Download PDF | Alexandru Madgearu - The Asanids_ the political and military history of the second Bulgarian Empire (1185–1280)-BRILL (2017).
367 Pages
The Sources
The internal sources provide only some scattered information about the political and military events of 185-1280, the period during which the dynasty founded by the two brothers Peter and Asan led the Second Bulgarian Empire, revived by the Vlach! and Bulgarian rebellion against Byzantium.
The most important internal sources are the letters sent to Pope Innocent 111 (1198-1216) by Johannitsa (Ionita) (1197-1207) and his Archbishop Basil. Those letters were written in Bulgarian or Greek, but survive only in Latin translation. They reflect international relations and particularly the political ideology of the new state (the pope’s claim of the imperial title as a source of legitimacy different from Constantinople).
John Asan 11 (1218-1241), whose rule coincided with the apex of the Empire's territorial expansion, won the great victory of Klokotnitsa against the Greek Empire of Thessaloniki (March gth 1230), which he celebrated by means of an inscription on a pillar in the Church of the “Forty Martyrs” in Tarnovo.’ A foundation inscription has been laid in 1231 at the gate of the Stenimachos fort, (now known as Asenova krepost, near Asenovgrad in the Rhodopi mountains).
It was destroyed in 1883, but a facsimile* has been preserved. Also, John Asan 11 exchanged letters with Pope Gregory 1x (1227-1241)° and granted trading privileges to Ragusa. The charter for Ragusa is very important for understanding Bulgarian realities (see chapter 8).
There also are some religious texts comprising historical information. Emperor Boril’s Synodikon mentions the names of several tsars. This text, adopted at the anti-Bogomil synod summoned in Tarnovo, in 12u, was based on the Synodikon of the Sunday of Orthodoxy, itself adopted in Constantinople in 843, and was, in essence, a collection of anathemas directed against the Bogomil heretics. Until late 14th century, references of some historical importance had been repeatedly added to it (the final form is ascribed to Saint Euthymios, the last Patriarch of Tarnovo, 1375-1393).
Unfortunately, no complete manuscript of this text has survived; it has been reconstructed based on two complementary versions, dating from 1382 and the 16th century, respectively. Some of the historical information is only found in the later version (edited first by Marin Drinov in 1876).® Likewise, information about the history of the Asanids can be found in the Life of Saint Ivan of Rila, in the Life of Saint Paraskeva (also called Petka by the Bulgarians), in the Life of Saint Ivan Polivotski, as well as in a text referring to the translation of the relics of Saint Marion of Moglena.”
Another category of internal sources is represented by the seals and sigillary rings belonging to the tsars (Asan, Johannitsa, Boril, John Asan 11, Mi¢o Asan and Constantine Asan), but also to boyars in charge of certain matters of state. They attest not only their names, but also the titles they held.® The coins issued in Bulgaria, bearing the tsars’ names and titles, as well as the archaeological discoveries from fortifications and other sites, represent a different kind of evidence that can also be included in the category of internal sources.
External sources are divided into several categories, according to their origin. First, the Byzantine sources. The most important one is the history of Niketas Choniates, both because the author was contemporary with the events, and because his work provides detailed records. As dignitary (he was the duke of the Philippopolis theme), he had access to accurate information regarding the development of conflicts, sometimes even taking part in the events as secretary to the emperor during campaigns. When describing battