benefit fr om assaults on imperial lands.69 This, in turn, changed the character of pronoia from an award for exceptional merits into a basic economic instrument for imperial defense. As a consequence of the spreading out of the pronoia system, much smaller number of people now remained under the direct ta xation of the fisc, which, thus made most of its apparatus dysfunctional and redundant. Another feature of the Byzantine economic mode l contributed indirect ly to the formation and growth of towns. The replacement of an obligation in kind by one in cash, a phenomenon 67 N. P. Sokolov, Obrazovanie Venecianskoi Kolonialnoi Imperii [Establishment of the Venetian colonial empire] (Saratov: Izdatelstvo Saratovskogo universiteta, 1963).p.284. 68 John Haldon, Warfare State and Society in the Byzantine World (London: UCL Press, 1999). p.65 69 Nicetae Choniatae Historia, pp. 208-9.

PAGE 139

139 known from antiquity, in pronoia system resulted not only in buying out the peasants corve duties, but also of the military service of pronoia holders. Not only was this practice not restricted by the state, but in the course of the eleventh and tw elfth centuries it was especially encouraged in the areas far from the fron tiers. The obtained cash was used for hiring mercenaries, who proved to be much more e fficient soldiers. The army of the Comneni, therefore, underwent even more profound reforms, although, it con tinued to be dominated by the pattern set during the eleventh century the exis tence of a single imperial field army, with additional mercenary divisions involved on specific fronts for specific campaigns. While the thematic forces, or rather their elite elements, continued to play an important role, the lead in military campaigns was now taken by centrally cont rolled mercenaries, as demonstrated by the establishment of great number of their banda in the provinces under their own command. In the 1160s, Manuel I granted for example four kastra in Paristrion to exile Rus princes.70 This was obviously sufficient to deter the st eppe nomads from further incursions. In the second half of the twelfth century, Eustathius of Thessalonica char acterized the Paristrion frontier as a peaceful region where the Scythian bow does not f unction, and his ropes are kept unused.71 The fruits of the so-established expansionistic policy we re most detectable in the eastern front. In the process of re-establishing the imperial power in Asia Minor, key strongholds were to be garrisoned to serve as bases for the expansion of imperial authority. From here, imperial forces were to push into marginal or enemy-occupied la nds to seize key centers, which were in turn to be garrisoned and to become the strongholds for further moves outward. This was a slow and incremental process, but it was successful as far as substantial lost areas were recovered in the 70 Hypatian Chronicle in Kazhdan and Epstein, Change in the Byzantine culture XI-XII centuries (Berkeley: UC Press, 1985). Appendix No 42 71 Eustathii Metropolitae Thessalonicensis Opiscula ed by T .L .F. Tafel (Frankfurt am Main, repr. Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1964), p. 200.

PAGE 140

140 period from the death of Alexios I in 1118 to the 1160s. A second stage involved the establishment of new themata, such as Thrakesion and Mylasa and Melanoudion by John II and Neokastra by Manuel I. The large number of small fortresses covering the major routes and dotting the country in both Asia Minor and the Balkans confirms that building activity in a significant scale was launched during the reign of Manuel I Comnenus. The old fortresses were renovated and new ones were established and garrisoned with militias from the local rural population. This population in return received land and fiscal privileges, a fact which played a formidable role in concentrating popul ation around the provincial fortresses.72 The adoption of the system of privileges reduced in scope and substantially simplified the range of the state economy and its apparatus. It had been scatte red into the provinces, each of which now had its own local administration, its own revenue, and its own expenditure.73 On the other hand, the system of privileges led to pa rtial demonetization of the state economy, given that there was now no obligation on th e holders of privileges to pay ta x, and still less to pay it in cash. In this way, large sums of money were libe rated from the state economy and remained in possession of private hands and provincial authori ties, who were concentr ated in the regional administrative centers. Manuel Is military eli tism along with his policy of building up the empires population resulted in a significant influx of immigrants, most of whom were prisoners of war, who, as Eustathius of Thessalonike asserts, contributed to our cities as inhabitants.74 Not a small group of foreign pronoia soldiers, as witnessed by bot h Eustathius and Choniates, 72 P. Magdalino, The Empire of Manuel Komnenos 1143-1180 ( Cambridge, Cambridge UP, 1993),pp. 132-136; 171-180; John Haldon, Warfare, State and Society in the Byzantine World p.97 73 See for details N. Oikonomides, The ro le of the Byzantine State in Economy in The Economic History of Byzantium .pp. 1026-1030. 74 Eustathii Metropolitae Thessalonicensis Opiscula ed by T .L .F. Tafel, p.200

PAGE 141

141 also merged into the low-class aristocracy in the provincial towns of the Empire.75 Although there is no direct evidence for the process of concentration of pronoia holders in the provincial fortresses, it could be analogically derived fr om the early Ottoman practice of garrisoning the newly seized fortresses, well inherited from the Byzantines. According to the Ottoman timar registers (tahrir defters ), not a small group of timar holders had the obligation of guarding the fortress, a duty that in fact made the place of service their permanent residence.76 In Byzantium, like in Italy and Dalmatia, thus, the medieval town took shape as a community headed by a bishop and dominated by a small group of aristocrat ic families increasingly involved in a private enterprise.77 How powerful those urban provincial elites became was demonstrated in Paristrion in 1185 when the grievances of the local archontes Peter and Asen led to a massive revolt resulting in the restoration of the Bulgarian state. The rebellion started in Turnovo, as Choniates reports, but the Bulgarian revolt, as well as the secession of the Serbs and the Cilician Armenians from the imperial rule, started as local and aristo cratic uprisings before they became national and popular and had much in common with the revol t of Theodore Mangaphas in Philadelphia. Its first target became the old Bulgar ian capital and largest town in Paristrion Preslav. Another town, Lovech, played crucial role in the clash between the troops of Peter and Asen and the Byzantines.78 It seems that Bdin also joined the poli tical formation of Peter and Asen. Its bishop was brought to Turnovo and compelled to consecrate a certain deacon Basil, a person, perhaps very close to the leader s of the revolt, as an archbishop of Turnovo and of the newly restored 75 Eustathii Metropolitae Thessalonicensis Opiscula ed by T .L .F. Tafel, p.200 ; Chon iates, Historia .p. 204. 76 Hr. Matanov, Vyznikvane i Oblik na Kiustendilski Sandjak, ; R. Kovachev, Nikopolskiat Sandjak prex Poslednata Chetvart na XV vek ; Duanka Bojani Luka and Vera Mutafchieva, Vidin and Vidinski Sandzak, XV-XVI vek 77 N. Oikonomides, Hommes daffairs grecs et latins a Cosntantinople, XIIIeXV sicles (Montreal-Paris : Institut d'tudes mdivales Albert-le-Grand, 1979). 78 Choniates, Historia .p. 219

PAGE 142

142 Bulgarian state.79 However, the culmination of the de monstration of power of the urban provincial elites came in the afterm ath of the fall of Constantinopl e, when the Greek urban elites in Thrace and Macedonia auctioned their politic al allegiance in exchange for communal tax privileges from the Latin, Bulgarian and later, Byzantine sovereigns. No less impact on the growth of towns in the Byzantine World had the structural changes of the financial services, which unde rwent serious simplification as well.80 In the provinces, the prerogatives of the omnipresen t Byzantine tax collector ( praktor) were sharply reduced by the number of holders of privileges who might live in his area and by the commanders ( kephalai ) of the towns, who were now entitled to collect their fees directly from the taxpayers.81 The obligation of sitarkesis or sitarchia of towns (a tax evolved from synone ), the supplying of fortified settlements with foodstu ffs at a fixed price witnessed by the ninth-century sources, had been converted into a regular payment in cash by the eleventh-twelfth centuries. This money, most of which remained in the hands of the pr ovincial authorities, wa s available now for buying supplies from the local producers for satisfyi ng the needs of food and equipment. More importantly, the conversion of the military duties into cash affect ed the compulso ry recruitment of artisans with an auxiliary role in the army. While this did not signifi cantly affect the army dispositions supplied centrally with necessary equipment and services by the fisc, the local fortresses fell in sharp deficit of artisanal services, which now were to be obtained by ready cash. Thus, at the local level, the demonetization of st ate economy resulted in promotion of the pattern 79 Pismo ot Dimitar Homatian Arhiepiskop na Ohird do Vasiliy Pediadit, mitropolit na Korfu [A Letter of Demetrius Chomatianos, Archbishop of Ohrid, to the me tropolitan of Korfu, Basil Pediaditis] ed. and transl. by Peter Nikov, Prinos kum Istoricheskoto Izvoroznanie na Bulgaria i kum Istoriata na Bulgarskata Tsurkva [A contribution to the Bulgarian historical sources and to the history of Bulgarian Church] Spisanie na BAN vol.XX issue 11(1921). pp. 20-47. 80 N.Oikonomides, The role of the State p.1029. 81 Konstantinos N. Sathas, Mesaionike Bibliotheke, (MB) 7 vols. (Venice-Pari: Typois tou Chronou, 1872), Vol. 6, pp. 6278.

PAGE 143

143 of demand of goods and labor, which, combined w ith the incentives offered by the local centers, security, and judicial services, became the main elements of the gravitational force attracting rural population around the fortified nuclei and reshaping the settlements landscape. It might be safe to say, therefore, that the rise of towns manifested towards the end of the twelfth century was attributable to both, economic growth in ag riculture and administrative reforms undertaken by Manuel I Comnenus. Urban Morphology In his accounting book of 1366, Antonio Barb erius, the accountant of Amadeus VI, Count of Sa voy, distinguished clearly the fortress of Mesembria ( Castrum Mesembrie ) from the suburbs of Mesembria ( Villa Mesembrie ), but perceived both as an organic and coherent entity called the city of Mesembria ( Civitas Mesembrie).82 The same pattern of distribution of urban space is confirmed by the archaeological evidence elsewhere in the late Byzantine Empire. The Byzantine fortresses, enforced, renovated and multiplied by new ones during the first half of the twelfth century, were located at strategic and inaccessible spots and th eir position, appearance, and internal structure were dictated by their ba sic function defense. While Preslav, Dorostorum, Shumen, Ohrid, Skopje, Prespa a nd many other towns of the First Bulgarian Empire continued to flourish throughout the Late Middle Ages, the old capital, Pliska, destroyed during the assaults Svetoslav and Ioannes Tzimiskes in 969-972, contra cted to an insignificant rural settlement, which towards the mid-eleventh century ceased to exist. Its large terr itory (56 ha) and open location required defense resources, which the former pagan center did not have. (fig.4-2). The great majority of the fortified sites in th e territory of the Bulgarian state, which was restored, in 1185, were, of course, not episc opal or administrative centers, but strategic 82 L. Gorina, Materialyi Dnevnika Antona Barberi po Istorii Bolgarii I Vizantii [Materials of the book of A. Barberius for the history of Bulgaria and Byzantium] in Byzantinobulgarica No 4 (1973). pp. 229-251.

PAGE 144

144 fortifications guarding the main roads and mountain passes. They displayed the characteristics of nothing more than a fortified farmstead, within th e enclosures of which, as Choniates described the fortress of Prosek, flocks of sheep and herds of cattle were put to graze. (fig.4-3)83 Others, such as Sobri, Zletovo, Markova Sushica and Zh eleznec (Siderokastron) in Macedonia, Tsepena in Rhodopes Mountain and Novo Burdo in Serbia, extended their road-guarding functions over the mines, exploited in the region. (fig.4-4). However, the prolonged period of peace a nd demographic growth, combined with economic progress in agriculture a nd trade and the formidable role of Manuel Is administrative reforms was well reflected in the towns app earance. The corroboration between archaeological and written sources at this poi nt is unquestionable. Towards the second half of the twelfth century many of the settlements located within the provincial fortresses expanded outside their defensive walls. The change of the urban struct ural tissue reflected th e change of the basic function and nature of the town from defensiv e strongholds and seats of state and ecclesiastic authority into centers of producti on and trade with a more definitively urban way of life. North from the Balkan Mountain, new urban centers aros e along with the expansion of the old ones. Turnovo, the center of rebelli on of Peter and Asen and capital of the Second Bulgarian Empire, was situated on two nei ghboring hills, Tsarevets (13 ha) a nd Trapezitsa (12 ha), divided by the meanders of the Yantra River. Intensiv ely inhabited in Late Antiquity, then abandoned, the site was reoccupied towards the end of the ei ghth century as part of the internal fortress system of the First Bulgarian Empire. The arch eological discoveries of large complexes for producing sgraffito, earthenware, and building ceramics as well as for iron making in the suburbia between the fortresses of Tsarevets (fi g. 4-6) and Trapezitsa, suggest that towards the 83 Nicetae Choniatae Historia, .p.277.

PAGE 145

145 middle of the twelfth century the urban ti ssue of Turnovo already expanded beyond its fortifications (fig. 4-5).84 The industrial activities on a large scale, within and outside the ci tadels indicate that the choice of Turnovo as a center of the re bellion was not accidental, but based on the towns economic and human potential, accumulated through the peaceful period that followed the final defeat of the Pechenegs. At its heyday in the midfour teenth century, Turnovo co mprised a territory no smaller than 80 ha, expanding over the neighbori ng hills, Devin Grad and Sveta Gora and the area between them and accommodating in about 12, 000 -15, 000 townsmen.85 Mesembria was another town that gained momentum during the twelfth century. The growth in agriculture and, accordingly, the trade importance of Mesembria, was certainly reflected by the growth of its i nhabited area: the early-Byzantine town, situated on a strategic peninsula of 10 ha spread over the adjacent contin ental coast (fig. 4-7). At the opening of the twelfth century, the population growth of th e town was confirmed by the promotion of a Mesembrian bishop into a metropolitan.86 The prosperity of the town was reflected by the Christian relics collected there the relics of St. Theodore Strate lates, St. Bartholomew, and St. Sixtus.87 84 Konstantinos N. Sathas, Mesaionike Bibliotheke, (MB) 7 vols. (Venice-Pari: Typois tou Chronou, 1872), Vol. 6). pp. 93-115. A.Popov, Manastiryt Velika Lavra v Pismenite Iztochnici, Nauchnata Literatura i Arheologicheskite Prouchvania, [Great Lavra Monastery according to the written sources, scientific lite rature and archaeological investigations] in Ibid. pp. 129-143. 85 According to the estimations of Atanas Popov, Za Socialno-ikonomicheskiat Oblik na Turnvograd prez XIIXIV vek, [ About the socio-economi c appearance of Turnovo, 12th -1 4th centuries] in P. Petrov. ed. Srednovekovniat Bulgarski Grad ( Sofia: n.p., 1980).pp. 152165. 86 V. Giuzelev, Die mittelalterliche Stadt Mesembria Bulgarian Historical Review No 1(1977) pp. 50-59. 87 V. Giuzelev, Novi Danni za Istoriata na Bulgaria i na grad Nesebar [New data for the history of Bulgaria and of the town of Nesebar] Vekove Vol. 3 (1972).pp. 10-16.

PAGE 146

146 The relatively scarce coin evidence from Mesembria, as demonstrated by the Template 1, however, should not be mistaken as a sign for towns economic insignificance.88 The inadequacy of the coin material is due to the hostility of th e salty soils there to copper and bronze coins. In addition, it should be noted that unlike the medieval sites of Tu rnovo, Preslav, Cherven, Shumen, and others, the ceaseless occupation of the site of medieval Mesembria has been a serious obstacle for providing systematic archaeological investigations. Th erefore, the majority of the single coins have been accident ally discovered during the constr uction works in the new town located outside the peninsula. Only few coin s came from some conservation works on the architectural remains within the walls. Fortunately, the economic potential of Mesembria is well documented in contrast to the other Bulgarian medieval towns. The large contributions of 17, 000 hyperpyra paid by the Mesembrian townsmen to Amadeus of Savoy in 1366, along with the archeological evidence of the splendid Mesembrian churches give clear in dication of the wealth accumulated in Mesembria.89 It should be remembered that in 1339, the comm une of Dubrovnik found it difficult to repay the debt of 20, 000 hyper pyra, which it owed for the grain, purchased from some merchants from Genoa and Romania.90 The growing Mesembrian trade with Genoa and Venice gained such an importance that it may be safely said that in the fourteenth century, the control over Mesembria and its hinterland shaped the Byzantine-Bulgarian relations. It should be noted, however, that not always did the growth of a town stem from its initial administrative or ecclesiastic significance. A comparative analysis between written and archaeological sources reveals qu ite the opposite situation in the cases of Melnik, Cherven, and 88 See Template 1 in the Appendix 89 L. Gorina, Materialyi Dnevnika Antona Barberi po Istorii Bolgarii I Vizantii [Materials of the book of A. Barberius for the history of Bulgaria and Byzantium] in Byzantinobulgarica No 4 ( 1973). pp. 229-251. 90 A. Laiou, The Byzantine Economy in the Mediterran ean Trade-System: Thirteen th Fifteenth centuries DOP, No 34/35 ( 1980/81) pp. 177-222

PAGE 147

147 Provat-Ovech, where the establishment of episco pal seats followed the growth of towns population and economic magnitude. At the opening of the thirteenth century, Melniks growing economic importance became the main reason for b ecoming a capital of the appanage of Alexius Slav, a nephew of the founders of the Asen D ynasty, Asen, Peter, and Kaloyan. Slav moved his residence into Melnik from Tzepena, a small upland stronghold controlling the local silver mines and the road from Philipopolis through the Rhodopes Mountain to the Valley of the Strymon, Macedonia, and Thessalonike. The analysis of the written sources, offered by I. Dujcev, indisputably defines the establishm ent of the episcopal seat in Melnik after the restoration of the Byzantine Empire in 1261 by Michael III Palaeologos.91 However, a brief analysis of the coin material found during the archaeological investigations in Melnik in 197179, denotes that the most prosperous period of the town was between 1200 and 1260.92 Out of the 533 coins dated from the period 3rd century B.C. end of the 14th century A.D., 521 are from the period 12001430s, while the period of 1200-1260s is repres ented by 411 coins, 321 of which are single coins and 90 of two hoards.93 All the coins are of small denominations. No silver or gold coins are found, a fact that delineates economic activities on a regular, daily basis, in which wide social strata of the town were involved. Similar to Melniks development are the cases of Cherven and Provat-Ovech. The last amendment to the Synodicon of the Bulgarian Church was made during the reign of the last Bulgarian ruler, Ivan Shishman, and for the lands of the Danubian Plaine it mentioned 14 patriarchs of Turnovo, 12 bishops of Preslav, 6 of Dorostorum, 5 of Lovetch, 3 of Cherven and 2 91 Ivan Dujcev, Bulgarsko Srednovekovie .pp. 3856. 92 Vl. Penchev, Moneti [Coins] in Melnik, Gradat v Podnojieto na Slavovata Krepost [Melnik, the town at the foot of the Slavs fortress] ed. by Violeta Nesheva (Sofia: BAN, 1989) pp. 209230. See also Template 1 in the Appendix. 93 Ibid.

PAGE 148

148 of Provat-Ovetch.94 In addition, the Synodicon ranked the bishops according to their dignitary, based on the size of their sees or flocks, most of which, undoubtedly, were concentrated in their residential towns. The first among the bishops wa s the Patriarch, residing in the capital Turnovo, followed by the bishop of Preslav, the former capita l and the next town in order of importance. The next was the bishop of Dorostorum, the olde st episcopate north of the Balkan Mountains, followed by the bishops of Lovetch, Cherven and Provat-Ovech. The reason for different numbers of bishops is based, most likely, on the different time of establishment of their sees before the last amendment of the Synodicon A cross reference with The Life of St. Theodosius reveals that the second bishop of Provat-Ovec h, Lazarus, attended the Church Council of Turnovo in 1359s.95 Therefore, the establishment of th e Provat-Ovetch episcopacy could be dated no earlier than 1320-1330. Th e episcopacy of Cherven, acco rdingly, could be dated not much earlier than that of ProvatOvech, wh ile in the case of L ovetch the correspondence between Pope Innocent III and Kaloyan attributed the establishment of the episcopacy there at the opening of the thirteenth century.96 However, in both towns, Cherven and Provat-Ovetch, the coin material reveals that the economic e xpansion anticipated the establishment of the episcopal sees there.97 Unfortunately, since there are still no available systematized coin data for Lovetch, nothing could be concluded for that town (fig. 4-8) 94 Also known as Borils Synodicon. It is dated February 11, 1211, and was amended over the following two centuries to include the reestablishment of the Bulgarian Patr iarchate under Tsar Ivan II Asen (1235 A.D.), as well as a list of kings and queens, patriarchs and bishops from Boris and Maria down to Ivan Shishman (1393); See for details M.G. Popruzhenko Synodik Tsarja Borila [Borils Synodicon] Bulgarski Starini No 8 (1928) pp. 83-84. 95 V. Zlatarski, Jitieto na Sv. Teodosia [Life of St. Theodosius] in Sbornik na NU Vol XX (1904).pp.25-26. 96 Iv. Dujcev, Prepiskata na papa Inokentii III s Bulgar ite [The correspondence of Pope Innocent III with Bulgarians] Godishnik na Sofiiskia Universitet IFF Vol. XXXVIII, (1942-3). pp.2224. 97 See Template 1, in Appendix

PAGE 149

149 The systematic archaeological investigations on the citadel of Cherven confirmed the late establishment of the bishopric there. The three biggest churches of Cherven (with an average size of 200 sq. m.), were built in the first half of the fourteenth century on the most representative spots of the town.98 According to the coin and pottery material, Cherven, initially centered within the fortress in the first decades of the th irteenth century, started spreading westward over the entire terrace (18 ha) and, later, when the sp ace on the terrace was exhausted, it stretched out over the terrain east of the citadel and around the river.99 The inhabited area and building density define Cherven as one of the biggest and most im portant urban centers in late medieval Bulgaria. Having in mind that the population of Tsarevets (13 ha.) is esti mated at no less than 3,000 and that both citadels of Cherven and Tsarevets displa y the same building density, it would be safe to estimate the population on the 20-ha platea u at Cherven at about 4,000 ( fig. 4-9) .100 Ovetch or, as the Byzantines called it, Provat, is mentioned very rarely in the surviving Byzantine sources, once by G. Akropolites, denoting th e town as part of the appanage of Peter, Asens brother,101 and again in the poem of Manuel Ph ill, glorifying the campaign of the Byzantine general Michael Glabas Tarchaniotes against the rebels of Ivailo in 1279-80.102 Ovetch also appears on the 1459 map of Fra Mauro, where the town is presented as a significant 98 Violeta Dimova, Srednovekovniat Cherven [The medieval Cherven] (Sofia, BAN, 1985).pp. 103-116. 99 For the size of the plateau see Peter Vulev, Geologo-Geografski Pregled na Raiona na Cherven [Geological and geographical examination of the region of Cherven] in V. Dimova, Srednovekovniat Cherven p.8 100 In 1985, 80% of the area of Tsarevets was completely uncovered. It displayed 480 dwelling houses. For details see A. Popov, Za Socialno-I konomicheskiat Oblik na Turnvograd prez XIIXIV vek, [About the socio-economic features of Turnovo, 12th -14th centuries] in P. Petrov, ed. Srednovekovniat Bulgarski Grad .pp. 152165. 101 George Acropolites, Historia ed. A. Heisenberg, Georgii Acropolitae Opera Vol.12. (Lipsiae: In aedibus B.G. Teubneri 1903), Vol.1, pp. 72-3; also in Grucki Izvori za Bulgarskata Istorija (GIBI) Vol VIII. p.154. 102 H. Loparev, Vizantiiskii Poet Manuel Phill. K Istor ii Bolgarii v XIII-XIV veke [The Byzantine poet Manuel Phill. About the history of Bulgaria in 13th -14th centuries] SPb, 1891.p. 52

PAGE 150

150 stronghold.103 The site of medieval Ovetch was sp oradically surveyed, but no systematic investigations were provided ther e yet. Although scarce, the coin material from Ovetchs citadel still gives an idea of the towns development. Ovetch, like Preslav, was sacked by Michael Glabas during his campaign against the peasa nt tsar Ivailo in 1279-80 and all of their inhabitants were resettled in the town of Aetos, on the southern slope of the Balkan Mountains.104 While Preslav never regained its previous prosperity and slowly declined, Ovetch, due to its strategic location, on the middle of th e road between Turnovo and the port of Varna, flourished again. Together with Shumen, Karvuna, Kaliakra and Varn a, the town formed a urban network, whose fast development in the mid-fourteenth century was greatly influenced by the growing trade with Venetians and Genoese merchants, which became the economic backbone of the despotate of Dobrudja. Bdin, a center of an appanage of the Shis hman branch of the Asen dynasty in the last quarter of the fourteenth centu ry, acquired such an economic importance that the town even rivaled the political supremacy of Turnovo. Localized on the southern bank of the Danube River, Bdin became the main trade center of northwestern Bulgarian lands, producing significant amount of grain, fur, wax, and iron. The silver mines, the tariffs from the goods coming from Walachia, Dubrovnik, and Hungary, the import of salt, which was in high demand in western Bulgaria, were the sources that secured the political aspirations of its ruler, Ivan Sracimir, to proclaim himself an emperor and to separate th e territory of his appa nage from Turnovo. So confident felt Ivan Sracimir in his contest with Turnovo that he even detached the bishopric of 103 T. CaspariniLeporace, Mappamondo di Fra Mauro (Venice: Istituto poligrafico dello stato, 1956).pl. XXXV, p.48. No 348. 104 H. Loparev, Vizantiiskii Poet Manuel Phill. .p. 52

PAGE 151

151 Bdin from the Patriarchate in Turnovo and place d it under the jurisdiction of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. The rise of the Macedonian towns reflected by the change of their appearance and growth of their size is also well documented arch aeologically. In hi s survey of 82 late medieval fortified sites on the territory of presen t-day Republic of Macedonia, Ivan Mikul ik provides evidence of 42 fortresses attracting suburbs with ci vilian population.105 In most cases, indeed, the sites did not go beyond the pha se of rudimentary proto-urban development and their size and appearance suggest predominantly ag ricultural characteristics, such as the settlement on the top of ancient Sevtopolis, mentioned in the previous chapter. Along with fortresses guarding roads and passes, dozens of small protecting phrouria were built adjacent to the mines that were thriving in the regions of Porechie, Zhel eznec, Debrica, Kozhuh, Osogovo, and elsewhere. However, the Ottoman tax registers of the mid-fi fteenth century recorded quite a few towns in Macedonia with an amount of population be tween 4,000 and 5,000: Prilep, Ohrid, Skopje, Serres, Kostur and Strumica.106 Not surprisingly, those are the same towns that the treaty between Alexius III Angelus and the Venetia ns mentioned in 1199, while confirming and expanding the trade privileges for Venice.107 The same population size is recorded in the Ottoman tax registers of 1519 (when, most likel y, the demographic situation in Macedonia reached its pre-Black Death level) for th e towns of Melnik, Novo Brdo, and Kratovo.108 105 I. Mukul ik Srednovekovni Gradovi i Tvurdini vo Makedonia [Medieval towns and fo rtresses in Macedonia] (Skopje: Makedonska akademija na naukite i umetnostite, 1996). 106 N. Todorov, The Balkan City 1400-1900 (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1983), p.64 107 Mikul iks survey is limited to fortresses in the Former Y ugoslavian Republic of Macedonia Larissa and Naissus, mentioned by the treaty of 1199, are in modern Greece and Serbia, respectively. 108 Hristo Matanov, Vyznikvane i Oblik na Kiustendilski Sandjak Appendix, Template 1.

PAGE 152

152 Unfortunately, the lack of enough written sour ces, combined with wide range of reasons impeding systematic archaeological investigatio ns, limits the attempts to uncover solid and detailed evidence for the rise of towns along Da nube River, such as Bdin, Riahovo, Nicopol, and Dorostorum, or for those of th e Moesian inland such as Lovech, Pleven, and Vratitsa, or even for the towns south from the Balkan Mountains, su ch as Philipopolis, Krun, Kopsis, Serdica, and Vereya. While some information could be compiled for Bdin from dispersed and isolated texts, mainly because of its political role in the la te 1300s, or for Philipopolis and Serdica, mainly because of Crusade chroniclers and Ottoman ta x records, the significance of Nicopol and Dorostroum, for instance, could be assessed onl y speculatively. After the conquest of Bulgaria both towns became Ottoman administra tive centers of vast territorial units. Nocopol was the last residence of the Bulgarian tsar Ivan Shishman after the fall of Turnovo, while Dorostorum, besides being an old episcopal center and Bulgaria n provincial mint, became part of the tutelage of the Walachian Princes, calling themselv es autocrats of Drister (Dorostorum).109 Yet the existing data for numerous smaller towns, such as Svurlig, Urvich, Chernomen, Batkun, Ustra, Krichim, Koznik, Tvarditsa, D ublin, Venchan, Zagrad, Constantia, and many others are quite disheartening for the researcher, not allowing ev en tentative assumptions. However, although the subsequent superimposed habitation in most of th e main medieval towns in Bulgaria hampers the archaeological research, the medieval urban sites that have not been inha bited at a later date (especially Cherven, Preslav, Shumen, Lovetch, Pernik, Melnik, and above all Turnovo), produced impressive results, quite promising fo r reconstructing the urban social fabric and development in medieval Bulgaria. On the archaeol ogical record of these sites, however, is based the following attempt at drawing a general pict ure of the late medieval town in Bulgaria. 109 Documenta Romaniae historica, seria B. Tra Romneasca Vol. 1 (1257-1500) (Bucharest: Editura Academiei Republicii Socialiste Romnia, 1966).pp. 63; 70; 73;75;80;90.

PAGE 153

153 Patterns of Fortified Nuclei Generally, the walls that surrounded the town s are the m ost accessible elements of the urban tissue to a researcher and quite informative for the urban plan. As part of the defense system, they strictly matched the characteristics of the terrain and followed the edge of the terrace on which a fortress was usually built. Their width and height greatly varied depending on the accessibility of a particular site. On the mo st vulnerable spots their width was often between 2.5 3 m, in order to bear a construction of 10-12 m in height, and integrated towers of different shape for enforcing the defense. All the restored fortresses built during the time of the First Bulgarian Empire or during the Byzantine occ upation used the foundations and material of earlier fortifications dating from the late Ro man or early Byzantine times. The construction technique remained, however, largely unchanged: opus emplectum a type of masonry, whose the external and internal facades were made of hewn stone blocks, bound by mortar, and pebbles set in the middle. The entire cons truction of the wall was reinforced with embedded scaffolds assembled in a frame, which also served for leveling the stones rows (fig. 4-10). The crown of the wall, as it is preserved in the square tower of the western wall of Cherven, was originally made of crenels and me rlons, built to protect the sentry-posts (fig.411).110 Although the existing rule for defending fortresses, as mentioned by Kekaumenos that houses should never abut on the walls, the regulation, according to the archaeological evidence, has been rarely inforced.111 The constantly growing population within the limited walled space resulted in an extreme building density, which le ft little room for following the classical rule. 110 Violeta Dimova, Srednovekovniat Cherven.p.58 111 Kekaumenos, Strategicon, ed. G. Litavrin (Moscow: AN SSSR, 1972).

PAGE 154

154 Therefore, the overflowing urban tissue as di splayed by the archaeol ogical discoveries in Shumen, Turnovo, and Cherven, wa s additionally walled. In Shumen, fortifications for the suburbs were extended twice duri ng the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, an indication not only of population growth, but also of growing economic potential. It is well known that the building and maintaining of a fortress was an obligation of the inhabitants of the fortified settlements, ( kastroktisia in Greek; gradozidane in Bulgarian). However, since the fortifying of the suburbs must be out of milita ry concern and, thus, presumably, left to the sphere of towns communal self-regulation, it is quite possible that it was a pr ocess sanctioned by the central power, but financed and executed by the towns administration. Support for this claim is provided by the manner of constructing the subur b fortifications in the cases of Shumen, Cherven, Turnovo, as well as of Pergamon.112 They do not compare to the quality of the fortresss fortifications. Thei r size and quality of masonry, of ten bound with adobe, suggest that they were designed against petty warfare and banditism rather than as an extension of the fortress defense strategy against serious attack involving siege machines. In Shumen, at the first stage of walling the suburb a barrier-wall parall eling the southern walls of the fortress was erected comprising, thus, the smaller and lower terra ce at the foot of the fortress. (fig.4-12) The space between the two walls was never entirely closed; instead, a new wall was erected 300 meters south from the second barrie r. Again, the space marked by the two walls was not entirely closed either from the east or from the west.113 Unfortunately, systematic investigations on the suburbs of Shumen have not yet been carried out, but only a field survey detecting that after the exhausting the southern sl ope of the hill, the s uburb of Shumen spread 112 Klaus Rheidt, The Urban Economy of Pergamon in The Economic History of Byzantium pp.623-629. 113 Vera Antonova, Shumen and Shumenskata Krepost [ Shumen and Shumens fortress] ( Shumen: Antos, 1995).pp. 116-118. The wall was identified during the initial field surv ey in the suburb of Shumen. However, a systematic archeological examination of the subu rb has not yet been carried out.

PAGE 155

155 over the hills northern and western slopes. The archaeological evidence reveals similar manner of partial walling the suburbs in the ca ses of Turnovo, Cherven, Ohrid, Pergamon, and elsewhere. In all the cases, the suburbs fo rtifications functioned rather as checkpoints controlling and regula ting the access to the suburbs and their markets than as some strategically military structures. Although there is no direct co rrelation between the settlement s physical appearance and their function, the sites with th e largest fortified areas tende d to be centers of greater administrative and ecclesiastic importance, which in the course of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries also meant economic significance, visually illustrated by the size of the adjacent suburbs. Turnovo, with a fortified area of 23 ha was the leading administrative and economic center of Bulgaria, with an inhabited area of more than 80 ha. Cherven had a fortress comprising 2.4 ha and developed suburbs of more than 20 ha. To the area of Shumens fortress of 3 ha, a suburb was added, which was more than three times the size of the fortress. The fortified area of Lovech was 2.8 ha, with a suburb of 10 ha.114 The area of the suburbs of Kaliakra and Mesembria is not known, but they must have being proportional to their fo rtified sites of 13 and 10 ha, respectively. In Macedonia, the same rela tion between the size of fortresses and their suburbs has been found. The largest kastra such as Ohrid, Prilep, Skopje, Serres and Strumitsa, developed the largest suburbs.115 On the opposite end of the spectrum were the myriad of small provincial fortresses with solely defensive functions, guarding roads and m ountain passes and offering shelter for the rural population. Although they also attrac ted population in a scale proportion al to their fortified size, 114 Rough estimations, according to the surf ace survey on the terrain around the fortress. No detailed investigations on the suburbs have been performed there. For details see J. Changova, Lovetch (Sofia: Voenno Izdatelstvo, 2006) 115 Ivan Mikul ik Srednovekobvni Gradovi i Tvurdini vo Makedonia .pp. 132-134

PAGE 156

156 they obtained a qualitatively distinctive appearan ce from that of the large administrative and ecclesiastic centers. Their intramural space did not lose its military function. It remained uninhabited by civilians, with only a few military buildings and cisterns. As demonstrated by 42 fortresses from the Central Tundzha Valley 116 surveyed by Atanas Popov, the adjacent settlements were not the result of overflowing in tramural tissue but of an adjoining village seeking the closeness of the fortresss protection.117 In addition, the uninhabited fortresss space and the distance between the fortifications and the neighboring villages, which in certain cases, such as the village at the top of the ancient Sevtopolis and the vill ages of Tuzha and Vetren, is as long as 1-3 km, implies a lack of organic cohesion between them.118 The few guards that such a type of fortress usually had, recruited among th e local villagers, hard ly induced the regular economic interaction between the fortress and it s country, that could become a gravitational force for a town formation. Their interaction was intensified only in time of facing some crisis, political or natural, but usually they lived se parate lives, as suggested by the local churches, which, as detected in the cases of Chilechito (0.5 ha), Hisaria ( 0.8 ha) and Kaleto (0.4 ha), were built within the neighboring villages but outside the fortifications.119 Finally, the distinction between urban and rural fortresses is signified by the title of thei r governing officials. While an urban administrative center was under the governing of a kephale whose authority stretched over 116 Region in Central Bulgaria, enclosed between the Balkan Mountain from the north and Sredna Gora Mountain from the south 117 Atanas Popov, Krepostni i Ukrepitelni Suorazhenia v Krunskata Srednovekovna Oblast [Fortresses and fortifications in the region of medieval Krun] (Sofia: BAN, 1982). 118 A. Popov, Kreposti i Ukrepitelni Suorazhenia pp. 49-50; 74-83; J. Changova, Srednovekovnoto Selishte nad Sevtopolis XI-XIV vek [ The medieval settlement on the top of Sevtopolis, 11th14th centuries] (Sofia: BAN, 1972),pp. 5-7. 119 A. Popov, Kreposti i Ukrepitelni Suorazhenia pp. 35-37; 47-49; 49;61-66; Hisaria /local toponym/ a fortress located 0.5km NE from the modern village of Nikolaevo; Kaleto /local toponym / a fortress 2 km N from the village of Vetren: Chilechito /local toponym/ a fortress near the modern village of Enina.

PAGE 157

157 the adjacent hinterland, a small rura l fortress was managed only by a kastrophylax, a military commander in charge with the command of th e fortress garrison and maintenance of fortifications.120 Typical for a settlement adjacent to a small fortress is the village on top of the ancient Sevtopolis, whose predominant agricultural functi on marks its fortress as rural. However, sometimes the appearance of the small rural fort resses could be misleading for the type of their adjacent settlement. In the late thirteenth early fourteenth century, some of the rural fortresses in the mining districts changed their ap pearance and function along with the growth of the mining activity, and obtained certa in proto-urban characteristics. Their interior space became first a storeroom for the dugout ore and necessary equipment and then gradually turned into a residential and trade place. The best-preserved example of such a rural fortress that grew into a small town, a center of mining, is that of Sobri on the Shar Mountain in Macedonia.121 Yet in the cases of the mining centers of Zletovo and, later, Kratovo, thei r fortresses did not change their purely military outlook of their intramural spaces despite the significant growth of their adjacent settlements, denoted by the written sources. An explanation could be found in the fast growth of such centers due to the discovery of rich deposits of silver-lead ore in their vicinity. With the exhausting of the ore deposits, however, the significance of thos e proto-urban centers declined, giving way to some new mining centers. The provincial monastic foundations also played important formative role for the emergence of settlements adjacent to their fortif ications. The monasteries were, usually, either 120 L. Maksimovi The Byzantine Provincial Administration, pp. 175-6. 121 Ivan Mikul ik Srednovekobvni Gradovi i Tvurdini vo Makedonia pp. 330-333. See fig. 4.

PAGE 158

158 fortified or had one or more closely located fort resses for their protection. When fortified, as in the case of St. John the Forerunner Monastery in Kurdzhali, (South Bulgaria) their fortifications did not differ from that of a regular fortress, with solid walls enforced with towers of different shape (fig. 4-13).122 Sometimes, as at Rila Monastery, the defens e was organized within a centrally located tower (fig. 4-14). Unlike Serbia, however, wher e the settlements adj acent to the monastic fortifications, such as those of Gra anica, Studenica, i a, and Mileeva, quickly manifested certain socio-economic proto-urban features, the settlements that evolved around the monasteries in Bulgaria never displayed a socio-economic potential that w ould allow them to grow beyond their rural limitations. An explanation of this phenomenon can be found in the dominant role of the state and its provincial administration for the to wn formation in Bulgaria that in its turn stems from the longer institutional tradition and closer following of the Byzant ine social and cultural model in Bulgaria in comparison with Serbia. A good example, in that se nse, is the settlement pattern that emerged around the rich Bachkovo Monastry. Although ever since the eleventh century the monastery had been endowed with surrounding fortresses and villages to secure military protection and a labor force, the late me dieval town of Stenimachos merged with the administrative fortress of Petric, the co-center of the theme Stenimachos-Tzepina, established during the Nicaean re-conquest of Thrace, but not with the rich monastery, which was only 5 km away. The monastery, however, developed it s own adjacent village (Bachkovo), clearly distinguished from Stenimachos in appearance size, and dominant agricultural activities.123 122 N. Ovcharov and D. Hadzhieva, Srednovekoviat manastir v Kurdzhali, centar na episkopiata Ahridos (XI-XIV v) [The medieval monastery in Kurdzhali, center of the bishopric Ahridos ( 11th-14th centuries)] in Razkopki i Prouchvania ( Sofia: BAN, 1992), pp. 23443. 123 D. Tzonchev and St. Stoilov, Asenova Krepost pp. 7-8; 21; 42

PAGE 159

159 The last line of fortress defense was built ar ound an internal citadel or a tower, usually located on the highest site within the rampart. Samples of internal citade ls come from almost every fortress, regardless of their significance, location, and purpose. Built in the eve and aftermath of the crisis of the se venth century, the internal citadels were the result of an attempt for optimization of the fortresss efficiency in the context of consta ntly decreasing human resources. Massively constructed and enforced with towers, their small size (1000-5000 square meters) and strategic position enab led the entire fortress to be controlled effectively with a minimum number of soldiers. With the re-establi shment of the fortresses as administrative centers during the high middle ages these internal citadels becam e the main residences of the fortress commanders and, later, if the fortress evolved into a towns nucleus, of the towns administration. Not rarely was the presence of intern al citadels and towers, especially in the late middle ages, interpreted by the th eoretically confused Bulgaria n post-communist archaeology as analogs of the Western seigniorial castles.124 Understanding feudalism as political separatism, which is the landmark of the Balkan political history of thirteenth-fourteenth centuries, the advocates of Balkan seigniorial castles accepted the dotting of the rural landscape with towers and citadels with internal line of defense as si gns of progressing feudaliz ation and as a trend similar to the Western European incastellamento. However, despite the physical similarities with the Western castles, the internal citadels of the Byzantine Empire had different structures and functions. First, cont rary to their Western counterparts, their emergence stemmed from purely military considerations as a concentration of the fortress defense faculties and not as a fortified private estate as it was the Western 124 N. Ovcharov, Perpericon i Okolnite Tvurdini prez Srednovekovieto [ Perpericon and the surrounding fortresses during the Middle Ages] ( Sofia: Tnagra, 2003).pp. 11-21; Iv. Djambov, Zamakut v Srednovekovna Bulgaria. Tradicii i Vliania [The castle in medieval Bulgaria. Traditions and influences] Arheologia Vol. 3. (1992).pp. 10-19

PAGE 160

160 seigniorial castle. Second, they were not design ed as inheritable privat e residencies and they were not part of the rural pronoia holder paroikos dichotomy. Quite the contrary, in the Byzantine World the fortresses had never lost th eir public origin, purpose, and function. They were public military-administrative centers, rule d by an appointed commander. They constituted the central power and collective residencies of the provincial pronoia holders. Some of them, indeed, ended as private residencie s, especially after the second half of the thirteenth century, even though it came about through an act of usur pation and political separatism. This, however, did not make these citadels castles, in the Western seigniorial sense, but palaces ( oikoi ) in a Constantinopolitan sensehearts of new capitals and of new polit ical bodies. The citadel of Ras or Markovi Kuli in the fo rtress of Prilep, thus, fuctioned essentia lly the same as did the palace of Bulgarian emperors in Turnovo, that of Bdins Principality, in Bdin, or the emperors palace in Constantinople. All of them displa yed differences only in scale. The incastellamento phenomenon that started in Northe rn Italy and spread all over the European Mediterranean and, later, over most of western Europe, was result of a private enterprise and had more to do with internal class structure in the West than with defense against external invasions.125 Although the castles in the West emerged for defense against invaders such as the Saracens, Vikings, and Magyars, their mo re significant development appears to be occurring in the period after these threats had passed their peak. It was in the succeeding period, in the later tenth and the eleven th centuries, when the castles sa turated the landscape there during a time of little disturbance in the West. The fortified village, or castelnaux as Benoit Cursente called them in Gascony, was a type of village subordinated to a castle and surrounded by a 125 Pierre Toubert, Les structures du Latium mdieval Vol.1 (Rome: cole franaise de Rome, 1973).pp. 87; 338; 374-412.

PAGE 161

161 defensive structure, which may be a wall, a moat, and embankment or just a moat.126 Hardly designed for a heavy siege, the castelnaux still offered protection from bandits and small-scale violence. In addition, the liberties associated with these settle ments enabled the local lay and ecclesiastic lords to gather peas ants there. The final result of incastellamento was a society dominated by seigniorial lordsh ip exercised from a network of castles that reshaped the landscape. By the end of the twelfth century, the castrum had become the dominant form of rural settlement in Western Europe. Like Western Europe, by the end of the tw elfth century the landscape of the Eastern Balkans was saturated with rural fortifications: watchtowers, barrier wall s and fortresses. Only on the mauntain slopes that fenced the Centra l Tundzha Valley ( also known as Kazanluk Hollow, an area of 800 sq. km.in Central Bulgar ia, secluded between the Balkan Mauntain Range form the north and Sredna Gora Mauntain form the south; Strazhata Pass from the east and Tvarditsa Pass from the east) were there more than 42 fortifications.127 However, despite the similarity in the physical appear ance of the rural lands cape and the exceptional, but still existing samples of private fortress building in the surviving Byzantine docum ents, closer scrutiny reveals that the private initiative for building kastra was permitted extremely rarely, usually in the face of some serious military threat, when the imperial court was prone to employ any possible resources. However, even then it displa ys attitudes and priori ties, which contrast fundamentally with those in the West. The typicon of Bachkovo Monastery of 1083 records the will of its founder, Gregory Pakourianos, in which, among twelve villages an d twelve separate estates bequeathed to 126 Benoit Cursente, Les castelnaux de la Gascogne medievale (Bordeaux: Federation de historique di SudOuest, 1980). 127 Atanas Popov, Krepostni i Ukrepitelni Suorazhenia

PAGE 162

162 Bachkovo Monastery, are mentioned six kastra .128 The document also mentions the imperial chrysobull granting fiscal immunity for the improvements made by Pakourianos, specifically mentioning building of kastra .129 However, though privately built, the fortresses were designed for public usage. Two were for the co mmunity of Stenimachos and the others for protection of the monastery and its subordi nated villages. The ch arters for granting kastra by Michael VII and Alexius I explicitly mentioned that the granted kastra were not inheritable and they remained in some sense imperial possessions even after their concession.130 In the majority of cases, as it was in that of kastron of Pantelion on the island of Leros, given to the monastery of St. John the Theologian, a small neighboring fort resses or a tower (donjon) was given or their building was permitted to the monastic foundations for their own protection.131 This, however, did not change the public character of either th eir building or of their function. Everywhere the documents witness to the bu ilding and main taining of kastra ( kastroktisia in Byzantium, gradozidane in Bulgaria and Serbia) as a public obligation, imposed by the state for public purposes. Even in the mid-fourteenth century, on the eve of the massive Ottoman advance, when John V was only too glad to enlist private ente rprise in the maintenance of the provincial fortifications, both monasteries and lay landow ners went through the formality of seeking imperial permission before building towers for their protection.132 A kastron held as a private 128 L. Petit Typicon Grgoire Pakourianos pour le monastre de Ptritzos / Bachkovo/ en Bulgarie. Vizantiiskii Vremmennik Vol 11. ( 1940) Appendix No 1; V. A. Arutiunova-Fidanyan, Typik Gregoria Pakuriani [ Typicon Gregory Pakourianos] (Erevan: n.p. 1978); 129 Ibid. 130 N. Oikonomides, The Donation of Castles in the Last Quarter of the Eleventh Century. in Polychronion, Festshrift Franz Dolger zum 75 Geburtstag (1966).pp. 413-417. 131 N. Oikonomides, The Donation of Castles 132 Actes de Lavra, Vol. III, ed by Paul Lemerle, A. Gu illou, N. Svoronos, Denise Papachryssanthou. nos.127 and 141: Chrysobull of John V for the Monastery of the Anargyroi at Constantinople ed. by E. Lappa-Zizica in Zbornik Radovi Vizantolojkog Instituta No.18 (1978).pp. 160-1.

PAGE 163

163 inheritable possession, a fortified oikos (household), especially in Palaeologean era, always signals an independent political body. As it was demonstrated above, the semantics of kastron in Slavic ( tvrd ), was narrowly related to the notion of state ( tvurdzhave ). The same, although in a more complex way, is valid for the meaning of oikos, a term of central importance for understanding the Byzantine social model, often overs hadowing the significance of class Oikos (household) was not confined to th e private sphere as it was in the West and in its theological and social dimensions were the two sides of the same coin. The entire world, the O ikumene (the inhabitable earth), was conceptu alized by the Byzantines as Gods household, with the emperor, as Gods lieutenant and caretaker until the Second Coming of Christ. This theological concept became a matrix for the Byzantine social model, quite noticeable, however, in its spatial representation. The Great Palace of the emperors in Constantinople was a cluster of oikoi, upon which the entire public administration was centered and, thus, became not only a spatial metaphor of the entire empire but also a functional and architectural model for the oikoi of the provincial ecclesiastic and lay officials. The same model was followed by the Bulgar ian rulers in Turnovo in constructing theologo-political ideal and its spatial representation. Designated according to their tutelage as lords of Bulgarian and Greek kingdoms, Bulgar ian Tsars also appropria ted the role of the Byzantine emperor as Guardian of the Orthodoxy, Father and Protector of the world, and New Constantine.133 The tendency of appropriating the Byzantine universalism that started with the fall of Constantinople in 1204 is well manifested in the words of Ivan II Asen inscribed in the Turnovian church of the Holy Forty Martyrs, according to which the Greeks and the 133 Iv. Dujcev, Iz Starata Bulgarska Knizhnina Vol. II pp. 128; 130; 134; Hr. Kodov, The Psalter of Kuklen Monastery (Pesnivets) in Opis na Slavjanskite Rukopisi v Bibliotekata na Bulgarian Academy of Sciences [Annotated inventory of the Slavic scriptures at the library of Bulgarian Academy of Sciences] (Sofia: BAN, 1969),p.14; Hr. Kolarov, Titulatura i Polnomochia Vladetelskoi Vlasti v Srednevekovoi Bolgarii [Tutelage and authority of the central po wer in medieval Bulgaria] Etudes Balkaniques No 3 (1978) pp. 96-101

PAGE 164

164 Franks submitted to my power because they had no other emperor than me.134 What may seems quite propagandistic construction is, actual ly, the real state of affairs as acknowledged by the Greek archbishop of Ohrid, Demetrios Chomate nos: The power of the empire moved almost entirely westward in Zagora ( Bulgaria) a nd, was natural to recognize her hegemony and her right to hold bishops in her churches because there was no hope for restoration of the Roman Empire.135 The cultural importance of Turnovo culminated in the fourteenth century by attaining now, similarly to Constan tinople, the name Tsarigrad Turnov, 136 the Bulgarian capital, claimed fame of a town equal to that of Rome and Constantinople.137 The adoption of Byzantine theologo-political ideal found its spatial representation in Bulgaria not only in the imitation of structure a nd function of the Great Pa lace of the Byzantine emperors, but also in the construction of the urba n space and in Bulgarian architecture in general. Designed as a polygon of buildings with massive external facades dominated by five towers, the palace of the Bulgarian rulers had at the center of its internal court two (the great and small) throne chambers attached to the western line of buildings, which faced the court church named after, and treasuring the relics of, the patron of the city, St. Petka (Paraskeva) of Epivat.138 The palace had two entrances: one ce remonial, located on the northern wall, and another, from the south leading to the auxiliary buildingsthe stables, kitchen, winery etc. A cluster of 134 Iv. Dujcev, Iz Starata Bulgarska Knijnina. p. 97 135 J.B. Pitra, Analecta sacra et cl assica Spicilegio Solesmensi parata Iuris ecclesiastici Graecorum Selecta paralipomena, VI vol. 6. (Paris and Rome, 1891; repr. Farn-borough: Gregg Press, 1966). Col. 95 136 Tsarigrad is the Slavic sobriquet for Constantinople. From Tsar (Emperor) and Grad (City). 137 As in the old Russian poem Zadonshtina in M. N. Tihomirov, Istoricheskie Svjazyi Ruskogo Naroda s Iujnyimi Slavjanami s Drevneishih Vremen do Polovinyi XVII veka Slavjanskii Sbornik (1947),pp.125-201. 138 V. Nesheva, Bogospasniat Tsarev Grad Turnov [The Blessed Tsars town of Turnovo] ( Sofia: Alea, 2000),pp 8895.

PAGE 165

165 administrative buildings formed the eastern line of buildings, while the chambers of the royal family were placed behind the throne hall (fig. 4-15). The principle of Justinian Law of un ity and harmony between the earthly and heavenly realms, though divided, ac cording to the same law, is clearly substantiated in Turnovo by the spatial relation between the patriarchal a nd the emperors palaces. They were physically separated, but, at the same, time sharing the same space (fig.4-16). Not surprisingly, the patriarchal palace and its central church were not located on the neighboring Tsarevets hill of Trapezitsa, but next to and domi nating over the emperors palace, denoting, thus, that the source of the earthly law is the ble ssing by the heavenly kingdom (fi g. 4-17). The hosting of both the rulers and patriarchal palaces on the hill of Tsar evets resembles as well the textual structure of the Nomocanons where the laws of the empire (nomos) were matched by and compared to the laws of the church (canons) within the same body of te xt and not in separate books. Undoubtedly, this theologically substantiated space construction of Turnovo is the ultimate manifestation of the triumph of the Byzantine cultural model in Bulgaria. Analogically, the space model of Turnovo, as it will be shown further, wa s patterned over the provincial administrative centers (figs. 4-17; 4-18; 4-19). Urban Public Space In m ost of the uncovered medieval urban site s, the variable width and sudden ending of the towns streets, suggest the notion rather of a labyrinth than of some town planning (fig. 426). Exclusions, however, are not missing. The to wn of Sobri in Macedonia, for instance, displays a remarkably good arrangemen t of the urban tissue w ithin its fortifications with a grid of streets running at almost right angles to each other.139 Similar to that of Sobri was the planning 139 See fig. 4-4; For details see Ivan Mikul ik Srednovekobvni Gradovi i Tvurdini vo Makedonia.. p p. 330-333.

PAGE 166

166 of Cherven where the main street stretched out along the entire fortre ss connecting the eastern and western gates and continuing through the suburb on the plateau, up to its westmost end. (fig. 4-19). The two subsidiary streets running along the walls and their connections with the main street, together with the multitude of blind alle ys among them form the frame of the streets network in the fortress of Cherven. While the main streets were built at the time when the fortress had purely military functions, the network of short and blind alleys were created obviously during the time of urbanization of the fortress, after the open ing of the thirteenth century. The street network of Lovech displays si milar characteristics, while that of Shumen is more chaotic. Following the topog raphic peculiarities, the streets of Tsarevets were situated as a series of concentric lines following the isohypses a nd connected by arterial al leys and stairs that radiated from the top of the hill, hosting the emperors and patriarchal palaces (fig.4-20). Some of those descending alleys were leadi ng directly to the thr ee gates, two of which were small, walking passages, specifically de signed for communications with the neighboring suburbia. While the streets of Tsarevets were cobbled, those in Shumen, Cherven, and Lovech were indented within the rock platform. The colorful vignettes of Constantinopolit an daily life, as provided by Choniates and Tzetzes, in which the urban street s were of central commercial si gnificance, could be attributed, undoubtedly, to any other large urba n centers of the Byzantine World.140 Within the fortresses of Turnovo, as well as of Shumen, Cherven, and Lov ech, the main streets, which were also the widest communicative arteries, were used as mark et streets, as suggested by the findings from their surrounding buildings ( fig. 4-21). 140 Nicetae Choniatae Historia. pp.57-8; 119-20; John Tsetses Letters ed. P.A. M. Leone (Leipzig: Teubner 1972).pp.31-34

PAGE 167

167 It seems that this was also the morphology of any urban quarter, as examined by the partial archaeological investigatio ns in the New Town suburb, at the foot of the Tsarevets Hill and not only of its fortified center.141 The basic tax-unit known from the written sources, the parish community, is best expressed spatially in Turnovo, which towns structure was subdivided into small quarters of 30-40 homes, grouped aro und a church and following the characteristics of the terrain. Their administrative differentiation is suggested by th eir cemeteries, some of which numbered more than 100 burials, placed around the community churches.142 Within 80% of the uncovered territory of Tsarevets fortress, 480 houses are discovered, grouped around 11 parochial churches that functi oned along with another 12 monaster ial, patriarchal, or private churches.143 There are no indications of any principle determining such spatial organization other than opportunism. The churches and their surro unding communities emerged simultaneously. In front of each of the parochial churches as well as of the emperors palace and patriarchal church, Holy Ascension, public squares were formed, so me of which, perhaps, functioned as open marketplaces.144 The towns subdivision into parochial communities is well documented also in Melnik, where the records of early Ottoman cyzie registers are confirme d by the archeological research. At the end of the fi fteenth century the suburbia of Melnik had 11 quarters, grouped 141 Atanas Popov, Za Socialno-ikono micheskiat Oblik na Turnvograd prez XIIXIV vek, [About the socioeconomic features of Turnovo, 12th -14th centuries] in P. Petrov, ed. Srednovekovniat Bulgarski Grad (Sofia: n.p., 1980).pp. 152165; Y. Nikolova, Turnovgrad v Svetlinata na Novite Prouchvania [Turnovo within the light of the newest discoveries] in Ibid. pp. 145-151. 142 As of the church No 18, located near the western wall, where 118 burials are discovered. For details see Y.Nikolova, Gradoustroistvo i Arhitektura [Town planning and Architecture] in Istoria na Veliko Turnovo in 3 Vols. Vol.1 ed. by D. Kosev, (Sof ia:OF, 1986).pp. 231-282; R. Ancheva, Ulicata kato Element na Gradskata Struktura prez XIIIXIV vek [ The street as an element of the urban structure, 13th-14th centuries] in Iubileen Sbornik Srednovekovno Turnovo (V. Turnovo: Abagar, 2005).p.121. 143 Y.Nikolova, Gradoustroistvo i Arhitektura, pp.232; 246-247 144 K. Dochev, Turnovo, Sixth-Fourteenth Centuries in The Economic History of Byzantium, p.677; V. Kiselkov, Mitropolit Grigoii Tsamblak [Metropolitan Gregory Tsambl ak] (Sofia: n.p., 1946).p.51

PAGE 168

168 around their religious centers, churches and mo sques (former churches in the pre-Ottoman period).145 The town quarters of Turnovian suburbia oc cupied the alluvial terraces and the four promontories formed by the meanders of the Ya ntra River: Tsarevets, Trapezitsa, Momina Krepost, and Sveta Gora (fig. 4-19). It seems th at the walled suburbium between Tsarevets and Trapezitsa, the New Town, as the author of the Life of St. Sava calls it, gained status equal to Tsarevets in terms of social and economic importance. It became a densely populated area with centers for the production of iron, brick, and potte ry hosting the most prominent monasteries and churches, in which were located the tombs of the Asenids and many of the relics made Turnovo famous.146 Outside the New Town, east from Tsarevets, the suburbium of Momina Krepost Hill (Devingrad) was located; another un named quarter stretched out north of the hill of Trapezitsa. As Demetrius Chomatianus, Archbishop of Ohrid informs us, parts of the urban space specially designated for occupation by foreigners were often present in large Byzantine cities.147 Turnovo was no exception. The location of the well -documented Jewish Quarter in Turnovo can be identified according to the local toponymy, on the territory enclosed between Trapezitsa from the north and Yantra River from the south. Indica tive of the size and importance of the Jewish community in Turnovo is th e fact, mentioned in the Life of St. Theodosius, that a Christianized 145 Hr. Matanov, Vyznikvane i Oblik na Kiustendilski Sandjak, p.72; B. Tsvetkov, Selishtnata Mreja v Dolinata na Sredna Struma prez Srednovekovieto, IXXVII v [ Settlement network in the valley of middle Strymon during the middle ages, 9th-17th century], (Sofia, 2002); V. Nesheva, K vartal Chatala [ Chatala Quarter] in Melnik, Gradyt v Podnojieto na Slavovata Krepost [Melnik, the town at the foot of Slavs fortress] ( Sofia: B. Tsvetkov, 1989).pp. 4054. 146 Dometian, Jivot Svetoga Symeona i Svetoga Save [Life of St. Symeon and St. Sava] ed.by B. Dani i (Belgrade: Drz avnoj s tampariji 1965).p.303. 147 J. Pitra, Analecta sacra et classica specilegio solesmen si parata, Vol. VI: Juris ecclesiastici graecorum selecta paralipomena. (Paris and Rome, 1891, repr. Farnborough: Gregg Press, 1966) columns, 661-664.

PAGE 169

169 Jewish woman from Turnovo became a Bulgarian empress, wife of Ivan Alexander.148 Southeast from Tsarevets, on a terrace enclosed by the meande r of Yantra River, was located the quarter of the Latins, most likely Italians, called Franks in the local idiom.149 Unfortunately, neither the Jewish Quarter nor the Frankish Quarter has been thoroughly studied. Latin colonies also existed in Philipopolis, where, next to the existing Ar menian community, a Latin Quarter was formed during the passing of the Second Crusade (1147-1149);150 in Varna where Venetians and, later Genoese settled;151 and in Bdin, where a colony of Ragusan merchants was established.152 Besides Turnovo, Jewish quarters existed in Bdin, Pleven, Mesembria, and Varna.153 Armenian colonies, besides Philipopolis, fluoris hed in Sofia, Nicopol, and Bdin.154 Although the fourteenthcentury lawyer from Thessaloni ke, Constantine Harmenopoulos, specifically mentioned in his compendium of ci vil and criminal laws that pottery production kilns, garum155 facilities and dye shops had to be built at a certain distance from any resident area, there are no spatial signs in the urban tissue of Turnovo th at industrial activities were 148 V. Kiselkov, Jitieto na Sv. Teodosii Turnovski [Life of St. Theodosius of Turnovo] (Sofia: Bozhinovi, 1926) pp. 19-22. 149 V. Kiselkov, Mitropolit Grigoii Tsamblak .p.50 150 Odonis de Deogilo, Liber de via Sancti Sepulchri in Latinski Izvori za Bulgarskata Istoria [Latin sources for the Bulgarian history] Vol.3. ed. by M. Voinov, Iv. Dujcev; Str. Lishev and B. Primov (Sofia: BAN, 1965).p.122. 151 The Treaty of Ivanko, despot of Dobrudja with Genoa in Iv. Dujcev, Iz Starata Bulgarska Knijnina [Old Bulgarian literature] Vol. II, pp. 137-138. 152 Codex diplomaticus Hungariae ecclesia sticus ac civillis, studio et opera ed. by Hg. V. G. Fejer, Vol. II (Budae: n.p., 1829).pp. 309-311. 153 E, Eskenazi, Kum Vuprosa za za Istoriata na Evreite na Balkanite VII XIV v. [About the history of the Jews in the Balkans, 7th -14th centuries] in Godishnik na evreiskite kulturno-prosvetni dryujestva 1967, No 1; 52-55; Y. Trifonov, Istoria na Grada Pleven do Osvoboditelnata Voina [History of Pleven up to the Liberation War] (Sofia: Saglasie, 1933).pp. 32-34 154 S. V. Ovnanian, Armiano-Bolgarskie Istoricheskie Sviazy [Armenian-Bulgarian historical relations] (Erevan: AN ASSR, 1968).pp. 34-40; Hr. Matabov, Pavlikianskoto Dvijenie v Bulgarskite Zemi [Paulician movement in Bulgarian lands] in Studentski Prouchvania Vol.1 (1975).pp.140-143. 155 Garum souse condiment, derived from fish that have been allowed to ferment.

PAGE 170

170 concentrated within special zones. 156 On the contrary, kilns for po ttery, glass, br icks, and tiles, as well as furnaces for iron and non-ferrous meta l smelting, existed next door to shrines and palaces in the New Town and on the Tsarevets Hill.157 It seems that in Cherven, nevertheless, some regulation existed. Despite the wide range of crafts practiced within the fort, as demonstrated by the archaeological evidence, no kiln or furnace was discovered there. Furthermore, the signs of concentrated furnaces located on the same plateau, but outside the fortress, suggest that residential quarters were formed on the basis of professional organization.158 However, Shumen displays characteristic s similar to those of Turnovo: furnaces and kilns are part of the resi dential area of the fortress. 159 This fact confirms the lack of uniformity in town regulation, which in turn imp lies that it was a matter of self-regulation by the local towns administration. Within the area of Turnovo, 50 churches func tioning between the late twelfth and the late fourteenth centuries have been discovered so farall of them bearing th e characteristics of the late Byzantine Orthodox churches : splendid external and internal decorations but modest and intimate size.(fig. 4-22). 156 Constantine Harmenopoulos, Excerpts from Manuale legum; ed. by G. E. Heimbach, Manuale legum sive Hexabiblos, Book II, 4, 13-23 (Leipzig: T.O. Weigel, 1851). 157 Mirko Robov, Proizvodstveni Kompleksi za Bitova i Storitelna Keramika, [Complexes for production of earthenware, sgraffito and building ceramics] in Iubileen Sbornik Srednovekovno Turnovo (V. Turnovo: Abagar, 2005). pp. 93-115 158 G. Georgiev, Arheologicheski Danni za Jeliazodobivaneto v Severoiztochna Bulgaria prez Srednite Vekove [ Archaeological data for iron making in Northeastern Bulgaria during the middle ages] Priroda No 5 ( 1955).pp. 6573 159 V. Antonova, Shumen and Shumenskata Krepost. pp 84-103

PAGE 171

171 The moderate size of late medieval church es in the Balkans, however, has sometimes been interpreted as a sign of economic recession.160 Yet the reasons for th e modest size of the Orthodox churches and urban monasteries or the l ack of urban monuments in general is quite well explainable by the absence of planning and shortages of urban sp ace in the extremely densely populated late medieval towns in the Balkans (fig. 4-23). It should be stressed, however, that, above all, the modest size of the Orthodox churches is a result of the centrality of oikos as a metaphor patterned over the entire Byzantine society and of Orthodox cultural tradition of individualism, privacy, and humility in religious sphere. Although both Byzantine and Western Europe an monastic practices were built on the guides of St. Basil, by the opening of the thirteen th century the different institutional context and historical development in the European East a nd West resulted in noticeable differences in monastic life. While in Western Europe the adhere nts to the strict Benedictine Rule, the Order of Cistercians and the monks of the Abbey of Cluny and its constellation of dependencies, exemplified the rigid anti-individualistic rules of Western cenobitic monastic life, the salient features of the Orthodox monastic practice were choice, rivalry, in austerity, and individualism. The primacy of the state and Roman law, brought by Leo VI (886-912) into conformity with the Christian cannon, additionally stimulated Orthodox monastic individualism that became also a model for the public religious practices. As a re sult, the variety of monastic practices that coexistedlavriote, eremitic and cenobitic, the lack of monastic orders that made the monastic vocation relatively open matter, the process of massively delegating economic functions to the monastic foundations, and, last but not least, the wide public access to doctrinal issues, a result of 160 See for instance Machiel Kiel, Urban Devel opment in Bulgaria in the Turkish Period The International Journal of Turkish Studies Vol. 4 (1989).pp. 79 -158, who advocates the idea of an Ottoman conquest bringing peace and stability to a region torn apart by local wars and economic decline.

PAGE 172

172 adopting Slavic vernacular as a li terate language, broke the line isolating monasticism from the public world and fostered the deinstitutionalizati on and privatization of the religious practices, bringing them, thus, under the public control, with little if any inte rvention of the central power. Individual households, even t hose of modest means, enjoyed a remarkable degree of personal control and choice regardi ng religious practices. Quite illuminating the status of the Orthodox C hurch within the societ y is the passage of the tenth-or-eleventh-century Life of St. Nikon where Nikon Metanoeite was dealing with the plague that swept the town of Sparta.161 Asked for help by the desperate population of the town, Nikon solved the problem in cons onance with the tradit ional methods at the time: expelling the Jews from the town, tearing down the slaughterh ouse near the church of St. Epiphanios, and building a church at the place where the local archontes played a polo-like ballgame called tzounganion.162 None of Nikons suggestions was met with resistance by th e local townsmen except the appropriation of thei r playground for building a churc h. Nikon, however, succeeded in realization of his plan, not by the support of the lo cal imperial or ecclesiastic institutions, but by looking for public consensus through manipul ating the public opinion, through miracles, through insistence, through appeals for repent ance, and through threats for divine anger.163 Yet, the competition for appropriating the public space, which besides tzounganion was also used as a marketplace, ended with a compromise: the church and the ball game co-e xisted at the same spot.164 161 Denis Sullivan, The Versions of Vita Nikonis Dumbarton Oaks Papers No 32 (1978).pp. 157-173. 162 Ibid. p. 112 163 Ibid pp. 118-124 164 Ibid. pp. 134-140

PAGE 173

173 On the one hand, the public co ntrol of religious practices opened the door of religious pluralism and tolerance. At the time when Jews were expelled from England (1290) and France (1306 and, finally in 1394/5), the universality of Orthodoxy in the Balkans was presumed and for the most part heterodoxy was ignored by the stat e administrations of Byzantium and Bulgaria. It was no accident that Jewish and Latin communities flourished in the larger Balkan towns. The weak institutionalization of Orthodoxy was demonstrated by the Council of Turnovo in 1355, which was its astonishing in deal ing with a wide range of religi ous teachings and heresies in Bulgaria. These included the Bogomils, the Ad amites, the Paulicians the anti-Hesychastic faction of Barlaam and certain Judaising practiti oners; and the soft treatment of their leaders by the officials branded and expelled from Bulg aria unlike the tradi tions of the Western Inquisition.165 On the other hand, the public control over relig ious practices led to wide involvement of private parties founding monastic institutions. Us ing tax privileges, easily granted by central power to ecclesiastic foundations, th e private founders of monastic institutions turned them into business ventures. The foundation and endowment of a family monastery, or church, became, thus, a sound economic enterprise, a social security investment against various misfortunes, which threatened the integrity of a household, and which were cap able of bringing material, as well as spiritual benefits to th e founder and his heirs. Therefor e, private churches, chapels and monasteries were some of the most preferable ways of investment. Within the limited and expensive urban properties, the smaller the size, the more effective was the investment. Since the social structure in the late medieval Balkans, du e to the lack of legal re cognition of nobility, was not characterized by strict class differentia tion. Usually, the founded urban churches, although 165 V. Kiselkov, Jitieto na Sv. Teodosii Turnovski pp. 18-19.

PAGE 174

174 private, individual or collective possessions, were attended by the entire neighboring community. The economic aspect of religious privatization was, of course, absent in the model of religious practices, adopted by the lower classes. Yet priv ate access to religion wa s preferable: households that were too modest to have a separate building or room for a chapel would still have an iconostasis for private veneration. An important part of the public space was the water supply of the fortresses and their adjacent settlements. Water for the inhabitant s of the urban suburbia was available usually through open wells or from the neighboring river, while for the fortresses, as demonstrated in Tsarevets, as well as in Cherven, Shumen, a nd Lovech, it was provided by combination of rainwater cisterns and fortified wells, attach ed to the towns walls and reaching to the neighboring rivers.( fig. 4-24). An open drainage system of can als and ditches was in use in all the examined fortresses (fig. 4-25). The discovery of a bathhouse in Turnovo, lo cated in the enclosed suburb between the fortresses of Tsarevets and Trapezi tza, near the monastery of Holy Forty Martyrs, confirms the continuation of the ancient tradition of public health in the late medieval Balkans. 166 However, its location within the center of the New Town unequivocally si gnals its business purpose: The New Town was not an administrative center necessitating special regime of access, but a market and productive center, offering at the same time to the traveling merchants and pilgrims the attractions of some of the most valuable Ch ristian relics of Turnovo and the security of its walls ( fig. 4-26). 166 Kekaumenos, Strategicon, in Sovety i rasskazy Kekavmena ed. G. Litavrin (Moscow: AN SSSR, 1972).pp. 28-30; Ch. Bouras, Aspects of Byzantine City in The Economic History of Byzantium, from the Seventh to the Fifteenth Centuries ed. by A. Laiou ( Washington D.C. : Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 2005).pp. 525526

PAGE 175

175 The bathhouse in Turnovo was similar to those in Corinth, Servia, Thessalonike, Ioannina, and elsewhere in the Balkans th at thrived during the late middle ages.167 The Turnovo bath had an area of 375 sq. meters and functi oned, according to the coin and pottery finds, between the second half of the thirteenth and the late fifteenth century. The building, obviously serving the needs of the regular townsmen in Turnovo, had a utilitari an character, built in stones and bricks but lacking any exte rnal or internal decoration.168 According to the archeological analysis of the bathhouse plan, the main entrance was on its sout hern side, while on the opposite end was located the praefurnium of the hypocaust system (fig. 4-27). The floor and the walls of the hypocaust system were covered with hydr o-isolative layer of bricks and lime covered by marble slabs. The internal face of the walls was also plastered with thick thermo-isolative coat cons isting of broken bricks and lime Within the two niches of the room of praefurnium remains of flues were found that ve ntilated the bathhouse. The water was brought down through ceramic pipes coming from the Yantra River running a few meters westward from the bathhouse. Urban Private Dwellings The best archaeologically exam ined medi eval sites of Turnovo, Lovech, Cherven, and Shumen display a great variety of urban dwelling types, according to their building materials and techniques, shapes, and functions. Built in utilitari an manner, the structure of the late medieval urban house was defined by reasons of economy, ease, and limits of space. The relatively small 167 Y. Nikolova, Gradoustroistvo i Arhitektura [Town planning and Architecture] in Istoria na Veliko Turnovo ed. by D. Kosev, Vol. I (Sofia: OF, 1986).pp. 269-271. 168 Jordan Aleksiev, Shishmanovata Banja v Veliko Turnovo [Shishmans Bathhouse] in Mezhdunarodna Fondacia Sv. Panteleimon (V. Turnovo: Sv. Panteleymon, 1993), pp 59-65.

PAGE 176

176 area size delineated by the remains of dwellings (15-25 sq. m.)169 and their solid foundations of 60-90 cm in width indicate a two-story structure.170 In general, the first floor was built of hewn stones, aggregated by masonry of either lime-a nd-sand or of clay, while the second floor was built entirely in wood or mud bricks, re-infor ced by wooden beams, as suggested by finds of spikes with a length of 5-18 cm.171 The remains of the house foundations are not very helpful for defining what was the dominant type of hous es second floor. Most likely, it was the ramshackle wattle-and-daub or mudbrick construction, although some stone second floors of wealthier houses also existed (fi g.428). In certain cases, the intern al face of the first floor walls was plastered either with clay or with a limeand-sand mixture. However, while the lime-sand and clay masonries were equally distributed in Tsarevets, Turnovo, in Shumen, Lovech, and Cherven, the dominant masonry was clay. Usually the urban houses were of a ground-leve l type. Nevertheless, when built on abrupt slopes they acquired a semi-dugout appearance with an above the ground faade and walls indented in the slope of the hill It should be noticed, however, that even when situated on a flat terrace certain houses possessed an underg round basement below their first floor.172 Due to the extent of systematic studies in Turnovo, the wi dest range of house types has been examined there. 169 This size average refers to the hous es in Turnovo and Lovech. The majority of the houses in Cherven and a significant number of those in Shumen had much larger first floor areas. 170 Violeta Dimova, Srednovekovniat Cherven, pp. 125-127; see also J. Changova, Lovetch pp.80-87; Vera Antonova, Shumen and Shumenskata Krepost.pp. 56-69; Yanka Nikolova, Zhilishteto v Turnovo prez XIIXIV vek [ The house in Turnovo, 12th 14th centuries] in Tsarstvashtia grad Turnov ( Sofia: Nauka i Izkustvo, 1985).pp. 6474. 171 Nikolova, Zhilishteto v Turnovo prez XIIXIV vek 172 See for instance dwelling B in J. Changova, Lovetch p.83.

PAGE 177

177 Three semi-dugout houses on the slope of the Momina Krepost Hill, grouped around a small church, were designated as part of a whole quarter, situated outside the fortified suburbia.173 Built against the slope, the semi-dugout dw ellings had one floor and one room and, were constructed by wattle-and daub, set upon a lo w-rise foundation of stones. The skeleton of the construction was made of beams, as i ndicated by discovered hol es where the beams nested.174 In their construction and appearance, the houses of Momina Krepost Hill did not differ from their counterparts in Hotn itsa and the village on the top of Sevtopolis, which was examined in the previous chapter. The entire quarter of Momina Krepost Hill, therefore, would have had a rather rural appearance in sharp conrast to the qu arters in Tsarevets and the territory enclosed between Tsarevets and Trapezitsa. The archeologi cal investigations on th e Momina Krepost Hill reveal a mixture of agricultural activities and artisanship, signaled by the findings of agricultural tools, iron slag, kilns, and sgraffito pottery as well as by silos and ovens, often located outside the houses. The market orientation of these activ ities is signaled by coin finds, concentrated around the discovered houses and a church. More than 200 coins of small denominations, which are dated from the late twelfth through the end of the fourteenth centuries (fig. 4-29).175 Regrettably, since there are no systematic archaeological investigations at the unwalled suburbia of Turnovo, the dominant dwelling type within the medieval urban zones cannot be identified securely. However, the accessible rema ins of dwellings within the fortified nuclei of the late medieval urban sites in Bulgaria indica te that the mass urban dw elling consisted of two 173 Y. Nikolova, Srednovekoven Kvartal na Hulma Momina Krepost v Veliko Turnovo, [Medieval quarter on the hill of Momina Krepost in Veliko Turnovo] Arheologia No 1 (1963).pp. 34-41. 174 Ibid. 175 Konstantin Dochev, Monetite ot Hulma Momina Krepost [ The coins from Momina Krepost hill] in Izvestia na Istoricheski Muzei Veliko Turnovo No 9 ( 1994).pp.125-132

PAGE 178

178 rooms, each of which was located on a different floor, had a rectangular plan and combined the functions of a dwelling and workshop. This pattern, however, had its variations too. While in Shumen and Turnovo the number of examined houses with one room on the first floor equals that of the houses with two and more rooms, in Cherven the houses with one room in their first floor const itute 92 per cent of the investigated houses.176 In Lovech, the houses with one room on their first floor are only 20 percent of the total, but due to the small number of dwellings investigated there (15) the sample is not even representative of the space within the walls ( fig. 4-30).177 Another difference between the houses of the mentioned urban centers is no ticeable in the size of their inhabitable areas. While the samples from Turnovo, Shumen, and Lovech give an average size of 15-20 sq. m for their first floor, the houses in Cherven had an impressive average size of 41 sq. m.178 Functionally, there was no difference be tween the various mass dwellings of the medieval towns under examination here. While thei r first floor could be used as both workshop and dwelling space, as denoted by the discoveries of ovens constructed of earth, stone, or bricks and of working utensils, the second floor was clearly defined as an exclusively private residential space. The urban houses usually contained one oven, although objects with two ovens, or an oven and an open hearth, most likel y related to the artisanal activiti es of their inhabitants, have also been registered.179 On the first floor the houses usually had silos, whose size varied, according to the number of family members a nd their economic resources. Because of the 176 Y. Nikolova Zhilishteto v Turnovo prez XIIXIV vek in Tsarstvashtia grad Turnov pp. 6474; V. Antonova, Shumen and Shumenskata Krepost pp. 55-69; V. Dimova, Srednovekovniat Cherven. pp. 125-128 177 J. Changova, Lovetch pp. 83-87 178 Calculations are based on data contained in V. Dimova, Srednovekovniat Cherven. pp. 125-128 179 Y. Nikolova, Zhilishteto v Turnovo prez XIIXIV vek.

PAGE 179

179 extreme density of houses, with very little (0.71.5 m), if any, space between them, no silos or ovens were located outside the dwellings. Therefore, it is safe to conclude that the majority of the houses within the late medieval urban cente rs in Bulgaria did not have courtyards.180 In short, there was a wide range of urban house types, from sunken-floored houses on the Momina Krepost Hill to wealthy dwellings with two and more rooms of polygonal plans (suggesting loggia at front of th e second store), as well as twostore houses built entirely in stone. A typically wealthy urban dwelling was unc overed and studied in Tsarevets. The so-called Boyars House was located on the descending northward ridge of the hill, on the same line as the emperors and patriarchal palaces.181 The house had an L shaped plan, built in two stories, where the first one was constructed by stones, ag gregated by lime mortar and comprising an area of 137 sq. meters almost equally divi ded into three rooms.(fig. 4-31). The second floor was built of wood and perhap s had the same space distribution as the first one. On the second floor, along the entire faade, was a wooden terrace, connected autonomously with the ground leve l by wooden stairs. The entrance was framed by two columns, according to the uncovered marble stand bases. At a right angle to the residential building was an auxiliary building, which shared a wall with the yard fence and was built in wood. At the southwestern corner of the yard with an area size of 635 sq. me ters was located a small chapel that functioned, perhaps, as a private church. The location of th e house, spatially separated from the rest of the civil buildings, its large fenced courtyard, and its size, which is most impressive for Tsarevets, suggest the high social status of its owner. However, whether this high social 180 The only private dwelling with a courtyard disc overed within the urban fortifications is the Boyars House of Tsarevets, described further in the text. 181 Y. Nikolova, Zhilishteto v Turnovo,.For the location of the house see fig. 17

PAGE 180

180 status was result of certain administrative position, economic activities, or both cannot be established on the basis of the archaeological evidence.182 The best-known example of a wealthy urban dwelling is located w ithin the suburbia of late medieval Melnik.183 According to the manner of mas onry and ceramic decoration of the faade, the house, also known as the Boyars House, was built during the thirteenth century, when Melnik became capital of Alexiu s Slavs despotate (fig. 4-32). The last building phase was dated to the ea rly 1700s, but the house was in use until the late nineteenth century. Since th e house was repeatedly modified, the initial external appearance and internal space-distribution can be reconstr ucted on the basis of the signs and traces remaining on its walls. The faade displayed an external decoration consisting of horizontal and radial rows of bricks, placed among the stones that underlined the windows and gates arches (fig. 4-33). The house had a trapezoid-shape plan with an impressive appearance of an area of almost 350 sq. m. and height of 8 m, according to its su rviving walls. On the northeastern end of the house and upward on the hills slope was built a s quare defense tower with an area of 60 sq. m rising above the house. There was a direct passage from the liv ing floor of the house to the tower, which was blocked during the later reco nstructions. Another entr ance to the tower was located outside the house, very close to its main entrance. Both the house and tower had walls wide 1.2 m at their bases, which narrowed upw ard to 0.9 m. The masonry of lime and hewn stones was enforced by embedded scaffolds, not un like to those of fortress ramparts. The house 182 Y. Nikolova, Zhilishteto v Turnovo prez XIIXIV vek. 183 V. Nesheva, Kvartal Chat ala [Chatala Quarter] in Melnik, Gradyt v Podnojieto na Slavovata Krepost [Melnik, the town at the foot of Slavs fortress] ( Sofia: BAN, 1989).pp. 40-54; The outgoing archaeological debate regarding the later reconstructions of the house and, especially, the initial and later purpose of its tower are skipped from this summary.

PAGE 181

181 had two stories. The first one was indented into th e inclined terrain and had a height of 4 m, thus matching the slope angle. The second floor was the living area of the house, in which central place was devoted to a lounge. The lounge, around which four rooms were situated, was connected to the ground floor throug h internal stairs. The house ha d a 3 m. wide balcony built on its western faade, which was not connected to the ground as it was the case of the Boyars House in Tsarevets The central entrance of the house was pl aced on its eastern side, close to the corner between the house and the tower, and was designed to lead direct ly to the living floor from the slope of the inclined terrain. It was an arch-like gate, wide 1.7 m., built on its eastern side. Another entrance was loca ted beneath the balcony on the we stern side and connected the ground floor with the street. According to the archaeological analysis, the house had only one, quite large fireplace (wide 2.1 m. at the floor level) abutting on the northwestern wall of the house, in the dining room, which perhaps served also as a living room during the winter. A wellbuilt wastewater system connected the kitchen through ceramic pipes with a septic tank, built under the restroom on the wester n end of the ground floor. From there the ceramic pipes drove the wastewater to the gully of the Rozhen River. About 6 m. to the north from the main entrance was discovered a well supplying the house with water. Much like the Boyars House in Tsarevets, the house in Melnik had a c ourtyard, enclosing an area on the northern side of the house including the well. Some 14-15 meters to the south from the hous e, was a church, whose size of about 80 sq. meters suggests that it was used not only as a private church of the house but also as a community church.184 Farther to the east and north, more remains of buildings have been found, 184 V. Nesheva, Kvartal Chatala.pp. 54-67

PAGE 182

182 which, unfortunately, are too fractured to allow a ny interpretaion, except to indicate the limits of the Chatala Quarter parish community (fig.4-34) There are clear indications that the Boyars House in Melnik was by no means unique, as a typically wealthy dwelling, examples of which have also been found elsewhere in the Balkans. The ground floors of large houses (re)built dur ing the nineteenth cenury, such as the Manolov House Kremenliev House and Potashov House in Melnik, show a type of masonry identical to that of the Boyars house and the fortress of Slav, on the plateau above the town.185 In addition, in the quarter of St. Marina, in Melnik, were uncovered the remains of two houses with similar masonry and decoration and with nume rous remains of sgraffito pottery.186 The buildings had similar ground-floor sizes and were independently supplied with water. The first building had an aqueduct, the second one had an internal well. Around both houses the slag and tools finds indicate the existence of iron and copper-m aking workshops. Buildings similar to the Boyars House in Melnik are known from Mistra. The family houses of the Laskaris, the Krevatas and the Frangopoulos (fig.4-35)187 and from Stari Bar,188 Dubrovnik189 as well as Turnovo (fig 436).190 185 Ibid. p. 53 186 Ibid 187 I. P. Medvedev, Mistra. Ocherk Istorii i Kulturyi Pozdnevizantiiskogo Goroda [Mistra. Essay on the history and cultura of the late Byzantien town] (Leningrad: Nauka, 1973).p.163 188 D. Bokovi Stari Bar ( Belgrade: Savezni institut za zas titu spomenika culture 1962).p.347 189 M. Vasi Arhitectura i Sculptura u Dalmatii ( Belgrade: Izdavac ka knjiz arnica Gece Kona 1922).p. 23-29. 190 Three stone houses at the foot of Trapezitsa, from which, unfortunately, due to an earthquake at the beginning of the twentieth century, remained only few poor photos (fig. 35) For more details about these houses see K. Miatev, Arhitekturata v Srednovekovna Bulgaria [Architecture of medieval Bulgaria] (Sofia: BAN, 1965).p.141; A. Protich, Arbanashkata Kushta [ Arbanasi house] Godishnik na Narodnia Muzei Sofia, No 3 ( 1922).p.55, fig. 37; L. Zaharieva, Srednovekovni Boliarski Jilishta of Vtorat a Bulgarska Durjava [Medieval boyars houses from the Second Bulgarian Empire] in Izsledvania vurhu arhitekturata na bulgarskoto srednovekovie ( Sofia: BAN, 1982) pp. 205-6

PAGE 183

183 Urban Social and Institutional Topography The late me dieval town in Bulgaria, as well as in Byzantium, just like its Western European counterparts, does not display any dis tinctive social order from its environment. Its social structure consisted of the same elements as that of the country, though in different proportions.There are landow ners and merchants, pronoia holders and paroikoi artisans and peasants, monasteries and churches, wealthy dynatoi and a large number of people belonging to the middle ( mezoi ) and lower classes ( mikroi ). It was a community headed by a clerical leader, (bishop) and/or by political ruler ( kephale ), appointed by the central power, and dominated by a small group of aristocratic families. Although the power was concentrated in few aristocratic hands, there are no signs within urban social arena of any spatial sepa ration between social classes in terms of the zones of the city in wh ich they lived. Palaces and luxurious houses, which must certainly have belonged to powerful people and represented major financial investments, were built next to common houses and workshops. The social structure of the late medieval Bulgarian town did not differ much from that of the Italian and Dalmatian cities in terms of concentration of landowners and wealthy people. While during the second half of the thirteenth cen tury Tuscan towns witnessed the rise to power of the corporation of Popolo (the corporation of largely middleclass artisans and merchants), as the fourteenth century progressed the urban patr ician households, as demonstrated by Florentine Catasto of 1427, re-asserted their dominance. At the time of the Catasto more than half of the rents collected in Tuscany, most of which represented returns from agricultural holdings, were concentrated in the city of Florence.191 Dubrovnik (Ragusa), during the same period was 191 David Herlihy, Distribution of Wealth in a Renaissanc e Community: Florence, 1427 in Philip Abrams and E. A. Wrigley, eds., Towns in Societies: Essays in Economic History and Historical Sociology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978), pp. 131-157.

PAGE 184

184 dominated by the same patrician democracy, in which aristocratic hierarchy reflected the economic power of noble families.192 The only difference in social terms, noticeable between Dubrovnik and fourteenth century Thessalonike wa s that regarding the political leadership of both towns. While the patrician council of Dubrovni k had the sovereignty to elect its own ruler, the patrician council of Thessaloni ke had to accept as their ruler the appointee of the emperor.193 Finally, and perhaps quite surprisingly for th e advocates of the agricultural character of the late Bulgarian and Byzantine town, the archaeological da ta from the fortresses of Turnovo (Tzarevets), Cherven, Lovech, and Shumen display predominance of artisanship over the agricultural activities. In general, the agricultural finds of plowshares and sickles are far less in comparison with the other artisan tools. In Tsarevets, within 480 private dwellings were discovered only 11 plowshares and 22 sickles.194 In Cherven, plowshares were not discovered at all, while the sickles are only two.195 In Lovetch, only two plowshares and one sickle were found.196 Given the history of all four towns, the ar chaeological finds from Shumen, perhaps, are the most instructive for the urban material life due to the abrupt break of the life within the fortress at the time of the Ottoman conquest, whil e the other three towns endured, more or less, an organized abandonment of thei r fortresses. Unlike the other three towns, Shumen was not an episcopal, i.e. significant administrative center an d could be taken as a ty pically provincial town 192 B. Kreki Dubrovnik in the 14th andn 15th centuries. A city between East and West (Norman, University of Oklahoma Press, 1971), p. 39. 193 Nevra Necipolglu, The Aristocracy in Late Byzantine Thessalonike: A Case Study of the Citys Archontes in Dumbarton Oaks Papers No 57. Symposium on Late Byzantine Thessalonike (Washington: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 2004), pp. 134-151. 194 According to the inventory books of Archaeological Museum of Veliko Turnovo and Archaeological Institute with Museum, Sofia V. Turnovo division 195 V. Dimova, Srednovekovniat Cherven, pp 64-6 ; Y. Nikolova, Zhilishteto v Turn ovo prez XIIXIV vek. pp. 208-211 196 J. Changova, Lovetch p. 133

PAGE 185

185 with population of 1,500-2,000. Within the 123 examined buildings of the fortress archaeologists found 9 plowshares and 18 sickles, and no less than 9 furnaces and 6 kilns have so far have been identified within the fortress.197 Moreover, Shumen produced 41 quern-stones and 81 hutchspatulas198 all of which are a strong ar gument against the idea of an agricultural town. An overwhelming majority of households in Shume n, in which bread was prepared every day, did not produce grain. The number of household utensils found in Shumen also bespeak the nonagricultural character of the town: 91 9 knifes, 50 flints and 35 scissors.199 Horizontal Social Structures The prim acy of the state in Byzantium and Bulgaria had formative capacity for shaping their social structure. Unlike European West, wh ere the departure from antiquity was carried out in the context of weak or often absent central po wer and resulted in strong social vertical ties, exemplified most clearly through the hierarchy of dependency existing between lord and vassal, the societies of the Byzantine World were cons tructed by a horizontal network of social relations, in the center of which stayed the household (oikos ) of a nuclear family.200 A good sample of East-West social differences is offered by Kazhdans comparison between the monastic orders in the West and the monastic alliances in Orthodox society, as manifested by the monastic republic of the Athonite monasteries. Wh ile the monastic orders replicated the strict, 197 V. Antonova, Shumen and Shumenskata Krepost. pp. 84-85; 102-103 198 Ibid. 199 Ibid. 200 The use of term Orthodox here is not arbitrarily, but designates the social difference between Byzantinetype and Westerntype societies concentrated and intensified in the different theological interpretation of the hierarchical structure of the Holy Trinity. While the interpretation of Rome denotes Holy Trinity as a vertical order,( Filioque ), the Orthodox interpretation of the Nicene creed rejects any notion of vertical structure. According to the Orthodox theologians, both Son and Holy Spirit originate from the Fa ther; The Roman interpretation considers Holy Spirit as a faculty of the Son and only indirectly connected to the Father. For details see A. Kazhdan and G. Constable, People and Power in Byzantium ( Dumbarton Oaks Center for Byzantine Studies, 1982),pp. 26;29-30; 93-95

PAGE 186

186 military type of subordination, the monastic institutions in Athonite republic consisted of units independent of and often competing with each other.201 The oikos in the Byzantine World became a fund amental metaphor for the relationship between God and humankind, between the emperor and his subjects and between emperor and the other rulers, between the lord and paroikoi (literary those who lived beside the house) established on his estate, and between spiritual fathers and moth ers and monastic brothers and sisters. The terminology of oikos denoting its harmonious family relations was extended and patterned over the vo cabulary of the fiscal administra tion, diplomacy, and socio-property relations. Sympatheia (sympathy) was a term for a type of tax exoneration; pronoia (providential care) denoted the parental care of the emperor for his people, through a gi ft given under certain conditions. Philia (love) was a term used not only as de signating friendship but also for an alliance between states.202 The only legitimate sovereign/ father of the Christian world, the emperor in Constantinople, headed a hierarchy of the international rulers family in which the English King was only his friend, the Bulgar ian one his son, the Russian his nephew and Charlemagne grudgingly granted the position of a brother.203 The oikos has a central analytical importance for understanding the structure of social tissue not only of Byzantium, but also of Bu lgaria. The pronounced difference between the Greek nuclear family and the Slavic extended and many-linear family, based on the demographic calculations of A. Laiou for the fourteen th century Macedonia, is overestimated.204 In both 201 A. Kazhdan and G. Constable, People and Power in Byzantium p.33-34 202 Kazhdan and Constable, People andn Power p. 28 203 Ioanis Karaianopolus, Politicheskata teoria na Vizantia [Political theory of Byzantium] (Sofia, Clement Ohridski University Press. 1992).pp. 16-27. 204 A. Kazhdan and G. Constable, People and Power in Byzantium p. 33; A. Laiou, Peasant Society in the Late Byzantine Empire ( Princeton: Princeton UP, 1977).pp. 80-81.

PAGE 187

187 compared groups, the families from the thema of Thessalonike, considered (arbitrarily) Greeks and those from the thema of Strymon, considered (arbitrari ly, again) Slavic, the dominant model is that of the nuclear family. The s light prevalence of 10-12 percent of the Slavic laterally extended families over the Greek laterally extended families cannot be a proof for qualitatively different family structures. Indee d, Kazhdans proposal might be valid for the early medieval era of the First Bulgarian Kingdom, wh en the clan was the dominant social form, for both proto-Bulgarians and Slavs. However, af ter the Christianization and the subsequent adoption of Byzantine theological an d political ideals in Bulgaria (9th -10th centuries) and, especially, after almost two cen turies of direct imposition of the Byzantine socio-economic model there, (11th -12th centuries) the differen ces between Bulgarians a nd Greeks were only in terms of language, ethnic awareness, and politics. The identical inheritance practices, defined by identical legal codifications in Bulgaria and in Byzantium and, finally, the size and distribution of the house living space, as demons trated above both in town and country, are secure proofs that the dominant family type in Bulgaria was the nuclear family. Therefore, it is safe to assume the same central importance of the household meta phor for both Bulgarian and Byzantine social structures. Summarising the twelfth-century Western Eu ropean impressions and beliefs expressed by Walter Map, M. Angold is surely right in his statement that what se t the Byzantine emperor apart from Western monarchs was his access to ready cash.205 The effective use of cadastral records made the taxation in Byzantium a powerful instrument of contro l over provincial society that distinguished it from its counterparts in the West. Be yond that, however, there was little control over the provincial societ y it was left to its own de vices. This social construction 205 M. Angold, Book Review of Leonora Neville. Authority in Byzantine Provincial Society, 950100. The American historical review. 110, no. 2, (2005): p. 535.

PAGE 188

188 resulted in a significant gap between the theologically constructed, metaphysical, and incomprehensible central authority and its subjects, which was compensated by developing of pervasive network of horizontal relationships, forming associati ons and hierarchies between the oikoi : village and town communities, monastic institutions, heretical sects, confraternities, professional organizations, friendships and spiritua l kinships. However, just like the faculties of the larger social struct ure, those associations lacked vertical structur es beyond the household (or quasi-household) relationships. In cer tain aspects, the centrality of oikos metaphor fostered the individualism and atomization of Orthodox soci eties, (although, certain ly not in the degree implied by Kazhdan), especially perceivable in pr ivatization of religious practices. On the other hand, however, the dominance of the horizontal interoikos ties over vertical class relations resulted in an easy integration between the public and the private, in which, often, women acted as household heads, either because they were widows or because their husbands were absent. The resulting gender integration, ho wever, was neither limited to equal inheritance rights nor to people of higher social status. The spectrum of gender integration ranged from the female members of the Confraternity of Thebes,206 (a towns male club of mezoi ) to samples of formidable aristocratic ladies that held togeth er their family and guided their fortunes and made the Byzantine society so prominent for its gender tolerance.207 Leonora Neville, on the basis of the etymological meaning of paroikoi, (those, who lived beside the house) proposed that the relation between a holder of tax privileges ( pronoia ) and paroikoi was a relationship between two houses, not between two classes.208 It is well 206 John W. Nesbitt and J. Wiitta, A confraternity of the Comnenian era Byzantinische Zeitschrift No 68 (1975),pp. 360-384. 207 Steven Runciman, Women in By zantine Aristocratic Society in Byzantine Aristocracy IX to XIII Centuries ed. by M. Angold (Oxford, B.A.R 1984),pp. 10-22. 208 L. Neville, Authority on Byzantine Provincial Society, 950-1100 (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2004),p.77.

PAGE 189

189 known nowadays that the labor for ce fiscally subordinated to a pronoia was not an individual, a paroikos, but an entire oikos the basic tax-paying unit, whos e taxes and corve amount were defined by the state according to its immovable and movable property. The dependency of a household was clearly fiscal and not individual: the basi c tax-paying unit, oikos was only fiscally obliged to the pronoia. Its head, the oikodespotes was free to live wherever he wanted as long as the fiscal obligations of the oikoi were met. The rest of the family members were free of obligations both fiscally and individually. The existence of pronoia paroikoi relations in the town is hardly a surprise for Byzantine economic historians. Its interpretation by Ma rxist historians, howev er, as a sign of a predominantly agricultural character of the late Byzantine city demonstrates weak explanatory power. It renders the existence of paroikoi in the town to the underdeveloped process of labor separation and, thus, to an agricu ltural predominance to urban economy or to the lack of urbanity at all. The charter of Stefan Duan to the mona stery of St. Gabriel of Lesnovo lists the names of 50 heads of households from the town of tip with their pr operties granted to the monastery as paroikoi .209 The charter of Duan to the Chilandar monastery of 1348, mentions a certain Bale the Armenian from the town of Strumica, who was granted to the monastery.210 Another town resident, George Luker from Serres, with his home and possessions was granted by a charter to the monastery of St. Panteleimon.211 Although the charters do not sp ecify the profession of the granted paroikoi six of the surnames, mentioned in the charter of St. Gabriel monastery suggest 209 Stoyan Novakovi Zakonski spomenici Srpskih Drjava Srednega Veka [ Legal documents of the Serbian state during the Middle Ages] (Belgrade: Drz avnoj s tampariji, 1912),p.678 210 Stoyan Novakovi Zakonski spomenici. p. 404 211 Ibid. p. 508

PAGE 190

190 that these were craftsmen.212 Similarly, other samples implying that pronoia paroikoi relations were not limited to agriculture are well known fr om the sources. However, Marxist historians, by examining the relation between pronoia and paroikoi in its limited class context of its substitutes, dynatoi village community attempt nothing less than to adjust the Byzantine socioeconomic model to the aristocracypeasantry class relation of Western feudal society.213 This outcome is hardly surprising given that pronoia paroikoi relations outside agriculture are beyond the analytical reach of the labor division category. Instead, the flexibility of oikos metaphor offers much better understanding not only for Byzan tine urban socio-property relations, but also for town-country relations in th e Byzantine Empire and in Bulg aria, as well as for the ongoing debate of town-country re lations in general. The analytical importance of the oikos metaphor, however, has been already proven in Byzantine historiography.214 Further, Leonora Neville explained the centrality of the oikos category as surpassing the centrality of class and its substitute categories, estate and village community, for understanding the social structure of the Byzantine Empire.215 Yet, as Paul Magdalino warns, the importance of horizontal stratification of oikos should be taken into 212 Ibid. p. 392 213 G. Tsankova-Petkova, Za Agrarnite Otnoshenia v Srednovekovna Bulgaria [ About the agrarian relations in medieval Bulgaria] ( Sofia: BAN, 1964); C. Lishev, Za Stokovoto Proizvodstvo vuv Feodalna Bulgaria [About industrial production in feudal Bulgar ia] ( Sofia: BAN, 1957).p p. 88-112; A.P.Kazhdan,Recenzia Vurhu Knigata na S. Lishev, Za Stokovoto Proizvodstvo na Feodalna Bulgaria [Book review of S. Lishev, About industrial production in feudal Bulgaria] in Srednye Veka Vol 13( 1958).p. 128.; L.Gorina, Voprosy SocialnoEkonomicheskogo Razvitia Vtorogo Bolgarskogo Tzarstva v Sovremennoi Bolgarskoi Isotriografii[Questions about the socio-economic development of the Second Bulg arian Empire in contemporary Bulgarian literature] in Slavjanska Istoriografia (1961).p. 104; B.T. Gorianov, Pozdnevizantiiskii Feudalism [The Late Byzantine Feudalism] ( Moscow: AN SSSR, 1962); M. Siuziumov: Borba za Puti Razvitia Fe odalnyih Otnoshenia v Vuzantii [Struggle for development of feudalism in Byzantium] in Idem, Vizantiiskie Etiudyi ( Ekaterinburg: Izdatelstvo Uralskogo Universiteta 2002).pp.305-326 214 A. Kazhdan and G. Constable, People and Power in Byzantium; P.Magdalino The Byzantine Aristocratic Oikos in The Byzantine Aristocracy, IX to XIII Centuries ed. by M. Angold ( Oxford: B.A.R., 1984),pp.92-111; 215 L. Neville, Authority on Byzantine Provincial Society, 950-1100 (Cambridge, Cambridge UP, 2004),pp. 67-71.

PAGE 191

191 consideration very carefully and always extra polated on the background of class-relations, even for the Byzantine World, vigorously re sisting any social classification. There was neither nobility within the Byzan tine Empire, nor some other social class besides the slaves that had legal definition of its status. The only existing classification of people was regarding their movable and unmovable properties: real esta te, land, and draft animals. The notion of aristocracy in Byzantine texts, therefore, was not connect ed to high birth, but rather to a position of trust in imperial service, a notion quite close to the modern understanding of meritocracy. What could be considered a ristocracy, therefore in Byzantium, as well as in Bulgaria, was a group of people, who, in one form or another, was paid by the government, either through the system of im perial salaries or through its m odified version, the system of privileges,(pronoia system). The social composition of aristocracy was extremely heterogeneous, given that pronoia was an economic award and not a prom otion of the social status of the grantee. The holders of pronoia represented a wide social sp ectrum, ranging from members of the imperial family and foreign mercenaries, to people from the lowest ranks of society.216 Pronoia holders often acted as paroikoi of monasteries or tenants of wealthier landowners. Quite often local peasants were entrus ted with state strategic tasks, (as those recruited by Manuel I for guarding provincial fortresses and mountain passes) in exchange for tax exemptions, which, in fact, made them, pronoia holders, i.e. aristocracy.217 At the first glance, the Byzantine aristocracy fits into the classical Western notion of aristo cracy as a landowning hereditary group that monopolizes the links with the central power. Quite cont rary to the Western model, however, the Byzantine aristocracy wa s a function of the state, its executive officers, and had the 216 Jacques Lefort, The Rural Economy, Seventh to Twelfth Centuries pg. 237; P. Lemerle, The Agrarian History of Byzantium (Galway: Galway University Press, 1979).p.143 217 See footnote 63 above and footnote 98 of Chapter II.

PAGE 192

192 characteristics not of a hereditary, but of a co rporate group, which had the ability to absorb new men and lacked the rigid and inaccessible structures of personal dependencie s in existence in the West. On the other hand, however, this loose vertic al structure seems to create a certain blockage for the proper function of the social institutions Michael Choniates was a ppalled by the lack of order in the assembling of the archontes of Khalkis on the island of Euboea: One sees Celts, Germans and Italians assembling in an orderly fa shion and debating with a sense of decorum, but as for the Byzantines, they get infuriated at the slightest pretext and reduce any meeting called for the common good into shambles.218 Byzantine sources normally designate the aris tocracy by such interchangeable usage of the terms, as archontes (rulers) and dynatoi (powerful). The semantic difference between de jure and de facto exercising of power by archontes and dynatoi was certainly obliterated in theory by the chrysobull of Romanos Lakapenos of 922, in which the dynatos was presented in terms of the capacity to exercise influence upon others and in practice by the sale of life-tenured administrative posts and titles of honor.219 However, by introducing the order of sebastoi (Augusti), in which the command positions were re served for the members of the ruling dynasty, the political style of the Comnenians changed th e political ideal from meritocracy into an aristocracy bond by blood ties, clearly reflec ted through the growing use and abuse of aristocratic surnames. It also practically monopolized the central and provincial governorships. Below them came the second rank of bureaucracy, to which the old aristocratic families found themselves restricted. Accordingly, the Comnen ian administrative model became the model in 218 Michael Choniates, Michael Akominatou tou Choniatou ta Szmena ed. By Sp. Lambros Vol.1 ( Athens: n.p., 1979).p. 183 219 N. Oikonomides, The role of the Byzantine State in Economy in The Economic History of Byzantium, from the Seventh to the Fifteenth Centuries (Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 2005).pp. 1026-1030.

PAGE 193

193 Bulgaria too, where the road to highest admini strative posts went excl usively through blood or marital relationships with the ruling Asen dyna sty, which, thus, secured its power during the entire period of the Second Bulgarian Empire.220 The Comnenian political model, the fall of Constantinople in 1204, and the decreasing authority of the central power that followed, on one hand, catalyzed the traditional distinction between public and private aspects of imperial power and, on the other hand, fostered the sense of family independence of dynatoi The Byzantine aristocrat in the post-Comnenian period, thus, was a public figure valuing his priv acy above all. Accordingly, this dual, self-centered and statecentered social orientation of dynatoi determined the ambivalent role of urban communities, dominated by dynatoi to act as both intermediary for a nd counterbalance to the state. Although the domination of one or the ot her inclination was gr eatly depending on the dynamics of intraand interoikos configurations, it would be quite misleading if the urban communal life have to be examined outside its class dimensions. Vertical Social Structures Aside fr om the strictly military and fiscal tasks, imperial auth ority had little interest in regulating provincial society, thus, leaving it fluid and with consid erable autonomy to manage its daily life. Byzantine emperors di d uphold the Justinianic ideal of imperial building through their role in fortifying the towns, but they paid l ittle attention to civil amenities. Aside from fortifications, civil projects such as bridges or monastic foundations we re undertaken through the initiative of individual households for their own benefit. Imperial admini stration did not interfere with the organic growth of medieval town fabric either and the use of space in towns as well as 220 For the genealogy of Asen dynasty see I. Bojilov, Familiata na Asenevci 1186-1460 [Asens Family, 11861460] (Sofia: BAN, 1985).

PAGE 194

194 the regulation of urban life in general seems to have been left to the balance of power between the formal and informal provincial authorities. As an appointee of the central power and as resemblance of the solitary emperors authority, a governor of a town ( kephale ) was a fairly remote and alie n figure, isolated spatially from the rest of the town within the enclosures of the internal citadel and, socially, due to being an outsider and the short term of his mandate pr eventing him from establishing close ties with the local elite. Despite the authority he represen ted, his duties were confined to maintaining law and order and ensuring tax co llections while his power wa s constantly eroded by the concentration of tax privileged individuals within the town an d by the expansion of communal tax privileges. There is no common agreement among the By zantinists regardi ng another provincial office, the kastrophylax. The appearance of this office in both Byzantium and Bulgaria after 1204 compelled Michael Angold to consider his functions as limitations of kephale authority by sharing his responsibilities, signaling, thus, the growing towns autonomy.221 On the other hand, L. Maksimovi saw the kastrophylax as a mere assistant of the kephale In the administrative centers, the functions of kastrophylax were concentrated on guardi ng the fortress, while in the small rural fortresses, lacking administrative significance and large population, the figure of kastrophylax was the main authority.222 Besides with kastrophylax, the kephale shared his authority with an urban senate ( synkletos ) composed of various numbers of people from the higher ranks of the military, 221 M. Angold, Archons and Dynasts: Local aristocrats and the cities of the later Byzantine Empire in The Byzantine Aristocracy, IX to XIII Centuries ed. by M. Angold.pp. 236-254 222 L. Maksimovi The Byzantine Provincial Administration pp. 175-6.

PAGE 195

195 administrative, and ecclesiastic dynatoi.223 Documents recording urban senates, except those of Constantinople and Thessalonike, however, are extremely rare, but not non-existent. The senate of Edessa, like that of Thessalonike, had 12 members.224 Some information about the urban senate concerns the Byzantine, a nd later Serbian town of Serres, as well as the Bulgarian capital, Turnovo.225 But can this pattern be extrapolated to the other towns? Unfort unately, the available data from the sources are inconclusive. Most like ly, the senate was an informal urban organism, consisting of members vested with the local military, fiscal, and ecclesiastic authority, which exercised some coordinative and advisory function to the kephale, but was not the towns representative and legal body. This is confirmed also by the lack of administrative public buildings other than those of th e towns governorship. The senate was a nexus of official and informal local authorities and it embodied th e communal tax and self -governing privileges, which, as will be discussed furt her, were obtained only by the la rger towns in the course of thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. Therefore, it is hard to believe that the smaller provincial towns, which did not enjoy special treatment by the fisc and, in which the local authority was concentrated in fewer hands, would have needed such a coordinative body. In addition to the towns senate, there was an urban assembly (ecclesia ), which consisted of all residents, but defin itely dominated by the local archontes and dynatoi Like the senate, the ecclesia was not an organ of governing, authorized w ith legislative initiative, but an assembly summoned under some critical occasi ons in the life of the city. All presented at the assembly 223 L. Maksimovi The Byzantine Provincial Administration, pp. 255-271; Costas P. Kyrris, The Byzantine Urban Class between 1204 1341 in Liber Memorialis Antonia Era Studii presentati alla Comissione Internazionale Assemblee di Stato ( Cagliari, 1961),pp. 21-31 224 Costas P. Kyrris, The Byzantine Urban Class, p. 22. 225 G. Ostrogorsky, Sabrana Dela Vol. 1-6 [Collected works] (Belgrade: Prosveta, 1969-70) ,p. 545; A. E. Vakalopoulos, Istoria tos Makedonia, 1354-1833 ( Thessalonike:n.p., 1969),p.19. For the synkletos of Turnovo see S. Bobchev, Istoria na Starobulgarskoto Pravo [History of old Bulgarian legal codes and practices] (Sofia, 1908, reprinted Sofia: Albatros, 1998), pp. 337-340.

PAGE 196

196 could speak and vote freely but it is unlikely that its role wa s anything more than advisory, except during time of social upheaval when the lower classes of the population exercised greater influence. The institutional urban structure and administrative terminology in Bulgarian towns was a mirror of their Byzantine counterparts. Disa ppointed, perhaps, by the constant rivalries for the Bulgarian crown, after the deat h of Ivan II Asen, the peoples assembly of Melnik decided in 1246 to hand over the town to the advancing army of John III Ducas Vatatzes, in exchange for an imperial chrysobull confirming their demands, mo st likely, tax privileges.226 It seems that what Antonio Barberius envisioned in his accountan t book under the communitas of Mesembria and communitas of Emona were, in fact, local peoples assemblies, responsible for paying the heavy reparations imposed by Amadeus VI, Count of Savoy.227 In 1355, the peoples assembly of Turnovo met with exaltation the emissaries of Cantacuzene seeking military alliance against the rising Ottoman threat.228 Yet the agreement reached between Ivan Alexander and John Cantacuzene, under the pressure of the citizen s of Turnovo, was never put into practice. The interoikoi ties affected the communal life both formally by the intimidating power of the dynatos over the mezoi and mikroi in the peoples assembly a nd, informally, as Gregoras tells us, in their town homes where they talked until late at night on political matters enacting and forming plots, plans, policies, and conspiracies.229 All those who excelled in political power and glory and directed the imperial affairs, as Gregoras describes the dynatoi, were the 226 George Acropolites, Historia ed. A. Heisenberg, Georgii Acropolitae Opera Vol.1 and 2. (Lipsiae: In aedibus B.G. Teubneri, 1903), pp.22; 72-76; also in Grucki Izvori za Bulgarskata Istorija (GIBI) [Greek Sources for the Bulgarian History] Vol. 8 ed. by M. Voinov, L. Jonchev, V. Tupkova-Zaimova. (Sofia: BAN, 1972). pp. 172-3; Fr. Dlger, Regesten der Kaiserurkunden des Ostrmischen Reiches von 565-1453 Vol.1-4 (Munich Berlin: Oldenbourg, 1924-65). Vol. III, p.21 No 1789. 227 L. Gorina, Materialyi Dnevnika Antona Barberi po Istorii Bolgarii I Vizantii [Materials of the book of A. Barberius for the history of Bulgaria and Byzantium] in Byzantinobulgarica No 4 ( 1973). pp. 229-251. 228 V. Zlatarski, Jitieto na Sv. Teodosia [Life of St. Theodosius] in Sbornik na NU Vol XX (1904).pp. 25-26. 229 Nicephorus Gregoras, XII, ch. 13: II, p.619

PAGE 197

197 political class, through whose hands, according to Eu stathius of Thessalonike, all public affairs passed, as well as private, for it is their own self -interest, which normally makes them take care for the common good. Thousands frequent them at all hours over all manner of business: marriages, commerce, and every co nceivable kind of transaction.230 The traditional alienation of the central power from the daily life of the provincial towns, determined by the limitation of the power of kephale within the sphere of law and taxes left most of the regular activities in the hands of the local town patriciate, which thus became more or less a permanent political class. From this political class emerged the dynasts studied by M. Angold.231 They were informal leaders of the dynatoi, capable of dominating and handling internal political and economic ri valries, but also of protectin g the towns economic interests from the encroachments of outsiders, most of ten in the person of governmental officials.232 Because of his informal authority, the dynasts activities were rarely recorded in Byzantine sources. Kekaumenos mentions, certain Noah, the dynast of the Thessalian port of Demetrias.233 The port of Raidestos, on the Marmara seacoast, was in the hands of a dynast from the powerful Vatatzes family.234 At the end of the fourteenth centur y, Paul Mamonas was a second-generation dynast in Monemvasia.235 As for Bulgaria, certain indications in the sources suggest that the role of the dynast was played by the ban. The term (a Slavic calque fr om Hungarian) is absent from 230 Eustathii Metropolitae Thessalonicensis, Opiscula ed by T .L .F. Tafel (Frankfu rt am Main, repr. Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1964).p.92 231 M. Angold, Archons and Dynasts: Local aristocrats and the cities of the later Byzantine Empire in The Byzantine Aristocracy, IX to XIII Centuries, ed by M. Angold, pp. 236-254 232 Angold, Archonts and Dynasts. 233 Kekaumenos, Strategicon, in Sovety i rasskazy Kekavmena ed. G. Litavrin (Moscow: AN SSSR, 1972).p.34 234 Ioannes Skylitzes, Synopsis Historiarum ed I. Thurn ( Berlin-New York: De Gruyter, 1973).p.343 235 Georgios Sphrantzes, Memorii, 1401-1477, ed. V. Grecu (Bucharest: Editura Academiei Republicii Socialiste Roma nia 1966).pp. 6;198.

PAGE 198

198 the official administrative terminology of the S econd Bulgarian Empire, but its appearance in the sources seems to indicate the informal and spontan eous leadership of urban militias resisting the Ottoman invaders, as in the case of ban Yanuka of Sofia and ban Velio of Tzepena.236 Yet the information about the emergence and the social role of the ban available in our sources is not sufficient for describing in more detailed manner its attributions. The appearance of the dynast however, should not be mistaken for some challenge to imperial sovereignty. Instead, dynasts acted as members of an informal network of power underlying the administrative system and guarant eeing that no one of the rival inter-town oikoi constellations would rise to prom inence. Although lacking legal basis, in times of political chaos the power of the dynasts became the gravitating force around which communal life was organized against invaders. In th e post-Comnenian period of disi ntegration of th e central power into series of imperial agents competing for the provincial revenues, many of the towns were practically ruled by their dynasts and/or bishops.237 Quite illuminating for the status of the dynast within the urban political structure is the text of Pactum Adrianopolitanum between the Venetian podest of Constantinople and represen tatives of the city of Adri anople in the spring of 1206.238 According to the document, the Latin conquerors recognized the rights of the Adrianopolitan archontes and the autonomy of the city under its capitaneus Theodore Branas in exchange of military service for the 500 horsemen. Although is not quite clear, what Byzantine title was 236 Husein, Beday ul-vekai [ Astonishing events] ed. by A. S. Tveritinov oi Vol. 1 ( Moscow: Izdatelstvo vostochnoi liteartury, 1961).p. 76; Seaddedin, Chronica dellorigine e progresse della casa ottomana ( Vienna: Appresso M. Riccio, 1649).p. 124; St. Shishkov, Bulgaromohamedani [Bulgarian Muslims] (Plovdiv: Turgovska pechatnitsa, 1936).p.66; 237 J. Hoffman, Rudimente von Territorialstaaten im byzantinischen Reich, 1071-1210 (Munich: Institut fu r Byzantinistik und Neugriechische Philologie der Universita t, 1974),pp. 47-60; 90-96; J. Herrin, Realities of Byzantine Provincial Government: Hellas and Peloponnesos, 1180-1205. Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 29. (1975), pp. 253-284. 238 G. L. F. Tafel and G. M. Thomas, Urkunden zur ltern Handels und Staatsgeschichte der Republik Venedig Vol II. ( Vienna: Hofund Staatsdruckerei, 1856-1857), pp. 17-19

PAGE 199

199 translated as capitaneus the clearly informal character of Branas authority suggests that he might have been a dynast It should be kept in mind, however that Branas power was limited by his fellow archontes of Adrianopol, who were his equals in the negotiations with the Latins. Branas was accompanied by Michael Kostomoires, a representative of the archontes, whom the document calls the noble inhabitants of the land.239 Pactum Adrianopolitanum also opens the question of whether the Latins im posed western notions on Byzantine society or if they simply confirmed already existing conditions. Some light on the problem is shed by the cross-reference between Choniates History and the chronicle of Geoffrey de Villehardouin.240 Both authors reveal that negotiations between the Latins and the towns of Adrianople, as well of Didymoteichon, were the result of long political maneuvering of the Byzantine notables of the Thracian towns between the new Latin master s of Constantinople a nd the Bulgarian ruler Kaloyan (1197-1207). Choniates reports that after the fall of Constantinople, the dynatoi of Thracian towns, whom both the Boniface of Mont ferrat and Baldwin of Flanders had rejected, decided to offer their services to Kaloyan. What were the terms on which Kaloyan accepted such services is not at all clear, but they were presumably not much different from those presented in the Pactum Adrianopolitanum : confirming the rights of the urba n patriciate in exchange for military support. The course of the events in the spring of 1205 reveals that among the Thracian towns siding with Kaloyan were Vyzie, Tzouroulos and Arkadiopolis.241 Encouraged by the cooperation of the Thracian towns, which made no lit tle contribution to his de feat of the Latins at Adrianople in May 1205, Kaloyan then moved towards the towns of the region of Thessalonike 239 Ibid, pp. 17-19 240 Geoffroi de Villehardouin. La Conqute de Constantinople ed. and transl. in Bulgarian Vs. Nikolaev, (Sofia: n.p. 1947); Nicetae Choniatae Historia. p.335 241 Nicetae Choniatae Historia, p. 336;

PAGE 200

200 in order to persuade them to follow th e example of their Thracian counterparts.242 Choniates evidence suggests, therefore, that relations between the central power and provincial urban communities, as concretized by Pactum Adrianopolitanum, were not based on some new, western norms imported by the Latins, but were part of relatively l ong political tradition, jealously defended by the Byzantine urban political class. Support fo r this claim comes also from the coastal towns of Bay of Kotor, Kotor and Bu dva, which, according to their best investigator, Ilija Sindik, by the time of thei r incorporation into the state of Stefan Nemanja, 1184-6, already enjoyed tax privileges and autonomy, granted by the Byzantine emperor.243 Yet the power of the Adrianopolitan political class led by the local dynast, capable of organizing the impressive military force of 500 horsemen, was limited by the community consensus of all inhabitant s of the town. Although the popular assemblies emphasized the restricted political role of the demos undoubtedly they played an im portant part, especially in times of crisis, in the formation of concrete political decisions and ideologies, as manifested most clearly by the Zealots regime in Thessalonike. Th ere are other examples of the dominant role of the lower classes during times of political turmoil. Thus, after the flight of the Latin knights from Philipopolis in the summer of 1205, the inhabitants of the town installed Alexios Aspietes as their leader (most likely dynast ) to organize the defense of the to wn against the advancing forces of Kaloyan.244 In 1341, the people assembly of Adria nople, dominated and manipulated by the archontes, recognized the imperial di gnity of John Cantacuzene. During the following night, however, the counter-reac tion of the urban commoners mistreated by the dynatoi led by some 242 Ibid,p.338 243 Ilija Sindik, Odnos grada Budve Prema Vladarima iz Dinastie Nemani cha [Relationship between the town of Bidva and the first rulers of the House of Nemanji ] Istoriski Chasopis No 7 (1957) Pp 95-114. 244 Nicetae Choniatae Historia, p. 345

PAGE 201

201 laborer Branos drove the dynatoi out of town. Sweeping local archontes out of town or life was the leitmotif of the movement of the Zealot s in Thessalonike in 1342. Another example of forcible repudiation of the urba n patriciate by commoners is that of Venchan, a small town of northeastern Bulgaria, whose inhabitants took up ar ms against the decision of the local political elite to hand over the town to the Ottomans.245 Similarly in Varna, when noticing the advancing troops under Ali Pasha, the notables in town were r eady to arrest their rule r, Ivanko, and to turn over the power to the Turks in ex change for the security of thei r lives and properties. However, with the help of the commoners, Ivanko elim inated the traitors and saved the city.246 All of above leads to the conclusion that the authority to regu late social behavior in the provincial towns was particularly fluid, informal, and subject to capacity of physical power, wealth, and community consensus and not vested in some legally rec ognized aristocratic social status. However, soon the informal archontic power and community consensus obtained legal recognition. It is not clear whet her the privileges cl aimed by the Thracian townsmen in the political maneuvering between Kaloyan and the Latin s were just customary rights or privileges, legally ratified by former imperial chrysobulls. Ho wever, it seems that the imperial chrysobulls, which were granted to significant numbers of towns in the 1250s was the price demanded for their return to Byzantine aut hority after 1261. Thus, the special rights and privileges of Thessalonians, which the Latins confirmed in 1205-6, were confirmed one more time by John III Vatatzes in 1246.247 The situation was similar in all towns of Thrace, Macedonia, and Greece, 245 Husein, Beday ul-vekai pp. 189-191. 246 Ibid. 247 George Acropolites, Historia, ed. A. Heisenberg, Georgii Acropolitae Opera Vol.12. (Lipsiae: In aedibus B.G. Teubneri, 1903), Vol. 1, pp. 78; 80., also in Grucki Izvori za Bulgarskata Istorija (GIBI) [Greek Sources for the Bulgarian History] Vol. 8 ed. by M. Voinov, L. Ionchev, V. Tupkova-Zaimova. (Sofia: BAN, 1972), pp. 173-175.

PAGE 202

202 which joined the Nicaean realm.248 Later, in 1262, Monemvasia received a chrysobull, exempting its inhabitants from land taxes and kommerkion (market taxes). The privileges of Monemvasia were then confirmed and expande d further by successive Byzantine emperors and despots of Morea. 249 The content and sphere of privileges granted to towns is well illustrated in the case of Athens, where the emperors representativethe praetor did not even have the right to collect taxes or exerci se ordinary jurisdiction.250 However, the most detailed town charter, the chrysobull granted to Ioanina (Janina) by Androni cus II in 1319, reveals a spectrum of rights and privileges that very few towns of We stern Europe enjoyed at that time.251 The initial charter granted to the town of Kruje (K roia) did not survive, but the to wns privileges are known from the Golden Bull of Alfonso V of Aragn, issued in 1457, which confirmed the privileges granted before by Andronicus III and Stefan Duan.252 With the increasing importance of towns, the practice of reasserti ng and expanding previously exis ting privileges and rights by rival sovereigns seems to have become a traditi onal policy in the late medieval Balkans. Unfortunately, there are no surviving Bulg arian documents recording privileges and rights of urban communities. Some indications in the Bulgarian copy of the Mining Law of Novo Brdo and the Rila Charter of Ivan Shishman, point to th e legal recognition of communal ownership and as such suggest the existence of urban communities as legal subjects. However, 248 F. Dlger, Regesten der Kaiserurkunden des Ostrmischen Reiches von 565-1453 Vol.1-4 (Munich: Oldenbourg, 1924-65).Nrs 1788, 1789, 1852. 249 Miklosich Mller, Acta et diplomata graeca medii aevi sacra et profana. Vols 1-6 (Vienna: Scientia Verlag, 1860-1892). Vol V. pp. 154-55. 250 G.Stadtmller Michael Choniates, Metropolit von Athen (c.1138-c.1222) (Vatican City: Pont. Institutum Orientalium Studiorum, 1934).p.162 251 L. Maksimovi The Byzantine Provincial Administration under Palaiologoi ( Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1988).pp. 258-259. 252 A. Solovjev and V. Moshin, Grcke Povelie Srpskih Vladara, p. 41.

PAGE 203

203 there is nothing like the Byzantine imperial chrys obulls granting communal tax privileges or Article 137 of the Stefan Duans law code, stati ng that every town has its own chrysobull for the enfranchisements and duties of its inhabitants.253 However, the efforts of Kaloyan to include the rich Thracian towns in his realm, the following incorporation of these towns in the Second Bulgarian Empire by Ivan II Asen, and th e drive of the rulers in Turnovo towards the towns of Thrace and Black Sea coast that shaped their policy in the course of the fourteenth century suggest that the silence of the sources is not sufficient proof for the lack of town privileges in Bulgaria. If, at the time of Kaloyan, the Thracian and Macedonian towns had to be persuaded to accept him as a supreme ruler, most likely, that was the modus operandi for other neighboring towns. Presumably, as part of the Byzantine cultural model, Bulgaria, just like Serbia, had adopted the Byzantine model of re lations between the cen tral power and its provincial towns. There are very few Byzantine documents revealing the sources of archontic wealth as a basis for their political power. Despite the incompatibility established by law between highranking office status and involvement in business,254 in the course of and after the twelfth century the massive purchase of dignities by wealthy individuals without corresponding obligation to discharge admini strative functions signals the gradual involvement of the aristocracy in commerce. Archontic revenues are illustrated by the description of the properties of Goudeles Tyrannos, an archon of Nymphaion, Asia Minor. It is not known what kind of compensation Tyrannos received for his imperial se rvice in the town, but a cross-reference with the salaries paid by the Venetian government to the notables of Thessalonike in 1425 suggests 253 St. Novakovi Zakonnik Stefana Dusana Tzara Srpskog 1349 i 1354 Article 137 254 Basilika [Basilics] ed. by I.D. Zepos ( Athens: ek tou typographeiou te s palingenesias Io ann. Angelopoulou, 1896-1900), 6.1.123.

PAGE 204

204 that the main income of dynatoi came from outside their administrative engagements.255 In 1294, Tyrannos possessed agricultural es tates outside the city and a considerable amount of house property within the city, some of which he mortgaged for 420 hyperpyra.256 He also owned a share of perfumery, four workshops selling cloth and a tower containi ng a bakery that was bringing him the amount of 200 hyperpyra.257 Similar is the distribut ion of income for the archontes in Thessalonike at the end of the fourteenth century. Most of them, in addition to land revenues and office salaries, were engaged in banking and trade.258 The information that could be put together from various sources regarding the economic activities of the Bulgar ian aristocracy suggests that the political sepa ratism of the Dobrudjan despotate and of the Bdin Principality was in fact a function of specialization of these regions in producing particular goods and of the regionaliza tion of their trade with specific international partners. The political separatism of the Dobrudjan despotate rose in parallel to the growth of money circulation within its towns, as demonstr ated by the finds in Karvuna and Provat-Ovech, a fact, undoubtedly, rooted in the increasing involvement of the local archontes in grain trade with the Italian city-states.259 It seems that the wealth they derived from their business activities was substantial enough to challeng e the supremacy of Turnovo. The development of the Bdin Principality can be explained in similar terms. The political aspirations of its ruler, Ivan255 Nevra Necipo lu, The Aristocracy in Late Byzantine Thessaloni ke: A Case Study of the Citys Archontes, in Alice-Marry Talbot ed. Symposium on Late Byzantine Thessalonike (Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 2004).pp. 133-151 256 Miklosich Mller, Acta et diplomata graeca medii aevi sacra et profana. Vols 1-6 (Vienna: Scientia Verlag, 1860-1892). Vol. VI., pp. 285-7. 257 Ibid. 258 Nevra Necipo lu, The Aristocracy in Late Byzantine Thessalonike 259 The Treaty of Ivanko, despot of Dobrudja with Genoa in Iv. Dujcev, Iz Starata Bulgarska Knijnina [Old Bulgarian literature] Vol. II, pp. 137-138; for the money circulation in Karvuna and Ovech see also Template 1.

PAGE 205

205 Sracimir, stemmed from a signi ficant amount of grain, fur, wax, and iron, produced in the country, and from the trade activities of Bd ins townsmen with Walachia, Dubrovnik, and Hungary.260 The regular business involvement of the Bulgarian aristocracy is signaled by the personal involvement of the Bulgarian emperor Ivan Alexander in trade with Dubrovnik. In 1362, through his middleman Petrucio de Barlet to, the Bulgarian emperor exported a certain amount of grain to Dubrovnik, part of the profit fo r the sale of which he reinvested in buying 425 kg. of wax.261 The purchase of wax by the ru ler of a country famous for its export of wax reveals the purely business venture of Ivan Alexander. At the same time, as Francesco Pegolotti asserts, the wax from Zagora ( cera Zagora i.e. Bulgaria) had the hi ghest quality and price on the international market. Ivan Alexander must have taken advantage from the price difference of one ducat per pound, presenting the wax of Dubrovnik ( cera Raougia ) as wax of Bulgaria ( cera Zagora ).262 Similarly astute was the governor of Mesembria, Kaloyan, who was engaged in trade with grain. In 1361, the kephale of Mesembria, a town famous for exporting grain, purchased in Chilia 157 modioi of wheat ( about 38, 600 kg), whic h had to be transported with the assistance of a certain Genoese, named Ant onio de Finalle either to Mesembria or to Sozopolis or Agathopolis, most likely, for re-export.263 No surprise that five years later, the 260 Str. Lishev, Bulgarskiat Srednovekoven Grad pp. 131-136. 261 Libri Reformationum, III, Monumenta Ragusina ( Zagreb Sumptibus Academiae Scientiarum et Artium, 1895).pp. 156-157. 262 Francesco Balducci Pegolotti, La pratica della mercatura ed. Allan Evans. (Cambridge, Mass.: Mediaeval Academy of America, 1936) p. 293. 263 G. Pistarino, Notai genovesi in Oltremare: Atti rogati a Chilia da Antonio di Ponzo`, 13601 (Genoa: Istituto internazionale di studi liguri, 1971) pp. 62-3.

PAGE 206

206 personal reparations of 2000 hyperpyra imposed by Amadeus VI on the same Kaloyan were paid by the latter in wheat.264 When to these examples of involvement of th e upper class in business activities are added cases revealing the entrepreneurship of the Byzantine emperor John V,265 the question about the social motivations for economic initiative in the Balkans is la rgely solved: Turnovo, Constantinople, Thessalonike, and Dubrovnik di splay the same social and economic model, differing only in its political aspect. Among archontes there were also members of the mi ddle class professions of notaries, money-changers, and trade-agents, some of them, most likely, connected with guild-like associations. The data for Bulgarian trade agen ts are scanty but not absent. A certain Nikola Dosev arrived in 1340 in Dubrovnik, who was said to be a merchant from Bulgaria.266 In 1348, the arrival of another Bulgarian merc hant, Cvetan Draganov, was registered.267 A certain Jacob from Mesembria resided permanently in Cons tantinople, where he was involved in trade.268 A colony of thirteen merchants from Mesembria, Sozopolis, and Varna was registered on the island of Chios at the beginning of the fourteenth centu ry, later joined by a grou p of Jewish merchants also from Bulgaria.269 264 L. Gorina, Materialyi Dnevnika Antona Barberi po Istorii Bolgarii I Vizantii [Materials of the book of A. Barberius for the history of Bulgaria and Byzantium] in Byzantinobulgarica No 4 (1973) pp. 229-251. 265 A. Laiou, Byzantine Economy in Med iterranean Trade System in A. Laiou, Gender, Society and Economic Life in Byzantium ( Norfolk: Variorum, 1992) pp.177-222. 266 I. Sakazov, Stopanskite Vruzki na Bulgaria s Chujbina prez XIVvek, [The economic international relations of Bulgaria during the 14th century] Godishnik na Sofiiskia Universitet Vol. 30, issue No. 7 (1935) pp. 1-100. 267 I. Sakazov, Stopanskite Vruzki na Bulgaria s Chujbina prez XIVvek 268 Ibid 269 Ibid

PAGE 207

207 Quite instructive for the economic power and accumulation of capital among this class are Ottoman documents witnessing the investme nt of substantial am ounts of money for buying off the right of collecting the imperi al taxes on rice in Thrace in 1455.270 Individuals from Philipopolis and Adrianople, both Chri stians and Jews, appear as inve sting in the purchase of the imperial taxes at the impressive price of 2-3 million akes an amount likely to have been accumulated during the pre-Ottoman period.271 Although rarely, pieces of information witnessing the value of transac tions in trade could be found. Such is the case of Theodore Katharos, a trade-agent of the Thessalonian archon John Rhosotas, who attempted to recover his losses of 3, 875 ducats, which he had invested in a single transaction.272 Another source reveals that Kataharos im pressive scale of entrepreneurship was not an isolated case. In 1400, John Goudelis in vested 2,600 hyperpyra in a trading venture in Aegean.273 The economic dominance of the urban politic al class in late Byzantine and Bulgarian town shows striking parallels with the patrician demo cracy of Dubrovnik, where the aristocratic hierarchy reflected th e economic power of the noble families.274 In Mesembria, the reparations imposed by Amadeus VI in 1366 on the towns population clearly reveal the same social structure. While the entire communitas of Mesembria was taxed at 17, 000 hyperpyra, personal reparations of about 50 to100 hyperpyra were imposed on certain dignitaries, according 270 Vera Mutafchieva, Otkupuvaneto na Durjavnite Prihod i v Osmanskata Imperia prez XV-XVII vek i Ravitieto na Parichnite Otnoshenia [Buying off the imperial revenues in the Ottoman Empire, Fifteenth to Seventeenth centuries and the development of the money circulation] Istoricheski Pregled, No 1 (1960).pp. 40-52 271 Vera Mutafchieva, Otkupuvane to na Durjavnite Prihodi. 272 N. Necipo lu, The Aristocracy in Late Byzantine Thessalonike. pp. 133-151. 273 A. Laiou, The Byzantine Economy in the Mediterran ean Trade-System: Thirteen th Fifteenth centuries DOP, No 34/35 (1980/81) pp. 177-222, Addendum. 274 The phrase patrician democracy is that of B. Kreki Dubrovnik in the 14th and 15th centuries. A city between East and West (Norman, University of Oklahoma Press, 1971), p.39

PAGE 208

208 to their economic potential. The governor of the town, Kaloyan, was honored with a special collection of 2,000 hyperpyra.275 The governmental salaries of the lower class of dynatoi did not differ much from the income of the urban artisans, wa ge laborers, technicians, and pe tty shop owners, with whom they formed the class of mezoi the nascent middle cl ass of the bourgeoisie.276 Undoubtedly, agriculture, especially viticulture, was an important suppl emental source of income for the mezoi This was true presumably more for the dynatoi given that the majority of pronoia consisted of land, less for the group of manual la borers and petty merchants. Further, although the undoubted concentration of wealth in a few noble hands, as attested by the written sources, the total dominance of coins of sm all denominations within the finds of the late twelfth to the late fourteenth century suggest that the majority of the ma rket transactions were the everyday purchases passing through the hands of the mezoi and mikroi The long list of various professions that could be composed from the sources and the archaeological finds, suggesting high specializati on of labor and standard ization of production, raises the question of the social organization of industrial production th e role and development of the guilds in the Byzantine Empire (and, eventual ly, in its Balkan neighbors) that still poses a serious challenge to economic historians.277 The sources for the subj ect are scanty, if not 275 L. Gorina, Materialyi Dnevnika Antona Barberi po Istorii Bolgarii I Vizantii [Materials of the book of A. Barberius for the history of Bulgaria and Byzantium] in Byzantinobulgarica No 4 ( 1973). pp. 229-251. 276 C. Morrisson, Prices and Wages in Byzantine World, in The Economic History of Byzantium, from the Seventh to the Fifteenth Centuries (Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 2005).pp.866-7.; N. Necipo lu, The Aristocracy in Late Byzantine Thessalonike. pp. 133-151 277 For the attempts of enlisting the professions found in the sources see the generalizations of B. Tsvetkova, Prouchvane na Gradskoto Stopanstvo, XV-XVI vek [ Study on urban economy, 15th -16th centuries] ( Sofia: Nauka i Izkustvo, 1971),p. 89; N. Oikonomides. Hommes daffaires grecs et latins a Constantinople (Paris: Institut d'tudes mdivales Albert-le-Grand. 1979 ) pp. 94-107; V. A. Smetanin, Vyzantiiskoe Obshtestvo XI II-XV vekov po Dannyi Epistolografii [ Byzantine society of 13th -15th centuries according to the epistolary sources] ( Sverdlovsk, Izdatelstvo Sverdlovskogo Instituta, 1987),pp. 76-100.

PAGE 209

209 nonexistent. The main source for the structural organization of the professions in the Byzantine Empire is the Book of the Eparch, issued at the beginning of the tenth century, and codifying the earlier existing practi ces in Constantinople.278 The purpose of this lawcode was to restrain the growth of manufacturing and trad e activities outside the guild sy stem in those economic sectors that were considered vital for the fisc. Moreover, the regulation of commercial activities was directed against the emergence of monopolisti c market structures and the subsequent concentration of economic power in a few hands The existence of guilds in Byzantium until the late twelfth century is beyond any doubt.279 However, their existence beyond the twelfth century is a quite controversial issue that still has to be clarified. Most scholars maintain that the guilds, as understood by the Book of the Eparch had practically disappeare d, given that the rules and regulations for the organization of manufacture leave no trace in the By zantine narrative sources of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. 280 Others acknowledge certa in traces within the sources of guild-like organizational forms in part icular sectors of production that do not fit the guild model, but rather that of te mporary unions of petty producers.281 Finally, others argue that guilds continued to exist after the twelfth century, but as unofficial bodies, in the sense that their chiefs were not appointed anymore by the govern ment, but still represented their organization 278 M. J. Siuziumov, Vizantiiskaia kniga Eparkha: Vstupitelnaia Statia, Perevod, Kommentarii [Byzantine Book of the Prefect: Introduction, translation, comments] (Moscow; AN SSSR, 1962. 279 See the extensive list of references as cited in G. C. Maniatis, The Domain of Private Guilds in Byzantine Economy, Tenth to Fifteenth Centuries, Dumbarton Oaks Papers Vol. 55. (2001), pp. 339-369, ff. 91. 280 P. Charanis, On the social structure and Economic Organisation of the Byzantine Empire in the Thirteenth Century and Later, Bizantinoslavica Vol. 12 (1951),p. 151; I. P. Medvedev, The Problem of so-called Byzantine Manufacture, Byzantiaca No. 9 ( 1989),p.174; V. N. Zavrazhin, K Voprosy o Pozdnevizantiiskoi Manifakture, in Srednevekovnyi Gorod ( Saratov: Izdatelstvo Saratovskii Universitet, 1981),pp. 136-7; Frances, Isceznovenie korporacij v Vizantii, [Disappearing of guilds in Byzantium] Vizantiiskii Vremennik, No. 30 (1969), pp. 38-47; 281 Klaus-Peter Matschke Die Schlacht bei Ankara und das Schicksal von Byzanz (Weimar: Bhlau, 1981),pp.156-7 G. C. Maniatis, The Domain of Private Guilds in Byzantine Economy, Tenth to Fifteenth Centuries, Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 55. (2001), pp. 339-369.

PAGE 210

210 before the officials.282 The main reason for disagreement am ong historians is the different meaning of guild The scholars accepting the Byzantine legal understanding of guilds or corporations, (as manifested in the Book of the Eparch ) as forms of association that brought individuals practicing certai n professions together in entities, legally recognized and controlled by the state, quite reasonably deny the existence of guilds beyond tw elfth century. Others, who see guilds as organizations that primarily we re intended to regulate and define industrial manufacture and commercial exchange, and whose relations with the state authorities played only secondary role, maintain the continuing exis tence of guilds. It should not be forgotten, however, that the role of the Byzantine state in economy was not a constant. During and after the twelfth century both decentralization and pr ivatization must be taken into account. Quite surely, this decentralization, manifested by free trade and market competition, affected fundamentally the state-guild relations. However, the most influential market actors, the foreign individual and organized merchants, as well as the powerful Byzantine archontes who increasingly involved themselves in business activities with the Latins, became practically independent from the control of the state. Thus the prevention of the emergence of monopolistic market structures and subsequent concentration of economic power, consciously or not, was left to the market self-regulation and was not anymore concern of the state. Hence, there existed of a significant part of privileged market actors, w ho were not controlled by the state, and who stultified the control of the remaining portion of the market. Accordi ngly, the states guilds supervisory apparatus became dysfu nctional and, thus, in turn c ontributed to the erosion and subsequent break between the state and guild that culminated in 1204 and its aftermath. No 282 N. Oikonomides. Hommes daffaires grecs et latins a Constantinople pp. 94-107; P. Horden, "The Confraternities in Byzantium," in Voluntary Religion ed. W. J. Sheils and D. Wood (Oxford, Blakwell, 1986),pp. 3334; M. Angold, "The Shaping of the Medieval Byzantine 'City,"' Byzantinische Forschungen No. 10 (1985),pp. 3134.

PAGE 211

211 traces exist of guilds beyond the twelfth century, but no evidence ex ists either that professional organizations disappeared altogeth er after that. What, most likely, happened, was that guilds, as state institutions, known from the Book of the Eparch merely obtained an entirely voluntary organizational form, unrestricted by the state control. Whether this should be termed guild or association, is a matter of pure semantics. Much more important, however, is that the new type of guild played a far more decisive sociopolitical role than th e state guild of the Book of the Eparch, for it participated in the administration of towns through its own representatives, thus more effectively protecting its participants interests. Suffice it to point the example of Zealots in Thessalonike. The explanation offered above for the lack of sources referring to guilds after ca 1200 is substantiated by the subsequent reinstatement of guilds under the Ottoman economic etatism. The early Ottoman period is very rich in regulative acts concerning the state-guild relations, especially in the sphere of mining. There are no less than seven regula tive codifications of mining for the period 1390-1638, all sanctioned by the Ottoman power.283 The earliest of them, concerning the regulations of mining in Kratovo, was issued by Bayezid II just a few months after the battle on the Kosovo Pole in 1389, when the mines of Kratovo fell into Ottoman hands. Another mining law, Zakon za Rudniku Novo Brdo [Mining Law in Novo Brdo] was issued in 1412 by the Serbian ruler Stefan Lazarevi and, according to its Bulg arian copy of Chiprovci in 283 N. Beldiceanu Les actes des premiers sultans conservs dans les manuscripts turcs de la bibliothque nationale Paris, Vol. II, Rgliements miniers 1390-1512 (Paris: Mouton 1964), pp. 243-268; Zakon o Rudnicima Despota Stefan Lazarevicha [Mining Law of Stefan Lazarevic] ed. by N. Ra doijcic (Belgrade, 1962 ); F. Spaho,Turski Rudarski Zakoni [Turkish mining laws] Glasnik Zemaljskog Muzeja u Bosni i Harcegovini Vol. 25 ( 1913), pp. 147-9, Vol. 26 (1914),pp. 151-162; R. Anhegger, Beitrge zur Geschichte des Bergbaeus im osmanischen Reich Vol. II ( Istanbul, 1943-1945),pp. 239-270; Irene Beldiceanu-Steinherr and N. Beldi ceanu, Un rglement minier ottoman du rgne de Sleyman de Lgislateur, Sdostforschungen Vol.21 ( 1962), pp. 149-167.

PAGE 212

212 1638, was ratified by the O ttoman jurisprudence.284 Quite surely, both legal texts do not signal the emergence of mining professional organizat ions. Their appearance in the Balkans was brought by the Saxon miners in the second quarter of the thirteenth century and, wherever they set their communities, the model of the Saxons shap ed local social and te chnical organization of mining. However, the emergence of both codes at almost the same time points to a shift in the relation between the state a nd professional organizations demonstrated through the implementation of supervisory state officials fo r the mining organizations. The evidence that the stipulations of the mining codes were operative also for the Western Bu lgarian lands comes out of the identical organizational st ructures of mining, demonstrated by two documents. First, there is the dual usage of Bulgarian words together with their Serbian variants in the Law of Novo Brdo, the seventeenth century Bulgarian copy of the code of Stefan Lazarevi Finally, there are the Saxon mining terms, preserved in the t oponymy of the regions of Velbujd, Kratovo, Samokov, Sofia, Vratza and Chiprovci.285 The association of miners in the Law of Novo Brdo is called drouzhina (association, union), delineating, thus, quite clea rly its loose structure. The same term is used in the Treaty of Michael Asen with Dubrovnik of 1253, where it denotes the trade organization of the Bulgarian merchants in the city of Dubrovnik.286 The structure of the grou p of miners was a voluntary association of gvarks (from the German work Gewerk), who possessed shares from the ore deposits, discovered by a houtman (from German Hauptmann).287 The head of a drouzhina was 284 Zakon o Rudnicima Despota Stefan Lazarevicha [Mining Law of Stefan Lazarevic] ed. by Radojci (Belgrade: Nau no Delo, 1962. 285 Str. Lishev, Bulgarskiat Srednovekoven Grad pp.73-5. 286 I. Dujcev, Iz Starata Bulgarska Knijnina [Old Bulgarian literature] Vol. II, p.50. 287 Zakon o Rudnicima Despota Stefan Lazarevicha, pp.41-2.

PAGE 213

213 the uorbarar a term known also from the mining regulative documents of Bohemia, 288 who functioned as an arbiter of the professional disputes among gvarks. Along with the gvarks, the mining regulations mentioned wage laborers, who were hired by the gvarks for heavy-labor operations. There is, however, no masterjo urneymanapprentice structure. Entering a corporation ( drouzhina ) of miners was a matter of approval from other members, while leaving it and starting a new shaft, after paying the comm on expenses, was an unrestricted personal choice.289 Expelling a gvark from the corporation was also matter of consensus.290 There were no internal regulations aiming at ensuring uniformity and no restrictions on the quantity or quality of inputs and the number of workers that could be employed or on the amount and type of equipment that could be installed. However, in the course of the fifteenth century, the Ottoman mining regulations display a clear trend of gradual increase of the number of state officials ac ting as supervisors of the mining process, while the ourbarars and houtmans roles were reduced to a mere assistance of the functions of the state officials a ktib (secretary), dealing with the daily expenses of the mine, and a yasaqquly the state official supervising the applicatio n of a particular regional, or imperial mining code and exercising certain police functions.291 Both ktib and yasaqquly were subjects to the authority of the local kadi (judge) and sancakbei, the local administrator Along with the ktib and the yasaqquly functioned the emin and the amil, the officials supervising the tax collection, who were also subordinated of the kadi .292 In the mining code of 1536, issued by 288 N. Beldiceanu Les actes des premiers sultans, p. 105 289 Zakon o Rudnicima Despota Stefan Lazarevicha, p. 42, Article 18 290 Ibid. p.44, Article 26. 291 N. Beldiceanu Les actes des premiers sultans p.234; 255 292 Ibid,p.200; 205; F. Spaho, Turski Rudarski Zakoni [Turkish mining laws] Glasnik Zemaljskog Muzeja u Bosni i Harcegovini Vol. 25 ( 1913), pp. 147-9, Vol. 26 (1914),pp. 151-162

PAGE 214

214 Suleiman the Magnificent, the professional organizat ion of miners lost its self-regulatory status and was placed under the di rect command of the local kadi, who now had the authority over the entire process of mining, refini ng, and selling the acquired silver. He also assessed the taxes apportioned to the miners and the salaries of th e state officials involve d in their supervision.293 The development of the relations betw een the state and mining professional organizations, from the end of the fourteenth to the opening of the seventeenth centuries, thus witnessed some fundame ntal changes. The Mining Law of Novo Brdo of 1412 depicts a corporation of miners that played a decisive socio-political role in the local towns affairs. It had its own court and 12 representatives in the towns government and acquired the right of fair prices of bread and meat and of the services of tailors, shoemakers, and smiths, as well as of the commodities necessary for their productionhides and leather for their clothes and equipment and tallow for lighting.294 The mining corporation, as characterized by the mining code of 1536 by Suleiman the Magnificent, is a very different organization. It has lost its social importance and its autonomy and became a mere sum of stat e employees. Both outcomes were the result of the change of the state role in economy, and not of changing socio-economic relations shaping the model and function of professional organizations. The changes in state-guild relations, demonstr ated in the sphere of mining are observable elsewhere. During the time of liberal economy in the pre-O ttoman period, the professional organizations existing in the Byzantine Empire were left outside the ever-decreasing economic scope of the state and the source references a bout them, respectively, were marginal and vague. Nicholas Oikonomides has demonstrated that such profession al organizations existed for 293 F. Spaho, Turski Rudarski Zakoni [Turkish mining laws],p. 178. 294 Zakon o Rudnicima Despota Stefan Lazarevicha, Articles 9-17.

PAGE 215

215 notaries, perfumers, butchers, sailors, constructio n workers, and salt makers in Constantinople and Thessalonike.295 By privileging the miners with fixe d prices for bread, meat, hides, and tallow, as well as for the services of tailors, smiths, and shoemakers, the Mining Law of Novo Brdo indirectly refers to the existence of other manageable professional communities, which did not enjoy such privileges.296 Similarly, the reference of A. Ba rberius to the existence of a group of bakers to whom Amadeus VI ordered the baki ng of a great quantity of ships biscuits in Mesembria, points to the same phenomenon.297 The vague traces of professional organizations within the thirteenth-fourteenth centurys sources suddenly make it possible for an Ottoman kanunname from the end of the fifteenth century to promulgate explicitly detailed regulations for the professional organizations in Constantinople and some other large cities.298 Besides the fixed prices a nd qualities of the crafts final products, the law stipulates the supervision of professional organizations by the local kadi. A few decades later, in 1524 1550, there was already an abundance of Ottoman normative documents regulating the professional organizations in Bursa, the fur-dressers, curriers, and shoemakers in Sofia, the tailors and grocers in Philipopolis and the iron makers in Samokov.299 It is quite improbable that these guilds were inve nted by the Ottomans, whose policy, as it is well 295 N. Oikonomides. Hommes daffaires grecs et latins a Constantinople pp. 94-107 296 Zakon o Rudnicima, Articles 9-17. 297 L. V. Gorina, Goroda Bolgarskogo Prichernomoria v seredine XIV veka po Dnevniku Antona Barberi [ Bulgarian Black Sea towns in the middle of the 14th century, according to A. Barberius] in Sbornik Istochniki i istoriografia slavianskogo srednevekovie (1967),p.67 298 L. Barkan, XV Asrin sonunda bazi byk ehirlede e ya ve yiyecek fiyatlarinin tesbit ve tefti i hususlarim tanzim eden Kanunlar, [Laws regulating the fixing and inspecting particulars of prices for goods and food in some large cities at the end of the fifteenth century] in Tarih fesikalari, ( Istanbul, 1941) pp. 321-340. 299 Herman Thorning, Ftvvetname-i-kebir in Idem, Beitrge zur Kenntnis des islamischen Vereinswesensauf Grund von Bast Madad et-Taufiq (Berlin: Mayer & Mu ller, 1913) pp 225-230; G. Gulubov, Osmanoturski Izvori za Istoriata na Sofia. Sudebni Documenti of XVI v [Ottoman sources for the history of Sofia. Legal records of XVI century] Serdica No. 3-4 (1942) p.88; Ahmet Refik, Trk idaresinde Bulgaristan ( IstanbulL: Devlet matbaasi, 1930),p.16-17.

PAGE 216

216 known, was to leave, more or less, intact the administrative and economic machinery left behind by the Byzantines. It seems permissible then to deduce the adoption and preservation by the Muslim rulers of the forms of public contro l of the crafts employed in the Byzantine administration, at least in dealing with non-Muslim artisans, and perhaps, even its extension to the Muslims themselves. Figure 4-1. Plan of the cita del of Strezov Grad [adapted from the plan of Iv. Mikul ik Srednovekovni Gradovi i Tvurdini vo Makedonia p.231] 3-4= Open space of Strezov Grad. 5= Fortified inhabited area (Markov Grad). 6= Unfortif ied inhabited area. 7= Koula,Small citadel. 8= Another small citadel. 9-10= Churches with cemeteries. 11= Ancient settlement.

PAGE 217

217 Figure 4-2. Pliska [adapted from the plan of M. Harbova, Ukrepeniat Bulgarski Srednovekoven Grad, p.52, fig.14] a) Plan of the town. b) Fortif ied nuclei. c) Profile of the town. d) Rulers residential center. 1= Moat. 2= Stone-walls with towers. 3= Street network. 4= Monastery. 5= Fortified nuc lei. 6= Residencial area. Figure 4-3. Ra, reconstructi on [Reprinted with permission from N. Ovcharov and D. Kodjamanova, Peprerikon i Okolnite Tvurdini preSrednovekovieto (Sofia: Tangra, 2003). p. 102].

PAGE 218

218 Figure 4-4. Towns design. (A) Sobr i. (B) Markova Sushica. [Reprinted with permission from Iv. Mikul ik, Srednovekovni Gradovi i Tvurdini vo Makedonia pp.293; 331]. Figure 4-5. Late Medieval Turnovo [adapt ed from the plan of M. Harbova, Ukrepeniat Bulgarski Srednovekoven Grad p.123, fig 50]. A) Profile of the city. B) Urban space distribution. 1= The fortress of Tsarevets. 2= The fortress of Trapezitsa. 3= The New Town the main, fortified suburb between Trapezitsa and Tsarevets. 4= Devin Grad A B

PAGE 219

219 (unfortified quarter on the sl ope of Momina Krepost Hill ). 5= Frankish (Latin) quarter (unfortified). 6= Quar ter, north of Trapezitsa (unf ortified). 7= Jewish quarter (unfortified). 8= Extension of the New Town in the late fourteenth century (fortified). Figure 4-6. Tsarevets. The main gate system a nd patriarchal church of Holy Ascendance at the top of the hill. Figure 4-7. Mesembria. A) The Church of Chri st Pantokrator. B) Aeri al view of the town. [Courtesy of Municipality of Nesebar] A B

PAGE 220

220 Figure 4-8. Lovech [adapted fr om the plan of M. Harbova, Ukrepeniat Bulgarski Srednovekoven Grad p.115, fig.46] A) Distribution of the urban space. 1= Fortress. 2= Suburbia. B) Profile of the terrain.

PAGE 221

221 Figure 4-9. Cherven [Adapted from the plan of K. Skorpil, S. Geor gieva and M. Harbova, Ukrepeniat Bulgarski Srednovekoven Grad p.96, fig.37]. A) Distribution of the urban space. 1= fortress of Cherven. 2= esatern fort ified zone of the plateau. 3= fortified suburb (on the plateau). 4= Unfortified subur b (below the plateau). B) Profile of the terrain. Figure 4-10. Fortress masonry. A) Opus emplectum tower in Kaliakras citadel. B) External view of a wall, enforced by scaffolds in Kaliakra [Reprunted with permission from G. Djingov, A. Balkanska and M. Josifova, Kaliakra Vol. 1. (Sofia: BAN, 1998), pp. 26; 83]. A B

PAGE 222

222 Figure 4-11. Cherven. The main tower at the western entrance of the town [Courtesy of Archaeological Musem of Veliko Turnovo] Figure 4-12. The fortress of Shumen and its first suburban fortif ication [Courtesy of Archaeological Musem of Veliko Turnovo].

PAGE 223

223 Figure 4-13. Monastery of St. John the Fore runner (Ioannes Prodrome) [Reprinted with permission from N. Ovcharov and D. Kodjamanova, Peprerikon i Okolnite Tvurdini preSrednovekovieto (Sofia: Tangra, 2003). p. 42] Figure 4-14. Rila Monastery with its defense tower in the center [Courtsey Archaeologcal Museum V. Turnovo]

PAGE 224

224 Figure 4-15. Emperors palace in Tsarevets, Turnovo, A) Plan. B) Reconstruction [Reprinted with permission from B. Kuzupov and Y. Nikolova, Gradoustrojstvo i Arhitektura in Istoria na Veliko Turnovo Vol.1. p. 259] 1= the great throne chamber. 2= the church of St. Petka. 3= administrative bu ilding. 4= military section. 5= living area. 6= auxiliary buildings. Figure 4-16. Patriarchal Palace in Tsarevets, Turnovo, with the church of Holy Ascension. A) Plan and B) Rreconstruction. [Reprinted with permission from B. Kuzupov and Y. Nikolova, Gradoustrojstvo i Arhitektura in Istoria na Veliko Turnovo Vol.1. p. 259]. A B

PAGE 225

225 Figure 4-17. Turnovo, the fortress on the hill of Tsarevets. [Adapted from the investigational plan of Archaeological Museum of Ve liko Turnovo on Tsarevets. Courtesy of Archaeological Museum of Veliko Turnovo] 1= Patriarchal palace with the church St. Ascension. 2= Emperors palace. 3= Boyars House noble house lining with the emperor and patriarchal palaces. 4= The main gate of Tsarevets. 5= Gate, leading to the New town, the suburb between Trapezi tsa and Tsarevets. 6= Gate, leading to the Franks Quarter. Figure 4-18. Fortress of Lovech [Adapted from J. Changova, Lovetch p.50.fig. 35] 1= The citadel governors residence. 2= The episcopacy.

PAGE 226

226 Figure 4-19. Fortress of Cherven. Plan [Adapted from V. Dimova, Srednovekovniat Cherven (Sofia, BAN, 1985), Apendix] A) The cita del, governors residence. B) The episcopacy with the episcopal church. 1= Buildings from the first half of the fourteenth century. 2= late Roman early Byzantine building period. 3= Buildings from the last quarter of the fourteenth century. 4= Buildings 11th -12th century. Figure4-20. Street network of Tsarevets and of part of the New Town. [Reprinted with permission from M. Harbova, Ukrepeniat Bulgarski Srednovekoven Grad p.126. fig 52]

PAGE 227

227 F Figure 4-21. Western Main Str eet of Tsarevets. A) General view. B) Graphic reconstruction. [Reprinted with permission from I. Le fterov and Y. Nikolova, Gradoustrojstvo i Arhitektura in Istoria na Veliko Turnovo Vol.1. p. 259]. Figure 4-22. Church of St. Demetrius in Turnovo, located in the New Town. A B

PAGE 228

228 Figure 4-23. Urban monastery, located on the northernmost point of Tsarevets graphic reconstruction [Reprinted with permission from T. Teofilov and Y. Nikolova, Gradoustrojstvo i Arhitektura in Istoria na Veliko Turnovo Vol.1. p. 262] Figure 4-24. Fortified well at the southeastern angle of Tsarevets [Reprinted with permission from Y. Nikolova, Gradoustr ojstvo i Arhitektura in Istoria na Veliko Turnovo Vol.1. p. 262].

PAGE 229

229 Figure 4-25. Draining ditch in the fortress of Lovech [Courtsey of Archaeological Museum Veliko Turnovo] Figure 4-26. Location of the Bath House within the New Town in Turnovo [Adapted from J. Aleksiev, Shishmanovata Banja v Veliko Turnovo in Mezhdunarodna fondacia Sv. Panteleimon (1993) p. 60, fig.2]

PAGE 230

230 Figure 4-27. Plan of the Bath House. [Adapt ed from J. Aleksiev, Shishmanovata Banja v Veliko Turnovo in Mezhdunarodna fondacia Sv. Panteleimon (1993), p. 61. fig.3] 1= Preafurnium. 2= Tepidarium. 3= Caldarium. 4= Laconicum. Figure 4-28. Urban houses from Turnovo. A) Stone second store. B) Ramshackle second floor [Reprinted with permission from L. Zahari eva, Srednovekovni Bolia rski Jilishta of Vtorata Bulgarska Durjava in Izsledvania vurhu arhitekturata na bulgarskoto srednovekovie (Sofia: BAN, 1982).pp. 208; 214.] A B

PAGE 231

231 Figure 4-29. Semi-dugout house from Momina Krepost Hill. A) Plan. B) Reconstruction. [Reprinted with permission from Y. Nikolova, Srednovekoven Kvartal na Hulma Momina Krepost v Veliko Turnovo, Arheologia No 1 (1963).pp. 35; 39. Plan: 1 and 2= ovens and/or open hearth. 3= granary pi t. 4=foundations of a modern building. 5= stones, used in the construction. 6= holes nesting the wooden construction. A B

PAGE 232

232 Figure 4-30. House-plans. A) One -, two-, and multiple-room from Shumen. [Reprinted with permission from V. Antonova, Shumen and Shumenskata Krepost .p.63] B) Multiple room house-plans from Lovech [reprinted with permission from J. Changova, Lovetch p.84] Figure 4-31. Boyars House from Tsarevets. A) Plan. B) Reconstruction. [Reprinted with permission from Y. Nikolova, Zhilisht eto v Turnovo prez XIIXIV vek in Tsarstvashtia grad Turnov (Sofia: Nauka i Izkustvo, 1985).pp. 71;73]. B A A B

PAGE 233

233 Figure 4-32. Boyars House in Melnik. A) General view. B) Plan of the house [adapted from the plan of V. Nesheva,Kvartal Chatala in Melnik, Gradyt v Podnojieto na Slavovata Krepost p.42] Figure 4-33. Boyars House in Melnik. Decoration on the facade [Reprinted with permission from V. Nesheva,Kvartal Chatala in Melnik, Gradyt v Podnojieto na Slavovata Krepost p.112] Figure 4-34. Plan of the Boyars House ( a & b), its adjacent church (c) and their neighboring dwellings (d &e).[Adapted from the plan of V. Nesheva, Kvartal Chatala,p.54] B A

PAGE 234

234 Figure 4-35. Private dwelling in Mistra [R eprinted with permission form I. Medvedev, Mistra. Ocherk Istorii i Kulturyi Pozdnevizantiiskogo Goroda .p.163] Figure 4-36. Wealthy (boyars ) house in Turnovo [Reprinted with permission from L. Zaharieva, Srednovekovni Boliarski Jilish ta of Vtorata Bulgarska Durjava in Izsledvania vurhu arhitekturata na bulgarskoto srednovekovie (Sofia: BAN, 1982).p.207.

PAGE 235

235 CHAPTER 5 REGIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE The opening of the thirteenth century found the Eastern Me diterranean as an already form ed economic unit, within which goods circulat ed according to specific patterns. The area consisted of Greece, Constantinople, the Black Sea region and its adjacent inland, Asia Minor, Crete, and the Ionian and Aegean islands. Alexa ndria, Syria, Cyprus, and Cilicia also formed part of this unit. This region became important to the West for both its exports and imports. As an exporter of food (grain, honey, wine, and olive oil) and raw materials (cotton, linen, leather, silk, wax, alum, and lead), the Eastern Mediterr anean was of great importance to some specific parts of Europe, mainly to the Italian city-sta tes. The primary import was cloth of all kinds, mostly from Lombardy and Flande rs. The Eastern Mediterranean also played another role in international trade. This was a transit area, thr ough the outlets of cities such as Constantinople and Pera, Tana and Caffa, Candia an d Alexandria luxury pr oducts of the Far East made their way to Europe. Towards the end of the fourteenth century, the Eastern Mediterranean displayed an impressive economic unity at a time of great political fragmentation. In the course of the thirteenth and four teenth centuries, the Eastern Mediterranean obtained the features of a region al market unit. It was characte rized by the mechanism of supply and demand that resulted in uniform price form ation. It was marked also by the establishment and development of trade coordinating and nava l facilitating institutions such as lodges and councils,1 which, through navigation char ts, traders manuals and currency rates of conversion provided the merchants with inform ation for their business activities.2 This information network, 1 As for instance the Venetian Officium de navigantibus and Genoese Consilium super factis navigandi et Maris Maioris. 2 The most famous manual is Francesco Balducci Pegolotti, La pratica della mercatura ed. Allan Evans. (Cambridge, Mass.: Mediaeval Academy of America, 1936)

PAGE 236

236 as the set of documents of Florentine merchant Fr ancesco Datini from the late fourteenth century shows, helped the merchants a nd their agents to ma ximize their profits through an adequate manipulation of the market conditions.3 Last but not least, the re gion was marked by circulation of widely accepted and convertible currency, wh ich, as exemplified in the case of Bulgaria, (discussed below) radically increased its vol ume in the course of the observed period. The study of the range and directions of Italian maritime trade in the Black Sea region, already well asserted in the historiography, demonstrates that networks of Venetian, Genoese, and later Florentine traders ran and dominated th is market. Italian merchants controlled the sealanes and communications with thei r ships and with their colonies in the most important ports. They created and ran the information mechanisms and their needs dictated the price formation and currency transactions. However, since the political development as part of social superstructure is directly dependent on the economic basis as announced by Marx, the combination of political polycentrism (decline) and economic growth in the Eastern Balkans was simply beyond the explanatory reach of Marxist theory. Thus, Bulgarian medievalists, due to theoretical impediments and lack of sufficient sources, mechanically employed the reigning opinion among the Byzantinists, considering Italian trade priv ileges, extracted from the Byzantine government, as a chief factor for undermining the growth (o r even substituting the existence) of a local merchant class. The involvement and dominatio n of the Italian merchants in the Black Sea regional trade was considered, ther efore, as an evidence of the economical and political decline of the Byzantine socio-economic mo del. Additionally, this comple ments quite conveniently the thesis of underdevelopment and of not co mplete division of labor between the town and 3 J. Heers, Il commercio nel Me diterraneo alla fine del secolo XIV e nei primi ani del XV Archivo Storico Italiano No 113 ( 1955).pp. 157-209.

PAGE 237

237 country. Not recognizing the shift in emphasi s of domestic economy from a land-based statecommanded economy to a public economy of exchange, best illustrate d by the increasing economic role of the towns as an arena of nona gricultural production, th e reigning historical materialism explained the engagement of Bu lgaria in the global political and economic configurations as a political co urse, which met only the narrow class interests of the politicaladministrative elite and which only weakened th e national integrity and deepened separatist tendencies metastases of the late feudalization.4 The participation in interna tional trade gave further impetus to the domestic economic growth. Undoubtedly, the safeguarding of the ec onomic interests of the Italian maritime citystates influenced intensely regional politics and th e market initiative of the political class in both Byzantium and Bulgaria in the course of the four teenth century. However, the international trade run by the Italians did not engender either the market-oriented economy or the emergence of a native merchant class. What becomes apparent from the following analysis is that the entrance of Bulgarian lands into international trade to be a natural realization of th e long local process of transformation of the land-based economy into an economy of exchange that started towards the end of the twelfth century. Well before the entrance of the Black Sea Region into the transcontinental trade system, the dominance of ma rket in economy already shaped the regional politics. To such a degree the political struggles in the Balkan s, especially between Byzantium and Bulgaria, were motivated by the desire of th eir leadership to capture trade centers for the purpose of extending their control over merchants and over routes of inland and maritime trade that it may safely be said that trade becam e a chief factor in regional policymaking. 4 See for instance Al. Burmov, Istoria na Bulgaria po Vr emeto na Shishmanovci [ History of Bulgaria during the epoch of the Shishmans] Godishnik na Sofiiskia Universitet Sofia No-1-2 (1947),pp. 1-27; N.S. Derzhavin, Istoria Bolgarii Vol.1-3 ( Moscow: AN SSSR, 1947).

PAGE 238

238 What is only vaguely detectable through the sources, but is clearly denoted by the archaeological coin evidence, is that Italian trade activity in the Balkan regional economies did not undermine the growth of the local merchant class either. Quite the opposite, it promoted and complemented the development of a market-orien ted economy. It gave further impetus to the development of regional network of market cente rs and to the growth of an unrelated to agriculture and the stat e offices native merchant class, r ecognized and protected by the local authority. What this chapter demonstrates is that the great river of the international maritime trade that flew towards Italy and Western Europe was fed in the regional trade outposts by the network of local tributaries, run by local trader s. So powerful became this social class that towards the end of the fourteenth century it matched and even exceeded the resources of the state. Not surprisingly, the urban centers where this merchant class was concentrated outlived their state. Trade and Politics in Late Medieval Bulgaria The commercial overton es in the political struggles in the Balkans that dominated the fourteenth century regional politics had their an tecedents as early as 894, when a trade war between Byzantine Empire and Bulgaria triggered the imperial ambitions of Symeon (893-927) and Bulgarian political hegemony in the southeastern Europe. The peace of the eleventh and twelfth centuries brought by the Byzantine rule spr ead over the entire Balkans contributed to the gradual economic and demographic growth, whic h, towards the second half of the twelfth century, resulted in a change of the towns function and nature from defensive strongholds and seats of state and ecclesiastic authority into centers of production and trade with a more definitively urban way of life. The prospects of wealth that arose from the new productive and trade function of the towns became a gravitati onal force, not only for the common population, but also for the local powerful figures competing for the provincial revenues.

PAGE 239

239 The death of Kaloyan in 1207 fueled the centr ifugal political forces in Bulgaria. Alexius Slav, a holder of an appanage centered at th e Rhodopes Mountains stronghold of Tsepena and nephew of Asen, Peter and Kaloyan, refused to pledge allegiance to the new ruler Boril and seceded his lands from the ruler in Turnovo. Shortly after that, in 1208, he secured his independence by marrying the daughter of the Latin Emperor, Henry of Flanders.5 Maneuvering between Turnovo, Constantinople, a nd the rising despotate of Epirus, Alexius soon extended his lands and moved his capital from the small upland stronghold of Tsepena, controlling the mountain route between the Upper Thracian Plain and the Valley of Strymon, to Melnik, a local distributive trade center, located at the crossroa ds of much more impor tant trade routes. One came from Thessalonike and headed northwa rd, through Velbuzhd, Ni, and Belgrade to Hungary and Central Europe; the other, parallel to the old Via Egnatia connected Constantinople and the Aegean Sea coast to Dubrovnik and Kotor through Strumitsa, Prosek, Skopje, and Prizren. The surviving documents are not very instruc tive for the Slavs motives for transferring his residence. It is certain, however, that the hinter land of Melnik was not favorable to any large-scale agricultural de velopment. Nor did Melnik offer the high level of security of Tsepena. The poor sand soils of Melniks hinter land are suitable only for vineyeards, for which, indeed, the region of Melnik was most famous. Yet, this cannot account for Alexius Slavs choice of a new capital. Some light on the problem, however, is sh ed by the analysis of coins, discovered in the town, according to which the tim e of moving the Slavs residency coincided with the period marked with the most radical increase of money circulation in the medieval development of Melnik. The reason for this radical increase, undoubtedly, should be sought in the rise of the town as an in land trade center for the goods coming from Thessalonike, resulting 5 Henri de Vallenciennes, Historie de lemperor Henri de Constantinople (Paris : Paul Geuthner, 1948).pp. 52-55.

PAGE 240

240 in a distinctive accumulation of wealth in the town.6 Confirmation for the trade transactions between Melnik and Thessalonike is hard to doc ument in the written sources, although examples are not missing. In 1270s, Carentano Zane, a Vene tian consul in Thessalonike, was regularly selling textile in Melnik through his trade agent.7 The most secure evidence for the growth of commerce in Melnik and its ties with Thessa lonikean market comes from the quantitative analysis of the coin finds in Melnik, 1185-1261, according to which the overwhelming majority of the money circulating in the town were the product of the Thessalonikean mint.8 The flux of money and goods coming from Thessalonike, through the commercial exchange, is quite evident also in the accumulation of wealth in the town illustrated by the large-scale establishment of ecclesiastic foundations at that time in Melnik9 and of wealthy urban dwellings in its suburbs, exemplified by the Boyars House and its analogs in the quarter of St. Marina.10 The continuous prosperity of the town in the course of the thirteenth century was recognized officially through the elevation of Melnik into the rank of bishopric around 1261 and into a metropolitan center towards the end of that same century. Parallel to the Slavs acquisition of Melnik, the same process could be observed in Prosek, a town located westward from Melnik and controlling both the in land route paralleling Via Egnatia and the route going northward from The ssalonike, along the Vardar Valley, towards 6 See Template I 7 David Jacoby, Foreigners and the Urban Economy in Thessalonike ca-1150ca 1450. Symposium on Late Byzantine Thessalonike, Dumbarton Oaks Papers No 57 (2004),pp. 85-132. 8 Vl. Penchev, Moneti [Coins] in Melnik, Gradat v Podnojieto na Slavovata Krepost [Melnik, the town at the foot of Slavs fortress] ed. by Violeta Nesheva (Sofia: BAN, 1989) pp. 209230. 9 Most of the Melniks churches as well as the monastery of the Holy Mother of God, (for which establishment and granting with tax exemptions, a charter issued by Alexius Slav survived), are dated to the first half of the thirteenth century. 10 See previous chapter.

PAGE 241

241 Skopje, Belgrade, and Hungary. In the years following Kaloya ns death, another nephew of Asen, Peter and Kaloyan, a man na med Strez, established an inde pendent political unit, centered on Prosek. Again, as in the case of Melnik, the time of Strez independence thoroughly coincides, as demonstrated by the coin evidence, with the peak in coin circulation in Prosek.11 The competition of provincial powerful figures for securing their revenues through establishing control on trad e routes and market centers is quite detectable during the first half of the thirteenth century, but it still was not the domi nant tone in regional politics. It was sporadic in character, limited in scope and it displayed secondary to other factors concern, such as dynastic issues and personal rivalries, mixed with certain ethnic awareness. Yet with the progress of the century, commercial nuances became more and more distinctive in Bulgarian foreign policy. In 1253, a military and trade treaty was concluded be tween the Bulgarian emperor Michael II Asen (1246-1256) and the Prince of Dubrovnik, Georgius Marselius, and 26 members of the City Council.12 The treaty was concluded in the sp irit of already established friendly commercial relations between the two sides, manifested in the Dubrovnik Charter of Ivan II Asen.13 However, the treaty of 1253 has two essentially new features. For the first time we notice the concern of the Bulgarian central power for th e rights and privileges of a national merchant class and also for the first time we learn about trade and politics being closely interrelated. The document has two parts, military and commercial, both directed against the Serbian King Stefan I Uro. Besides the mutual declarations for protecting merchants property, both sides agreed on re-distributing the gains of any campaign against Serbia. In case of military success, thus, the 11 I. Mukul ik Srednovekobvni Gradovi i Tvurdini vo Makedonia [Medieval towns and fo rtresses in Macedonia] (Skopje: Makedonska akademija na naukite i umetnostite, 1996), pp. 230-237 12 G. A. Ilinskii, Gramotyi Bolgarskih Tsarei [ Charters of the Bulgarian em perors] (Moscow: Sinodalnaia tipografiia, 1911).pp. 155-159. 13 Ibid.pp. 13-14.

PAGE 242

242 city of Dubrovnik claimed only it s previously owned lands, now o ccupied by Uro, and lavishly conceded the rest of Serbian lands to the Bulgarians. In addition, the Ragusans assumed an obligation to donate half of thei r profits derived from the salt trad e within the Serbian lands to the Bulgarian emperor. Finally, after repeating the pr ivileges of the Ragusan merchants granted by Ivan II Asen, the treaty pronounced equivalent rights for the Bulgarian merchants in the city of Dubrovnik. Immediately, after the signing the document, it was set into action. The Bulgarian army entered deeply in the Serbian lands, reaching Belo Pole on the Lim River.14 As suggested by the reaction of Radoslav ( 12491255), Prince of Zahumlje, the Bulgar ian-Ragusan coalition seems to have had som e successin the next year, Rados lav threw off the suzerainty of Hungary and joined the Bulgarian-Ragusan coalition.15 Due to the Bulgarian internal turmoil that started after the death of Michael II Asen, th e military alliance between Bulg aria and Dubrovnik appeared to be short-lived and fruitless. However, thei r commercial ties remained narrow and mutually beneficial in the course of the next century. The Ragusans continued to play an important role in the fourteenth century Bulgarian trade, when their colonies of merchants were established in Turnovo and Bdin and Bulgarian merchants, an d even Bulgarian rulers themselves, became actors on the Ragusan market.16 More unambiguous influence of trade on Bulgarian politics, however, is evident after the reestablishment of the Byzantine power in Constantinople in 1261, which reintroduced the strong traditional Byzantine interest in the Black Sea coas tal towns. In order to secure the grain supply 14 V. Zlatarski, Iuzhna Bulgaria sled Sm artta na Tsar Ivan Asen II i Reginskia Mir [Southern Bulgaria after Ivan II Asen and Peace of Regina] Godishnik na Narodnata Biblioteka v Plovdiv (1927).pp. 327-341. 15 Ibid. 16 Libri Reformationum, III, Monumenta Ragusina (Zagreb: Sumptibus Academiae Scientiarum et Artium, 1895).pp. 156-157.

PAGE 243

243 of the capital, the first concern of the Palaiol ogean government became to gain control over the trade outposts in the western littoral of the Black Sea, then still under Bulgarian rule. The conflict that arose over the contro l of the southwestern Black Sea coast and its main trade centers Mesembria, Agathopolis, and Sozopolis, became thus a key factor for regulating the BulgarianByzantine relations until the very end of the Bulgarian state. So important was the region around Mesembria for the Bulgarian tsars that it displ aced to a certain degree the traditional focus on Macedonia as a territory of natural expansion, a policy, the tradit ion of which could be traced as far back as the reign of Krum (802-814). To a certain extent, it signal s also that the ethnic awareness that dominated Bulgarian politics du ring and after the wars for restoration of Bulgarian state, 1185-1205, ceased to be a sour ce for a rational policymaking. Instead, the policymaking became deeply commercially motivate d. It shifted its focus towards the Black Sea towns, dominated by Greeks. In the spring of 1263, a Byzantine army led by Michael Glabas Tarchaniotes advanced towards Mesembria, where a pretender for the Bulgarian throne, Mitso Asen, was besieged by the legitimate Bulgarian Tsar, Constantine Asen. After capturing the towns of Agathopolis, Sozopolis, Debelt, Rusokastron, and Anchialo s, Tarchaniotes received the power over Mesembria from Mitso Asen, who, in exchange, was granted a governor ship in Asia Minor.17 As it seems from the following development, Constantine Asen did not accept the loss of Mesembria and the other Black Sea towns. In the early 1265, he tried to restore the status quo by using the authority of his no minal overlords, the Mongols.18 He joined the punitive action of 17 H. Loparev, Vizantiiskii Poet Manuel Phill. K Istor ii Bolgarii v XIII-XIV veke [The Byzantine poet Manuel Phill. About the history of Bulgaria in 13th -14th centuries] SPb, 1891.p. 52-55; Georgius Pavhymeres, De Michaele et Andronico Palaeologis ed. Immanuel Bekker, Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae, (Bonn: Ed, Weber, 1835).p.350. 18 At this time, Bulgaria was nominally under the dominion of the Mongols

PAGE 244

244 Berke Khan for freeing the Seljuk Sultan Izzedin, kept as a hostage by the Byzantines. However, although the Mongols action did not bring direct results to Constantine, his demonstrative willingness to join and help the Mongols in their anti-Byzantine campaign alarmed the Byzantines and revitalized his ambitions. In re sponse to the threat posed by the BulgarianMongol alliance, Michael VIII launc hed a diplomatic gambit to alie nate the Bulgarians and the Mongols from each other. In order to calm the grievances of the Bulgarian ruler, in 1268, Michael VIII offered his niece, Maria to the r ecently widowed Constantine, with the disputed Black Sea towns as a dowry. However, soon the ch anges of the geopolitical configurations made the return of the Black Sea towns unnecessa ry. The Genoese merchants, concerned with safeguarding their commerce in the northern Black Sea littoral, already convinced the emperor to alter his policy towards the Golden Horde. The new course of Byzantine-Golden Horde relations was already set in motion and, in 1273, it was cemented by the ma rriage of Nogai, controlling the Western portion of the Golden Hordes territor ies, with an illegitim ate daughter of Michael VIII.19 Having secured the Mongols friendship, there was no need a nymore to return the Black Sea towns to the Bulgarians. From 1273 onwar d, the regular Mongol ra ids drained out the strengths of Bulgaria, which, busy with her own surviving, diverted her focus from the Black Sea coastal towns. Disappointed, Constantine tried to neut ralize the Byzantine diplomatic campaign by securing the help of Charles I of Anjou, the arch-enemy of the newly restored Byzantine Empire.20 Yet the pressure of the Mongols became much more efficient than anything else. In the following years, the Mongols raids devastated the Bulgarian lands, destabilized the power of 19 Janet Martin, Medieval Russia (Cambridge, Cambridge UP, 1995) pp. 144 20 V. Zlatarski, Istoria na Bulgarskata Durjava prez Srednite Vekove in 3 Vol.[ History of the Bulgarian State in the Middle Ages] ( Sofia: Durzhavna Pechatnica ,19271940), Vol.3. pp.529-537.

PAGE 245

245 Constantine Asen and provoked the rebellion of Ivaylo, who, in 1277, liquidated the legitimate ruler. The Anti-Byzantine union of French, Bu lgarians, Serbs, and Venetians, grouped around Charles I of Anjou collapsed after the revolt of the Sicilian Vespers which seceded Sicily from the kingdom of Charles and severely shortened his resources. The Black Sea towns remained Byzantine until the turn of the century. The control over the western Black Sea litto ral continued to shape Bulgarian-Byzantine relations in the course of the fourteenth centu ry. One of the first steps of the new Bulgarian emperor, Theodore Svetoslav (1300-1321), was directed towards the Black Sea towns, which, due to the Byzantine engagement with the Catalans of Roger de Flor, were annexed easily with the agreement of their ci tizens to the Bulgarian realm in the early summer of 1304. Aware of the growing importance of the western Black Sea litt oral for the supply of Constantinople in the context of the Ottoman advance into Asia Minor, both Byzantines and Bulgarians continued to launch several campaigns, each changing the power over the region in the following two years. However, the Byzantine-Bulgarian conflict ende d with a peace treaty in 1307, which recognized the Bulgarian suzerainty over the mentioned area after some economic pressure enforced by Svetoslav. In the winter of 1306-7, due to the Italian-Mongol conflict th at blocked the grain export from Caffa and Tana, Constantinople fell in a dire need for grain. Only after the Byzantines agreed to Svetoslavs political dema nds did he allow grain to be shipped from Mesembria and Anchialos to Constantinople.21 Soon after the securing of the Black Sea towns and the access of Bulgarian grain to the Cons tantinopolitan market, Svetoslav introduced in Bulgaria the silver coinage, more appropriate for the purpose of long distance trade in the Mediterranean trade system. 21 A. Laiou, The provisioning of Constantinople during the winter 1306-7. Byzantion No 37 (1967), pp. 91-113

PAGE 246

246 For the rest of the fourteenth century these towns continued to alternate between Bulgarian and Byzantine suzerainty. After the death of Svetoslav s successor George II Terter in 1322, the towns of the southwestern Black Sea littoral threw off Bu lgarian rule and joined the empire of Andronicus II Palaeo logos. The Bulgarian-Byzantine treaty of 1324 divided these towns between both sides. The Bulgarians received Mesembria, Anchialos, Aetos, Diampolis, and Rusokastron; and, under the Byzantine pow er Sozopolis, Agathopolis, and Vukelon. This division was confirmed in the treaty of 1328, but after the Bulgarian defeat by the Serbs in 1330, again, all of the mentioned towns came back und er the Byzantine rule. Again, the towns of the Black Sea littoral fell under Bulgarian suzerai nty in 1332. In 1366, they were separated from Bulgaria by Amadeus VI of Savoy and turned ove r to the Byzantines, who ruled them until the fall of the empire. The intensified presence of Genoese and Venetian merchants in the Black Sea, marked by constant efforts to safeguard their own ec onomic power, internationalized the BulgarianByzantine rivalry over the western Bl ack Sea littoral. The collapse of the crusading states shortly after the restoration of Byzantin e power in Constantinople made the Black Sea region a chief connecting link between the wester n and eastern ends of the inte rcontinental trading network of Venice and Genoa. The Genoese trade privilege s secured by the treaty of Nymphaion soon resulted in their complete dominance in the Black Sea region, at least during the reign of the first two Palaiologoi. The Venetians, having become personae non gratae in Constantinople and in the Straits after 1261, tried to find a path to recover their supremacy in the East, through alliances with various western pr etenders to the Byzan tine throne with Ch arles I of Anjou, in 1281, and with Charles of Valois, in 1306. A lthough Venetian trade in the Black Sea was

PAGE 247

247 restored after the treaty of 1302, the Genoese hegemony in the Black Sea maritime trade remained undisputed, at least until the 1320s. Unsurprisingly, the Genoese closer ties with Byzantium foreordained Venice as a natural Bulgarian ally in the existing bipolar power structure. However, the pressure of Bulgarian administration on Genoese merchants in Bulgarian trade outposts in 131214, as registered by the surviving Genoese sources, was hardly motivated by the existing political configurations, but seems to be connected to the Byzantine embargo on Bulgarian grain export s to Constantinople. In March 1315, Bernabos de Monyardino was sent as a Genoese envoy to plead before Theodore Svetoslav in order to obtain compensations for the damages caused to Genoese merchants by the emperor of Zagora and his subjects.22 The Bulgarian reply to the Genoese demands was protracted for more than a year and, finall y, demonstratively ignored. The Genoese responded with a decree banning trade with Bulgaria.23 In his efforts to evade the Byzantine gr ain-trade embargo, Theodore Svetoslav, most likely, resorted to the use of Genoese privileged status as the only possible way for securing the appearance of the Bulgarian gr ain in the most convenient an d profitable regional market, Constantinople. Therefore, the source of Bulgarian-Genoese tension should be sought, eventually, in the eventual fric tions that arose around the role of the Genoese as middlemen for the sale of Bulgarian grain in Constantinople. The following re duction of the total Genoese ban of trade with Bulgaria (Zagora) in the next year, to the level of official Byzantine demands, 22 V. Giuzelev, Tri Reshenia na Genuezkia Savet za Hazar ia ot 22 mart, 1316 [Three decrees of the Genoese Council for Gazaria ( Khazaria) of March 22, 1316] in his Ocherci varhu Istoriata na Bulgarskiat Severoiztok i Chernomorieto XIIXV v [ Essays on history of Bulgaria n Northeast and Black Sea coast, 12th -15th centuries] (Sofia: Borina, 1995) pp. 103-108 23 Ibid.

PAGE 248

248 affecting only the sale of the Bu lgarian grain in Constantinople,24 and the silence of the sources for continuing abuses of Genoese merchants in Bulgaria after 1316, indicate that the solution to the problem satisfying both Bulgarian and Genoese sides had been achieved.25 Under the demands of Byzantine government, the same measure towards Bulgarian grain export in Constantinople was applied by the Venetia ns, which, alarmed by the Ottoman threat in Asia Minor and Aegean Archipelag o, radically changed their stand towards Byzantium. The turn in the Venetian-Byzantine relations immediately affected Bulgarian relations with Venice. In 1320, the Venetian bailo in Constantinople report ed to the Senate of Venice that the Venetian merchants have been ordered by the emperor not to sell grain from Mesembria and Anchialos in Constantinople.26 The instant impact of this ban on Bulgarian-Venetian relations is not attainable through the existing sources, perhaps b ecause the control over the southwestern Black Sea towns shifted too often between Bulgaria an d Byzantium in the following decade. However, more frequent Venetian complaints started comi ng from Bulgaria in the 1340s, when the Black Sea towns came again under Bulgarian rule. In 1343, two noble Venetians, Niccol Pisani27 and Lorenzo Foskarini, suffered a significant loss of goods (estimated at 1000 and 4000 hyperpyra, 24 The explicit mentioning in Genoese Consilium gubernatorum decree of February 14, 1317, that grain from Bulgaria could be sold anywhere else besides Constantinople in L. T. Belgrano, Prima serie di documenti reguardanti la colonia di Pera, Atti della Societa ligura di storia patria Vol.XIII (1884) pp. 116-123 ; also in V. Giuzelev, Tri Reshenia na Genuezkia Savet za Hazaria ot 22 mart, 1316 25 V. Giuzelev Ocherci varhu Istoriata na Bulgarskiat Severoiztok i Chernomorieto Appendix 26 G. M. Thomas and R. Predeli, Diplomatarium Veneto-levantinum sive acta diplomata res venetas, graecas atque levantis illustrantia Vol Ia. (1300-1350) (Venice, 1880), p. 165 ; V. Gjuzelev, Venecia i Genua v Politicheskata i Stopanska Istoria na Bulgarskoto Chernomorie, prez XIVsredata na XV vek v Svetlinata na Novi Izvori [Venice and Genoa in the political and economic history of Bulgarian Black Sea coast, 14thmid-15th centuries in the light of new documents] in Srednovekovna Bulgaria v Svetlinata na Novi Izvori ( Sofia, 1986).pp. 156-242. 27 Niccolo Pisani was the Venetian military co mmander in the Venetian-Genoese War of 1350-52

PAGE 249

249 respectively), confiscated at the orders of the Bulgarian emperor Ivan Alexander.28 Another case was registered in the same year of 1343, i nvolving the Venetian noble Orsato Bonisena and others suffering certain losses from th e administration of Ivan Alexander.29 The multiple Venetian claims for compensations, just lik e those of Genoese of 1315-17, were merely disregarded. However, the Venetian response differed from that of the Genoese. An internal compensatory tax of 0.5% was levied on the goods of the merchants who claimed to be Venetians and who were coming from Bulgaria for reimbursing the merchants suffering losses there.30 The Genoese scenario of 1314-16 was applie d again, this time upon the Venetians. By upsetting the business interests of important Venetian figures in Bulgaria, a certain mitigation of the Venetian position regarding some vital Bulgaria n problems was intended. This had to do with supposedly, the presence of the Bulgarian grain at Constantinopolitan market It seems that this scenario worked well again and the problem was so lved in a way satisfactory for both sides. In 1362, a Venetian notarial act in Constantinople registered a certain Manol, born in Constantinople and a former protovestiarius of the Bulgarian emperor, who, as a merchant delivering wheat in Constantinople from Mesembria, presented himself as a Venetian instead of Greek or Bulgarian.31 Even though such cases are extremely rarely recorded there is a good reason to believe that the granting of Venetian or Genoese status was far mo re frequent than it was reflected in the surviving documentation. Gran ting of Venetian status to foreigners was a 28 Archivio di Stato di Venezia Senato, Delliberazioni miste XXI record 49; Also as Bulgaro-Venecianski Dokumenti [Bulgarian-Venetian documents] in Hristomatia po Istoria na Bulgaria [Chrestomathy of Bulgarian history] ed by V. Giuzelev and P. Petrov Vol. II (Sofia: Nauka i Izkustvo, 1978),pp 243-44. 29 Hristomatia po Istoria na Bulgaria, pp 243-44. 30 Archivio di Stato di Venezia Senato, Delliberazioni miste XXI record 49. 31 G. M. Thomas and R. Predelli Diplomatarium Veneto-levantinum sive acta diplomata res venetas, graecas atque levantis illustrantia Vol Ia. (1300-1350) (Venice: Sumptibus societatis, 1880) p. 84

PAGE 250

250 device widely employed by Venetian politics in the eastern Mediterranean at that time.32 Various Byzantine emperors, Andronicus II, John VI, John V complained bitterly about the widespread practice of granting Venetian or Genoese status.33 It should be noticed also that according to the Venetian response to Bulgarian abuses the levy of 0.5% tax on all merchants coming from Bulgarian Black Sea coast and claiming Venetian status it often wa s simply a matter of some money arrangement. Yet although the widespread practice of granting privileged Venetian or Genoese trade status, as it is witnessed by the notary records of Antonio di Ponz from Chilia in 1360-61, there was a considerable number of petty merchant s, from Mesembria, Sozopolis, Adrianople, Mavrokastro(n), and elsewhere that ran their bus iness without resorting to privileged status.34 Some of them made exchange c ontracts with Italians, either for borrowing money or for hiring a ship. An artisan from Trebizond made a contract with a Genoese from Pera with profit estimated at 22.3 hyperpyra. A Greek monk from the monastery of St. Atanasia was a ship owner, who borrowed money from two Italians to prepare his vessel for sail.35 Similar is the case of a certain Kaloyan from Mesembria (associat ed by most historians with th e governor of Mesembria at the same time), who purchased in Chilia 157 modioi of wheat (in about 38, 600 kg), which needed to be transported through the Genoese ship-owner Antonio de Finall e either to Mesembria or to Sozopolis or Agathopolis.36 Others operated business by establishing synthrophiai 32 See the detailed analysis about this practice in D. Jacoby "The Byzantine Outsider in Trade (c. 900-c. 1350)," in D. Smythe, Strangers to Themselves (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2000), pp. 135-37. 33 G. M. Thomas and R. Predelli Diplomatarium Veneto-levantinum sive acta diplomata res venetas, graecas atque levantis illustrantia Vol II. (1351-1454) (Venice: Sumptibus societatis, 1880-89) No 49. 34 G. Pistarino, Notai genovesi in Oltremare. Atti rogati a Chilia da Antonio di Ponz ( 1360-61) (Bordighera: Istituto internazionale di studi liguri, 1971), nos. 72,80, 86; A. Laiou, Byzantine Economy in Mediterranean Trade System in A. Laiou, Gender, Society and Economic Life in Byzantium ( Norfolk: Variorum, 1992).pp. 177-222. 35 A. Laiou, Byzantine Economy in Mediterranean Trade System. 36 G. Pistarino, Notai genovesi in Oltremare: Atti rogati a Chilia da Antonio di Ponzo`, 13601 pp. 62-3.

PAGE 251

251 (shareholding organizations) w ith or without Italian partic ipation. Although the surviving documents, especially those concerning merchant s from the Bulgarian lands, are too few to permit some precise estimation of the role of th e local merchants in the Eastern Mediterranean trade, the general picture is quite distinct. The great river of the international maritime trade that flew towards Italy and Western Europe was fed in the regional trade outpo sts by the tributaries, run by local traders and controlled by local powers. These tributar ies, in turn, were fed by the network of small streams of inland trade, carri ed out by petty local tr aders or by the local producers themselves. The record s of this local stream netw ork, understandably, are extremely rare but not nonexistent. The accounting book of the Genoese military commander of December 1351 registered, for instance, some of these smallscale trade activities wi th the local population of Mesembria, Emona, and Varna, which at this point were able, perh aps, to bypass the usual middleman transactions of a cask of wine; of 5.5 modioi of wheat; of 69 modioi of wheat; of 45 modioi of barley.37 The separatist local forces unequivocally foll owed the direction of these inland streams of trade and were vitally interested in controlling the influx points with the current of international trade. Thus, the economic potential of the market of Chilia and its growing importance for regional and international trade became irresistib le lure to the political ambitions of despot Dobrotitza.38 The quantity of wheat delivered in Genoa from Licostomo( Chilia) from 1358 to 37 V. Giuzelev, Iz Smetkovodnata Kniga na Genoezkat a Voenna Sluzhba za 1351-52 [ Excerpts from the accounting book of Genoese Military commanding, 1351-52] in his Ocherci varhu Istoriata na Bulgarskiat Severoiztok i Chernomorieto XIIXV v [ Essays on history of the Bulgar ian Northeast and Black Sea coast, 12th -15th centuries] ( Sofia: Borina, 1995). Appendix No 4. 38After him was named the Despotate of Dobrudja, a semi-independent political unit that arose in 1360s from the appanage given by the Bulgarian emperor to Terters dynasty.

PAGE 252

252 1360 increased, respectively, from 12, 098 mini (992, 036 kg) to 15, 901 mini (1, 303, 882 kg).39 The export of wheat in the notar ial records of Antonio di Ponz in Chilia, from August to October 1360 alone was in the am ount of 20, 000 mini (1, 640, 000 kg).40 In 1361, Dobrotitza, whose foreign policy was in accordance with hi s suzerain in Turnovo, seized Chilia from the Genoese. Where the impressive grain surplus of Chilias hinterland was redirected is not clear from the sources. However, during the period of war between Genoa and Despotate of Dobrudja, 1361-1387, no Genoese export from the wester n Black Sea littoral is recorded. The curious cases, mentioned above, in wh ich grain from one region of intensive production and trade, Chilia, is tr ansported to another of the same specialization, the Black Sea coast of Thrace, could be explained, of course, by either Turkish raids in Thrace or, more likely, by some regional price differences resulting in alluring options for re-export. Undoubtedly, the presence in Chilia of merchants from centers renowned for grain production and trade denotes also the complete integration of local entrepre neurs in the Italian financial and commercial system. But above all, however, this fact signals the formation of a prof essional entrepreneurship of a modest size, a middle merchant class, not conn ected to the state, which had only weak ties to local agriculture and landholding and whose drive for maximizing the profits went well outside their immediate area. As it seem s from the surviving Ottoman documents, this class not only survived the demise of the local Balkan states, but also it continued to play an active role in the regional economy, at least in the first decades of the Ottoman rule in the Balkans. In 1455, at the end of an anarchy period that lasted more than fifty years, individuals from Philipopolis and Adrianople, of Christian and Jewi sh origin, invested in buying o ff the Ottoman imperial taxes on 39 V. Gjuzelev, "Du commerce gnois dans le s terres bulgares durant le XIVe sicle," Bulgarian Historical Review (1979), pp. 36-58. 40 G. Pistarino, Notai genovesi in Oltremare, ,pp. 62-3.

PAGE 253

253 rice in Thrace with the impressive sums of 2-3 million akes .41 Similarly, in 1476, some twenty years after the fall of Constantinople, a group of Greeks merchants returned in the city to compete for the right of collecting the Ottoman taxes.42 It is beyond any doubt, that the accumulation of such wealth started in the pre-Ot toman period as a result of business activities, such as mentioned above. Unambiguously, the struggle for controlling the local trade outposts was the dominant tone in the Balkans politics, radicalized by the imminent Ottoman threat. The Mongol-Italian conflict of 1344-7 compelled the Venetians to safeguard their ec onomic interest in the western Black Sea coastal towns. In 1346-7, they conclu ded a treaty with Bulgar ia regulating trade, custom-tariffs, and the protection of individu al and collective Venetian rights in Bulgaria.43 The import taxes payable by the Venetians in the po rts ruled by Ivan Alexander, according to the treaty, were established at 3% and a Venetian consul, located in Varna, was recognized as autonomous authority governing th e community of Venetians in Bu lgaria with their own courts, residential quarters, and churches.44 However, there is no sign of any privileged status of the Venetian traders established by th e treaty of 1346-7. The lack of some Genoese hostile response towards the Venetian-Bulgarian treaty also suggests that the established tariffs were analogical to the tariffs imposed on any other traders. Accordingly, in the fo llowing Genoese-Venetian war of 41 Vera Mutafchieva, Otkupuvaneto na Durjavnite Prihod i v Osmanskata Imperia prez XV-XVII vek i Ravitieto na Parichnite Otnoshenia [Buying off the imperial revenues in the Ottoman Empire, Fifteenth to Seventeenth centuries and the development of the money circulation] Istoricheski Pregled, No 1 (1960).pp. 40-52 42 A. Laiou, Byzantine Economy in Me diterranean Trade System. Addendum. 43 V. Giuzelev, Kletva i Dogovor na Gospodin Alexander, T zar na Zagora ili Bulgaria s Venecianskata Sinioria ot 1346 ili Skliuchen prez 1347 [Oath and Treaty of Sir Alexa nder, Emperor of Zagora or Bulgaria with the Venetian Signoria of 1346 and concluded ion 1347] in Srednovekovna Bulgaria v Svetlinata na Novi Izvori [Medieval Bulgaria in the light of new sources] ( Sofia: Narodna Prosveta, 1981),pp. 156-182. 44 V. Giuzelev, Kletva i Dogovor na Gospodin Alexander, T zar na Zagora ili Bulgaria s Venecianskata Sinioria ot 1346 ili Skliuchen prez 1347.

PAGE 254

254 1351-55 and its ByzantineGenoese prelude in 1348-9, Bulgaria t ook clearly a neutral position, attempting to maintain good relatio ns with all the parties involved in the conflict. In May 1351, a mutual agreement was achieved between Ivan Al exander and John Cantacuzene directed against Ottoman advance. In November 1351, Genoese admiral Paganino Doria sent a mission to the southwestern Black Sea coastal towns for securing the food supply for the Genoese navy and the friendship of the Bulgarian court.45 It seems that Genoese-Bulgarian negotiations were successful. An interesting note in the account ing book of Genoese military commander from December 1351 reveals that a Genoese consul, who had to assist the supply of food for the navy, already resided in Mesembria at the time.46 In March 1352, another Genoese envoy with gifts for the Bulgarian emperor was sent to Turnovo. In October 1352, the Venetian admiral Marino Faliero handed to Ivan Alexander in the Danubi an trade post of Nicopol a letter from Andrea Dandolo reminding of Bulgarian obligations assu med by the Bulgarian-Venetian treaty of 13467.47 Political developments of the western Black Sea littoral became ev en more complicated in 1360s, with the rise of the political and economic role of the fa mily appanage of the Terters, the Despotate of Dobrudja (Dobrudzha).48 In 1340 Dobrotitsa, (after whom the Despotate of Dobrudja was named), together with his brot her Theodore, were actively engaged in the Byzantine civil war, siding with Anna of Savoy, while their senior brother Balik held the town of 45 V. Giuzelev, Iz Smetkovodnata Kniga na Genoezkat a Voenna Sluzhba za 1351-52 [ Excerpts from the accounting book of Genoese Military commanding, 1351-52] in his Ocherci varhu Istoriata na Bulgarskiat Severoiztok i Chernomorieto XIIXV v [ Essays on history of the Bulgar ian Northeast and Black Sea coast, 12th -15th centuries] ( Sofia: Borina, 1995). Appendix No 4. 46 Ibid. 47 Vittorio Lazarini, Marino Faliero avanti il dogiado Nuovo archivo veneto, V (1893), pp. 95-197 48 For the emergence of Dobrudja Despotate see V. Giuzelev, Ocherci varhu Istoriata na Bulgarskiat Severoiztok i Chernomorieto XIIXV v. pp. 9-86.

PAGE 255

255 Karvuna as an appanage from the Bulgarian emperor.49 The engagement of Dobrotitsa in the Byzantine turmoil brought him into martial relations with Constantinople that fed his ambitions for independence. In 1359-60, after a series of military failures, Dobrotitsa came to terms with the new emperor Cantacuzene, left Thrace, and a ssumed the power in Karvuna from his deceased brother. Immediately, he entered a long period of war with Genoa ove r the control of the Bulgarian towns in the Danubean Delta. In 1366, Dobrotitsa was involved in the complex military-diplomatic stalemate engendered by the a nnexation of the Bdin appanage by Hungary, the blockade of John V Palaeologos in Bdin, and the following seizure of the Bulgarian southern Black Sea towns by Amadeus VI of Savoy. The c onflict started in 1364 as an open war between Bulgaria and Byzantium, again over the contro l of the Black Sea towns of Mesembria and Anchialos. Dobrotitsas intercession in this poli tical gambit resulted in the integration (perhaps, conceded by Ivan Alexander) of the important town of Varna into his Despotate. The war between Dobrotitsa and Genoa continued until 1387, when the Genoese diplomacy adopted a more flexible line for safeguarding Genoese economic interests through settling the conflicts with the Despotate of Dobrudja, the Golden Horde, and the Ottomans. On the other hand, Dobrotitsas deat h in 1385 already opened the way fo r a peace and the treaty was concluded in May 1387 with his successor Ivanko. The structure of th e treaty is similar to that of the Bulgarian-Venetian pact of 1346-7. Both side s agreed to mutual guaranteeing the lives and properties of the subjects of the other party, cust om tariffs were arranged as low as 1%, and a Genoese consul governing the community of th e Genoese on the territory of the Dobrudja 49 John Cantacuzene, Eximperatoris historiarum libri quattuor Vol. 1-3 ed. by L. Schopen (Bonnae: Ed. Weber, 1828-1832) Vol. II, p.584-5.

PAGE 256

256 Despotate was established in Varna.50 All of these confirmed the Genoese special status in Dobrudja to have separate courts, churches a nd places of residence and, last but not least, separate measures and weights. A special clause in the treaty de noted that exports of grain in times of hunger would be a matter of special permission by Ivanko.51 However, two points the lack of reciprocal clauses for the traders, subjects of Ivanko; and the lowest possible tariffs established by the treaty suggest that Ivanko did not have much r oom for maneuvering, but wanted to achieve peace with the Genoese as soon as possible, perhaps, in order to use them as an intermediary for deflecting the Ottoman thr eat. To some degree, he succeeded. The final Ottoman blow to the Dobrudja Despotate was po stponed by about a decade, until the battle of Nicopol, in 1396. On the other hand, the provisioning of the local rulers veto for exporting grain denotes certain equality of the both parties. It seem s that this clause was relevant rather to the analogical restrictions imposed by the Byzantine em peror in Constantinople on the Venetian and Genoese export of grain in times of crisis than to the critical situation arising from the Ottoman advance.52 It marks one of the last attempts of a lo cal political power to function as a regulator of the market, an intrinsic feat ure not only of the Byzantine social model but also of the precapitalist economy in general. After the loss of the Black Sea coastal to wns in the late 1360s, the power in Turnovo sank in economic crisis and became an easy prey to the Ottoman offensive. Shortly after the death of Ivan Alexander in 1371, and the tribut ary dependence imposed by the Ottomans on his 50 V. Giuzelev, Ocherci varhu Istoriata na Bulgarskiat Severoiztok i Chernomorieto XIIXV v. Appendix 5. It is not known, however, what happened with the earlier Venetia n consul in Varna, authori zed by the Bulgarian-Venetian treaty of 1346-7. Most likely, his residence was moved to the capital Turnovo. 51 V. Giuzelev, Ocherci varhu Istoriata Appendix 5 52 For the similar restrictions on grain export in times of crisis see A. Laiou, Byzantine Economy in Mediterranean Trade System in A. Laiou, Gender, Society and Economic Life in Byzantium (Norfolk: Variorum, 1992).pp. 177222.

PAGE 257

257 successor, Ivan Shishman, the holder of the we stern Bulgarian appanage of Bdin, Sratsimir severed his ties to Turnovo and declared hims elf an emperor. Unfortunately, the insufficient archaeological attention on the towns of the Bdin Principality obstructs some clear understanding of the international trade links of this region. However, some id ea of the economic resources of Sratsimirs appanage emerges from the 1308 a nonymous description of Bdin and its region, according to which, the land was rich in silver, iron, silk, wax, and salt.53 Obviously, this was the main range of commodities for Bdins commercial activities with Dubrovnik, Hungary, Serbia, and the Walachian principalities that formed the economic backbone of Sratsimirs political independence. In 1381, the secession at tained its complete character. The Bdin bishopric switched its allegiance from the Patriarch of Turnovo to the Patriarch of Constantinople. Similarly, in the east, the Dobr udja Despotate also articulated its complete independence from Turnovo, manifested by its peace treaty with Genoa in 1387. Although coins issued by Ivan Shishman and found in Shumen, Pr ovat-Ovetch, and Varna i ndicate that the link of Turnovian Bulgaria with the Black Sea coast was not completely blocked, the loss of revenues from tariffs and port taxes and, above all, the loss of direct access to th e international market, combined with the high tribute now paid to the Ottomans, seriously reduced the Bulgarian revenues. In this, as well as in the eventual taxes imposed by the Despotate of Dobrudja and by the Despotate of Zagora,54 should be sought the reasons for th e rise of Nicopol on the Danube as a main trade outpost of Turnovian Bulgaria and last residence of the Bulgarian ruler. Quite naively, Bulgarian historians for a long time consid ered the secession of th e Bdin appanage with its silver mines as a chief cause for the deba sement of the silver coinage and the obvious 53 Descriptio Europae Orientalis, ed. by O. Gorka ( Krakow: Sumptibus Acad emiae Litterarum 1916), pp. 37-38; 54 After the capture of Mesembria and Anchialos in 1366 by Amadeus VI of Savoy, they were returned to John V Palaeologos. On his turn, John V formed an appanage Zagora, at the region around Mesembria and gave it to his son Michael Palaeologos.

PAGE 258

258 economic crisis in Bulgaria.55 Yet, as it seems, it was the loss of the Black Sea coastal towns through which Bulgaria participated in the inte rnational Mediterranean market and from where the main flux of silver was coming. Right after th e loss of Mesembria and Anchialos in the crisis of 1366-69, the Mongols the usual mercenary corpus employed in the Bulgarian army, which terrified the Ottoman invaders and built up Ivan Alexanders confidence disappeared from the battlefields in Thrace. They would appear agai n, however, towards the very end of the century, this time as Ottomans allies. The crisis had it s precise expression in th e radical debasement of the Bulgarian silver coinage afte r 1371, as much as four times le ss than the silver coins of 133271.56 Unsurprisingly, after the fall of Turnovo in 1393 to the Ottomans, the last residence of the Bulgarian ruler became the Danubean trade post of Nicopol. Accordi ngly, in order to cut off the flux of goods and money from and to Nicopol, the O ttomans strategically directed their offensive along the line of Shumen-Dorostoru m (Dristar; Silistra). Thus, bot h the inland and river routes from Nicopol towards the Black Sea coast were blocked. No long after that, in 1396, Turnovian Bulgaria came to an end. What emerges clearly from the outline above is that the drive for controlling trade activities, market institutions, and infrastructure by the local powers progressively became the dominant attitude in thirteenth to fourteenth centurys Balkan politics. Far more importantly, this outcome signals the existence of a group of trade actors, of a me rchant class, recognized and protected by the local authority, which actively interacted with the foreign traders and ran the local network of everyday market activities. Ho wever, the complete decoding of commercial overtones in Bulgarian foreign po licy necessitates an estimation of the range and scope of these 55 See for instance V. Pe nchev and J. Yurukova, Bulgarsiki Srednovekobni Moneti i Pechati [ Bulgarian medieval coins and seals] ( Sofia: Bulgarski Hudozhnik, 1990) p.164 56 K. Dochev, Bulgarski srednovekovni moneti, XIII-XV v [Bulgarian medieval coin s, XIII-XV centuries] (V. Turnovo: Tsentreks, 2003),pp. 102-116

PAGE 259

259 domestic commercial activities, be st assessable through the analysis of the trends in monetary circulation. Undoubtedly, in its turn, the emerge nce, development and scale of the monetized commercial sector would reveal correspondingl y the emergence and development of trade entrepreneurship. Coin Production and Circulation Undoubtedly, any economy has certain segmen ts that escape the m echanisms of the market. Whether that segment is 90 percent or 60 percent is not so important, since it is simply a matter of degree. What qualifies the very nature of a certain economy as market oriented or not is whether the larger part of its volume is commer cialized, i.e., ruled by the mechanism of supply and demand. On its turn, the commercializa tion of production, both agricultural and nonagricultural, and the resulting from it dr ive for maximizing the profits and economic specialization, required urban resources57 capital, information, civil institutions, and above all, marketing networks to expand. Certainly, si nce the degree of commercialization of a preindustrial economy is always higher than the degree of its monetization, the evaluation of the latter through the trends of coin production and circulation, analyzed further, is one of the most secure indications of the scale and development of the commerci al sector, market network, and, consequently, since all of these ar e concentrated and inst esified faculties in the urban centers, for the general trend of urban developm ent in late medieval Bulgaria. It should be noted here that urbanization in its late medieval Byzantine/Bulgarian variant is not the institutionalization of su rplus extracting by urban community from its enviroment by extraeconomic means, as exemp lified by the Tuscan towns that stiffened the 57 i.e. resources concentrated in the urban zones.

PAGE 260

260 economy of their country.58 Rather, because of the more loose and fluctuating social structure of the Byzantine and Bulgarian societies, it was th e outcome of a spontane ous and self-regulating process of functional sp ecialization and concentr ation of institutions. It should be reminded also th at the numerous attempts to estimate the monetized portion of the commercial exchange in the Byzantine Empi re ended with assumptions rather than secure or convincing conclusions. By collecting and commenting on numerous transactions, Nicolas Oikonomides and Helen Saradi, fo r instance, arrived at totally opposed conclusions about the scale of monetization in Byzantiu m. After analyzing forty exampl es of monetary exchange payments, wages, gifts or acts of charity, loan s drawn from saints lives of the eighth to eleventh centuries, Oikonomides simply arrived at the conclusion that the middle Byzantine economy was monetized to a high degree.59 To the entirely opposite conclusion arrived Saradi in her analysis of about twenty archival documents from the thir teenth to fourteenth centuries that deal with transactions se ttled partly or wholly in kind.60 Recently, the more convincing approaches and more reliable sources, em ployed by Ccil Morrisson and Angeliki Laiou, resulted in the conclusion that the national product monetization ratio of the Byzantine economy towards the middle of the tw elfth century was about 46%.61 Unfortunately, the lack of any source allowing comparison of the prices and wa ges between Bulgaria and Byzantium obstructs a similar approximation for the Bulgarian economy. Whether the conclusion for the monetization 58 S.R. Epstein, Town and country: economy and institutions in late medieval Italy Economic History Review Vol.46, issue 3 ( 1993) pp. 453-477 59 N. Oikonomides, Se poio batmo itan exrimatismeni i mezobyzantini oikonomia Rodonia: timi ston M. I. Manusaka ( 1993) ,pp. 363370. 60 H. Saradi, Evidence of Barter Economy in the Documents of Private Transactions, Byzantinische Zeitschrift Vol. 88(1995),pp. 40518 61 A. Laiou, The Byzantine Economy: An Overview; C. Morrisson, B yzantine Money: Its Production and Circulation in The Economic History of Byzantium: from the seventh trough the fifteenth centuries Ed in Chief A. Laiou (Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, D. C, 2002), pp. 1145-1164; 909-966.

PAGE 261

261 ratio of the Byzantine economy could be taken as a starting point for the further economic development in Bulgaria or whether, due to the comparatively later intro duction of money in the Bulgarian lands, this level was attained much later is not clear at this poi nt. Indeed, the Bulgarian lands were part of the Byzantine economy for more than 150 years, during which the monetization of this region supposedly was harmonized with the existing level of monetization in Byzantium. But it is also true that in the course of the Byzantine rule, the Bulgarian lands remained somehow marginal and rather a buffer zone than some core Byzantine territory not only in political, but also in ec onomic terms. Therefore, the only available approach revealing whether the Bulgarian economy in the course of the thirteenth a nd fourteenth centuries could be articulated as market oriented or not is thr ough the analysis of the trends in the volume and nature of the monetary production and circulation and to the related commercial sector and local merchant class. The following analysis is based on the data generated from the previous surveys and catalogues provided by generations of Bulgarian and Western numismatists such as Ivan Jordanov, Nicola Mushmov, Todor Gerasimov, K onstantin Dochev, Vladimir Penchev, Philip Grierson, David Metcalf, Michael Hendy, and Ccil Morrisson. The finds of coins of the Second Bulgaria n Empire are grouped into two main periods. The first comprises the period from the reestablishment of the Bulgarian state in 1185 to the introduction of a regular Bulgarian coin system by Constantine Tich-Asen, (1257-1277) with two sub-periods divided by the captu re of Constantinople by the F ourth Crusade in 1204. Starting from the introduction of Bulgarian national coin system in 1257, the second period continues up to the end of the fourteenth century, when Bulgaria fell under the ru le of the Ottomans.

PAGE 262

262 Money Circulation, 1082-1185 The general picture of monetary developm ent in the Bulgar ian lands after its final conquest by Basil II in 1018 is illustrated by hoa rds and single coin finds on the territory of present-day Bulgaria .62 The conclusion coming from the collect ed data is in accordance with the reigning opinion in historiogra phy that with the exception of central Greece, in the lower Danubae region, and some important strongholds in Bulgaria, the monetization of the Balkans progressed only slowly in the course of the eleventh and the first ha lf of the twelfth centuries. It was hindered in the 1030s and 1080s by troubles and incursions, which explains why the anonymous folles of class A and B before 1034 are the best represented in the region.63 The single coin finds of the pre-1185 pe riod indicate fairly slow rate of monetization of the economic activities within the urban areas. It is a pictur e compatible with that of the rural areas, exemplified by the village of Kovachevo and that on the top of the ancient Sevtopolis.64 The number of coins found in the territory of pres ent day Bulgaria cons ists exclusively of billon aspron trachea (a copper-alloy coin of 95-98 percen t copper and 5-2 pe rcent silver) and tetarteron (100 percent copper co in). The only hyperpyron dated of the period was found in the former Bulgarian capital, Preslav.65 Besides Preslav, strategic st rongholds, such as Shumen and Vereya (Stara Zagora) as well as important trade posts, such as Isaccea, Mesembria and Karvuna, which had a direct s ea connection to Constantinople, display a certain scale of monetization in the pre-1185 period. However, in most of the inla nd Balkan strongholds, such as 62 SeeTable A-1in the Appendix. 63 Ccile Morrisson, Byzantine Money: Its Production and Circulation in The Economic History of Byzantium: from the seventh trough the fifteenth centuries Ed in Chief A. Laiou (Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, D. C, 2002), pp. 909-966.; Iv. Jordanov, Moneti i Monetno obryshtenie v Bulgaria 10821261 [ Coins and coin circulation in Bulgaria 1082-1261] (Sofia: Nauka i Izkustvo, 1984), pp. 103-111 64 See Chapter 3, p. 83 ff 65 Iv. Jordanov, Moneti i Monetno obryshtenie v Bulgaria 1082pp. 105-107.

PAGE 263

263 Turnovo, Cherven, Kaliakra, and Melnik, coin circulation was nonexistent in the period. Unsurprisingly, the documentary and architectu ral evidence for the reign of Manuel Comnenus, as a period of noticeable economic take off is unequivocally supported by the coin data. It is marked by the beginning of coin circulation in Turnovo, Melnik and Provat-Ovetch and by the radical increase of the coin finds in Preslav, Mesembria, Vereya and Karvuna. The reverse trend, noticeable in Isaccea and enforced by the discover y of four hoards there (Isaccea I-IV), as well as by a hoard in Vereya (I) could be explained th rough analysis of the coin finds in Preslav and Vereya, where exactly the coins of the first billon emission (1143-50) of Manuel I are missing, an indication of the scale and dir ection of the Cumans invasion in 1148.66 Apparently, Preslav and Vereya quickly recovered for, in few years the increase of coin circulation there achieved impressive acceleration. The hoards of the period 1082-1185 are rather rare for such a long period with not a few political crises. They are gr ouped in two main regions, the lower Danube and the region of Philipopolis-Vereya and denote th e disturbances caused by Pech enegs in the 1080s 1090s and by Cumans in 1148-50. The massive gold hoard of Kalipetrovo (4 kg, of which only 36 pieces are present) was concealed due perhaps to the P echenegs threat around 1090 and given that gold was the principal monetary imperial instrument, most likely, it was connect ed with the center of the Byzantine administration located in Dorostorum.67 The distribution of the hoards around important Byzantine administrative/military centers suggests that the major ity, if not all of the eleventh century hoarded money could be classified as sa ving hoards, accumulated over a long 66 Iv. Jordanov, Moneti i Monetno obryshtenie v Bulgaria 1082-1261 pp. 105-107 67 Only 36 coins of these 4 kg were cat alogued. See for details O. Iliescu, Premires apparitions au Bas-Danube de la monnale reforme dAlexis I Comnme Etudes Byzantines et post-byzantines Vol. 1 ( 1979),pp. 12-13

PAGE 264

264 period. The only exclusion is perhaps Plovdiv I, which composition of billon coins, all issued by Alexius I Comnenus, indicates rather an emergency. Money Circulation, 1185-1203 The hoards with latest coins struck betw een 1185-1203 resulted fr om the wars between Bulgarians and Byzantines and from the insecuri ty brought in the region by the Third Crusade. Examining this fact, D. Metcalf related the intensive hoarding of the period clearly with the soldiers payments, not with any abrupt incr easing of the market activities in the region.68 In support of this claim, comes the fact th at the hoards of 1185-1187 were predominantly distributed north from the Balkan Mountains wh ere the most crucial battles took place. In 11871195, when the theater of war was transferred in Thrace, the region, accordingly, became a main field of hoarding. In support to the Metcalfs th esis comes also the composition of the hoards. They consist predominantly of reduced-value aspron trachea (billon), known as an expediency or austerity coinage of less than the usual intrinsic value, which the Byzantine government used for paying its soldiers. It was a period of quick devaluation of the billon, which finally turned into a 100 percent copper coin. The hoards cont aining gold are already 17 % of all hoard finds, just two of them entirely composed of gold coin s, and four consisting of billon and gold coins. All of them seem to have been related to a high administrative/military or ecclesiastic authority. The electrum hoard of Zlatarica on the northern side of the Balkan Mountain is, most likely, related to the withdrawal of Isaac II Angel in 1190 from his cam paign against the leaders of Bulgarian revolt, Asen and Peter. The biggest gold hoard of Gornoslav, as examined by Michael Hendy, was the annual budget of the Bachkovo M onastery buried under the threat by the 68 D. M. Metcalf, Coinage in the Balkans, 820-1355 (Chicago: Argonaut, 1966), pp. 116-126

PAGE 265

265 crusaders of Frederick I Barbarossa (1152-1190) in 1189.69 The appearance of mixed, (billon and electrum) hoards, as found in Turnovo, Bani a, Novo Selo, and Gorno Slivovo, composed of coins collected in a somewhat short period indi cates rather emergency than saving character, perhaps, related to the withdraw al of Byzantine authority from the Thracian garrisons under the threat of the Third Crusade. Given that the ho ards of both periods had, presumably, the same origin of services related to the state or of large estates budgets the increase of their total number as well as the presence of hoards of higher value in 1185-1203 marks rather a beginning of a certain wealth redistribution under the impa ct of political instabi lity than some drastic increases of coin circulation. Support for this cl aim comes also from the single coin evidence, revealing certain but not drastic increase in coin circulation in Turnovo, Preslav, and Karvuna, as well as a renewal of coin circulation in Cher ven and Ovetch. The hoards north of the Balkan Mountain slowly gave way before single coin fi nds, which dominate in the urban centers of Turnovo and Preslav. In Thrace, due to the continuing warfare, the reverse trend prevailed. Money Production and Circulation, 1204-1256 The fall of Constantinople to the Latins in 1204 brought an end to the regular flow of money to Bulgaria. Instead, in order to surm ount the effects of a monetary deficit, a mass production of scyphata (concave) copper coins in tens of millions of specimens was initiated by the Latin and Bulgarian authoriti es, all of which imitated the billon coins of the Byzantine monetary system.70 Only in the territory of Bulg aria, there are more than 180, 000.71 The 69 M .F. Hendy, "The Gornoslav Hoard, the Emperor Frederick I, and the Monastery of Bachkovo," in C.N.L. Brooke, B. H. I. H. Stewart, J. G. Pollard and T. R. Volk (eds.) Studies in Numismatic Method Presented to Philip Grierson ( Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1983), pp. 179 91. 70 D. M. Metcalf, Coinage in the Balkans, 820-1355 (Chicago: Argonaut 1966), pp. 116-126; M. Hendy, Coinage and money in the Byzantine Empire, 1081-1261, (Washington: Dumbarton Oaks Studies, 1969); Iv. Jordanov, Moneti i Monetno obryshtenie v Bulgaria 1082-1261 ,pp. 59-66; K. Dochev, Bulgarski srednovekovni moneti, XIIIXV v .,pp. 20-23

PAGE 266

266 provenance of these coins triggered a historiographical debate in the 1950s, which is now considered solved due mainly to the efforts of Michael Hendy. According to his classification, met with general acceptance by both Byzantinists and Bulgarian numismatists, the imitative coins of the first half of th e thirteenth century can be gr ouped into two main categories, Bulgarian and Latin, depending on their origin, ic onography and date each one of them further subdivided into several classes.72 The Bulgarian copies are the earlier ones and consist of three types of imitation of the billon ,most typical for the Comnenian monetary system: class A copies of the fourth billon issue of Manuel I Co mnenus (1143-80); class B copies of the billon emission of Isaac II Angelus (1185; 1203-4) and class C copies of the billon emission of Alexius III Angelus (1195-1203). The average weight of the Bu lgarian copies is about 2.3-2.8 gr., with a clear tendency towards lighter and sm aller coins during the fi rst two decades of the thirteenth century. Their striking right after the emergence of carefully truncated original coins struck by Alexius III Angelus, dated around the end of 1203, is suggested by the same careful manner of truncating visible in some of them: f act signaling the drastic monetary deficit in the region. They differ from the later Latin imitations in being very close to the general idea of their prototypes, but they display detail s of the pendilia, collarpiece or loros that do not fit into the strict pattern of imperi al coin iconography. Their inscriptions and patterns are sketchily rendered, their flans are often smaller than those of the originals and thei r striking is carelessly made. In addition, the coins consist of pure copper and thei r weight is significantly reduced from that of the billon of Comneni and Angeli (3.84.3 g.). In si ngle coin finds, it is not always easy to make a distinction between Byzantine originals and Bulgarian imitations, but when coins are found in 71 The situation in the late 1980s. K. Dochev, Bulgarski srednovekovni moneti, XIII-XV v p.20. 72 M. Hendy, Coinage and money in the Byzantine Empire, 1081-1261

PAGE 267

267 hoards, the difference is easily noticeable. The Bu lgarian origin of this category of imitative coins is proved by topographic and quantitative analyses of the discovered hoards. Out of 80 hoards containing the coin types mentioned a bove, 56 are found on the territory of modern Bulgaria, 16 are from the territory of S outhern Macedonia (modern Greece), and 4 from Northern Dobrudja (modern Romania). While the hoa rds from todays Bulgaria contain all three classes of coins, those from Greek Macedoni a and the Struma Valley have very small proportions of class C, and no coins of class B.73 The juxtaposition of the topographic data with the political developments in the region allows for more precise dating of their issuing: class A, between 1200 and 1207; class B, 1206-1209; and class C between 1206 and 1218.74 The second category of imitative coins is known (again, according to M. Hendys classification) as Latin imitations and has been dated between 1208 and 1240.75 The subdivision of this group contains more than 25 classes, with iconographic patterns combining elements of the twelfth century Byzantine monetary iconog raphy, as well as some entirely new elements (which, in fact, renders the term imitative inap propriate). There is no ne ed for the purpose of this study to repeat the already established exha ustive categorization of the Latin imitative coins that was set up by the fundamental work of M. Hendy and complemented by many other Western and Bulgarian numismatists.76 Of little importance is also the exact location of the eventual mints issuing some of the Latin and most of the Bulgarian imitations. Whether 73 Iv. Jordanov, Moneti i Monetno obryshtenie v Bulgaria 1082-1261, pp. 60-61 74 Iv. Jordanov, Bulgarskoto Imitattivno Monetosechene ot Nachaloto na XIII vek [Bulgarian imitative coinage from the beginning of the XIII century] Numizmatika No 3 (1978),pp. 3-18 75 Iv. Jordanov, Moneti i Monetno obryshtenie v Bulgaria 1082-1261, pp. 61-65. This dating, based on the detailed analysis of the hoards from Bulgaria containing Latin imita tions, is much more convincing than those of M. Hendy, D. M. Metcalf and C. Morrisson. 76 D. M. Metcalf, Byzantin oBulgarica: the Second Bulgarian Empire and the problem of Bulgarian imitative trachea before and after 1204," Numismatic Circular vol. 81 (1973), pp. 418421;

PAGE 268

268 Bulgarian imitative coins were produced in Adri anople or Philipopolis is of little significance. What is for sure is that the mint in questi on was located somewhere in Thrace and was acquired during the wars of Kaloyan against the Latin Empire. As for the typology of the Latin imitations, suffice it to say that it consists of two sub-t ypes, according to the place of their minting, Constantinople and Thessalonike. The two sub-types divide according to size: large module coins (dm 17-25 mm; average weight 1.52 g) a nd small module coins (average weight 0.51.5 g; average weight 0.51.2 g.). Analyzing the similar iconography of differe nt modules of the Latin imitations, C. Morrisson articulated the idea that the small and large modules are, actually, fractions of the large modules.77 The same outcome is suggested also by the quantitative analysis of the hoards containing Latin imitations from So uthern Macedonia and Struma Valley.78 The presence in them of coins of both large and small modules of the same class implies th at they were minted simultaneously or, in other words, that they were indeed, fractions of the same monetary system that operated in a common area of coin circulation. At a quick glance, it seems that contrary to that conclusion comes the appearance of fractioned copper coins by the 1230s and culmin ating in the 1240s and 1250s to the degree displayed by the hoard of Dolna Kabda (Northeast ern Bulgaria). It cons ists of 2800 copper coins of 94 different monetary types, issued by a ll coin producers in the Balkans from 1143 to 1258.79 77 C. Morrisson, Book review of Coinage and money in the Byzantine Empire, 1081-1261, by M. Hendy. Numismatic Chronicle No 11 (1971), pp. 356-66; Ccile Morrisson, Byzantine Money: Its Production and Circulation in The Economic History of Byzantium, pp. 909-966; Iv. Jordanov, Bulgarskoto Imitattivno Monetosechene ot Nachaloto na XIII vek [Bulgarian imitative coinage from the beginning of the XIII century] Numizmatika No 3 (1978),pp. 3-18; V. Penchev and J. Yurukova, Bulgarsiki Srednovekobni Moneti i Pechati [ Bulgarian medieval coins an d seals] ; K. Dochev, Bulgarski srednovekovni moneti, XIII-XV v [Bulgarian medieval coins, XIII-XV centuries] 78 Iv. Jordanov, Moneti i Monetno obryshtenie v Bulgaria 1082-1261, pp. 63-65. 79 Iv. Jordanov, Une trouvaille collective de monnaies du Moyenage (XIII sicle) prs di village du Dolna Kadba, district of Targoviste BizantinoBulgarica Vol. 6 (1980), pp. 173-213.

PAGE 269

269 All of the coins in the hoard, regardless of their initial diameter are broken into 4, 6, 8 or more parts. Similarly, this phenomenon a ppears in the majority of the hoards in Bulgaria, buried in 1330s-1350s and containing copper coins with different modules. Morrissons proposition is contradicted by the fact that if the imitative coins of different modules were fractions of the same system, then there would have been no need for leveling the weight and size of the larger coins to the size of the smaller ones by means of fractioning. The most plausible explanation reconciling the idea of C. Morri sson with the existence of fractioned coins is the dynamic character of the monetary policy, fluctuat ing according to its economic and political considerations. In fact, as it se ems, the initial idea of closel y following the subdivisions of the Byzantine monetary system was abandoned because of serious concerns for the rising cost of producing large module coins. Towards the end of the twelfth century, the compulsory exchange value vested in the billon by monarchic regalia was, undoubtedly, much higher than their intrinsic value as metal.80 This comes from the much higher ratio of productive cost-intrinsic value in minting coins of small denominations in comparison with minting, for instance, gold coins, and it was not a unique f eature of the Byzantine monetary system, but had its analogues in the monetary systems of Western Europe as we ll. In 1347, the cost of minting florins, for instance, was 1% of the coin s value, while the cost of minting the smallest copper denominations was 37% of their value.81 Since the value of the smallest coin denominations was rather an abstract, compulsory rate, vested by poli tical authority after the initial consolidation of the political power the Latins in Constantinople, there was no pr actical need of minting large 80 See the treaty of Isaac II Angelus with the crusaders of the Third Crusade in February 24, 1190 according to which one hyperpyron was exchanged for 120 stamena, either old or new. in Str. Lishev, Za Pronikvaneto na Parite v Feodalna Bulgaria [ About money introduction if feudal Bulgaria] ( Sofia: BAN, 1958), pp. 145-146. 81 Thomas J. Sargent and Francois Velde, The Big Problems of Small Changes (Princeton: Princeton UP, 2001), pp. 51-52.

PAGE 270

270 module coins. Little wonder, then, that given the difficulties of the Latins in Constantinople, who, as reported by Choniates, in their want for money resorted to melting down statues for securing material for their worthless copper coins,82 towards the end of 1220s they started a massive production of small module coins. This tr end is also noticeable in the money production of the other political actors in the region. Soon after small m odule coins were issued by the Latins, the mints of both the Nicaean Empire and the Despotate of Epirus al so struck series of small module copper coins. In response to th e flux of small module coins, the political authorities in Bulgaria, (perhaps losing the urban center where the eventual mint was located) resorted to cutting the coins with large modules to the level of weight of the small coins in circulation in an attempt to prevent the drain ou t of their large module co ins. According to the archaeological evidence, the coexistence of both large and small coins in the regional commercial exchange became quite beneficial for the producers of sm all module coins, as exemplified by the minting practices in Thessalo nike at the time of Manuel Ducas Comnenus (1230-1237). Initially, the fiscal au thorities of the Empire of Th essalonike started to melt down Bulgarian truncated coins. But it seems that so regular and massive became the flux of truncated coins in Thessalonike that instead of melting th em, they started merely to counterstrike the fractions of the broken Bulgarian coins and added th em to the series of their small module coins. Significant amounts of those counterstruck fractions of coins came back and spread over the Bulgarian territories reaching its northernmost regions.83 The evidence of hoarded and single 82 N. Choniates, Historia pp. 357-358 83 See for instance the quantitative analysis of the hoards Pres lav VI, Silistra II, Nisovo, Ustovo as well as the single coins from Turnovo, Preslav and the village on the top of Sevtopolis in Iv. Jordanov, Moneti i Monetno obryshtenie v Bulgaria 1082-1261, pp 122-226; For the hoard from Vidin see Vl. Penchev, Kolektivna Nahodka s Medni (Bilonovi) Skifati, XIII-XIV vek ot Vidin [Hoard of copper ( billon) scyphati 13th-14th centuries from Vidin] Numizmatika i Epigrafika No 3 ( 2003),pp. 130-159; For the hoard of Petrich see Vl. Penchev, Kolektivna Nahodka ot Medni ( Bilonovi) Skifati, ot Purvata Polovina na XIII vek Namereni krai Petrich [Hoard of copper ( billon) scyphati from the first half of the 13th century, found near Petrich] ( Sofia: Agato, 2003).

PAGE 271

271 coins from Petrich, Vidin, Silistra, Preslav, Tu rnovo, Melnik, and elsewhere of Thessalonikan coins, counterstruck on truncated fractions of Bulgarian large module imitative coins is very informative for the intensity of money turnover at the first half of the thirteenth century and, accordingly, for the parameters of regional trad e. The massive presence of Thessalonikan coins in Bulgaria during the second quart er of the thirteenth century, second only to that of Bulgarian and Latin imitative coins, unambiguously defines the economic importance of Thessalonike for the Bulgarian inland trade and its connection to the international Mediterranean trade system.84 The intensive trade connections between Turnovo and Thessalonike, demonstrated by the spread of Thessalonikan regular and counterstruck money in Bulgar ia, helps to clarify also the reasoning of the massive imitative coinage undertaken by the Bulgarians and Latins. It sets the arguments of D. M. Metcalf defining the imitative coinage as military money of expedience not necessarily indicating an incr ease of coin circulation85 at variance with the archaeological evidence. Metcalfs proposition would have some grounds if supported by an adequate number of hoards, composed of a single type of coins or at least of coins produced by a single political subject Byzantium, the Latin Empire, or Bulgaria. To be sure, there are some hoards of original Byzantine money buried before the start of Bu lgarian imitations, although not as many as claimed by Metcalf.86 More than 90 percent of the hoard s containing Latin imitations (buried 84 See for instance the single coin finds in Turnovo, according to K. Dochev, T rnovo, Sixth-Fourteenth centuries The Economic History of Byzantium, pp 673-678. See also the single coin finds in Preslav according to Zh. Zhekova, Za Priemstvenostta mejdu Preslav i Shumen po Numizmatichni Danni [About the succession between Preslav and Shumen according to the numismatic data] in Tradicii i Priemstvenost v Bulgaria i na Balkanite prez srednite vekove (V. Turnovo: University of Veliko Turnovo, 2003) pp. 220-229. 85 D. M. Metcalf, Byzantin oBulgarica: the Second Bulgarian Empire and the problem of Bulgarian imitative trachea before and after 1204," Numismatic Circular vol. 81 (1973), pp. 418421. 86 In support of his claim Metcalf cites as halfand half hoards (composed of 50% full billon and 50 % devalued billon) hoards containing predominantly Latin and Bulgarian imitations, such as Kazanluk 1195, Toulovo 1208; Kiustendil 1208, which is, in fact, true, but highly misleading regarding the saving and military character of these hoards.

PAGE 272

272 after 1206-8) are mixed with Bulgarian imitations or coins of the Nicaean and Thessalonikan empires, or, more often, with all of them.87 Among the other hoards are counted the homogenous gold hoards (such as the electrum hoard of Zlatarica) and a few billon hoards, which, except the hoard of Strazhitsa (35 kg ) contain rather sm all numbers of coins (e.g. Turnovo I with 53 coins and Turnovo VIII with 9; Preslav III with 22 an d Prelav V with 7; Vereya III with 13).88 All of these types of hoards suggest, indeed, the pres ence of money, unused in commercial exchange either due to some emergency or, as D. M. Metc alf argues, buried by soldiers as savings simply because there was nothing this money could buy.89 The logic of the latter, however, is thoroughly invalidated not only by the sharp incr ease of the urban coin circulation, as demonstrated by the urban single coin evidence, but also by the monetary turnover in the country, exemplified by the coin finds of the vi llage on the top of Sevtopolis and the cemetery discovered near todays village of Yantra.90 Undoubtedly, part of the causes th at led to the start of the im itative coinage in Bulgaria was tied to the necessity of paying the soldiers of the newly formed Bulgarian army, but as it seems, this was not the main use of the imitative coinage.91 The dominance of hoards with 87 See the detailed description of the hoards in Iv. Jordanov, Moneti i Monetno obryshtenie v Bulgaria 1082-126, pp 135-227. 88 See Table A-2 Hoards 1185-1203 in the Appendix. 89 D. Metcalf, Coinage and Coin finds Associated with a Military Presence in the Medieval Balkans in Kovanje and kovnice anti kog i srednevekovnog novca ed. by Vladimir Kondi (Belgrade: Narodni Muzej. 1976), pp 89-97. 90 See the data collected for the village on the top of Se vtopolis in the Chapter II; For the necropoleis near Yantra the period of 1204-1256 is presented by 43 copper coins while the entire period of the 11th the end of the 12th century is presented by 3 folles for. For details, see Iv. Bachvarov, Yantrenski Nekropoli [Yantras necropolis], (V. Turnovo: Vital, 1993) p. 64 91 Metcalfs assumption that the imitative coinage wa s necessitated to pay Asens Cuman allies faces two counterarguments. The first is that Bulgarian imitative coinage according to the coin material so-far known is initiated as early as 1203-4, when the secession of Bulgaria was alread y admitted by the Byzantines and the main battles had been already fought. Second, it is unlikely that the Cumans were paid in a piecemeal basis with (copper) petty cash, and not in bulk money (gold) as an autonomous military unit.

PAGE 273

273 highly assorted content, the intensity of the commercial exchange exemplified by the velocity of money turnover between Bulgarian provinces and Th essalonike and, last but not least, the radical increase of the money circulation in the urba n and rural areas suggest that no matter its immediate reason, the imitative coinage was the n ecessary medium of exchange that catalyzed local and regional trade. This explanation, however, sheds some li ght also on the question why the regional powers, Bulgaria and the Latin Empire did not mint money officially, in the names of their rulers. It seems that despite the political fragme ntation of the former Byzantine Empire, the lack of desire on the part of the ne w political actors for changing its monetary system has its salient commercial considerations, directed towards pr eserving the economic integration of the region. The imitative coins produced by Latins and Bulgar ians were considered by their contemporaries as merely filling the gaps of the old Byzantine monetary system, the function of which was crucial for securing their political aspirations. Ther efore, none of the local powers dared to alter a well working and highly trusted monetary system, in which the main value of its petty coins, i.e. their ratio of exchange to th e golden nominal, was vested by the public consensus upon its compulsory market rate, not by their intrinsi c metal value. In 1203, Kaloyan (1997-1207) was crowned and formally granted by Pope Innocen t III the right of minting in his own name. Baldwin of Flanders had this right before he was elected a Latin Emperor. However, neither Kaloyan nor Baldwin and, later, Henry, issued m oney in their names and dared to impede the commercial exchange and tax collection by exerci sing their monarchic re galia. Kaloyans asking for and receiving the right of minting by Innocen t III signals rather an attempt for propagating and legitimizing his political ambitions than so me real intentions for changing the reigning monetary system. This might have been an especial ly delicate subject at the time of building the

PAGE 274

274 Bulgarian Greek anti-Latin coalition with the provincial Byzantine townsmen, which might still have had the bitter taste le ft by the effects of debasement of the nomisma in the eleventh century. An eventual issuing of gold or copper coins in the name s of the Bulgarian or of the Latin emperors would only set the notion of insecurity in commercial exchange, unleashing endless monetary speculations and would aliena te the Greek urban population, which any and all of the mentioned rulers strove to incorporate. However, since neither the Latins nor Kaloyan had the necessary political environment for issuing money in their names, the best line for making trustworthy their power was to continue to issue coins imitating the old trustworthy Byzantine money. With the ascendance of Ivan II Asen on Bulgarian throne in 1218 and the following political stabilization came along th e increased interest in intern ational trade manifested by the commercial treaties with Dubrovnik in 1230s and in 1253, discussed above. Bulgarian political hegemony in the Balkans in 1230s created now an adequate political basis for issuing money officially, in the name of Ivan II Asen, who, laconically summarized the situation in his inscription in the church of Holy Forty Martyrs in Turnovo: Because the Greeks and Franks had no other emperor than me.92 The coin was designed not as re al means of exchange, however, but rather as a propagandistic instrument for his ambitions of building a Bulgarian-Byzantine Empire. The commemorative and propagandistic char acter of Bulgarian nomisma is evident in its higher (18 carats) content of gold than thos e issued by John III Ducas Vatatzes (16-17 carats) and in its limited emission. Ivan II Asens copper coins had the same purpose. Both types of coins have a distinctly Byzantin e iconography with a definite in fluence of the Thessalonikean mint, where they, most likely, were struck, in commemoration of the 1230 Bulgarian victory 92 Iv. Dujcev, Iz Starata Bulgarska Knijnina [Old Bulgarian literature] Vol. II.p.97

PAGE 275

275 over the despot of Epirus, Theodore Comnenus. Obviously, the issuing of gold and copper coins in the name of Ivan II Asen was not a break wi th the Byzantine monetary system, but again, its continuation. Although this monetary system, as most of the monetary systems at the time, consisted of eclectic elements. The Latin and Bu lgarian imitative coins, the gold nomismata of Nicaea, Bulgaria and Thessalonike, the silver coin s of Thessalonike and the copper coins of all of these it was still th e old Byzantine system ba sed on the Roman pound (327g.). The general picture derived from the quantitativ e analysis of the collected data shows that during the period 1204-1257 the general number of the hoards increased drastically in comparison to the previous periods. While for the period 1081-1185 there are only 7 hoards known from Bulgaria, for the subsequent two decades (11851203) the number of hoards increased more than five times. This trend a ccelerated even further for the period 1204-1257 and the number of hoards reached 109 within fifty year s, which is thirty times more than the pre1185 period. This drastic augmentation of hoarded money immediately poses the question of the nature of this phenomenon. Was the remarkable boost in hoarding in 1204-56 only a proportional reflection of the increase in politic al insecurity of the region or it was an indication also for the shift from land-based, state-commanded economy to a public economy of exchange, where more people operated with more money? Indeed, the period of 1204-1257, especially it s first and last decades, was marked by almost constant warfare and intern al conflicts, to a degree incompar able to the Comnenian era. In fact, only the period of Ivan II Asens reign (1218-1241) was marked by a general political stability. Ascending the throne in 1197, Kaloyan continued even mo re rigorously the aggressive policy of Asen against Byzantium, redirected towa rds the Latins after 120 4. His successor, Boril, (1207-1218), attempted to continue the political line of his predecessor, but suffered losses in all

PAGE 276

276 of his attempts against the Latin s, the Hungarians, and the Serbs. The collected monetary data reveals complete concordance with the political development witnessed by the written sources. The period of permanent warfare between the fall of Constantinople in 1204 and the ascendance of Ivan II Asen in 1218 is marked by more than a half of the concealed hoards in the period 1204-1256. The hoards of this sub-period are quite ev enly divided by the three main regions of Bulgaria: Thrace, Moesia, and Macedonia. While the intensive hoarding in Thrace and Macedonia clearly reflects the ongoing combat there, the hoarding in Moesia, a region undisturbed by military operations at the time, is tied, most likely, to th e political change in Turnovo in 1207, when Boril, suspected as a main organizer of the plot against Kaloyan, married his widow and acquired the throne. The localiz ation and the compositi on of the hoards in Northern Bulgaria, therefore, must be associated with the persecutions launched against the supporters of the legal heirs of the crown, the sons of Asen, who fled the country. The eventual domestic disturbances are confirmed mainly by th e location of the hoards in this region. About half of them were buried within the walls of the main administ rative centers Turnovo, Preslav, Dorostorum (Druster, Silistra) and Lovech.93 One way to explain the dramatic increase in hoarding is to examine the single coin data from urban areas, under the assumption that th e increase in hoarding was a function of the increased market activities and not just of political insecurity.94 Within all urban centers where coinage was found in sufficient quantity, the in crease of hoarding is paralleled by relevant increase of the single coins circulation. In Pres lav there are 1106 single coins, but only 3 hoards 93 See the detailed description of the hoards in Iv. Jordanov, Moneti i Monetno obryshtenie v Bulgaria 1082-1261, pp. 135-22 Also, in Zdr. Pliakov, Monetnite Nahodki ot XIII-XIV vek kato Izvor za Vunshnoturgovskite Vryzki na Srednovekovna Bulgaria [ The coin finds of 13th -14th centuries as a source for the international trade links of medieval Bulgaria] Istoricheski Pregled No.3-4 ( 2002), pp.3-74. 94 See Table A-6 Urban Coin Finds in the Appendix

PAGE 277

277 with 249 coins. In Turnovo, there is more hoarded money than single finds, but only because of an extraordinarily large hoard of 4265 billon coins (Turnovo VIII), which was discovered in the vicinity of the town and may be related to the change of political power in 1207.95 The case of Vereya, burned by the Latins in 1208 and yet displa ying an increase of n early three times more single finds in comparison to the previous peri od, supports the general notion that the drastic increase of hoarded money resulted from the availability of more cash in more hands.96 The same is noticeable in Melnik, denoting its gr owing importance in the inland trade, which compelled Alexius Slav to move his residen ce there in the early 1200s and to become the economic basis for the elevation of Melnik into an episcopal center few decades later. As mentioned above, the evidence for abrupt increase of monetary circulation is not restricted to the urban zones. As demonstrated by the coin eviden ce from the village on the top of the ancient Sevtopolis, it affected also the countryside.97 A similar rise of money ci rculation in the country is demonstrated by the coin finds from the late medieval cemetery near the modern village of Yantra, in the district of Ve liko Turnovo. Three eleventh-to-twelve century Byzantine coins have been found there in addition to 43 coins dated to the first half of th e thirteenth century.98 A new era of political instability began w ith the death of Ivan II Asen after 1241. The distribution of the hoards, now concentrated in the Northern Bulgaria, clearly indicates the contraction of Bulgarian territory south of the Balkan Mountain s and the effects of the Mongol incursions that continued long after 1241 and well into the late thirteenth century. During the subsequent period (1241-57), the number of gold coins found in hoards increased dramatically. 95 Iv. Jordanov, Moneti i Monetno obryshtenie v Bulgaria 1082-1261, p.148. 96 See Table A-6 Urban Coin Finds in the Appendix 97 See Chapter 3, p. 83 ff 98 Iv. Bachvarov, Yantrenski Nekropoli [Yantras necropolis], (V. Turnovo: Vital, 1993) p. 64

PAGE 278

278 While no gold appears in the earl y thirteenth century, more than half of the hoards now are mixed with or entirely made up of gold coins. The average content of 10-13 gold coins in most hoards (excluding those of Tvur dica (236), Pirgovo (76), Shumen (51), and Lovetch (27)), suggests a certain circulatory char acter of gold nominal. This is further substantiated by the presence of Nicaean hyperpyra, all struck by John III Ducas-Vatatzes (1222-1254), especially those of his fourth and latest emission a fact revealing that they were not accumulated over a long time, but were, very likely, part of the current circulation. Of course, it is possible that some of the hoards were collected later than the obser ved period, but this probability is not very high given that the most frequent hyperpyra of Th eodore II Lascaris (1254-58) and, especially, of Michael VIII Palaeologos (1259-82) do not appear in hoards un til the end of the thirteenth century. Last but not least, the ci rculatory character of gold nomina l is suggested also by the fact that almost half of the hoards cont aining gold are mixed with copper. The support for the proposition about the circ ulatory character of gold nominal, however, is not restricted to the hoard ev idence. The urban coin data also shows a general increase of gold in circulation. The picture of the twelfth cen tury gold circulation, composed of a single hyperpyron of John II Comnenus (1118-1143) found in Preslav and two electrum coins of Isaac II Angel (1185-1195) from Turnovo is now cha nged into 10 hyperpyra from Turnovo, 3 from Preslav, 6 from Shumen, and 3 from Cherven.99 Silver coins also appeared for the first time in urban centers of Bulgaria: 9 are known from Preslav, 3 from Turnovo, 1 from Shumen. The regular appearance in circulation of gold could be, certainly, linked to the mass practice of 99 Iv. Jordanov, Moneti i Monetno obryshtenie v Bulgaria 1082-1261, p.113; Iv. Jordanov, Harakter na Monetnoto Tsirkulacia v Srednovekovnite Bulgarski Stolici, Preslav i Turnovo [Character istics of the coin circulation in the medieval Bulgarian capitals Presla v and Turnovo] in P. Petrov, ed. Srednovekovniat Bulgarski Grad (Sofia: n.p., 1980), pp. 229-239; Zh. Zhekova, Za Priemstvenostta mejdu Preslav i Shumen po Numizmatichni Danni [About the succession between Preslav and Shumen according to the numismatic data] in Tradicii i Priemstvenost v Bulgaria i na Balkan ite prez srednite vekove (V. Turnovo, University of Veliko Turnovo, 2003) pp. 220-229; V. Dimova Srednovekovniat Cherven [The medieval Cherven] (Sofia: BAN, 1985) pp. 273-286.

PAGE 279

279 fractioning the billon coins, reaching the extremes, beyond which the coins fractions became merely inoperative for both commercial transactions and tax purposes. This assumption is thoroughly supported by the character of the mone tary turnover. Afte r the introduction of Bulgarian national billon coinage in 1257, gold disappeared from both hoard and single coin finds. Money Production and Circulation, 1257 1400 The reign of Constantine Tich-Asen (1257-1277) m arks a turning point in the history of Bulgarian coinage. The growing concern with obviously uncontrolled fractioning of coins is registered clearly by the fact that immediately after his crowning, the new Bulgarian Emperor issued an official, large module of copper coin in large quantities. The newly elected ruler, a noble from Skopje, appeared on his first coins em ission as Constantine. The name Asen, was added only in 1258, when he married Irene, the daughter of the Nicaean Emperor, Theodore II Lascaris and the granddaughter of Ivan II As en, which gave him the reason for such an epithet.100 It is of little surprise that the monetary reform in Bulgaria coin cided in time with the money reorganization undertaken by Theodore II Lascaris, who ha d stopped the minting of small module coins a few years before Constantine Tich.101 However, Lascaris was aware that such a reform would be successful only if it was applie d elsewhere in the commercially interlocked territories of the Eastern Balkans. Therefore, the moneta ry reform in Bulgaria might be seen as 100 Georgius Acropolita, Opera ed. by A. Heisenberg. Vol. 1-2 ( Lipsae: In aedibus B.G. Teubneri 1903) pp. 153153 101 Ccile Morrisson, Byzantine Money: Its Production and Circulation in The Economic History of Byzantium: from the seventh trough the fifteenth centuries Ed in Chief A. Laiou (Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, D. C, 2002), pp. 909-966; Vl. Penchev, Kolektivna Nahodka s Medni (Bilonovi) Skifati, XIII-XIV vek ot Vidin [Hoard of copper ( billon) scyphati 13th-14th centuries from Vidin] Numizmatika i Epigrafika No 3 ( 2003),pp. 130-159.

PAGE 280

280 part of the matrimonial alliance between Lascar is and Constantine shortly after the latters ascension to power. Constantine struck six emissions of copper coins, the volume of which was estimated as more than ten million.102 Their weight of 2.5-3.5 g and size of 23-27 mm, between those of the smaller Nicaean tetartera ( ~2.2 g; 15-18 mm) and the larger Nicaean stamena (~ 4.3 g; ~35 mm) seem to point to the efforts of the Bulgarian gov ernment to create trustworthy money that could be used in commercial transac tions, but at the same time be cheaply produced. The design of Constantine Asens coin s noticeably differs from the roughmade Latin and Bulgarian imitative coins. The coins of Constantine Asen have aes thetically designed a nd carefully engraved legends, combining new Bulgarian with traditiona l Byzantine symbols. They remained the basic medium of exchange for more th an thirty years and circulated together with the copper coins struck by Georgi I Terter (1282-1292). The introd uction of large official emissions of copper, however, was not directed towards replaci ng the Byzantine monetary system. Instead, Constantine Asens goal was to replace its inoperative details with more functional parts. Striking gold remained, apparently, an excl usive prerogative of th e Nicaean emperors. In parallel Constantin es coins, the late 1260s also witnessed th e appearance of copper coins, struck by the despot Jacob Svetoslav a nd by Mico Asen. Being both pretenders for the Bulgarian throne, their coins were issued mainly for political reasons. The coins of Mico Asen and Svetoslav had rough and awkward iconographi es, showing a complete misunderstanding of the legends symbolism and, as suggested by the li mited number of specimens, such coins must 102 K. Dochev, Bulgarski srednovekovni moneti, XIII-XV v [Bulgarian medieval coin s, XIII-XV centuries] (V. Turnovo: Tsentreks, 2003),p. 44.

PAGE 281

281 have been struck in some extemporaneous provincial mint, with hardly any economic significance, at all.103 The picture of monetary circulation for the se cond half of the thirteenth century is very different from that of the fi rst half of th e century. Despite much turmoil between 1277 and 1300, which culminated in the ascension of a Mongol warlord to the Bulgarian throne, the general number of hoards is much smaller than that of the previous period. Only 22 hoards, 13 of which are from the site of Riakhovec alone, have been associated with the combination of Mongols depredations, foreign invasions of almost all Bulgarian neighbors, internal strife (the rebellion of Ivaylo, 1377-1379), and th e increasing separatism.104 The coin evidence from towns confirms the picture. While the disappearance of gold a nd silver from circulat ion in towns could be explained in terms of the introduction of the large billon coin s of higher value, the general decline in the total number of coins in circulation may be associated only w ith the political crisis that deteriorated the network of commercial exch ange. The situation during the last quarter of the thirteenth century is best illustrated by the mone tary finds in Riakhovec, a small fortress, located in about 20 km northward of Turnovo. Riakhovec produced 13 hoards with 770 early thirteenth century but only 3 coins of the second half of the century 2 struck by Constantine Asen and 1 by Michael VIII Palaeologos.105 The last quarter of the thir teenth century was also a peri od of hardship for Preslav. The campaign of Michael Glabas Tarc haniotes against Ivaylo in 1279 not only sacked and burned the towns of Ovetch and Preslav, but also moved th eir inhabitants on the southern slope of the 103 K. Dochev, Bulgarski srednovekovni moneti, XIII-XV v p.44 104 See Table A-4 Hoards 1241-1257 in the Appendix 105 Iv. Bachvarov, Moneti ot Riakhovec [Coins from Riakhovec] (Veliko Turnovo Gorna Oriahovica: Museums of Turnovo and Gorna Oriahovica, 1994), pp. 115-135

PAGE 282

282 Balkan Mountains.106 While the locatio n of Ovetch on the main road between Turnovo and Varna soon resulted in towns reanimation, Presla v never revived. Although it continued to be an administrative and ecclesiastic center, its econo mic functions were transferred now into its former guardian fortress, Shumen. Unsurprisingl y, the deteriorating situation of Northern Bulgaria affected also the econom ic activities in other regions of the Balkans, as demonstrated by single finds from Melnik, Vereya, and the village on the top of Sevtopolis. The political developments of the last quarter of the thirteenth century may thus explain the interruption of drastic increase of coin circul ation visible ever since the late twelfth century and culminating in 12181240. It seems that the political crisis of 1277-1300 was very different from that of the early 1200s. While the political insecurity of 1185-1218 was characterized by a mere change of political authority over towns an d their hinterland, which had left the agriculture and commercial infrastructure largely intact, the systematic devastation of the country accompanying the late thirteenth-century crisis re sulted in an apparent contraction of market activities. The ascension of Theodore Svetoslav (130013 21) put an end to the political crisis and the ensuing economic recession. The new ruler made long distance trade a main priority, which led to the introduction of silver coinage as more appropriate medium of exchange. The immediate reason for the introduction of silver in Bulgaria is, most likel y, the quick devaluation of silver on the international markets.107 The Venetian al pezzo system of minting, in which the weight and purity of each coin were individually controlled, pr evented quick response to price fluctuations of silver on the inte rnational markets. Thus, the price of silver in Venice remained 106 H. Loparev, Vizantiiskii Poet Manuel Phill. K Istor ii Bolgarii v XIII-XIV veke [The Byzantine poet Manuel Phill. About the history of Bulgaria in 13th -14th centuries] SPb, 1891.p. 52 107 St. Avdev, Monetnata systema v Srednovekovna Bulgaria [ Monetary system of medieval Bulgaria] (Sofia: Besike, 2005), p.153

PAGE 283

283 the same while outside Venice silver dropped well below it. In Byzantium, however, the traditional method of striking was al marco, a method in which a variable number of coins were struck from a fixed amount or quantity of precious metal. This resu lted in great variations in both weight and size between the individu al coins, but, on the other hand, the al marco method allowed for a more adequate adaptation to the pri ce fluctuations of the precious metals. Thus, the fluctuations in the international price of silver and the difference in monetary practices caused an increased demand of silver outside Venice, especi ally in the Eastern Mediterranean. Silver was now bought abroad and exchanged for gold in Veni ce at a very profitable rate. That gold was then exchanged for cheaper silver (or its commodity equivalence) outside Venice. In Byzantium, the increased Venetian demand fo r silver in exchange for gold led to the striking of the silver basilika, a factor that must have compelled Svetoslav to follow suit. Moreover, Svetoslav already secured his acce ss to the international trade routes by the incorporating into Bulgaria the region of Mesembria and Anchialos, the so-called granary of Constantinople. Venetian coins stopped circulating in Bulgar ia at the time of Pietro Granedigo (12891311), when the ratio between ducat and grosso was 1:18 in Venice a nd 1:24 in Byzantium (as well as Bulgaria). Venetian coins reappeared ag ain during the rule of Franzesco Dandolo (13291339), when the ratio in Venice was adju sted to the market price of 1:24.108 According to the qualitative analysis of Svetoslavs silver coins, his coinage was struck in three series, with a gradual increase in the total number of speci mens and a concomitant decrease in weight, following the fluctuations of the price of silver and gold.109 Like the Byzantine basilikon, the 108 St. Avdev, Monetnata systema v Srednovekovna Bulgaria p 153 109 V. Penchev and J. Yurukova, Bulgarsiki Srednovekobni Moneti i Pechati pp. 99-108.

PAGE 284

284 Bulgarian silver coin was flat and even had the same fineness (94%). It was, however, a little heavier than the half-basilikon (1,6g), but of almost the same size as the basilikon (20-21 mm). The silver coinage came to dominate the ci rculation during the reign of Svetoslavs successor, Michael Shishman (1323-1330), who struck five types of silver and four types of copper. However, the hightime of the Bulgarian silver coinage came with the reign of Ivan Alexander (1331-1371), who issued two silver and five copper series in tens of millions of specimens, which dominated the market up to the end of the century. The increase of coin circulation, as demons trated by the urban single finds, denotes a indicates growth of market activities at the loca l level in the Bulgarian Northeast. Even Preslav, which had been reduced to in significance by the de vastating campaign of Michael Glabas Tarchaniotes of 1279 displays noticeable signs of economic progress, especially after the political stabilization brought by the reign of Ivan Alexander (13321371). It seems that the growing political separatism of the Dobrudja Despotate from Turnovo did not affect the economic integrity of the region. The immobilized coin type of Ivan Alexander with Michael Asen, which had been struck in the early years of Ivan Shishmans reign was the dominant coin in circulation in the Despotat es centers Karvuna and Kaliakra.110 The main feature of the urban monetary tur nover, after the third decade of the fourteenth century, is the great diversity of single coins. In turn, this fact sugge sts an intensive money circulation between local regional centers. One th ird of all coin finds from Karvuna is made up of coins of Ivan Alexanders (11 specimens), the rest of it is 21 coins struck by no less than 12 110 D. M. Metcalf, Some comments on the metrology of coins of Ivan Alexander and of Ivan Sratsimir Studii i Cercet ri de Numismatic (1975), pp. 127-138; K. Dochev, Niakolko Belezhki varhu Srebarnoto Monetosechene na Ivan Alexander Mihail Asen [ Few notices about the silver coinage of Ivan Alexander with Michael Asen] Nimizmatica No.2 (1983), pp. 5-15; M. Dimitrov, Monetite ot Dionisopolis Karvuna, [The coins of Dionisopolis Karvuna] Dobrudja Vol 12 (1995).pp. 173-179.; V. Parushev, Srednovekovni moneti ot Kaliakra, [Medieval coins from Kaliakra] Izvestia na Naroden Muzej Varna Vol. 26. (1990). pp. 141-147.

PAGE 285

285 coin producers. The picture of m oney circulation in Ovetch, Turnovo, and Shumen is similar. It is heavily dominated by the coins of Ivan Alexande r and it displays a great variety of the coin types. It represents 13 additional coin producers from the second half of th e fourteenth century Byzantium, Venice, the Despotate of John II Orsi ni, Serbia, Walachia, Hungary, Moldavia, the Golden Horde, and its successors, the Duchy of Athens and the Principality of Achaia, the Ottomans, and, of course, the Bulgaria n rulers of Bdin and Dobrudja. The situation in Thrace, however, as demonstr ated by the coin circulation in Vereya and the village on top of the ancien t Sevtopolis is quite different. Th e Catalan and Mongol raids, the following Black Death and, finally, the Turkish incu rsions turned the Uppe r Thracian Plain, as demonstrated by the fifteenth century Ottoman cizye registers, into a desolate region. There are no indications in the written sour ces, however, that the same was true for Melnik. Perhaps, the town was affected by the Catalan raids in the region at the opening of the fourteenth century, but in the course of the following years, its in corporation into the semi-independent political formation of the protosevast Hrelio and then into the Serbian empire of Duan did not leave any signs of destruction in the town. Therefore, the explanation of lack of coin finds in Melnik after the reign Andronicus II (1282-1328) is matter of further research. The analysis of the coin circulation in four teenth century Bulgaria, reveals a steady trend of gradual monetization, in which trade played obviously an important role. Hoards are now made up mainly of silver, the preferable medium of exchange in long-distance trade. Its increasing presence in hoards chronologically and topographically follows the Ottoman advance, whose catastrophic impact virtually closed th e avenues of long-distance inland trade. The dominance of silver in hoards si gnals a certain division of the commercial sector into two levels: a local, one, in which the coins of small denomination (copper) dominated the everyday

PAGE 286

286 activities, and a regional or international, one, dominated by silver. The majority of mixed, silver, and copper hoards, marki ng a possible link between regional and local trade, came from the large urban centers of Turnovo, Vidin, and Sili stra. Mixed hoards of gold and copper coins of the period are few (only two) for a period of al most a century, and their small size indicates a combination of family savings and money in circulation. The group of hoards of gold is dominated by small-size hoards of various coin ty pes, an indication of long-term accumulation, a practice concomitant with the higher sector of middle class. More than 95 percent of all hoards of silver contain coins, struck by more than two rulers. The leadership among this group is held by Veni ce, whose coins are among 24 out of 60 hoards (40 percent). This is even more impressive wh en compared to the lack of any Venetian coins from the thirteenth-centu ry finds. The impressive portion of Ve netian coins in the turnover of the fourteenth-century Bulgarian money raises the question of the role of the Venetian merchants played in the inland Bulgarian tr ade, and, respectively, about the existence of a local merchant class. This remarkable amount of Venetian mone y suggests that even the interregional trade was dominated by the ubiquitous Italian merchants. However, some light on the phenomenon is shed by the research of D. M. Metcal f, on the thirteenth-century widespread Venetian imitations in the southern Balkans in the thirteenth century.111 After the signaling article of D. M. Metcalf, a number of Bulgarian and Serbian numismatists have reconsidered a significant number of Venetian grossi found in hoards from the regions of Ve lbuzhd (Kjustendil), Macedonia, Serdica (Sofia), Bdin (Vidin), and the Rhodopean region of Tsepena (Velingrad ) as local imitations.112 111 D. M. Metcalf Echoes of the name of Lorenzo Tiepolo: imitations of Venetian grossi in the Balkans Numismatic Chronicle VII series Vol. XII ( 1972), pp. 183-191 112 Metcalf Echoes of the name of Lorenzo Tiepolo; St. Dimtrievi Ostave koje sadrzhe srpski srednovekovni novca is perioda do 1371 [Hoards of Serbian medieval coins up to 1371] Spomenik No. 1 (Srpska Akademija Nauka i Umetnosti, 1981), pp. 12 ff; A. Jovanovi Ostava Srednevekovnog Novca iz Tetovo[A hoard of medieval money from Tetovo] Numizmatichar No. 3 ( 1980), pp. 169-180; St. Avdev, Imitacii na Vencianski Groshove ot

PAGE 287

287 The same was confirmed for the Venetian co ins found in hoards in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in Ohrid, Bitola Prilep, Titov Veles, and tip.113 Imitations of Venetian grossi appeared in large numbers in hoards from the territory of Dobrudja Despotate and elsewhere, but also in single finds from Turnovo, Shumen, Preslav and Karvuna.114 Most hoards containing Venetian imitative coins were found in the countryside (T ishevica I and II, the hoards found around Sofia and along the upper Struma Valley as well as those from Dobrudja), others in sparsely inhabited regions, such as the Rhodopes Mountains (Kamenica, Tsruncha III, Krichim, Bachkovo and others), hardly any ce nters of interregional or inte rnational trade. This, however, suggests that the Venetian imitatives were used fo r local purposes with litt le if any presence of Venetian merchants in the Balkan inland trade. Quite certainly, the mass appearance of imitative Venetian grossi in the Balkan coin circulation was facilitated by the growth of political separatism during the second half of the fourteenth century. Since there was no sufficient flux of real Venetian grossi the Venetian imitatives took the role of international currency (especially after the collapse of Duans empire), which the weak political control ov er the currency and the inadequate monetary policy of th e local powers made indispensable. Little wonder, then, that the mass appearance of Venetian imitatives comes fr om Macedonia, the region with most intense political fragmentation, and from the peripheral zones of Bdin Prin cipality ( Tish evica I and II) Bulgaria [Imitations of Venetian grosses from Bulgaria] Numismatica Vol 1 (1982), pp. 19-26; Vl. Penchev, Kolektivna Nahodka s Srebarni Bulgarski Imitacionni Moneti ot XIV vek [ Hoard of silver Bulgarian imitative coins from 14th century] Minalo Vol. 1 (2000), pp. 40-42. 113 Katerina Hristovska, A contribution to the Fourteenth-Century Venetian Imitative Coinage Foud on the Territory of Republic of Macedonia Macedonian Numismatic Journal No2 ( 1996), pp. 139-167. 114 Vl. Penchev and J. Yurukova, Bulgarsiki Srednovekobni Moneti i Pechati [ Bulgarian medieval coins and seals] (Sofia: Bulgarski Hudozhnik, 1990), pp. 195-199. Dochev, Moneti i Parichno Obrushtenie v Turnovo, XIIXIV v [ Coins and money turnover in Turnovo] (Turnovo: Vital, 1992), pp. 181-183; Zh. Zhekova, Za Priemstvenostta mejdu Preslav i Shumen po Numizmatichni Danni [About the succession between Preslav and Shumen according to the numismatic data] in Tradicii i Priemstvenost v Bulgaria i na Balkanite prez srednite vekove (V. Turnovo, University of Veliko Turnovo, 2003) pp. 220-229; V.Parushev, Srednovekovni moneti ot Kaliakra, [Medieval coins from Kaliakra] Izvestia na Naroden Muzej Varna Vol. 26. (1990).pp. 141-147

PAGE 288

288 and Turnovian Bulgaria ( Rhodopes region). To a certain degree, the hoards containing Venetian imitative grossi delineate also the routes of intraregional trade from the inland provinces towards the trade outposts of Thessalonike and the Black Sea co astal towns and from the mining regions of Tsepena, in the Rhodopes Mountains; of Vratza, and of Samokov along the Valley of Struma towards the Bay of Thessalonike. The hoards containing Venetian imitations from Macedonia, such as Dobrishte, Kichevo, Te tovo, Gostivar, Gradsko, and Ohrid suggest a variation of this route going fr om Sofia via the larger Macedoni an towns and arriving perhaps at the western coast of Epirus.115 A consequence of the regional political fr agmentation, the mass circulation of Venetian imitative money in Bulgaria provides evidence fo r the existence of a local merchant class, unrelated to landowning and agriculture. Since it was easy to test the fineness of gold coins via touchstones the ducat would have maintained its value beyond the areas of Venetian political and economic dominance. Nevertheless, so far there are no discoveries of ducats on the territory of late medieval Bulgaria, fact suggesting the limite d presence of Venetian merchants there. On the other hand, silver coins, the alternative monetary instrument of the long-distance trade, were harder to test for fineness, so they were us ually only accepted by people who trusted their alloy, i.e. the authority of their pr oducers. Therefore, the lower intrinsic value of the imitative grossi (fineness, weight) than the Venetian originals an d their high compulsory market rate, vested in them by the authority of Venetian economic power, made the imitative grosso much more 115 R. Mari Stobi -1937 Studie iz Srpske Numizmatike No. 20 (Belgrade: Nauc na knjiga 1956), pp.. 130-131; St. Dimtrievi Ostave koje sadrzhe srpski srednovekovni novca is perioda do 1371 [Hoards of Serbian medieval coins up to 1371] Spomenik No. 1 (Srpska Akademija Nauka i Umetnosti, 1981), pp. 12 ff; A. Jovanovi Ostava Srednevekovnog Novca iz Tetovo[ A hoard of medieval money from Tetovo] Numizmatichar No. 3 ( 1980), pp. 169-180; V.Bitrakova-Grozdanova, Prilog kon Ohrdiskata Kovnica ot XIV vek [ Contribution to Ohrids minting in 14th century] Istorja No.1 ( 1971), pp. 201-205; T. Gerasimov, Novi Moneti na Tsar Michael Asen [ New coins of emperor Michael Asen] Izvestia dn Bulgarskoto Arheologichesko Druzhestvo No 16-18 (1940), p.84; D. M. Metcalf, Echoes of the name of Lorenzo Tiepolo: imitations of Venetian grossi in the Balkans Numismatic Chronicle VII series Vol. XII (1972), pp. 183-191

PAGE 289

289 preferable means of exchange and, accordingl y, much more widespread than its original counterpart. Having in mind the necessary high leve l of organization for producing imitative Venetian grossi this production, undoubtedly, must have been closely related to and strictly controlled by the political authority, a fact mani festing in turn the political control over the domestic commercial forces and increased aristocr atic entrepreneurship. Most likely, given Ivan Alexanders personal involvement in trade, as demonstrated a bove, the main dealers of the Venetian imitatives were his or hi s familys personal trade agents. In support for this claim comes the existence of several hoards of substantial amount of silver, dominated by Venetians imitations, which could be hardly related to a regular trade activity.116 In support of this claim comes the ring-seal found w ithin the hoard of Kozarsko.117 It was engraved with a double-head eagle, a widespread sign of political authority in the late medieval Balk ans suggesting ties with the court in Turnovo. However, it should be kept in mind that in the course of the fourteenth century, especially during the reign of Ivan Alexander (1332-1371), the so-called system of free coinage was established and flourished. It was a system characterized by striking of coins from metal and by the order of private persons under the control of the stat e authorities. This widespread use of a free-coinage system is unambiguously manifested, as it will be seen further, by the presence of a significant portion of privately ordered coppe r money among the urban coin circulation. Therefore, besides for the trade agents of the monarch, the imitative Venetian coins must have been available for any professional merchant, w ho could bring the necess ary metal and pay the 116 Such as Tishevica I and II, Ruse, Vukovo, Dobrishte, Kamenica ( Template A-5 in the Appendix) 117 J. Yurukova, Monetni Nahodki Otrkiti v Bulgaria pr ez 1979 [Coin finds discovered in Bulgaria in 1979] Arheologia No1-2 ( 1981), pp. 126-130

PAGE 290

290 productive costs and taxes. This assumption is supported by the scale of the spread of the imitative Venetian coins on the territory of Bulg aria and their intensive concentration in mountain regions, whose toponymy suggests intensive mining.118 It is supported as well by the dominance of hoards with moderate amount of coins, hardly in possession or in disposition of persons related to the court in Turnovo or to its outgrowths g overning the appanages granted by the Bulgarian emperor.119 Another sign of private entrepreneurship comes from the hoard of Vukovo, where a ring with an inscription, (Lord, help the bearer) was found.120 Indeed, the inscription is insufficient to define precisely the origin of the ring bearer. Yet, compared to the ring seal of Kozarsko, it suggests rather an or dinary and private charact er than an official sign of power. Regrettably, what exact percent the imitation grossi are out of the total number Venetian silver coins cannot be determined, but the genera l impression is of a very high ratio, of perhaps 80-90%. Unfortunately, during the significant time gap between th e appearance of Metcalfs discoveries in 1972 (and the adoption of his thesis by the Bulgarian numismatists in 1980s) and the first numismatic records of hoards containing (allegedly) Vene tian coins of the 1890s, not a few of these hoards were scattered or merely lo st. However, secure data for hoards containing Venetian imitations exist for Tishev ica I and II; Kozarsko; Rakitovo; Silistra VI, Tsruncha III; Ruse, Kichevo; Igraliste, Dobrishte; Krupnik; Kniazhevo; Vukovo; Granica; Kostandovo; 118 Such as the hoards discovered in the region near Tsepen a. For the evidence of the local toponymy see St. Avdev, Monetnata systema v Srednovekovna Bulgaria [ Monetary system of medieval Bulgaria] (Sofia: Besike, 2005), p.158 119 See Template A-5 120 N. Mushmov, Kolektivni Nahodki na Moneti prez 1925-1926 [Hoards found in 1925-1926] Izvestia na Bulgarskiat Arheologicheski Institut Vol. 4 (IBAI) (1926-1927), pp. 321-326

PAGE 291

291 Rhodope; Krichim; Bachkovo; Kamenica; Drenovec; Vodica II; Vitinia; Vladaya and German III practically more than 90 % of the hoards containing Venetian money.121 The available sample of 653 silver coins of the large silver hoard Tishevica I yields 6 original Venetian grossi and 236 Bulgarian imitations (36%).122 In Tishevica II there are no Venetian or iginal coins, but 396 Bulgarian imitations out of the to tal of 932 silver coins (42%). A certain impression of the ratio between the official and imitative Venetian coins circulating in Bulgaria comes also from the urban coin evidence, which ranges between 8/ 5 (62.5%, Turnovo) and 7/7 (100 %, Shumen).123 The political fragmentation and the free coinage system, however, facilitated the imitation not only of the Venetian grossi Similarly, imitative silver coins of the Serbian king Stephen Dragutin were issued in the mints of Bdin, as well as imitations of the former governor of the appanage of Bdin, Michael Shishman (1323-1330), in the first years of Ivan Alexanders reign. The latter phenomenon could be explained as a reaction of th e pro-Serbian Bdins nobility against the new ruler, Ivan Alexander, who de throned the Serbian prot g and son of Michael 121 D. M. Metcalf, Echoes of the name of Lorenzo Tiepolo: imitations of Venetian grossi in the Balkans Numismatic Chronicle VII series Vol. XII (1972), pp. 183-191; N. A. Mushmov, Kolektivni Nahodki na Moneti prez.. [Hoards found in..] Izvestia dn Bulgarskoto Arheologichesko Druzhestvo ( IBAD ) (1919), p. 116; Ibid (1924), p 243; Ibid (1926/7), p. 321; Ibid (1927), p.321; T. Gerasimov, Kolektivni Nahodki na Moneti prez[Hoards found in..] IBAD (1935), p.486; Ibid (1938),p. 316; in Izvestia na Bulgarskiat Arheologicheski Institut (IBAI) (1939), p.454; Ibid (1941) p. 342; Ibid (1946 ),238; Ibid, (1952), p. 402; Ibid (1956), p. 363; Ibid (1963), p.262-3; Vl. Penchev Kolektivna Naho dka ot Tishevica [A hoard from Tishevica] Numismatica Vol. 2-3 (1983), pp. 20-27; Vl. Penchev, Kolektivna Nahodka s Srebarni Bulgarski Imitacionni Moneti ot XIV vek [ Hoard of silver Bulgarian imitative coins from 14th century] Minalo Vol. 1 (2000), pp. 40-42; Iv. Sotirov, Srebarni Monetni Sakrovishta ot Vrachansko [Silver hoards from the region of Vratza] Yearbook of Nov Bulgarski Universitet Vol. 4 (2001), pp. 375417. J. Yurukova, Mone tnite Nahodki Otkriti v Bulgaria [Coin finds in Bulgaria] Arheologia Vol. 4 (1979),p.64; Arheologia Vol. 1-2 (1981), p. 129; St. Avdev, Imitacii na Venecianski Groshove ot Bulgaria [Imitations of Venetian grosses from Bulgaria] Numismatica Vol 1 (1982), pp. 19-26. 122 Vl. Penchev, Kolektivna Monetna Nahodka ( XIV vek) ot selo Tishevica, Vrachanski okrag [ A hoard from Tishevica, ( 14th century) district Vratsa] Numizmatika no. 2 ( 1983), pp.20-27; Iv. Sotirov, Numizmatichen Etiud kum Istoriata na Avtonomnoto Vidinsko Kniazhestvo ot kraia na XIII vek do 30-te godini na XIV vek [ Numismatic study for the history of the autonomous Vidin Principality ca 1300 1330s] Annuary of the Institute of Archaeology with Museum Vol. I (2001), pp. 288-332 123 K. Dochev, Moneti i Parichno Obrushtenie v Turnovo, XIIXIV v. pp. 181-183; Zh. Zhekova, Za Priemstvenostta mejdu Preslav i Shumen po Numizmatic hni Danni [About the succession between Preslav and Shumen according to the numismatic data] in Tradicii i Priemstvenost v Bulgaria i na Balkanite prez srednite vekove pp. 220-229

PAGE 292

292 Shishman, Ivan Stephen.124 In Turnovo, during the reign of Ivan Shishman, were massively imitated the silver and copper coins of his brother and ruler of Bdin Principality, Ivan Sratsimir, fact signaling the intensive trade contacts between these two political units, despite the hostility of their rulers.125 Along with the imitations of the silver coins needed for long distance trade, it seems that after 1371, in most of the larger urban centers such as Turnovo, Cherven, Lovech, Nicopol, Bdin and Varna were intensively produced, as well, imit ations of the existing co pper coin types for the needs of everyday market activities. One of the most widespread imitative coin types was a copy of John II Orsinis copper coin.126 Whether there was any link, however, between the Venetian and Epirean imitations delineating some narrowe r commercial ties between Bulgaria and the Despotate of Epirus is not clear and it has to be left to the further archaeological research. However, it is highly unlikely th at an imitation of copper coin was intended for the purposes of long distance trade at the time of a three-metal monetary syst em. Most likely, along with the other copper imitations, it was produced for the ne eds of the local market, which, as it seems, was in a permanent deficit of money of small de nominations. In fact, in most cases, especially for the copper coins, the term imitations is not correct in the context of free coinage system. It should be called rather private coinage, which desi gn was restricted by the st ate authorities not to copy the signs of the coins of the currently ru led monarch, but nothing beyond that. Hence, there is an appearance of coins or rather of tokens with an iconog raphy of meaningless signs of crosses, dots and stars, to wh ich category belongs as well the J ohn II Orsini imitative type. Its 124 Vl. Penchev and J. Yurukova, Bulgarsiki Srednovekobni Moneti i Pechati pp. 195-199 125 Ibid. pp. 204-205 126 Ibid.

PAGE 293

293 iconography consisted of encircled cross, surrounded by pseudo letter s, often single-side struck, and sometimes having instead only several dots. 127 What was the scale attained by private coinage towards the last quarter of the fourteenth century? There are 550 single coppe r coin finds from Turnovo, all struck in the name of Ivan Alexander, billon and copper coins in the name of Ivan Shishman are 710, and 430 imitative or, rather, privately ordered copper coins.128 To eliminate the notion of some extraordinary character of the coin turnover in Turnovo, a similar presence of imitative coins is noticeable in the rural monetary turnover, as exemplified by th e late medieval cemeteries near the village of Yantra. The imitative coins, 1331-1400, ar e 68 out of the total of 150 pieces.129 In Shumen, the number of imitative copper coins (38) even exceeds the number of those issued by Ivan Shishman (36).130 The hoard evidence reveals the same massive presence of privately ordered copper coins. The large hoards of Silistra V (~10 kg., buried around 1388) and of Vidin III, (3000 pieces, buried around 1355-1364), unfortunate ly, not completely examined, consist exclusively of copper imitations.131 These eloquent samples of the massive pres ence of privately ordered money among the coin circulation at the conclusi on of the century are, of course, insufficient for estimating the precise level of monetization of the late medieval Bulgarian economy, as it is, however, all of the above. But the broad picture produced by this evidence is quite clear: a vigorous economy in 127 Vl. Penchev and J. Yurukova, Bulgarsiki Srednovekobni Moneti i Pechati pp.204-205 128 K. Dochev, Bulgarski srednovekovni moneti, XIII-XV v p.144. 129 Iv. Bachvarov, Yantrenski Nekropoli [Yantras necropolis], (V. Turnovo: Vital, 1993) p. 64 130 Zh. Zhekova, Za Priemstvenostta mejdu Preslav i Shumen po Numizmatichni Danni [About the succession between Preslav and Shumen accordin g to the numismatic data] in Tradicii i Priemstvenost v Bulgaria i na Balkanite prez srednite vekove (V. Turnovo, University of Veliko Turnovo, 2003) pp. 220-229 131 Vl. Penchev and J. Yurukova, Bulgarsiki Srednovekobni Moneti i Pechati pp.203-204

PAGE 294

294 constant hunger for ready cash, in which the privat e initiative at even local, petty-trade level matched, and perhaps, often exceeded the resources of the state. This does not mean, of course, that the presence of private money in monetary circulation signals some complete monetization of economy, but it delineates a definite trend in that direction, quite domin ant towards the end of the fourteenth century. Since the money suppl y was insufficient, inelastic, and unevenly distributed, barter continued to pl ay a role in economic relations, but a role already marginal and, as it seems, progressively reduced by the self-regulatory market mechanisms of demand and supply. This process of reducing the economic scal e of barter was contingent on two factors. First, this was the disparity between the commercialized gross domestic product and its monetized portion, leading to inva riably higher commodity prices in barter transactions than in their money equivalents.132 This, in turn, resulted in a certain common consensus about the necessity of privately ordered money lowering ba rter prices. Second, it was the existence of a social group, which, in order to safeguard its economic interests, eroded by the existence of barter, took the initiative for securing an adequate supply of medium of exchange: the professional middleman. 132 Exemplified, for instance, in the It alian trade practices in the Eastern Mediterranean, for which surviving parallel price lists confirm the assumption. For details see E. Ashtor, Pagamento in contanti e baratto nel commercio italiano doltremare, secoli XIVXVI,in Economia naturale, economia monetaria, ed. R. Romano and U. Tucci, Storia dItalia, Annali 6 (Turin: Einaudi 1983), pp. 363.

PAGE 295

295 Figure 5-1. Road network

PAGE 296

296 Figure 5-2. Area of circulation of Bulgarian silver coins, 1300-1331. Figure 5-3. Area of circulation of Bulgarian silver coins 1331-1400.

PAGE 297

297 Figure 5-4. Most popular type of silver coin, Ivan Alexander with his son Michael Asen [Courtesy of the Museum of V. Turnovo]. Figure 5-5. Area of circulat ion of Venetian imitatives.

PAGE 298

298 Figure 5-6. Venetian grossi and their imitations. A) Bulgarian imitation of a Venetian grosso, type L. Tiepolo; B) Original Venetian grosso of D. Dandolo.[Courtesy of the Museum of V. Turnovo] Figure 5-7. Bulgarian imitation of the copper coin of John II Orsini.[Courtesy of the Museum of V. Turnovo] A B

PAGE 299

299 CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION In Byzantium, as well as in Bulgaria and Se rbia, the modes of production in agriculture were arranged around two poles, generally called es tate and village. The most widespread form of an estate was pronoia normally assumed as a grant by the central power to an individual of revenues, previously owed to the state. Its widesp read in the twelfth century came as result of the imperial reaction to the threat of Pechenegs, Normans and Seljuk Turks in the eleventh century, realized in the context of decreasing gold reserv es. The response of the Comneni Alexius I, John II and, especially, Manuel I to change th e long-standing and fruitless strategy of defensein-depth into a new, more aggressive policy through activating the frontier zones for expansion was without alternative. However, the new stra tegy of strengthening the border zones in the context of sharp deficit of gold reserves coul d be achieved only thr ough the widespread of pronoia system by granting privileges to the local archontes often of nonGreek origin, in order to secure their loyalty and to direct their ambitions towards external expansion and not to benefit from assaults on imperial lands. This, in turn, changed the character of pronoia from an award given for exceptional merits into a basic ec onomic instrument for imperial defense. As a consequence, the ubiquitous adoption of the sy stem of privileges reduced in scope and substantially simplified the range of the state economy and its appa ratus. It had been scattered into the provinces, each of which now had its own local admi nistration, its own revenue, and its own expenditure. Much smaller number of people now remained under the di rect taxation of the fisc, which thus made most of its apparatus dysfunctional and redundant. On the other hand, the system of privileges led to partial demonetizat ion of the state economy, gi ven that there was now no obligation on the holders of privil eges to pay tax, and still less to pay it in cash. In this way,

PAGE 300

300 large sums of money were liberated from th e state economy and remained in possession of private hands and provincial authorities. The role of the state became thus crucial for the economic changes in agriculture that started in the eleventh-twelfth centuries. Since th e privilege holders were paying less tax and still less in cash, privileges resulted in improvement the infusion of cash into the market oriented production and accelerated money circulation. Thus, the state ceased to be the most important motive power behind the circulation of money as it had been by then. The structural changes in Byzantine ag riculture evoked by the introduction and widespread of pronoia system affected not only the presen ce of ready cash in private hands but also the efficiency of the orga nization of agricultural producti on. Since the land in the Balkans always exceeded the ava ilability of labor, the main economic problem of the region was how to make the labor most effective. However, the e fficiency of agriculture labor depended entirely on the possession of draft animals and supplementary equipment, the lack of which turned the manpower into a useless social burden. Therefore, the idea of delegating the right of extracting surplus by the tributary state to th e estate holders was the best solu tion to turn the state burden of landless and, accordingly, nontaxable subjects (eleutheroi) into an effective manpower ( zeugeratoi or boidatoi ). From this economic construction, any party was bene ficial. The fisc, although sharing its rights and incomes with a private party, (the estate) gained more from the taxing of the turned into zeugeratoi previously nontaxable eleutheroi. The estate gained the privilege of reduced tax, land and wo rk force for production. The peasants ( paroikoi), whose taxes were now transferred to the estate holder, gained more effective protection, economic security and means of production.

PAGE 301

301 The large estates produced grai n, wine, olive oil and products of animal husbandry. They possessed mills and workshops for iron and pottery production and collected rents not only from the arable land l eased to their paroikoi, but also from their urban real estates. However, the monasterial foundations with thei r vast land possessions were not only producers and traders but they also played an essential role for structur ing economic micro-regions. By their regular fairs they established the regional tr ade infrastructure between th e town and country. The large estates role in land management, thus, became dominant in agriculture in the course of thirteenth and fourteen th centuries. They provided better eco nomic and, often, po litical security than the state. Their competent staff, the prope nsity to invest and improve with the aim of maximizing the profits and, above all, their flexible structure, responding to the markets demands made the estate a real bearer of economic advan ce in agriculture. The advantages of the estate management were well recognized by the state authorities and often the initiative fo r granting of number of paroikoi or even whole villages to the monastic foundations came from the central power. The process of delegating economic functions to the monastic institutions was, however, not a monopoly of the political rulers. It was well paralleled by individuals as well. The private religious foun dations were the best possible insurance against various misfortunes: social, pol itical legal and fiscal, which threatened the integrity of a household. The foundation and endowment of a family monastery, or church, was a sound economic investment, capable of bringing material, as well as spiritual benefits to the founder and his heirs. The social role of monastic in stitutions, thus, went we ll beyond their religious, ideological and educational functions. Due to the collective character of ownership and lack of political aspirations, they became the best econo mic instrument of the central power. It even seems that they started to play somewhat modified-bank role in agriculture: to turn the

PAGE 302

302 abandoned (excessive and economically ineffectiv e) lands into profitable enterprises and to storage the financial reserves of the central power, which could be used according to the political expediency. In addition, the orga nization of production in the large estates was not composed only of different types of ag ricultural production, but also of large-scale involvement in processing and trading th e agricultural products. Towards the opening of the thirteenth century, this structural change caused noticeable growth of agricultural production that on its turn led to a growth of the rural industry, as registered by analyses of monastic praktika and of the charters of Bulgarian emperors. The trend of growth of the rural industry, however, is mu ch better articulated th rough the archeological evidence. In the cases of Hotnits a and of the medieval village located on the top of the ancient Sevtopolis, the market oriented craft production within the country, as demonstrated above, was of an impressive scale. The expansion of the agricultural economy was signaled as well by the growth of local trade. The surviving documents record systematic attempts of the large estates to acquire possessions as close as possibl e to the regional market centers and, thus, to reduce the transportation costs. The eleventh century aris tocratic maxima, articulated by Kekaumenos, to live off ones own, was not the dominant one duri ng the thirteenthfourteenth centuries. The great landowners now massively directed thei r production to the market. The end of the thirteenth and the opening of th e fourteenth century were mark ed by significant interest in obtaining urban properties and land in the vicinities of the citi es. Especially active in this endeavor were, of course, the monastic foundatio ns, the biggest landowners. The large estates, both, monastic and lay, possessed workshops and gr oceries, bakeries and wine shops, water and

PAGE 303

303 windmills, which were rented out or directly exploited by their owners. Almost all of the documented monasteries possessed prope rties in and near the cities. Further evidence for the growing sector of commerce is provided by the monastic documents suggesting proliferation of the local fa irs, organized by the monasteries in the first half of the fourteenth century. Combining market activities and religious festivities celebrating the patron saints, the monastic foundations used these occasions to raise revenues from the market dealings and levied commercial taxes and stall fees. The developmen t of fairs network in the Balkans seems to resemble the two waves of fair expansion in Western Europe during the ninth and then over the course of the eleventh and twelfth centuries The Byzantine model that was completely adopt ed in Bulgaria, thus, combined features of both coercing the peasants through class-ba sed asymmetrical power relations towards the market and pulling them into trade by economica lly efficient instituti ons: highly monetized tax system and price incentives of temporary and pe rmanent markets. The transformation of peasant subsistence, therefore, into market involvement could be considered as result of the state intervenism. It led to economic polyactivity as entering in tenancies and land leases markets and searching for incomes outside the agriculture, whic h, eventually, turned into a specialization and commercialization of the production as in the cases of sgraffito production in Hotnitsa and the iron-making in village on the top of Sevtopolis. The expanding commerce in the country led in turn to additional growth of the importance of fairs and urban market centers, a de velopment similar to that in the West. It is important to note, however, that while it was one of the main peasant demands in the revolt of 1381 in England to gain free access to the urban mark ets, such restrains are not registered in the Byzantine socio-economic model. Because of the scarcity of written sources for the Byzantine

PAGE 304

304 World in general and because majority of the surviving praktika concern the property of monasteries or of foundations that later became monastic, the petty peasant landholdings as well as the scale of economic activit ies of their owners could be assessed only ar chaeologically. Therefore, the evidence provide d by archaeological inve stigations in Hotnitza and the village on the top of Sevtopolis is crucia l for understanding the economic changes that the country went through during the course of thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The signs of bettering the peasants life, as demonstrated by the changes in tableware, were complemented by the scale of metallurgy, sgraffito pottery a nd jewelry production that went well beyond the needs of the villagers, apparently, produced for market realization. Last but not least, the impressive amount of ready cash, as exemplified by the coin finds in the village on the top of Sevtopolis, in Hotnitza, Riakhovec and the late medieval cemeterie s near the village of Yantra, indicating more money and more people with money, demonstrate the market orientation of agricultural production and rural craftsmanship. In many resp ects, this economic advance was based on the complementarity between the village, which provid ed the bulk of the production, and the estate, which ensured the better management. The main role, however, in this model of economic development was exercised by the state, the crea tor and regulator of the relations between the peasants and estate holders. The consequences of this tri-partite system are the saturation of the rural environment to the limits of its technical capacity for expa nsion, the proliferation of the estate and the following transformation of its production from self-subsistent to market oriented and the drive of the peasant, deficient in pr oper farming equipment for searching additional incomes outside agriculture: in artisanal production and specializa tion, and in commuting between the village and the regional market center. The unargua ble development of economy in the country in Byzantium during the eleventh-twelfth centuries was not unique, however, but it

PAGE 305

305 was part of the economic upheaval in the rest of Europe. It was further sped up with the progress of long distance trade in the Med iterranean world in the course of thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The formative role of Alexius Is, John IIs and especially of Manuel Is administrative reforms and the economic progres s in agriculture a nd trade brought by them resulted in a prolonged period of peace and demographic grow th that was well reflected by the towns appearance. Towards the second half of the tw elfth century, many of the settlements located within the provincial fortresses, especially the administrative and ecclesiastic centers, expanded outside their defensive walls and fo rmed suburbia. Certainly, this change of the urban structural tissue reflected the change of the basic func tion and nature of the town from defensive strongholds and seats of state and ecclesiastic authority into center s of production and trade with a more definitively urban way of life. Another feature of the Byzantine economic mode l contributed indirect ly to the formation and growth of towns. The replacement of an obligation in kind by one in cash, a phenomenon known from antiquity, in pronoia system resulted not only in buying out the peasants corve duties, but also of the military service of pronoia holders. Not only was this practice not restricted by the state, but in the course of the eleventh and tw elfth centuries it was especially encouraged in the areas far from the fron tiers. The obtained cash was used for hiring mercenaries, who proved to be much more efficient soldiers. Manuel I Comnenus expansionistic policy based on the widespread of pronoia resulted in massive building of new and renovating the old str ongholds that were to be garrisoned to serve as bases for the expansion of imperial auth ority. The fortresses were garrisoned with pronoia holders and militias from the local population, which in return received land and fiscal

PAGE 306

306 privileges, a fact which played a formidab le role in concentr ating population around the provincial fortresses. The obligati on of guarding the fortress, in fact, made the place of service for numbers of pronoia holders their permanent residence. No less impact on the growth of towns in th e Byzantine World had the structural changes of the financial services, which underwent seriou s simplification as well. In the provinces, the prerogatives of the omnipresen t Byzantine tax collector ( praktor) were sharply reduced by the number of holders of privileges who might live in his area and by the commanders ( kephalai ) of the towns, who were now entitled to collect their fees directly from the taxpayers. The obligation of sitarkesis or sitarchia of towns (a tax evolved from the synone ), the supplying of fortified settlements with foodstuffs at a fixed price wi tnessed by the ninth-century sources, had been converted into a regular payment in cash by the eleventh-twelfth centuries. This money, most of which remained in the hands of the provincial authorities, was availabl e now for buying supplies from the local producers for satisfying the needs of food and equipment. More importantly, the conversion of the military duties into cash affected the compulsory recruitment of artisans with an auxiliary role in the army. While this did not significantly affect the army dispositions supplied centrally with necessary equipment and se rvices by the fisc, the local fortresses fell in sharp deficit of artisanal services, which now were to be obtained by ready cash. Thus, at the local level, the demonetization of state economy re sulted in promotion of the pattern of demand of goods and labor, which, combined with the incen tives offered by the local centers, security, and judicial services, became the main elemen ts of the gravitational force attracting rural population around the fortified nuclei and reshaping the settlements landscape. It might be safe to say, therefore, that the rise of towns manife sted towards the end of the twelfth century was

PAGE 307

307 attributable to both, economic gr owth in agriculture and administrative reforms undertaken by Manuel I Comnenus. In Byzantium, like in Italy and Dalmatia, thus, the medieval town took shape as a community headed by a bishop and dominated by a small group of privileged families ( pronoia holders) increasingly involved in a private enterp rise. How powerful those urban provincial elites became was demonstrated in Paristrion in 1185 when the grievances of the local archontes Peter and Asen led to a massive revolt resulting in the restoration of the Bulgarian state. The Bulgarian revolt, as well as the secession of the Serbs and the Cilician Armenians from the imperial rule, was therefore a clear manifestation of the new ba lance of powers betwee n the political center and its provincial periphery a conseque nce of the widespread use of the pronoia system that dragged behind demonetization of state economy. Although there is no direct corre lation between the settlement s physical appearance and their function, the sites with th e largest fortified areas tende d to be centers of greater administrative and ecclesiastic importance, which in the course of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries also meant economic significance, visu ally illustrated by the size of their adjacent suburbs. Turnovo, with a fortified area of 23 ha, became the leading administrative and economic center of the restored Bulgarian state, with an inhabited area of more than 80 ha. Cherven had a fortress comprising 2. 4 ha and developed suburbs of more than 20 ha. To the area of Shumens fortress of 3 ha, a suburb was added, which was more than three times the size of the fortress. The fortified area of Lov ech was 2.8 ha, with a suburb of 10 ha. On the opposite end of the spectrum were the myriad of small provincial fortresses with solely defensive functions, guarding roads and m ountain passes and offering shelter for the rural population. Although they also attrac ted population in their vicinities, in a scale proportional to

PAGE 308

308 their fortified size, they obtaine d a qualitatively distinctive app earance from that of the large administrative and ecclesiastic centers. Their in tramural space did not lose its military function. It remained uninhabited by civilians, with only a few military buildings and cisterns. The few guards that such type of fortress usually had, re cruited among the local villagers, hardly induced some regular social or economic interacti on, between the fortress and its country. Their interaction was intensified only in time of facing some crisis, politic al or natural, but usually they lived separate lives, as suggested by the archaeol ogical evidence. The settlements near a rural fortress remained distant to their defensive cen ter not only socially, but also physically. Often, the distance between a fortress and its gravitat ing villages was of 3 to 5 and even more kilometers. But even in the extraordinary cases when a village was located closer to its defensive center, their social life, as exemplified by the churches always built outside the rampart, remained separated. The distinction between urban and rural fortresses is signified also by the title of their governing o fficials. While an urban administrative center was under the governing of a kephale whose authority stretched over th e adjacent hinterland, a small rural fortress was managed only by a kastrophylax, a military commander in charge with the command of the fortresss garrison an d maintenance of fortifications. The late medieval town in Bulgaria, as its By zantine counterparts, consisted of two parts, fortified nucleus and suburbia that were perceive d and that functioned as an organic and coherent entity. The last line of fortress defense was bui lt around an internal cita del or a tower, usually located on the highest site within the rampart. With the re-establishment of the fortresses as administrative centers after the crisis of the seve nth century, these internal citadels became the main residences of the fortress commanders and, later, if the fortress evolved into a towns nucleus, of the towns administration.

PAGE 309

309 The appropriation of the Byzan tine universalism, its theological-political ideal, cultural model and social norms in Bulgaria was well ex pressed by the construction of urban space. The principle of unity and harmony between the ea rthly and heavenly realms, though divided, is clearly substantiated in Turnovo and patterned over the provincia l administrative centers. The spatial domination of the patriarchal church and palace over the emperors palace denoted that the ultimate source of the ear thly law is the blessing by the heavenly kingdom. The constantly growing population within the limited walled space during the second half of the twelfth century resulted in an extreme building density. Therefore, in most of the uncovered medieval urban sites, the variable width and sudden ending of the towns streets, suggest the notion rather of a labyrinth than of some town planning. As suggested by the archeological evidence the main streets, which were also the widest communicative arteries, were used as market streets. The basic urban ta x-unit, known from the written sources, the parish community, is best expressed sp atially in Turnovo, whose struct ure was subdivided into small quarters of 30-40 homes, grouped around a church and following the characteristics of the terrain. There are no indications of any principl e modeling such spatial organization other than opportunism: the churches and their surrounding communities emerged simultaneously. In front of each of the parochial churches either within or outside th e rampart, as well as of the governors residential palace and of towns me tropolitan church, public squares were formed, some of which, perhaps, functioned as open mark etplaces. Much like its Byzantine counterparts, the late medieval town in Bulgaria had special zones within its structur e, assigned for occupation by foreigners. Latin, Armenian and Jewish colonies were formed in number of Bulgarian towns: Turnovo, Varna, Bdin, Pleven, Mesembria and Philipopolis.

PAGE 310

310 Although distinctive in its appearance, the medi eval town in Bulgaria did not display any unique social order different form that of its en vironment. Its social st ructure consisted of the same elements like that of the country, though in different propor tions: landowners and merchants, pronoia holders and paroikoi artisans and peasants, monasteries and churches, wealthy dynatoi and a large number of peopl e belonging to the middle ( mezoi ) and lower classes ( mikroi ). It was a community headed by a clerical leader, (bishop) and/or by political ruler ( kephale ), appointed by the central power, and do minated by a small group of aristocratic families. The social structure of the late mediev al Bulgarian town, thus, did not differ from that of the Italian and Dalmatian citie s in terms of concentration of landowners and wealthy people. Finally, and perhaps quite surprisingly for the advo cates of the agricultura l character of the late Bulgarian and Byzantine town, the archaeological data from the fortresses of Turnovo (Tzarevets), Cherven, Lovech and Shumen display predominance of artisanship over the agricultural activities. Although the power in the urban communities was concentrated in few aristocratic hands, there are no signs of any spatial separation between social classes in terms of the zones of the city in which they lived. Palaces and luxurious houses, exemplified in the present study by the Boyar House in Melnik and the Boyar House in Tsarevetz, which must certainly have belonged to powerful people and represented major financia l investments, were built next to houses of modest means and workshops. It should be notic ed, however, that the notion of aristocracy in Byzantine texts, or archontes, as they were called, was not co nnected with high birth but rather with a position of trust in imperial service: a notion quite close to the modern understanding of meritocracy. What could be considered a ristocracy, therefore in Byzantium, as well as in Bulgaria, was a group of people, who, in one form or another, was paid by the government,

PAGE 311

311 either through the system of imperial salaries or through its modified version, the (pronoia) system of privileges. Although th e Byzantine aristocracy seems to fit into the classical Western notion of aristocracy as a landowning hereditary group that monopolizes the links with the central power, contrary to the Western model, however, the Byzantine aristocracy was merely a function of the state that practic ally monopolized the central and provincial governorships. It was composed by state executive officers and had the characteristics not of a hereditary, but of a corporate group, which had the ability to absorb new men and lacked the rigid and inaccessible structures of personal dependencies in existence in the West. Among archontes there were also members of the mi ddle class professions of notaries, money-changers and trade-agents, some of them, most likely, connected with guild-like associations. The governmental sa laries of the lower class of archontes did not differ much from the income of the urban artisans, wage laborers, technicians and petty shop owners, with whom they formed the class of mezoi the nascent middle class of the bourgeoisie. The long list of various professions that could be composed from the source s and the archaeological finds, suggesting high specialization of labor and standa rdization of production, ra ises the question of the social organization of indus trial production the role and development of the guilds in the Byzantine Empire and in its Balkan neighbors that still poses a serious challenge to economic historians. The guild manufactures in Byzantiu m disappeared from the sources after the liquidation of the Byzantine government of Constan tinople in 1204 for almost three centuries. In the late fifteenth century, they emerged again in the economic context of the Ottoman Empire. However, if no traces of guilds exist beyond the twelfth century, th ere is also no evidence that professional organizations disappe ared altogether after this ti me. What, most likely, happened, was that guilds, as state institutions, known from the Book of the Eparch merely obtained an

PAGE 312

312 entirely voluntary organizational form, unres tricted by the state control and therefore unregistered in the written sources. The new type of guild played a far more decisive sociopolitical role than the state controlled guild of the Book of the Eparch, for it participated in the administration of towns through its own representa tives, thus more eff ectively protecting its participants interests. The changes in state-guild relations, demons trated above in the sphere of mining are observable elsewhere. Nicholas Oikonomides has demonstrated that such professional organizations existed for notaries, pe rfumers, butchers, sailors, construction workers and salt makers in Constantinople and The ssalonike. The vague traces of professional organizations within the thirt eenth-fourteenth centurys sources suddenly give a way to an Ottoman kanunname from the end of the fifteenth century promulgating explicitly detailed regulations for the professional organizations in Constantinople and some other large cities. A few decades later, in 1524 1550 there was al ready abundance of Ottoman normative documents regulating the profe ssional organizations in Bursa, the fu r-dressers, curriers and shoemakers in Sofia, the tailors and grocers in Philipopolis and iron makers in Samokov. Given that Ottoman policy, as it is well known, was to preserve th e administrative and ec onomic machinery left behind by the Byzantines, it seems quite possible then to deduce the adoption and preservation by the Muslim rulers of the forms of public cont rol of the crafts employed in the Byzantine administration. From the analysis of economic growth and urban development, as well as from the reevaluating the importance of trade for mode ling late medieval Bulgarian foreign policy it becomes apparent that the entrance of Bulgarian lands into the orbi t of transcontinental trade, run by the Italian maritime city-states, to be a natura l realization of the accumulated surplus at a local

PAGE 313

313 level. In its turn, the participation in the inte rnational trade gave further impetus on the domestic economic growth. To such an extent the political struggle s in the Balkans and, especially between Byzantium and Bulgaria, were motivated by the desire of their leadership to capture trade centers for the purpose of extending their control over merchants and over routes of inland and maritime trade that it may safely be said that trade became a chief factor in regional policymaking. What emerges from analyzing the surviving documents and, especially, from archaeological coin evidence is that the safeguarding of the economic interests of the Italian tradesmen influenced intensely the course of regional politics and the market initiative of the political class in both Byzantium and Bulgaria. It promoted, comple mented, and intensified the emergence and development not only of a market-oriented econo my, but also of a na tive merchant class, recognized and protected by the local authority an d unrelated to the state offices, which actively interacted with the foreign traders and ran th e local network of everyday market activities. The general picture derived from the quantitat ive analysis of the collected coin data shows that towards the end of the twelfth century and, especially, after the fall of Constantinople in 1204, the general number of the hoards, found in Bulgaria, increas ed drastically in comparison with the previous periods. While for the pe riod 1081-1185 there are onl y 7 hoards known from Bulgaria, for the subsequent two decades (1185-1 203) the number of hoards increased more than five times. This trend accelerated even further for the period 1204-1257 and the number of hoards reached 109 within fifty years, which is thirty times more than the pre-1185 period. This drastic augmentation of hoarded money immediatel y poses the question of the nature of this phenomenon: Was the remarkable boost in hoardi ng in 1204-56 only a propor tional reflection of the increase in political insecuri ty of the region or it was an in dication also for the shift from

PAGE 314

314 land-based, state-commanded economy to a publ ic economy of exchange, where more people operated with more money? Whether this drastic augmentation of hoard ed money was only a proportional reflection of the escalating political insecur ity of the region or it was as well an indication for the shift from land-based, state-commanded economy to a publ ic economy of exchange, where more people operated with more money, is explained through ex amining the single coin data from the urban areas. However, the single coin finds within all urban centers, where coinage was found in efficient quantity, reveals that th e increase of hoarding is parallele d by relevant increase of the single coin circulation. Therefore, it is safe to be said that th e increase in hoarding was a function of the increased market activities and not just of political insecurity. The long distance trade that toward s the opening of the fourteenth century became main priority of Bulgarian foreign policy was complemented by in troduction of silver coinage in Bulgaria that in the following years will dominate the money circ ulation. The analysis of the coin circulation in fourteenth century Bulgaria, reveals a stea dy trend of gradual monetization, in which trade played an obviously an important role. Hoards ar e now made up mainly of silver, the preferable medium of exchange in long-dist ance trade. Its increasing pres ence in hoards chronologically and topographically follows the Ottoman advance, whose catastrophic impact virtually closed the avenues of long-distance inland trade. The dom inance of silver in hoards signals a certain division of the commercial sector into two le vels: a local, in which the coins of small denomination (copper) dominated the everyday activities; and regional or international, dominated by silver. The majority of mixed, s ilver and copper hoards, marking a possible link between regional and local trade came from large urban centers, Turnovo, Vidin and Silistra. Mixed hoards of gold and copper coins of the period are few (only two) for a period of almost a

PAGE 315

315 century, and their small size indica tes a combination of family savings and money in circulation. The group of hoards of gold is dominated by sm all-size hoards of various coin types an indication of long-term accumulation, a practice c oncomitant with the higher sector of middle class. In the course of the fourteenth century, es pecially during the rei gn of Ivan Alexander (1332-1371), the system of free coinage was es tablished and flourishe d. It was a system characterized by striking of co ins from metal and by the order of private persons under the control of the state authorities. As a consequen ce of the regional political fragmentation and the existing system of free coinage, mass circulation of Venetian imitative silver grossi in Bulgaria is discovered towards the third decade of the fourteenth century. Similarly, imitative silver coins of the Serbian king Stephen Dragutin were issued in the mints of Bdin, as well as imitations of the former governor of the appanage of Bdin, Mi chael Shishman (1323-1330) in the first years of Ivan Alexanders reign. Along with the imitations of the silver coins, needed for the long distance trade, it seems that af ter 1371, in most of the larger urban centers, such as Turnovo, Cherven, Lovech, Nicopol, Bdin, Varna, imitatio ns of the existing copper coin types were intensively produced, as well, for the needs of th e local market, which, as it seems, was in a permanent deficit of money of small denominations In fact, in most cases, especially for the copper coins, the term imitations is not correct in the context of free coinage system. It should be called rather private coinage, the design of which was restrict ed by the state authorities of copying the symbols of the coins of the curren t monarch, but no more than that. The broad picture produced by the scale of this practice that will continue well after the demise of Bulgarian state is quite clear: a vigorous trade economy in cons tant hunger for ready cash, in which the private initiati ve at even local, petty-trade level matched, and perhaps, often exceeded

PAGE 316

316 the resources of the state. The massive use of im itative coins, thus, provide s an evidence for the reduction of the role of barter, for the scal e of commercialization of production, for the institutionalization of market, and, last but not least, for the existe nce of a local merchant class, unrelated to landowning and agriculture that was concentrated in the urban centers. The Bulgarian town of the thirteenth to four teenth centuries, as demonstrated above, was far from being a mere center of consumption and an epitome of socio-economic decline as earlier historians regarded it. Quite th e opposite, it was a thriving part of an economic model that was productive, well articulated and shared many asp ects of the Western European economic models. In the mid-fourteenth century, a conjunction of factors that had nothing to do with economic productivity: the plague that stru ck all of Europe, the Ottoman expansion, and the subsequent restructuring of the trade of th e eastern Mediterranean that together with the end of the Pax Mongolica reduced the economic importance of Consta ntinople, the Black Sea littoral and the Balkans in general, ultimately led to the demise of the medieval Byzantine World.

PAGE 317

317 APPENDIX TEMPLATES

PAGE 318

318Table A-1. Hoards 1082-1185 Denomination HOARD amount PERIOD HOA RD amountPERIOD HOARDamountPERIOD billon Vetren 12 1088-1092Isaccea I IV565 1148-1150Plovdiv 21 1092-1095 Suedinenie 20 118-1143 tetarteron Vereya 21 1143-1180 hyperpyron Kalipetrovo (4 kg) 361092-1095Suedinenie 5 1118-1143 Table A-2. Hoards 1185-1203 Denomination PLACE amountPERIOD PLACE amountPERIOD PLACE amount PERIOD Turnovo, I 53 1185-1187Dobri Djal 150 1185-1187Draganovo I752 1185-1187 Enchevci 1230 1185-1187Zlatarica 467 1185-1187Belica 101 1185-1187 Billon Brjastovo 507 1185-1187Iskra 54 1185-1187Kamenno 17 1185-1187 14 hoards Krushare 320 1185-1187Radnevo 19 1185-1187Shipka 17 1185-1187 Jagoda 308 1185-1187Novo Selo 144 1185-1190Tsruncha I 1248 1185-1203 Petrich 200 1185-1203Dorkovo 28 1185-1206Tsruncha II 923 1185-1203 Preslav I 38 1190-1195Smjadovo I 1048 1190-1195Vurbica 906 1200-1204 Draganovec 4000 1200-1204Isaccea V 784 1200-1204Shumen I 93 1200-1204 Billon Batkun 2120 1185-1190G.Nikolaevo786 1185-1190Enina 169 1185-1190 17 hoards Tiurkmen 128 1185-1190Vereya II 699 1185-1190Babek 760 1195-1200 Ovcharci 3272 1195-1200Plovdiv II 94 1195-1200Veroja III 16 1195-1200 Turnovo II 166 1195-1200G.Slivovo 150 1195-1200 Osikovo 10 1190 -1203 Banja 80 1185-1190Hubavene Hyperpyron Gornoslav 786 1185-1190Novo Selo 18 1185-1190 Electrum Zlatarica 400 1185-1190Ba nja 36 1185-1190Turnovo II 8 1195-1200 G.Slivovo 9 1195-1200

PAGE 319

319Table A-3. Hoards 1204-1218 Denom. PLACE amount PERIOD PLAC E amountPERIOD PLACE amountPERIOD Billon Moesia Thrace Macedonia Aksakovo 37 1206-1208 Asenovgrad 180 1210-1212 Aiani 34 1210-1212 Asenovci 158 1210-1212 Beli Izvor 112 1208-1209 Brestovo 991 Baniska 137 Bjaga 463 1218-1220 Brjastovo 1621 Vodica I 22 G. Chochoven 300 1208-1218 Vereia 70 Turnovo III 648 1206 Gurkovo 15 Gradevo I 104 1206 Turnovo IV 13 1206 Kazanluk II Gradevo II 351 1210-1212 Turnovo V 19 1208 Dorkovo 29 1204-1207 Babek 1400 1185-1203 Turnovo VI 9 1208-1209 Korten I 147 1208-1218 Drama 2863 Turnovo VIII 4265 1210 Korten II 1568 Dubrava 477 Turnovo IX 53 1210-1212 Kosten 95 Episkopi 59 1206-1207 Kunino I, II 455 1208-1209 Lukovo 974 Jeleznica 378 1210-1212 Kartal I, II 74 Maglizh 1196 Kolhikon 93 Lovech 230 Pazardjik 214 1208-1209 Kochani I-IV 733 Preslav II 246 Pirdop 62 1204-1206 Kiustendil 566 Silistra I, II 2527 1204-1206 Vereya IV 1944 1212-1218 Kiustendilsko 371 Strajica 35 kg 1206-1208 Vereya V 2600 1210-1212 Levkokhori 990 Tulcha 22 1208-1210 Tvurdica I 259 1208-1209 Logodash 301 Ch. Brjag 1362 1210-1212 Tulovo 674 Makedonia I-IV785 Chilnov 1166 1207-1218 Ustra I 1485 Neopolis 35 Lom I 3633 1203-1218 Cruncha I, II 2117 Pokrovnik 488 Smochan 930 1204-1206 Cherkovo ~500 1208 Thessalonike 50 Polsko Kosovo 175 1210-1212 Muglizh II 6923 1212-1218 Halkidika 305 Lukovit 4460 12101218 Krun I 60 1204-1209Tishanovo 525 Lom II 1689 1210 1218 Sovoliano 426 1204-1210 Koyno 497 1206-1207 Draganovo II 1278 1207-1210 Dolna Varpishta99 1206-1208 Struma Valley 471 1206-1210 Levski ( PL) 11

PAGE 320

320Table A-4. Hoards 1241-1257 Denomination PLACE amount PERIOD PLACE amount PERIOD PLACE amountPERIOD Hyperpyron Varna 14 1241-1257Vulchi Trun 8 1241-1257Lovech III 27 1241-1257 Pirgovo 76 Ravna 5 Shumen II 51 14 hoards Pisarci 10 Preslav IV 3 Preslav III 4 Tvurdica II 230 Krastilci 10 Smjadovo II 11 Ruen 5 Krichim 8 Bansko 8 Voevodovo 471 Gorsko Kosovo50 kg Seres 130 Billon Pisarci 300 Preslav III 34 Vulchi Trun 67 Preslav IV 48 Ravna 56 Varna 78 26 hoards Ruen 23 Aleksandrovo 125 Vardun 2020 G.Orjahovica 143 Vurbovka 30 Dolna Kabda 2800 Total 34 Ivancha 10 Issacea 800 Preslav V, VI57 Krasen 698 Lovech II 5663 Nisovo I 330 Svishtov 300 Ustovo 20 Mogilica 26 Tri Vodici 900 Ustra II 154 Levski (K) 2.5 kg Maglizh 6923

PAGE 321

321Table A-5. Hoards 1257-1400 Denomination PLACE amountPERIOD PLA CE amountPERIOD PLACE amountPERIOD Vidin V 12131390-1400 Silistra VI 51383-1400 Turnovo X 54 1393 Billon Vidin II 401270-1280 Melnik I 661258-1282Uglen 1kg 1330-1370 ( Bulgarian; Vidin III 30001300-1350 Melnik II 241258-1282German I 13 1330-1370 Byzantine; Vurbica 9061330-1370 Petrich 10421258-1260 Vidin I 23 1340-1400 Serbian; DraganovoIII 9 kg 1370-1390 Cherven I 4961383-1393Osikovo 24 1340-1400 Romanian; Narechen 13091370-1390 Cherven II 321380-1393Vidin IV 40 1370-1400 Venetian; Levski 13651258-1282 Malo mir 5911440-1445Dorkovo 3 kg 1258-1290 Westen Chuprene 12131258-1290 Tuzha 361330-1370Cherencha 14 1258-1300 European) Vardun I 20201259-1290 Chomakovci 111258-1290 Popovsko 8 1380-1390 44 hoards Silistra IV 301393-1402 Rjahovec I XIII7711258-1280Silistra V 10 kg 1380-1400 Melnik III 5201330-1400 Slatina (R om) 10211390-1400Sofiis ko 35 1400-1440 Rhodope 1261360-1380 German III 461370-1400Kichevo 506 1365-1371 Silver: Vidin V 321370-1400 Kniazhevo 311370-1400Kiustendil 14 1258-1300 (Bulgarian, Mesembria 1041390-1400 Krichim 521370-1400Drenovec 78 1370-1390 Byzantine Kozlovec 361300-1360 Bachkovo 2381370-1400Vratza 804 1380-1400 Serbian Podgore 581380-1420 Cherven III 431380-1393Vardun II 70 1390-1420 Venetian Ruse 1580 ~ 1444 Silistra III 401350-1400Tsruncha III 21 1270-1300 Romanian Kurdjali 281330-1370 Turnovo X 11370-1400Vladaia 20 1390-1430 Western Studena 221370-1400 Tishevica I 6521330-1350Varbica 30 1300-1340 European) Turnovo XI 101370-1400 Rak itovo 401330-1370Turnovo XIII 9 1350-1370 Saranci 81350-1370 Elhovo 81360-1370Vidincko 25 1370-1400 Rusensko 151370-1400 Florentin 8751390-1420Samokov 9 1258-1300

PAGE 322

322Table A-5 Continued. Denomination PLACE amountPERIOD PLA CE amountPERIOD PLACE amountPERIOD 60 hoards Luka 1301450 1460 Aleksandrovo 131333-1389Dubene 80 1330-1340 Pchelino 91370-1400 Vresovo 481350-1380Yambol 10 1350-1380 Rjahovec XII 11258-1300 Archar 3091370-1400Kjustendilsko 176 1370-1380 Varnensko 1061400-1410 Silistra VI 71383-1400 Tulcea (Rom) 21 kg 1355-1360 I Turnovo XII 61393 Tishevica II 9321330-1340Vukovo 400 1370-1380 Granica 391350-1371 Kostandovo 301295 Igralishte 100 1365-1371 Kozarsko 3771365-1371 Vidin I 11340-1400Krupnik 25 1365-1371 Dobrishte 8001365-1371 Kamenica 3001300-1330Vodica II 8 1383-1390 Vitinia 511370-1400 Sofiisko 1371395-1400Dryanovec 78 1383-1393 Prilep 1861360-1371 DraganovoIII 2 kg1330-1370 Opaka 13 1330-1383Markovcha ~ 100 1380-1390 Hyperpyron Bjala Cherkva 1151330-1383 Mizek 261330-1370Plovdiv III ~ 80 1355-1360 Smjadovo 191330-1383 Aleksandrovo 31333-1389Dubene 3 1330-1340 Tuzha 21330-1370 Varnensko 51330-1370Svishtov 4 1258-1300 26 hoards Velichkovo 31330-1370 Popovsko 101380-1390Eremija 10 1330-1370 Pomorie 211340-1400 Gramatikovo 31330-1370Sarafovo 30 1370-1390 Bjala 81330-1380 Karlovo 61283-1300Dragijevo 11 1325-1330 Tulcea (Rom) 1951355-1360 Lom 51330-1390Nisovo II 300 1380-1393 I German II 21283-1300German I 8 1258-1280

PAGE 323

323Table A-6. Urban coin finds PERIOD TOWN 1 Antiquity 641 641 800 800 --976 976 --1028 1028 --1081 1081 --1143 1143 -1185 1185-1204 1204 -1256 1257 -1300 1300 -1331 1331 -1393 PRESLAV Single coins 15 2 249 174 141 15 52 148 1106 72 16 32 TURNOVO Single coins 260 173 255 3650 694 1008 1796 HOARDS 2 154 226 5004 7 28 1299 SHUMEN Single coins 157 (9) AU 1 12 4 21 1 12 3 94 12 51 382 CHERVEN Single coins 9 1 7 3 25 3 10 60 HOARDS 3 AU 32 AE 43 AR 496 AR MELNIK HOARDS 66 AE 24 AE 520 AE Single coins 7 1 1 1 321 68 17 --1 Monetary data are compiled: For Turnovo, K. Dochev, T rnovo, Sixth-Fourteenth centuries The Economic History of Byzantiu m: from the seventh trough the fifteenth centuries (Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, D. C, 2002), pp 673-678; for Preslav and Shumen from Zh. Zhekova Za Priemstvenostta mejdu Preslav i Shumen po Numizmatichni Danni [About the succession between Preslav and Shumen according to th e numismatic data] in Tradicii i Priemstvenost v Bulgaria i na Balkanite prez srednite vekove (V. Turnovo, 2003) pp. 220-229; For Cherven: V. Dimova Srednovekovniat Cherven [The medieval Cherven] ( Sofia: BAN Press, 1985) pp. 273-286: For Mesembria: E. TeoklievaStoicheva, Medieval Coins from Mesembria 5th14th Centuries ( Sofia: Agato, 1994).; For Karvuna: M. Dimitrov, Monetite ot Dionisopolis Karvuna, [The coins of Dionisopolis Karvuna] Dobrudja Vol 12 (1995).pp. 173-179.; For Kaliakra: V.Parushev, Srednovekovni moneti ot Kaliakra, [Medieval coins from Kaliakra] Izvestia na Naroden Muzej Varna Vol. 26. (1990).pp. 141-147; For Ovetch: L. Lazarov, Danni za Monetnata Circulacia na Provadiiskata Krepost (Po danni na Dalgopolskia Muzei) [Data for the coin circulation of the fortress of Provat (According to data co llected in the museum of Dalgo Pole)] (V. Turnovo: Vital, 2001), pp. 101-140. For V ereya: M. Minkova, Monetnta Cirkulacia II-XIII v na Teritoriata na Augusta Traj anaBeroe -VereyaBoru j. [Coin circulation 2nd-13th centuries on th eteorrotry of Augusta Trajana Beroe Vereya Boruj] Numizmatika, Sfargistika i Epigrafika Vol. 2 (2005),pp 79-101.

PAGE 324

324Table A-6 Continued. PERIOD TOWN 2 Antiquity 641 641 800 800 --976 976 --1028 1028 --1081 1081 --1143 1143 -1185 1185-1204 1204 -1256 1257 -1300 1300 -1331 1331 -1393 VEREYA Single coins >1000 2 __ 18 45 23 93 8 21 2 __ 68? OVETCH Single coins __ 1 1 2 1 2 39 11 14 55 MESEMBRIA Single coins 30 15 21 22 17 1 9 7 30 9 3 75 HOARDS 46AU 18AE 20+ 74+ 104 102 AR KALIAKRA The citadel Single coins 1 8 1 2 18 35 KARVUNA Single coins 73 1 8 1 59 5 19 73 35 3 7 32 2 Monetary data are compiled: For Turnovo, K. Dochev, T rnovo, Sixth-Fourteenth centuries The Economic History of Byzantiu m: from the seventh trough the fifteenth centuries (Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, D. C, 2002), pp 673-678; for Preslav and Shumen from Zh. Zhekova Za Priemstvenostta mejdu Preslav i Shumen po Numizmatichni Danni [About the succession between Preslav and Shumen according to th e numismatic data] in Tradicii i Priemstvenost v Bulgaria i na Balkanite prez srednite vekove (V. Turnovo, 2003) pp. 220-229; For Cherven: V. Dimova Srednovekovniat Cherven [The medieval Cherven] ( Sofia: BAN Press, 1985) pp. 273-286: For Mesembria: E. TeoklievaStoicheva, Medieval Coins from Mesembria 5th14th Centuries (Sofia: Agato, 1994).; For Karvun a: M. Dimitrov, Monetite ot Dionisopolis Ka rvuna, [The coins of Dionisopolis Karvuna] Dobrudja Vol 12 (1995).pp. 173-179.; For Kaliakra: V.Parushev, Srednovekovni moneti ot Kaliakra, [Medieval coins from Kaliakra] Izvestia na Naroden Muzej Varna Vol. 26. (1990).pp. 141-147; For Ovetch: L. Lazarov, Danni za Monetnata Circulacia na Provadiiskata Krepost ( Po danni na Dalgopolskia Muzei) [ Data for the coin circulation of the fortress of Provat (According to data collected in the museum of Dalgo Pole)] (V. Turnovo, 2001), pp. 101-140. For Vereya: M. Minkova, Monetnta Cirkulacia II-XIII v na Teritoriata na Augusta Traj anaBeroe -VereyaBoru j. [Coin circulation 2nd-13th centuries on th eteorrotry of Augusta Trajana Beroe Vereya Boruj] Numizmatika, Sfargistika i Epigrafika Vol. 2 (2005),pp 79-101.

PAGE 325

325 LIST OF REFERENCES Written Sources Actes de Chilander ed. L. Petit and V. Korablev. Am sterdam: Hakkert, 1975. Phototype copy of the Addenda of Vizantiiskij Vremennik Vol. 17 and 19, Saint Petersburg, 1911-12. Actes de Philothe, ed. Regel, W., E. Kurtz and B. Korblev. Vizantiiskij Vremennik No 20 (1913), appendix 1. Actes de Kutlumus ed. Paul Lemerle, Paris: P. Lethilleux, 1946. Actas de Lavra I-III, ed by Paul Lemerle, A. Guillou, N. Svoronos, Denise Papachryssanthou. Paris: P. Lethielleux 1970, 1977, 1979. Actes de Vazelon ed. Th. Uspensky and V. Benech evitch, Leningrad: Gosudarstvenaia Pun\blishnaia Biblioteka, 1929 Actes de Xenophon ed. L. Petit, in Vizantiiskij Vremmnik. Saint Petersburg, Vol. 19 1903. Apendix. Actes de Zougraphou ed. by Ed. Regel, E. Kurtz and B. Korablev in Vizantiiskii Vremennik Vol.13 St. Petersburg, 1907. pp 1-190. Acta monasterii Eleause Ed. L.Petit in Izvestija Ruskogo Instituta Arheologii v Konstantinopole ( IRAIK) No 6, 1900. pp 1-153. Anna Comnena. Alexiad. transl and ed in Russian J. N. Liybarski. Moscow: AN SSSR, 1956. Angelov, Dimtar and Peter Tivcev, Izvori za istoriata na Vizantija [Sources for the Byzantine history] Sofia: Nauka i izkustvo, 1974. Archivio di Stato di Venezia Senato, Delliberazioni misti XXI. Rome: Ministero dell' interno, 1959. Basilika [Basilics] ed. by I.D. Zepos. Athens: Ioann Angelopoulou, 1896-1900. Bartsocas, C.S. Two 14th Century Greek Descriptions of the Black Death, Journal of the History of Medicine 21:4 (1966), pp. 395400 Bartusis, Mark, Khalifa Ben Nasse r & Angeliki E. Laiou, "Days a nd Deeds of a Hesychast Saint: A Translation of the Greek Life of St. Romylos", in Byzantine Studies/Etudes Byzantines 9:1 (1982), pp. 24-47.

PAGE 326

326 Belgrano, L. T. Prima serie di docum enti reguardanti la co lonia di Pera. Atti della Societa ligura di storia patria Vol.XIII (1884) pp. 116-123. Bdinski Sbornik Faxmile edition with an introduction by Ivan Dujcev. London: Varorium, 1972. Bolosnki Psaltir [Bolognas Psalter]. Ed. by Ivan Dujcev. Sofia: BAN, 1968. Browning, R. "Unpublished Correspondence betw een Michael Italicus, Archbishop of Philipopolis and Theodore Prodromos," Byzantinobulgarica No 1 (1962), pp. 279-97. CaspariniLeporace, T. Mappamondo di Fra Mauro. Venice: Istituto poligrafico dello stato 1956. Cecaumenes. Strategicon et incerti scriptorisde oficiis regis libellus. Ed by G. Litavrin. Moscow: AN SSSR, 1972. Codex diplomaticus Hungariae ecclesiasticus ac civillis, studio et opera G Fejer Vol. II Budae, 1829. Comnena, Anna. Alexiad Ed. Diether Roderich Reinsch. Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 2001. Constantine Harmenopoulos, Excerpts from Manuale legum; ed. by G. E. Heimbach, Manuale legum sive Hexabiblos, Book II, 4, 13-23. Leipzig: T.O. Weigel, 1851. Chronicle of Morea trans. Harold F. Evans as Crusad ers as Conquerors: The Chronicle of Morea. New York: Columbia UP, 1964. Demetrius Cydones (Kydones), Correspondence Vol. 1-2. ed. by R-J Loernertz, Studi e Testi 186, 208.Vatican: Biblioteca apostolica vaticana 1956-60. Dennis, G.T., trans., "The Shor t Chronicle of Lesbos 1355-1428", Lesbiaca 5 (1966), pp. 123144. Descriptio Europae Orientalis, ed. by O. Gorka. Krakow, 1916. Dimitrova, Ekaterina. The Gospels of Tsar Ivan Alexander. London: British Library, 1994. Documenta Romaniae historica, seria B. Tra Romneasca Vol. 1. (1257-1500) Bucharest: Editura Academiei Republicii Socialiste Romnia, 1966 Domentijan. Jivoti Svetoga Simeona i Svetoga Save [Life of St. Simeon and St. Sava] ed. by B. Dani i Belgrade: Drz avnoj s tampariji, 1965. Dubrovachke Acta I Povele. [ Acts and Novels of Dubrovnik] Vol 1. ed. J. Radonich. Belgrade, 1934. Ducas, Historia Turco-Byzantina, trans. Harry J. Magoulias as Decline and Fall of Byzantium to the Ottoman Turks Detroit:Wayne State UP, 1975.

PAGE 327

327 Dujcev, Ivan.. Miniatiurite na M anasievata Letopis [ Manasis Chronicl e miniatures] Sofia, 1968. ________. Iz Starata Bulgarska Knizhnina [Old Bulgarian literatu re] Sofia: Hemus, 1944. ________. Dokumenti ot Vatikanskia Arhiv za Bulgarskata Istoria [ Vatican documents for the Bulgarian history]. Izvestija na Istoricheskoto Drujestvo, No 13, 1933. ________. Bulgarski starini iz Makedonia [Bulgarian historical monuments in Macedonia]. Sofia, 1931. Ephraim. Chronographia. ed. I. Bekker. Bonn: Ed. Weber, 1840. Eustathii Metropolitae Thessalonicensis Opiscula. Ed. by T .L .F. Tafel. Frankfurt am Main, repr. Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1964. Evtimii, Patriarch of Turnovo. Jitie na Sv. Pa raskeva. [Life of St. Paraskeva] ed. by V. Kiselkov, in Bulgarska Istoricheska Biblioteka No 3, 1930. Filov, Bogdan. Londonsko Evangelie na Ivan Al exander i Negovite Miniaturi[ Londons Gospel of John Alexander and its miniatures] Spisanie na Bulgarskata Akademia na Naukite No 38, 1929. pp 1-39 Florinskii, T. Afonskie Aktyi [ Athonite Acts]. Saint Petersburg: V.S. Balashev, 1880. Ganev, Venelin. Zakon Sudenje Liudem [Law for Judging Peopl e] Sofia:BAN, 1959 Geoffroi de Villehardouin. La Conqute de Constantinople. ed. and transl. in Bulgarian Vs. Nikolaev, Sofia, 1947. George Acropolites, Historia ed. A. Heisenberg, Georgii Acropolitae Opera Vol.1 and 2. Lipsiae: In aedibus B.G. Teubneri, 1903. Georgios Sphrantzes, Memorii, 1401-1477. Ed. V. Grecu. Bucharest: Editura Academiei Republicii Socialiste Romnia, 1966. George Pachymeres, De Michaele et Andronico Paleologus ed. I. Bekker,Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae. B onn: Ed. Weber, 1835. Goshev. Ivan. Rilski Glagolicheski Listove [Glagolic lists from Rila Monastery] Sofia:BAN, 1956. Gramota na Stefan Urosh II Milutin ot 1300g. za manastira Sv. Georgi do Skopje. [Charter of Stefan Urosh II Milutin from 1300 about monaster y of St. George near the town of Scopje] in Sbornik Istoriju Iujne Srb ije i Susednih Oblasti. Scopje, 1936 Grigorii Camblak. Pohvalno Slovo za Evtimii [Praise for Evtimii] ed. P. Rusev. Sofia: BAN, 1971.

PAGE 328

328 Gjuzelev, Vasil. Chronicon Mesembriae. Godishnik na Sofiiskia Universitet No 66, (1975). pp. 147-193. ________. Novi Dokumenti za Turgoviata na Srednovekovna Bulgaria [New documents for the trade of medieval Bulgaria] in Srednovekovna Bulgaria v Svetlinata na Novi Izvori Sofia: Narodna Prosveta, 1986. Grucki Izvori za Bulgarskata Istoria [Greek sources for the Bulgarian history] Vol.6-9 edd. M. Voinov, V. Tupkova-Zaimova, L. Ionchev, Iv. Dujcev, G. Cankova-Petkova, P. Tivcev, Str. Lishev, St. Masl ev. Sofia, 1965, 1968, 1972, 1974. Gregory Akindynos, Letters trans. A. Hero. Washington D.C.:Dumbarton Oaks, Center for Byzantine Studies, No 19. Hanawelt, Emily, A., "An Annotated Bibliogr aphy of Byzantine Sources in English Translation", Byzantine Studies/Etudes Byzantines 9:1 (1982), pp. 68-87. Historia Peregrinorum. Transl. and ed. by Str. Lishev and B. Primov in Latinski Izvori za Bulgarskata Istoria (LIBI)[ Latin sources for the Bulgar ian history] Vol. 3. Sofia: BAN, 1965. pp. 2244. Husein, Beday ul-vekai [Astonishing events] ed. by A. S. Tveritinovoi Vol. 1. Moscow: AN SSSR, 1961. Innocetius III Papa-Caloioannes Rex. Epistolae. Ed. by Iv. Dujcev. In Latinski Izvori za Bulgarskata Istoria [ Latin sources for the Bulgarian history] Vol. 3, Sofia: BAN, 1965.pp. 307-378. Ioannes Cantacuzenus. Historiarum libri IV Corpus Scriptorum Hist oriae Byzantinae, Ed. L. Schopen. Vol. 1-3 (Bonn: 1828-97); partiall y translated by Timothy S. Miller as The History of John Cantacuzenus, Book IV, Text, Translation and Commentary (Ph.D. Dissertation, Catholic Univ ersity of America, 1975; Ann Arbor, Mi.: University Microfilms, 75-19,517. IoannesScylitzes Georgius Cedrenus. Synopsis historiarum, ed. I. Thurn BerlinNew York: De Gruyter 197; also as Historia. in Grucki Izvori za Bulgarskata Istoria [Greek Sources for the Bulgarian History] Vol 6. ed. by M. Voinov, Iv. Dujcev and V. Tupkova-Zaimova. Sofia, 1965. pp 198-340. Ioannes Zonaras, Epitome Historiarium Transl and ed. by P. Tivcev and V. Tupkova-Zaimova in Grucki Izvori za Bulgarskata Istoria Vol. 7. Sofia: BAN, 1965. pp. 102-208. Ivanov, Iordan. S v Ivan Rilski i Negoviyat Monastir [St. John of Rila and his monastery] Sofia, 1917. John Tsetses Letters ed. P.A. M. Leone Leipzig: Teubner, 1972. Kekaumenos. Strategicon, ed. G. Litavrin. Moscow: AN SSSR, 1972.

PAGE 329

329 Kiselkov, V. Mitropolit Grigoii Tsamblak [Metropolitan Gregory Tsamblak]. Sofia, 1946. ________. Jitieto na Sv. Teodosii Turnovski [Life of St. Theodosius of Turnovo] (Sofia: Bozhinovi, 1926. Hr. Kodov, The Psalter of Kuklen Monastery (Pesnivets) in Opis na Slavjanskite Rukopisi v Bibliotekata na BAN [ Annotated inventory of the Slav ic scriptures at the library of Bulgarian Academy of Sciences]. Sofia: BAN, 1969. Kritovoulos (Critoboulus), History of Mehmed the Conqueror trans. Charles T. Rigg, Princeton: Princeton UP, 1954. Laskaris, M. Vatopedska Gramota na Tzar Ivan II Asen [Vatopedi Chrater of John II Asen] Sofia: D rzhavna Pechatnitsa, 1930. Latinski Izvori za Bulgarskata Istoria (LIBI) [Latin Sources for the Bulgarian history] Ed. by Iv. Dujcev, M. Voinov, B. Primov, Str. Li shev. Vol.1-4. Sofia: BAN 19581981. Lazarini, Vittorio. Mari no Faliero avanti il dogiado Nuovo archivo veneto No 5 (1893). pp. 95-197. Libri Reformationum, Vol. III: Monumenta Ragusina Zagreb: Hartmann, 1895. Liubarskii, Ja. N. Mihail Psell: Lichost i Tvorchestvo [Michael Psellus: Personality and Creativity] Moscow: AN SSSR, 1978. Manuel II Paleologus Letters Text, Translation and Notes, e d., G.T. Dennis, Dumbarton Oaks Texts 4/Corpus Fontium Historiae Byzantin ae VIII. Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks, 1977. Michael Ataliata. Historia. Ed. I. Bekker. Bonn: Ed. Weber,1853. Michael Psellus, Chronographia Transl and ed. by J.N. Li ubarskii. Moscow: AN SSSR, 1978; GIBI Vol. 6. Sofia: BAN, 1965. pp. 33-108. Mller, Iosephus and Franciscus Miklosich. Acta et diplomata graeca medii aevi sacra et profana. Vols 1-6.Vienna, 1860-1892. Nedkov, B. Geografiata na Idrisi [The geography of Idrisi] Sofia: Nauka i izkustvo, 1960. Nicephorus Gregoras, Byzantina Historia ed. by L. Schopen Vol. 1-3. Bonnae: Impensis Ed. Weberi, 1825-1855. Nicephorus Gregoras, Corres pondence de Nicephore Gregoras ed. R. Guilland (Paris: Socit d'dition "Les Belles letters," 1927) Nicetas Choniates, Historia English trans. by Harry J. Magoulias as O City of Byzantium: Annals of Niketas Choniates Detroit: Wayne State UP, 1984.

PAGE 330

330 Nicholas Cabasilas (Kavasilas), Commentary on the Divine Liturgy, in J.P. Migne, Patrologiae cursus completu s, Series Greaco-latina. Paris, 1957. English trans. J.M. Hussey & P. McNulty, London: SPCK, 1960, repr. 1977, 1983. Novakovi Stoyan. Zakonski spomenici Srpskih Drjava Srednega Veka [ Legal documents of the Serbian state during the Middle Ages] Belgrade: Drz avnoj s tampariji, 1912. Pavlov, Plamen, Ivan Lazarov and Ivan Tiutiundzhiev, Dokumenti za Politicheskata Istoria na Bulgaria, XIIXIVvek [Documents for the political history of Bulgaria, 12th 14th centuries]. Veliko Turnovo: Asta, 1993. Pegoloti, F.B. Practica della Mercatura Ed.by L.Evance. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1936. Pismo ot Dimitar Homatian Arhiepiskop na Ohir d do Vasiliy Pediadit, mitropolit na Korfu [A Letter of Demetrius Chomatianos, Archbishop of Ohrid, to the metropolitan of Korfu, Basil Pediaditis] in Peter Nikov, ed. Prinos kum Istoricheskoto Izvoroznanie na Bulgaria i kum Istoriata na Bulgarskata Tsurkva [A contribution to the Bulgarian historical sources and to the history of Bulgarian Church] SpBAN vol.XX issue 11(1921). pp. 20-47. Pistarino, G. Notai genovesi in Oltremare: Atti r ogati a Chilia da Antonio di Ponzo`, 1360 Genoa, 1971. Pitra, J.B. Analecta sacra et classica Spi cilegio Solesmensi parata. V ol. 6: Iuris ecclesiastici Graecorum Selecta paralipomena. Paris and Rome, 1891; repr. Farnborough: Gregg Press, 1967. Popruzenko, M. G. Synodik Tsarja Borila [Borils Synodicon] Bulgarski Starini No 8 (1928) pp. 83-84. Sathas, Konstantinos N. Mesaionike Bibliotheke, 7 vols.Venice-Paris: Typois tou Chronou, 1872. Seaddedin, Chronica dellorigine e progr esse della casa ottomana. Vienna: Appresso M. Riccio, 1649. Sevcenko, Ihor. Inscription Commemorating Si sinnios, Curatorof Tzouroulon (A.D. 813), Byzantion No 35 (1965), pp. 564. Solovjev, A. and V. Moshin, Grcke Povelie Srpskih Vladara [Greek novels of the Serbian rulers]. Belgrade: Kresti 1936. Solovjev, A. Konchanski Praktik [ Koncha practikon] in Zbornik Radova Vizantolozhkog Instituta. Belgrade, No 3, (1955) pp 83-109.

PAGE 331

331 Stadtmller G. Michael Choniates, Metropo lit von Athen (c.1138-c.1222) Vatican City: Pont. Institutum Orientalium Studiorum, 1934. Thephylactus Bulgariae Archiepiscopus. Epistolae Ed. and transl in Bulgarian Simeon, Bishop of Varna and Preslav. Spisanie na Bulgarskata Akademia na Naukite No 27, (1931) pp.1-238. Thomas G. M. and R. Predelli Diplomatarium Veneto-levanti num sive acta diplomata res venetas, graecas atque levantis illustrantia Vol. Ia.(1300-1350) and Vol. II (1351-1454). Venice: Sumptibus societatis, 1880 89. Typicon Gregorii Bacuriani Ed. and Transl. in Rusian V. A. Arutniunov-Fidanjan. Erevan, 1978. Typicon Monastery Kosmosotirae. Ed. L. Petit. Izvestia Ruskogo Arkeologicheskogo Instituta v Konstantinopole. No 13, (1908). pp. 18-77. Wavren, Jean de. La campagne des croises sur le Danube, 1445 ed. N. Iorga. Paris: J. Gamber, 1927. Willelmi Tyrensis Archiepiscopi Chronicon ed. R. B. C. Huygens. Turnholt: Brepols, 1986. Woodhouse C. M. George Gemistos Plethon, Th e Last of the Hellenes Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986 Zakon o Rudnicima Despota Stefan Lazarevicha [The Mining Law of Stefan Lazarevi ] ed. by N. Radoj i Belgrade: Nau no Delo, 1962. Archaeological sources Antonova, Vera. Shumen and Shumenska Krepost [Shumen and the fortress of Shumen], Shumen: Antos, 1995. Aleksiev, Jordan. Srednovekovno selicshte krai Hotn ica [Medieval settlement near Hotnica] in Veliko Turnovo, Iubileen Sbornik. Ed. J. Andreev, K. Totev, and K. Dochev. Sofia: Abagar, 2005. ________. Shishmanovata Banja v Veliko Turn ovo [Shishmans Bathhouse] in Mezhdunarodna Fondacia Sv. Panteleimon V. Turnovo: Sv. Panteleymon, 1993. pp 5965. Bachvarov, Ivan. Monetni Nahodki ot Kreposta Rjahovec [Coin findings from Rjahovec fortress] V. TurnovoG. Orjahovica: Museums of Turnovo and Gorna Oriahovica, 1994. ________. Yantrenski Nekropoli [Yantras necropolis]. V. Turnovo: Vital, 1993. Balkanski. Ivan. Srednovekovnata Krepost Us tra [The medieval fortress of Ustra] Vekove No 6, 1974. pp 54102.

PAGE 332

332 Changova, Jordanka. Lovetch. Sofia: Voenno Izdatelstvo, 2006 ________. Srednovekovnoto Selishte nad Sevtopolis XI-XIV vek [The medieval settlement above Sevtopolis, 11th14th centuries] Sofia: BAN, 1972. ________. Razkopki na Loveshkata Krepost [Archeol ogical investigations of the fortress of Lovech] Arheologia No1, 1966. pp. 32-42 ________. Kum Prouchvaneto na Sgrafito Kerami ka v Bulgaria XII-XIV v. [Contribution to the examination of the Sgraphito ceramic in Bulgaria, 12th 14th centuries] Arheologia, No 1, 1962. pp. 2533. ________. Srednovekovni Orudia na Truda v Bulg aria [Medieval tools in Bulgaria] Izvestia na Arheologicheskia Institut Vol.XXV (1961).pp.19-55. Cvetkov, Boris. Selishtanata Mrezha v Dolinata na r eka Struma pres Srednovekovieto [Medieval settlement network in the Struma River valley] Sofia: B. Cvetkov, 2002 Dancheva-Vasileva, Ani. Lokalizirane na Latin skia Kvartal v Plovdiv prez srednovekovieto. [ Lokalization of the Latin qua rter in medieval Plovdiv] Istoricheski Pregled No 5 and 6, 1985 Deroko, Alexander. Srednovekovni Gradovi u Srbiji, Crnoj Gori I Makedoniji [Medieval towns in Serbia, Montenegro and Mace donia] Belgrade: Prosveta, 1950. Djambov, Ivan. Srednovekovno Selishte nad Antichnia grad pri Hisar. Sgradostritelstvo i Arhitektura [Medieval settlement above the antique town near Hisar. Housebuilding and architecture] Asenovgrad: Hr. G. Danov, 2002. ________. Srednovekovnata Krepost pri Sopot [Medieval fortress near Sopot] Plovdiv: Hr.G.Danov, 1991. ________. Zamukut v Srednovekovna Bulgaria. Tradicii i Vlijanija. [The palace of medieval Bulgaria. Traditions and influences] Arheologia No 3, 1992.pp.10-19 Djingov, G., A. Balkanska and M. Josifova, Kaliakra Vol.1. Sofia, BAN, 1998. Dimitrov, D. Rabotilnica za Trapezna Keramika vuv Varna [Workshop for tableware in Varna] Izvestia na Varnenskoto Arheologichesko Drujestvo No XI. (1960) pp. 111-128. Dimova, Violeta and Stamen Michailov, Srednovekovniat Cherven [The medieval Cherven] Sofia: BAN, 1985. Djingov, Georgi, Ana Balkan ska and Maria Josifova. Kaliakra Sofia: BAN, 1998.

PAGE 333

333 Dochev, Konstantin. Monetite ot Hulma Momina Krepost [The coins from Momina Krepost hill] in Izvestia na Istoricheski Muzei Veliko Turnovo No 9 (1994).pp. 125-132. Gatev, Peio. Srednovekovno Selishte krai Kovache vo [Medieval settlement near Kovachevo] Prouchvanija i Razkopki XXIII, (1985). pp 12-59. Georgiev, G. Arheologicheski Danni za Jeliazo dobivaneto v Severoiztochna Bulgaria prez Srednite Vekove [Archaeological data for ir on making in Northeaste rn Bulgaria during the middle ages] Priroda, No 5 (1955).pp. 65-73. Georgieva, Sonia and N. Gizdova, Srednovekovnata Krepost Cepina [The medieval fortress of Cepina] Izvestia na Arheologicheskia Institut XXIX, (1966) pp 41-63. Georgieva, Sonia and Raina Peeva, Srednovekove n Bulgarski Nekropol krai Lovetch i Nakitite Namereni v Nego. [Medieval Bulgarian necr opolis near Lovetch and the adornments found there] Izvestija na Arheol ogicheskia Institut Vol. 20 (1955).pp. 511-556. Georgieva, Sonya.Keramikata ot Dvoreca v Tur novo [Ceramics from the palace of Turnovo] in Tzarevgrad Turnov Vol.2 Sofia: BAN, 1974. pp. 12-205 ________. Za Keramichnoto Proizvodstvo v Srednove koven Preslav [The ceramic production in medieval Preslav] Istoricheski Pregled Vol.6 (1953). pp.6-18 Henning, Joachim. Sudosteuropa Zwischen Antike und Mittelalter Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1987. Istoria na Veliko Turnovo [ History of Veliko Turnovo]Vol. 1-2. Ed. by Str. Dimitrov and Dimitar Kosev. SofiaVeliko Turnovo: OF, 19862000. Melnik, Gradut v Podnozhieto na Slavovata Krepost [Melnik, the town at the foot of the fortress of Slav] Ed. by V. Nesheva, Boris Cv etkov, Dimka Serafimova. Sofia: BAN, 1989. Mukul ik, Ivan. Srednovekobvni Gradovi i Tvurdini vo Makedonia [Medieval towns and fortresses in Macedonia]. Skopje: Makedonska akademija na naukite i umetnostite, 1996. Milosevich, Gordana. Stanovanje u srednjovekovnoj Srbiji [Housing in Medieval Serbia] Beograd : Arheoloski Institut, 1997. Nesheva, V. Bogospasniat Tsarev Grad Turnov [The Blessed Tsars to wn of Turnovo]. Sofia, Alea, 2000. Neshkovi J. Arhitektura i Gradovi Srbije [Architecture and Serbian towns] Raska XXV, (1989). pp. 52113.

PAGE 334

334 Nikolova, J. Zhilishteto v Turnovo [The dwelling-house of Turnovo] in Tzarstvashtia Turnov [The reigning Turnov] Sofia: Nauka i Izkustvo, 1985. pp. 64-75. ________. Novi Danni za Plana na Srednovekovnia Tu rnov [New data for the plan of medieval Turnovo] Arheologia No1, VI, 1964. pp.10-15. ________. and N. Angelov. Srednovekoven Kvartal na Hulma Momina Krepost [Medieval quarter on Momina Krepost hill] Arheologia No 1 (1963) pp 34-41. ________. Srednovekoven Kvartal na Hulma Momina Krepost v Veliko Turnovo, [Medieval quarter on the hill of Momina Krepost in Veliko Turnovo] Arheologia No 1 (1963).pp. 3441. Ovcharov, Nikolai and Daniela Kodjamanova. Peprerikon i Okolnite Tvurdini preSrednovekovieto [Perperikon and the surrounding fo rtresses during the Middle Ages] Sofia: Tangra, 2003. ________. Srednovekoviat manastir v Kurdzhali, cen tar na episkopiata Ahridos (XI-XIV v) [ The medieval monastery in Kurdzhali, center of the bishopric Ahridos ( 11th-14th centuries)] Razkopki i Prouchvania Sofia: BAN 1992. Ovcharov, Nikolai. Istoria and Arheologia na Vardarska Makedonia XIV v [History and Archaeology of Vardarian Macedonia in 14th century] Sofia: SU "Sv. Kliment Okhridski," 1996. Penchev, Vladimir and J. Iurukova. Bulgarsiki Srednovekobni Moneti i Pechati [Bulgarian medieval coins and seals] Sofia: Bulgarski Hudozhnik, 1990. Pernik VIII-XIVv. Editor in chief Jordanka Changova, Vol.1-3. Sofia: BAN, 1981, 1982, 1983. Popov, Atanas. Krepostni i Ukrepitelni Suorazheni a v Krunskata Srednovekovna Oblast [Fortresses and fortifications in the re gion of medieval Kr un]. Sofia: BAN, 1982. Preslav: Sbornik Studii po Arheologia [Preslav: Collection of Ar chaeological studies] ed. St. Vaklinov, Sofia: BAN, 1980. Robov, Mirko. Proizvodstveni Kompleksi za Bitova i St roitelna Keramika, [Complexes for production of earthenware, sgraffito and building ceramics] in Iubileen Sbornik Srednovekovno Turnovo.Sofia: Abagar, 2005. pp. 93-115. Stancheva, Maria. Sofia au moyen ge la lumire de nouvelles t udes archologiques, Byzantinobulgarica No. 5 (1978). pp. 211-223. ________. Srednovekovna Sgraffito Keramika ot So fia [Medieval sgraffito ceramics from Sofia] in Serdika Vol. I. Sofia: BAN, 1964. Stancheva Maria and Lyudmila Doncheva Pet kova, Sur la surface habite de Sredec au XIXIVes, Izvestia na Arheologicheskiat Institut Vol. 35 (1979).pp.124-133.

PAGE 335

335 Sultov, B.Novotkrit Keramichen Centar of Ri mskata I Starobulgarskata Epoha [Newly discovered ceramic Roman a nd Protobulgarian center] Arheologia Vol 11 (1969).pp. 1224. Totev, Totiu. Great Preslav. Sofia: Professor Marin Dri nov Academic Pub. House, 2001 Tzarevgrad Turnov Eds. S. Georgieva, J. Nikolova, N. Angelov. Vol.1-3 Sofia: BAN, 19731980. Tzonchev, D. and St. Stoilov, Asenova Krepost [Asen fortress]. Plovdiv: Narodna biblioteka Iv. Vazov, 1960. Secondary Sources Abel, Wilhelm. Die Wstungen des ausgehenden Mittelalters Jena: G. Fisher, 1943. Ahrweiler, H. tudes sur le Structures Administratives et Sociales de Byzance London: Variorum Reprints, 1971. ________. Lhistoire et la gographie de la r gion de Smyrne entre les deux occupations torques (1081-1317) in idem, Travaux et mmoires Vol. 1. Paris: E. de Boccard, 1955. pp. 31-36. Almazov, A. Tainaja Izpoved v Pravoslavnoi Tzerkvi [The Secret Confession in the Orthodox Church] Vol 3. Odessa: Tipografiii shtaba odesskago voennago okruga, 1894. Anhegger, R. Beitrge zur Geschichte des Bergbaus im Osmanischen Reich Vols.1-2.Istanbul, 1943-1945. Angelov, Dimiter. Srednovekovniat Velbujd [The medieval Velbujd] Sofia: BAN, 1974. ________. Bogomisltvoto v Bulgaria [Bogomils movement in Bulgaria] Sofia: BAN, 1969. ________. Prinos kum Pozemlenite Otnoshenia vuv Vizantia [About the land property relations in Byzantium] Godishnik na Sofiiskia Universitet No2 (1952). pp. 37-45. Angold, Michael. The Byzantine Empire, 10251204 London, New York: Longman, 1985. ________. "The Shaping of the Medieval Byzantine 'City,"' Byzantinische Forschungen No. 10 (1985). pp. 31-34 ________. A Byzantine Government in Exile, 1204-1261 Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1975. Aristotle, Politics. ed. by David Keyt. Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1999. Ashtor, E. Pagamento in contanti e baratto nel commercio italiano d oltremare, secoli XIV XVI,in Economia naturale, economia monetaria, ed. R. Romano and U. Tucci, Storia dItalia, Annali 6. Turi n: Einaudi, 1983. pp. 363.

PAGE 336

336 Avdev, St. Monetnata systema v Srednovekovna Bulgaria [Monetary system of medieval Bulgaria]. Sofia: Besike, 2005. ________. Imitacii na Vencianski Groshove ot Bulg aria [Imitations of Venetian grosses from Bulgaria] Numismatica Vol 1 (1982), pp. 19-26. Barkan, rkhan. L. Research on the Ottoman Fiscal Surveys. in Studies in the Economic History of the Middle Ea st from the Rise of Islam to the Present Day. London-New York: Oxford U.P, 1970. ________. Essai sur les dones statistiques de recen sement dans lEmpire Ottoman au XV-XVI sicles Journal of the Economic and social History of the Orient Vol 1. (1957).pp. 9-36. ________. XV Asrin sonunda bazi byk ehirlede e ya ve yiyecek fiyatlarinin tesbit ve tefti i hususlarim tanzim eden Kanunlar, [Laws regulating the fixing and inspecting particulars of prices for goods and food in some large citi es at the end of the fifteenth century] in idem, Tarihr fesikalari Istanbul: Brhaneddin Matbaasi,1941. pp. 321-340. Beldiceanu N. Les actes des premiers sultans conser vs dans les manuscripts turcs de la bibliothque nationale Paris, Vo l. II, Rgliements miniers 1390-1512 Paris, 1964.Beldiceanu-Steinherr, Irene and N. Beldiceanu, Un rglement minier ottoman du rgne de Sleyman de Lgislateur, Sdostforschungen Vol.21 (1962), pp. 149-167. Bitrakova-Grozdanova, V. Prilog kon Ohrdiskata Kovnica ot XIV vek [Contribution to Ohrids minting in 14th century] Istorja No.1 (1971), pp. 201-205. Bojilov, Ivan. Familiata na Asenevci, 1185-1396 [Asens dynasty, 1185-1396] Sofia: BAN, 1981. Bochev, S. Istoria na Starobulgarskoto Pravo [History of old Bulg arian legal codes and practices]. Sofia, 1908. Bojani Luka Duanka and Vera Mutafchieva, Vidin and Vidinski Sandzak, XV-XVI vek [ Vidin and Vidin sancak, 15th -16th centuries]. Sofia: Nauka i Izkustvo, 1975. Bouras, Charalambos City and Village: Urban design and Archite cture. Jahrbuch der sterreichischen Byzantini stik 31/ 2 (1981) pp. 611-653. Bokovi D. Stari Bar Belgrade: Savezni institut za zas titu spomenika culture, 1962. Braudel, Fernand. The Wheels of Commerce: Civilization and Capitalism 15th-18th Century 2 Vols. New York: Harper &Row Publishers, 1979. ________. Capitalism and Material Life, 1400-1800. London: Harper and Row, 1973. Brhier, L. Les Institutions de lEmpire Byzantin: Le Monde Byzantin Paris: ditions Albin Michel, 1948

PAGE 337

337 Brenner, Robert. Property Relations and the Gr owth of Agricultural Productivity in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe. In Bhadury, Armit and Rune Skarstein. Economic development and agricultural productivity. Lyme, Norway: Edward Elgar Publishers, 1997 ________. The Social Basis of Economi c Development. J.Roemer ed. Analytical Marxism Cambridge, Cambridge UP, 1985. The Brenner Debate Ed. by T .H. Aston and C. H .E. Philp in. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985. Bulgarski Srednovekovni Gradove i Kreposti [Bulgarian medieval to wns and fortresses] Ed. by V. Giuzelev. Varna: Georgi Bakalov, 1981. Burckhardt, J. The Age of Constantine the Great tr. M. Hadas. New York: Pantheon Books, 1949. Burmov, Alexander. Selected Writings in 2 Vols. Sofia: BAN, 1968. ________. Istoria na Bulgaria po Vremeto na Shis hmanovci [History of Bulgaria during the epoch of the Shishmans] Godishnik na Sofiiskia Universitet Sofia No-1-2 (1947). pp. 127. ________. Feodalizmat v Srednovekovna Bulgaria Istoricheski Pregled Vol 2 (1946/47).pp.151-171. The Byzantine Aristocracy, IX to XIII Centuries ed. by M. Angold. Oxford: B.A.R. 1984. Campbell, Bruce M S., Mark Overton and Philip T. Hoffma n. Land, Labour and Livestock: Historical Studies in European Agricultural Productivity Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1991 The Cambridge Urban History of Britain, I: 600-1540. Ed. by D. Palliser. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000 Charanis, P. A Note on the Population and C ities of the Byzantine Empire in the XIIth Century in The Joshua Starr Memorial Volume New York: Conference on Jewish Relations, 1953. ________. On the social structure and Economic Organisation of the Byzan tine Empire in the Thirteenth Century and Later, Bizantinoslavica Vol. 12 (1951). pp. 149-158. Christians and Jews in the Ottoman Empire : The Functioning of a Plural Society Vol..2: The Arabic-speaking lands Eds. Benjamin Braude; Bernar d Lewis. New York : Holmes & Meier Publishers, 1982.

PAGE 338

338 The Church in Town and Countryside Ed. by Derek Baker. Oxford: Blackwell, 1979. irkovi Sima. The Serbs. Oxford: Blackwell, 2004. Clarke, H. B. and Simms, A, eds, The Comparative History of Urban Origins in non-Roman Europe: Ireland, Wales, Denmark, Germany Poland and Russia from the ninth to thirteenth century 2 Vols. Oxford: B.A.R. 1985. Continuity and Change in Late Byzantine and Early Ottoman society Papers given at a Symposium at Dumbarton Oaks Papers Ed by Anthony Bryer and Heath Lowry. Birmingham Washington D.C.: University of Birmingham, 1986 Cursente, Benoit. Les castelnaux de la Gascogne medievale Bordeaux: Federation de historique di SudOuest, 1980 Curta, Florin. East Central and Eastern Europe in the Early Middle Ages Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2005. Derzhavin, N.S. Istoria Bolgarii [ History of Bulgaria]. Vol.1-3. Moscow: AN SSSR, 1947. Dobb, Maurice. Studies of the Devel opment of Capitalism London: Routledge, 1946. Dochev, Konstantin. Bulgarski srednovekovni moneti, XIII-XV v [Bulgarian medieval coins, 13th-14th centuries]. V. Turnovo: Tsentreks, 2003. ________. Mitnicheski Taxi i Plashtania v Bulgar skata Durjava prez XIVv [Custom taxes and fees of the Bulgarian State in the 14th century] Numizmatika i Sfragistika 1994. No.1. pp. 92-100. ________. Niakolko Belezhki varhu Srebarnoto Monetosechene na Ivan Alexander Mihail Asen [Few notices about the silver coinag e of Ivan Alexander with Michael Asen] Nimizmatica No.2 (1983). pp. 5-15. Dimtrievi St. Ostave koje sadrzhe sr pski srednovekovni novca is perioda do 1371 [Hoards of Serbian medieval coins up to 1371] Spomenik No. 1. Belgrade: Srpska Akademija Nauka i Umetnosti, 1981. pp.12 16. Dimitrov, M. Monetite ot Dionisopolis Karv una, [The coins of Dionisopolis Karvuna] Dobrudja Vol 12 (1995).pp. 173-179. Dlger, Frank. The Byzantine Empire in The Cambridge Medieval History Cambridge, 1967. ________. Regesten der Kaiserurkunden des Ostrmischen Reiches von 565-1453 Vol.1-4. Munich Berlin, 1924-1965.

PAGE 339

339 Duby, Georges. Rural Economy and Country Life in the Medieval West. London: Edward Arnold, 1968. Dujcev, Ivan. Bulgarsko Srednovekovie [Bulgarian Middle Ages] Sofia: BAN, 1973. ________. Prepiskata na papa Inokentii III s Bulg arite [The corresponde nce of Pope Innocent III with Bulgarians] Godishnik na Sofiiskia Universitet Vol. XXXVIII, (1942-3). pp. 2224 The Economic History of Byzantium: from the Seventh through th e Fifteenth Century, ed. by Angeliki Laiou Dumbarton Oaks Research Librar y and Collections; Washington, D.C., 2002. Eldem, Edhem. The Ottoman city between East a nd West: Aleppo, Izmir, and Istanbul. Edhem Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999 Epstein, S.R. Regional Fairs, Instit utional Innovation and Economic Growth in Late Medieval Europe. The Economic History Review New Series, Vol 47, no 3 (Aug. 1994). pp. 459-482. ________. Town and Country: Economy and Institutions in Late Medieval Italy. Economic History Review. No 46, 1993. pp 453-477. ________.Cities, Regions and the Late Medieval Crisis: Sicily and Tuscany Compared. Past and Present 130, pp 3-50. Eshkenazi, E. Kum Vuprosa za za Istoriata na Evreite na Balkani te VII XIV v.[To tQuestion of the history of the Jews in the Balkans, VII-XIV centuries] in Godishnik na Evreiskite kulturno-Prosvetni Dryujestva, 1967, No1 Fallmerayer, J. Ph. Rom und Byzanz in Europa zwischen Rom und Byzanz. Bozen: Athesia, 1990. Friedman, David. Florentine New Towns. New York: MIT Press, 1988. Gawantka, W. Die Sogenannte Polis Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag Wiesbaden GmbH, 1985. Georgieva, S. Za Keramichnoto Proizvodstvo v Srednovekoven Preslav [ The ceramic production in medieval Preslav] in Istoricheski Pregled Vol.6. 1953. Gerasimov, T. Novi Moneti na Tsar Michael Asen [New coins of emperor Michael Asen] Izvestia dn Bulgarskoto Arheologichesko Druzhestvo No. 16-18 (1940), p.84.

PAGE 340

340 Gjuzelev, Vasil. Ocherci vurhu Istoriata na Bulgarskiat Severoiztok i Chernomorieto, XII-XV v [Essays on history of Bulgarian Northeast and Black Sea coast, 12th -15th centuries]. Sofia: Borina, 1993. ________.Novi Dokumenti za Turgoviata na Srednovekovna Bulgaria [New documents for the trade of medieval Bulgaria] in Srednovekovna Bulgaria v Svetlinata na Novi Izvori Sofa: Narodna Prosveta, 1986. ________. Bulgarski Srednovekovni Gradove i Kreposti [Bulgarian medieval towns and fortresses].Varna: Georgi Bakalov, 1981. ________. "Du commerce gnois dans les terres bulgares durant le XIVe sicle," Bulgarian Historical Review (1979). pp. 36-58. ________. Die mittelalterliche Stadt Mesembria Bulgarian Historical Review No 1(1977) pp. 50-59. ________. Novi Danni za Istoriata na Bulgaria i na grad Nesebar [New data for the history of Bulgaria and of the town of Nesebar] Vekove Vol. 3 (1972).pp. 10-16. Glotz, G. La cit grecque Paris: Le Renai ssance Du Livre, 1928. Gorina, L. V. Meterialyi Dnevnika Antoniusa Ba rberius po Istorii Bolgarii I Vizantiiv XIV v. [ Materials provided by the accounting book of An tonius Barberius to the history of Bulgaria and Byzantium], in Byzantinobulgarica Vol. IV, Sofia, 1973. ________. Voprosy Socialno-Ekonomicheskogo R azvitia Vtorogo Bolgarskogo Tzarstva v Sovremennoi Bolgarskoi Isotriografii [Ques tions about the socio-economic development of the Second Bulgarian Empire in c ontemporary Bulgarian literature] in Slavjanska Istoriografia Moscow, 1961. Gorianov, B.T. Pozdnevizantiiskii Feudalism [Late Byzantine feudalism] Moscow: AN SSSR, 1962 ________. B. T. Gorianov, Vozstanie Zilotov v Vizantii 1342-1349, Izvestia Akademyi Nauk S.S.S.R Vol. 3. 1947. Grierson, Philip. The Debasement of the Bezant in the Eleventh Century. Byzantinische Zeitschrift Vol.47 (1954).pp. 379. Grozdanova, Elena. Bulgarskata Selska Obshtina XV XVIII v [Bulgarian village community XV XVIII cc.] Sofia, BAN, 1979. Gulubov, G. Osmanoturski Izvori za Istoriata na Sofia. Sudebni Documenti of XVI v [Ottoman sources for the history of Sofia. Legal records of XVI century] Serdica No. 3-4 (1942). pp.86-92. Haldon, John. Warfare, State and Society in the Byzantine World London: UCL Press, 1999.

PAGE 341

341 Harbova, M. Ukrepeniat Bulgarski Srednovekoven Grad [The fortified medieval Bulgarian town] Sofia: Tekhnika, 1979. Harvey, Alan. Economic Expansion of the Byzantine Empire, 900-1200 Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1989. Heers, J. Il commercio nel Med iterraneo alla fine del secolo XIV e nei primi ani del XV Archivo Storico Italiano No 113 ( 1955).pp. 157-209. Hendy, Michael, The Economy, Fiscal Administration and Coinage of Byzantium .Northampton Variorum Press, 1989. ________. Studies in the Byzantine Monetary Economy, c.300 Cambridge New York: Cambridge UP, 1985. ________. "The Gornoslav Hoard, the Emperor Freder ick I, and the Monastery of Bachkovo," in C.N.L. Brooke, B. H. I. H. Stewart, J. G. Pollard and T. R. Volk (eds.) Studies in Numismatic Method Presented to Philip Grierson ( Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1983), pp. 179 91. ________. Coinage and money in the Byzantine Empire, 1081 -1261.Washington, Dumbarton Oaks Studies, 1969. Herrin, J. Realities of Byzantine Provincial Government: Hellas and Peloponnesos, 1180-1205. Dumbarton Oaks Papers Vol. 29. (1975), pp. 253-284. Herlihy, David. Cities and Society in Medieval Italy London: Variorum, Variorum 1980. Hrabak, Bogumil. Izvoz itarica iz Bosne i Hercegovine u Primorje od kraja XIII do pooetka XVII veka [Grain export from Bosnia and Herzegovina to Primorie: the end of 13th the opening of 17th centuries] in Godinjak Drutva Istori ara Bosne i Herzegovine No 14 (1963), pp.121-203. Katerina Hristovska, A contribution to the Fourteenth-C entury Venetian Imitative Coinage Foud on the Territory of Republic of Macedonia Macedonian Numismatic Journal No2 (1996), pp. 139-167. Hrochova, V. Bizantska Mesta v 13-15 stoleti Prague: Universita Karlova, 1967. Horden, P. "The Confraternities in Byzan tium," in. W. J. Sheilds and D. Wood eds. Voluntary Religion London: Blackwell, 1986. Hoffman, Philip T. Growth in a traditional society: the French countryside, 1450-1815 Princeton, N.J.:Princeton University Press, 1996. Hoffman, J. Rudimente von Territorialstaaten im byzantinischen Reich, 1071-1210 Munich: Institut fur Byzantinistik und Neugriechische Philologie der Universita t, 1974.

PAGE 342

342 Iliescu, O. Premires apparitions au Bas-Danube de la monnale reforme dAlexis I Comnme Etudes Byzantines et post-byzantines Vol. 1 (1979).pp. 12-13. Inalcik, Halil. Studies in Ottoman Social and Economic History London: Variorum Press, 1985 ________. "The Hub of the City: Th e Bedesten of Istanbul," International Journal of Turkish Studies 1 (1979-80), 1-17 ________."The Policy of Mehmed the Conqueror towa rd the Greek Population of Istanbul and the Byzantine Buildings of the City," Dumbarton Oaks Papers XXIII-XXIV 1969-70. pp. 231-49. Ionchev, L. Za Haractera na Ma nastirskoto Zemevladenie v Macedonia [The character of the monasterial landowning in Macedonia] Izvestia na Instituta po Istoria No 22 (1972).pp 121-182. Istoria na Veliko Turnovo. [History of Veliko Turnovo] Ed. by D. Kosev, Vol. I. Sofia: OF, 1986. Istoria na Veliko Turnovo [History of Veliko Turnovo]. Ed. by Str. Dimitrov, Vol. II. Veliko Turnovo: Abagar, 2000. Ivanov, Jordan. Bulgarski starini iz Makedonia. [Bulgarian historical monuments in Macedonia], Sofia: Nauka i Izkustvo, 1970. Jacoby, David. The Venetian Presence in the La tin Empire of Constantinople (1204): The Challenge of Feudalism and the Byzantine Inheritance, Jarbuch fur sterraichische Byzantinistik Vol 43 (1993).pp 141201. Jordanov, Ivan. Moneti i Monetno obrysh tenie v Bulgaria 1082-1261 [Coins and coin circulation in Bulgaria 1082-1261]. Sofia: Nauka i Izkustvo, 1984. ________. Une trouvaille collective de monnaies du M oyenage (XIII sicle) prs di village du Dolna Kadba, district of Targoviste BizantinoBulgarica Vol. 6 (1980). pp. 173-213. ________. Harakter na Monetnoto Ts irkulacia v Srednovekovnite Bulgarski Stolici, Preslav i Turnovo [Characteristics of the coin circulat ion in the medieval Bulgarian capitals Preslav and Turnovo] in Srednovekovniat Bulgarski Grad (Sofia, 1980), pp. 229-239. ________. Bulgarskoto Imitattivno Monetosechene ot Nachaloto na XIII vek [Bulgarian imitative coinage from the beginning of the XIII century] Numizmatika No 3 (1978). pp. 318. Jovanovi A. Ostava Srednevekovnog Novca iz Tet ovo[A hoard of medieval money from Tetovo] Numizmatichar No. 3 ( 1980), pp. 169-180. Karaianopolus, Ioanis. Politicheskata teoria na Vizantia [Political theory of Byzantium]. Sofia: Clement Ohridski University Press, 1992.

PAGE 343

343 Karpat, Kemal H. The Background of Ottoma n concept of City and Urbanity in Structure Sociale et Developpement Culturel des Villes Sud-est Europeennes et Adriatiques aux XVIIe et XVIIIe Siecles Bucarest: Assoc. Int. d'Etudes du Sud-Est Europeen, 1975. pp. 323-340. Kazhdan, Alexander. Change in Byzantine Culture and Literature of the Eleventh and Twelfth Centiries Berkeley: UC Press, 1985. ________. People in Power in Byzantium. An Introduction to Modern Byzantine Studies Washington: Dumbarton Oaks, 1982. ________. Derevnia i Gorod v Vizantii IXX vv. [Village and town in Byzantium, 9th-10th centuries] Moscow; AN SSSR, 1960. ________. Agrarnye Otnoshenia v Vizantii, XIII-XIVvv [Agrarian relations in Byzantium, XIIIXIV centuries] Moscow: AN SSSR, 1952. Kiel, M. Urban development in Bulgaria in the Turkish period : the Place of Architecture in the Process in International Journal of Turkish Studies Vol. 4 1989, pp. 79-158. Kolarov, Hr. Titulatura i Polnomochia Vladetelskoi Vlasti v Srednevekovoi Bolgarii [Tutelage and authority of the central pow er in medieval Bulgaria] in Etudes Balkaniques No 3 (Sofia, 1978). pp. 96-101. Kondov, N., "Za broja na naselenieto v Bulgaria kum kraja na XIV v. [For the amount of the population in Bulgaria towards the end of XIV century] Istoricheski Pregled 24 (1968), pp. 65-69. Kovachev, Rumen. Nikopolskiat Sancak prez Poslednata Chetvart na XV vek [The Nicopol sancak during the last quarter of the 15th century] Sofia: Nationa l Library Press, 1997. Kovanje and kovnice anti kog i srednevekovnog novca. Ed. by Vladimir Kondi Belgrade: Narodni Muzej, 1976. Kreki Baria. Dubrovnik, Italy and the Balk ans in the Late Middle Ages London:Variorum Reprints, 1980. ________. Dubrovnik in the 14th and 15th Centuries: a City between East and West Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1972. ________. Dubrovnik (Raguse) et le Levant au Moyen Age, Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes. Paris: Mouton, 1961. Kyrris, Costas P. The Byzantine Urban Class between 1204 1341 in Liber Memorialis Antonia Era Studii presentati alla Comi ssione Internazionale Assemblee di Stato Cagliari, 1961. pp. 21-31.

PAGE 344

344 Laiou, Angeliki. The Economy of Byzantine Mace donia in the Palaiologan Period in Burk, John and Roger Scot, Byzantine Macedonia: identity, image, and history: papers from the Melbourne Conference, July 1995 Everton Park, Queensland Australia, 2000. ________. Gender, Society and Economic life in Byzantium. Norfolk: Variorum, 1992. ________. In the medieval Balkans: Economic pre ssures and conflicts in the fourteenth century in S. Vryonis, Jr. ed., Byzantine Studies in Honor of Milton Anastos Malibu, California: Undena Publications, 1985. ________. Peasant Society in the Late Byzantine Empire Princeton: Princeton UP, 1977. ________. The provisioning of Constant inople during the winter 1306-7. Byzantion No 37 (1967). pp. 91-113. Lamerle, Paul. Agrarian History of Byzantium from the Origins to the Twelfth Century Galway: Galway University Press, 1979. ________. Philippes et la Macdoine orientale lpoque chrtienne et byzantine Paris: E. de Boccard, 1945. Lazarov, L. Danni za Monetnata Circulacia na Provadiiskata Krepost (Po danni na Dalgopolskia Muzei) [Data for the coin circulat ion of the fortress of Provat (According to data collected in the museum of Da lgo Pole)]. V. Turnovo: Vital, 2001. Lefort. Jacques. Rural Economy and Social Relations in Coutryside Dumbarton Oaks Papers Vol. 47. (1993).pp. 101-113. ________. Villages de Macedoine. Vol. 1, La Chalcidique occidentale. Paris: Diffusion de Boccard, 1982. Lishev, Strashimir. Bulgarskiat Srednovekoven Grad [The medieval Bulgarian town] Sofia: BAN, 1970. ________. Za Pronikvaneto na Parite v Feodalna Bulgaria [About money introduction if feudal Bulgaria]. Sofia: BAN, 1958. ________. Za Stokovoto Proizvodstvo v Feodalna Bulgaria [About industrial production in feudal Bulgaria]. Sofia; BAN 1957. ________. Tretia Krustonosen Pohod i Bulgarite [The Third Crusade and Bulgarians] Izvestia na Instituta po Istoria (1957).pp. 205-240.

PAGE 345

345 Litavrin, G.G. Provincialnyi Vizantiiski Gor od na Rubeje XII-XIII vekov [The provincial Byzantine town on the border of the 12th-13th centuries] Vizantiiskii Vremennik Vol. 37. (1976) pp.19-25. ________. Bolgaria i Vizantia v XI-XII vv. [Bulgaria and Byzantium, 11th12th centuries] Moscow: AN. SSSR, 1960. ________. Krestianstvo Zapadnoi i Iugozapadnoi Bolg arii, XI-XII vv. [Peasantry in West and Southwest Bulgaria, 11th-12th centuries] in Zbornik Instituta Slavianovedenii AN S.S.S.R. Vol. 14. (1956). Lomas, Kathryn. Introduction in Urban Society in Roman Italy New York: St.Martins Press, 1995. Longworth, Philip. The Making of Eastern Europe, from Prehistory to Post-Communism New York: St. Martin's Press, 1992. Magdalino, Paul. The Empire of Manueal Komnenos 1143-1180 Cambridge, Cambridge UP, 1993. Maksimovi L. The Byzantine Provincial admin istration under the Palaiologoi. Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1988. Maniatis, G. C. The Domain of Private Guilds in Byzantine Economy, Tenth to Fifteenth Centuries, Dumbarton Oaks Papers Vol. 55. (2001), pp. 339-369. Mari R.Stobi -1937 Studie iz Srpske Numizmatike No. 20 (1956), pp.130-131. Martin, Janet. Medieval Russia Cambridge, Cambridge UP, 1995. Matabov, Hr. Pavlikianskoto Dvijeni e v Bulgarskite Zemi [Paulician movement in Bulgarian lands] in Studentski Prouchvania Vol.1.(1975). Matanov, Hristo. Vyznikvane i Oblik na Kius tendilski Sancak, XVXVI vek [Kiustendil sancak. Genesis and Outlook] Sofia: IF-94, 2004. Matschke Klaus-Peter. Die Schlacht bei Ankara und das Schicksal von Byzanz. Weimar: Bhlau, 1981. Medieval EuropeBrugge, 1997 Conference Papers of the Medieval Europe, Brugge 1997 Conference. Ed. by Guy De Bo. Vol.1 : Urbanism in medieval Europe Zellik : Instituut voor het Arc, 1998. Medvedev, I.P. The problem of So-called Byzantine Manufacture Byzantiaka 9, 1989 pp.207228. ________. Mistra. Ocherk Istorii i Ku lturyi Pozdnevizantiiskogo Goroda [Mistra, an essay on the history and culture of the late Byzantine town] Leningrad: Nauka, 1973.

PAGE 346

346 Mendels, Franklin. Proto-Industrialization: the First Phase of Industrialization Process? in Journal of Economic History Vol. 32 ( 1972) pp. 241-61. Metcalf, D. M. Some comments on the metrology of coins of Ivan Alexander and of Ivan Sratsimir Studii i Cercet ri de Numismatic (1975), pp. 127-138 ________. ByzantinoBulgarica: the Second Bulgaria n Empire and the problem of Bulgarian imitative trachea before and after 1204," Numismatic Circular vol. 81 (1973), pp. 418 421. ________.Echoes of the name of Lorenzo Tiepolo: imitations of Venetian grossi in the Balkans Numismatic Chronicle VII series Vol. XII (1972), pp. 183-191. ________. Coinage in the Balkans, 820-1355 Chicago: Argonaut, 1966. Miatev, K. Arhitekturata v Srednovekovna Bulgaria [Architecture of medieval Bulgaria] Sofia: BAN, 1965. Miloshevich, Gordana. Stanovanje u srednjovekovnoj Srbiji [Housing in Medieval Serbia]. Beograd : Arheoloski Institut, 1997. M. Minkova, Monetnta Cirkulacia II-XIII v. na Teri toriata na Augusta Traj anaBeroe VereyaBoruj. [Coin circulation 2nd-13th centuries on th eteorrotry of Augusta Trajana Beroe Vereya Boruj] Numizmatika, Sfargistika i Epigrafika Vol. 2 (2005).pp. 79-101. Morrisson, Ccile. La Dvaluation de la Monnaie Byzantine au XIe sicle: Essai dInterprtation. Travaux et Memoires 6 (1976): pp. 6. ________. Book review of Coinage and money in the Byzantine Empire, 1081-1261, by M. Hendy. Numismatic Chronicle No 11 (1971), pp. 356-66. Mushmov, Nikola. Kolektivni Nahodki na Moneti prez 1925-1926 [Hoards found in 19251926] Izvestia na Bulgarskiat Arheologicheski Institut Vol. 4 (1926-1927), pp. 321-326. ________. Monetite i Pechatite na Bulgarskite Tsare. [Coins and seals of the Bulgarian Tsars]. Sofia: Izdanie na NM, 1924. ________. Kolektivni Nahodki na Moneti prez 1918. [Hoards found in 1918] Izvestia na Bulgarskoto Arheologichesko Druzhestvo (1919), p. 116. Mutafchiev, Peter, Istoria na Bulgarskia Narod [History of Bulgarian people] in 2 Vols. Sofia: BAN, 1940-43. Mutafchieva, Vera. Otkupuvaneto na Durjavnite Prihodi v Osmanskata Imperia prez XV-XVII vek i Ravitieto na Parichnite Otnoshenia [Buying off the imperial revenues in the Ottoman Empire, Fifteenth to Seventeenth cen turies and the development of the money circulation] Istoricheski Pregled, No 1 (1960).pp. 40-52.

PAGE 347

347 Necipolglu, Nerva. Archontes of Thessalonike in Symposium of late Byzantine Thessalonike Washington: Dumbarton Oaks Res earch Library and Collection, 2004. Nesbitt, John W. and J. Wiitta, A confraternity of the Comnenian era Byzantinische Zeitschrift No 68 (1975). pp. 360-384. Neville, Leonora. Authority on Byzantine Pr ovincial Society, 950-1100 Cambridge: Cmbridge UP, 2004. Nicholson, David. The Urban Europe 1100-1700 New York, Palgrave, 2003. Novakovi Stoyan. Selo .[Village] Belgrade: Srpska knjiz evna zadruga, 1965. ________. Zakonski spomenici Srpskih Drjava Srednega Veka [Legal documents of the Serbian state during the Middle Ages] Belgrade: Drz avnoj s tampariji, 1912. ________. St. Novakovi Zakonnik Stefana Duana Tzara Srpskog 1349 i 1354 [Codification of Stefan Duan, Tzar of the Serbs of 1349 and 1354]. Belgrade: Drz avnoj s tampariji, 1898. Oberlnder-Trnoveanu, Ernest. Monnaies Byzantin es des VII-X sicles D couvertes a Silistra et le Probleme du Commencement de lcono mie Monetaire dans le Premier Royaume Bulgare. Dobrudja No 12 (1995).pp. 137171. Obolensky, Dimitry. The Byzantine Co mmonwealth 500-1453 New York: St. Vladimir Seminary Press, 1982. Oikonomides, N. Se poio batmo itan exrimatismeni i mezobyzantini oikonomia Rodonia: timi ston M. I. Manusaka. Rethymnon, 1993. ________. Hommes daffairs grecs et latins a Cosntantinople, XIIIeXV sicles Montreal-Paris, 1979. ________. The Donation of Castles in the Last Quarter of the Eleventh Century. in Polychronion, Festshrift Franz Dolger zum 75 Geburtstag (Heidelberg, 1966).pp. 413-417. Oman, C. The Great Revolt of 1381 Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1906. Ostrogorsky, George. Sabrana Dela [Collected works] Vol. 1-6. Belgrade: Prosveta, 1969-70. ________. The History of the Byzantine State Oxford: Blackwell, 1968. ________.K Istorii Imuniteta v Vizantii [About history of immunity in Byzantium] Vizantiiskii Vremennik, Vol. 13. (1958). pp.55-106. ________. Pronjia. Prilog Istorii Feudalizma u Vizantii i Iujnoslavjanskim zemliama [Pronia. Applying history of feudalism in Byzantium and Southern Slavic lands] Belgrade: Posebna izdanja Srpska Akademija Nauka, 1951.

PAGE 348

348 The Ottoman city and its parts: Urban Structure and Social Order Ed by Irene Bierman; Rifa`at Ali Abou-El-Haj; Donald Pr eziosi New Rochelle, N.Y. : A.D. Caratzas, 1991. Ovnanian, S. V. Armiano-Bolgarskie Istoricheskie Sviazy [Armenian-Bulgarian historical relations]. Erevan: AN ASSR, 1968. Parushev, V. Srednovekovni moneti ot Kali akra, [Medieval coins from Kaliakra] Izvestia na Naroden Muzej Varna Vol. 26. (1990). pp. 141-147. Penchev, Vladimir and Jordanka Yurukova Bulgarskite Srednovekovni Moneti i Pe4ati [Medieval Bulgarian coins and seals] Sofia: Bulgarski Hudozhnik, 1990. Penchev, Vl. Kolektivna Nahodka s Medni ( Bilonovi ) Skifati, XIII-XIV vek ot Vidin. [Hoard of copper (billon) scyphati 13th-14th centuries from Vidin] Numi zmatika i Epigrafika No 3 (2003). pp. 130-159. ________. Kolektivna Nahodka ot Medni (Bilonovi) Sk ifati, ot Purvata Polovina na XIII vek Namereni krai Petrich [Hoard of copper (billon) scyphati from the first half of the 13th century, found near Petrich]. Sofia: Agato, 2003. ________. Kolektivna Nahodka s Srebarni Bulgarsk i Imitacionni Moneti ot XIV vek [Hoard of silver Bulgarian imitative coins from 14th century] Minalo Vol. 1 (2000), pp. 40-42. ________. Kolektivna Monetna Nahodka ( XIV vek) ot selo Tishevica, Vr achanski okrag [ A hoard from Tishevica, ( 14th century) district Vratsa] Numizmatika No. 2-3 (1983), pp.2027. Petrov, Peter. Vazstanieo na Peter i Asen [The uprising of Peter and Asen] Sofia; Nauka i Izkustvo, 1970. ________. Vazstanieto na Ivalio, 1277-1280 [T he uprising of Ivailo] Godishnik na Sofiiiskiat Universitet Vol.49 (1956).pp. 173-260. Pirenne, H. Medieval Cities: Their Origins and Revival of Trade Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday, 1925. Plato. The Republic. ed. by Benjamin Jowett. New York: The Modern Library, 1941. Plyakov, Zdravko St. Monetnite nakhodki ot X III-XIV v. kato izvor za vunshnoturgovskite vruzki na Srednovekovna Bulgaria [Coin findings from the 13th14th centuries as a source for the international trade relations of Bulgaria] Istoricheski pregled Vol.58. No 34, (2002), pp. 3-74. ________. Za Reglamentaciata na Gradskoto Zanaia tchiisko Proizvodstvo v Bulgarskite Zemi, XV-XVII vek, [Regulations of urban guild ma nufactures in Bulgaria, XV-XVII centuries] Izvestia na Instituta po Istoria pri BAN Vol. 21 (1970).pp.87-148

PAGE 349

349 Polivjannii, D. Srednovekovniat Bulgarski Grad XIII-XIV v [Medieval Bulgarian town XIII XIV centuries] Sofia: Nauka i Izkustvo, 1989. Postan, M. M. The Medieval Economy and Society Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1975. ________. Some Economic Evidence of Declining Population in the Later Middle Ages The Economic History Review, New Se ries Vol.2 No3 (1950).pp. 221-246. Primov, Boris. Bugrite, Kniga za Pop Bogom il i negovote posledovateli [The Buogres. A book for priest Bogomil and his followers] Sofia: OF, 1970. Refik, Ahmet. Trk idaresinde Bulgaristan Istanbul: Devlet matbaasi, 1930. Runciman, Steven. Women in Byzantine Aristocratic Society in Byzantine Aristocracy IX to XIII Centuries ed. by M. Angold. Oxford: B.A.R. 1984. ________. The Last Byzantine Renaissance Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1970. Russell, J. C. Late Ancient and Medieval Population Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1958. ________. British Medieval Population Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1948. Saradi, H. Evidence of Barter Economy in the Documents of Private Transactions, Byzantinische Zeitschrift Vol. 88(1995). pp. 405. Sargent, Thomas J. and Francois Velde. The Big Problems of Small Changes Princeton: Princeton UP, 2001 Sakazov, I. Stopanskite Vruz ki na Bulgaria s Chujbina prez XIVvek, [The economic international relations of Bulgaria during the 14th century] Godishnik na Sofiiskia Universitet Vol. 30, issue No. 7 (1935), pp. 1-100. Sakellariou, M. B. The Polis-State. Definition and Origin. Athens: Research Centre for Greek and Roman Antiquity, 1989. Sevcenko, Igor. Society and Intellectual Life in La te Byzantium. Collected Studies London: Variorum Press. 1981. Scholfield, Philip. Peasant and Community in Medieval England, 1200-1500 New York: Palgrave-Macmilian, 2003. Shishkov, St.Bulgaromohamedani [Bulgarian Muslims]. Plovdiv: Turgovska pechatnitsa, 1936. Smetanin, V.A. Osobenosti Gorodskogo Remesla v Vyzantii XIII-XV vekov i Vozstanie Naemnych Rabochich v Constantinople v 1372-3 Godach in Srednevekovnyi Gorod No 6, Saratov, 1981.

PAGE 350

350 Snegarov, Ivan Istoria na Ohridksta Arhiepiskopia [History of the Ohrids Archbishopric] 3 Vols. Sofia: Gutenberg, 19241934. Siuziumov, M. Vizantiiskie Etiudyi Ekaterinburg, Izd. Uralskogo Universiteta, 2002. ________. Rol Gorodov-Emporiev v Istorii Vizantii [The role of emporia in Byzantine history] Viz. Vremennik Vol. 13, (1958). ________. Ekonomika Prigorodov Vizantiiskih Krupnyih Gorodov [The suburban economy of the Byzantine big cities] Viz. Vremennik Vol. 11 (1956). ________. Kniga Eparha [Book of the Eparch] Sverdlovsk: Iz datelstvo Sverdlovskogo Instituta, 1949. Sokolov, N. P. Obrazovanie Venecianskoi Kolonialnoi Imperii [Establishment of the Venetian colonial empire]. Saratov: Izdate lstvo Saratovskii Universitet, 1963. Sotirov, Iv. Numizmatichen Etiud kum Istoriat a na Avtonomnoto Vidinsko Kniazhestvo ot kraia na XIII vek do 30-te godi ni na XIV vek [Numismatic study for the history of the autonomous Vidin Principality ca 1300 1330s] Godishnik na Instituta po Arheologia s Muzej Vol. I (2001), pp. 288-332. ________. Srebarni Monetni Sakrovis hta ot Vrachansko [Silver hoards from the region of Vratza] Godishnik na Nov Bulgarski Universitet Vol. 4 (2001). pp. 375417. Spaho, F. Turski Rudarski Zakoni [Turkish mining laws] Glasnik Zemaljskog Muzeja u Bosni i Harcegovini Vol. 25 (1913), pp. 147-9; ibid Vol. 26 (1914). pp. 151-162. Srednovekovniat Bulgarski Grad ed P. Petrov. Sofia, 1980. Stein, E. Untersuchungen zur spatbyzantinischen Verfassungs und Wirtschaftgeschichte, Mittelungen zur Osman Geschichte II. Reprinted Am sterdam: A.M. Hakkert, 1962. Sullivan, Denis. The Versions of Vita Nikonis Dumbarton Oaks Papers No 32 (1978).pp. 157173. Symposium on Late Byzantine Thessalonike ed by Allice-Marry Talbot. Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 2004. Tafel, G. L. F. and G. M. Thomas, Urkunden zur ltern Handel s und Staatsgeschichte der Republik Venedig Vols.1-2 Vienna: Hofund Staatsdruckerei, 1856-1857. Tafrali, O. Thessalonike au XIV sicle. Paris: P. Geuthner, 1913. Taranovski, T. Istorja Srpskog Prava u Nemanji koj dravi [History of Serbian jurisprudence in the state of Nemanici] Vol.2. Belgrade: Sluzbeni list SRJ, 1996. Tawney, Richard. Religion and the Rise of Capitalism New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co, 1926.

PAGE 351

351 Teall, J. L. The Byzantine Agricultural Tradition, Dumbarton Oaks Papers No 25, 197. pp. 33. TeoklievaStoicheva, E. Medieval Coins from Mesembria 5th14th Centuries. Sofia: Agato, 1994 Tihomirov, M. N. Istoricheskie Svjazyi Ruskogo Naroda s Iujnyimi Slavjanami s Drevneishih Vremen do Polovinyi XVII veka Slavjanskii Sbornik (1947).pp. 125-201 Tiv ev, Peter. Sur les cits By zantines aux XI-XII sicles. ByzantinoBulgarica Vol.1.(1962). pp. 163-191. Herman Thorning, Ftvvetname-i-kebir in Idem, Beitrge zur Kenntnis des islamischen Vereinswesensauf Grund von Bast Madad et-Taufiq Berlin: Mayer & Mu ller, 1913. pp 225-230. Todorov, Nikolai. Society, City and Industry in the Balkans, 15th 19th centuries. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 1998. ________. The Balkan City 1400-1900 Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1983. ________. Za Demografskoto Sustojanie na Balkan skiat Poluostrov prez Xv-XVI vek [The demographic situation of the Balkan peninsula during 15th -16th centuries] Godishnik na Sofiiskiat Universitet Vol.2 (1959-1960). Toubert, Pierre. Les structures du Latium mdieval Vol.1. Rome: Bibliothque des coles franaises dAthnes et de Rome, 1973. Town and Country in Europe, 1300-1800 Ed. by S. E. Epstein. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2001. Towns in Societies: Essays in Econo mic History and Historical Sociology. Ed by Philip Abrams and E. A. Wrigley. Cambridge: Ca mbridge University Press, 1978. Treadgold, Waren T. The Byzantine State Finances in the Eighth and Ninth Centuries New York: Columbia University Press, 1982. Trifonov, Y. Istoria na Grada Pleven do Osvoboditelnata Voina [History of Pleven up to the Liberation War]. Sofi a: Saglasie, 1933. Tsankova-Petkova Genoveva Agrarnite Otnoshenia v Srednovekovna Bulgaria [Agricultural relations in medieval Bulgaria] Sofia: BAN, 1964. Tzevtkov, B. Selishtnata Mreja v Dolinata na Sredna Struma prez Srednovekovieto, IXXVII v [Settlement network in the valley of middle Strymon during the middle ages, 9th-17th century]. Sofia: B. Tsvetkov, 2002. Tsvetkova, B. Prouchvane na Gradskoto Stopanstvo, XV-XVI vek [Study on urban economy, 15th -16th centuries]. Sofia: Nauka i Izkustvo, 1971.

PAGE 352

352 Waley, Daniel, The Italian City-Republics London, New York: Longman Group, 1988. Weber, Max. Economy and Society: an outline of interpretative sociology New York: Bedminster Press, 1968. Woodhouse, C. M George Gemistos Plethon, The Last of the Hellenes Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986. Vakalopoulos, A. E. Istoria tos Makedonia, 1354-1833. Thessalonike, 1969. ________. History of Thessaloniki Thessalonike: Institute for Balkan Studie, 1963. Van Bath, B. H. Slicher. The Agrarian History of Western Europe, 500-1850 London: Edward Arnold, 1963. Van Bavel, Bas and Jan Luiten van Zanden, T he Jump Start of the Holland Economy During the Late Medieval Crisis, 1350-1500 The Economic History Review Vol. LVII, No 3 (2004), pp. 503. Vasi M, Arhitectura i Sculptura u Dalmatii Belgrade: Izdavac ka knjiz arnica Gece Kona 1922 Von Arnim, J. Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta New Haven: Yale Press, 1986. Young, George. Nationalism and War in the Near East. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1915. Yurukova, J. Monetni Nahodki Otrkiti v Bulgar ia prez 1979 [Coin finds discovered in Bulgaria in 1979] Arheologia No1-2 (1981). pp. 126-130. Zavrazin, V.A. K voprosu o pozde nevizantiiskoi manifakture [A bout the question of the late Byzantine manufacture] in Srednevekovnyi Gorod. No 6, Saratov, 1981. Zaharieva, L. Srednovekovni Boliarski Jilishta of Vtorata Bulgarska Durjava [Medieval boyars houses from the Second Bulgarian Empire] in Izsledvania vurhu arhitekturata na bulgarskoto srednovekovie Sofia: BAN, 1982).pp. 205-6. Zhekova, Zh. Za Priemstvenostta mejdu Pres lav i Shumen po Numizmatichni Danni [About the succession between Preslav and Shumen according to the numismatic data] in Tradicii i Priemstvenost v Bulgaria i na Balkanite prez srednite vekove (V. Turnovo: University of Veliko Turnovo, 2003) pp. 220-229. ivojinovic, M. The Trade of Mount Athos Monasteries, Zbornik Radovi Vizantolokot Instituta Beograd 29/30 (1991). pp. 101.

PAGE 353

353 Zlatarski, Vasil. Istoria na Bulgarskata Durjava prez Srednite Vekove in 3 Vols.[History of the Bulgarian State in the Middle Ages]. Sofia: Durzhavna Pechatnica, 1927-1940. ________. Iuzhna Bulgaria sled Smartta na Tsar Ivan Asen II i Reginskia Mir [Southern Bulgaria after the death of Ivan II Asen and Peace of Regina] Godishnik na Narodnata Biblioteka v Plovdiv (Plovdiv, 1927).pp. 327-341.

PAGE 354

354 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Pavel Stoyanov Murdzhev was born in 1965, in Chirpan, Bulgaria. He grew up in Plovdiv, Bulgaria, where in 1985 he graduated from Georgi Dimitrov High School. He earned his B.A. in history and geography from the University of Veliko Turnovo in 1991. In 2001, Pavel entered a graduate program in history at East Tennessee State University, Johnson City Tennessee, which he completed in 2003. In August 2003, Pavel was admitted to a doctoral program in European history at the University of Florida, which he completed in December 2008. During his doctoral studies, Pavel was assigned as a teaching assi stant and teaching associate of the History Department at the University of Florida, as welll as an adjunct instructor in European History at the University of Central Florida, Orlando.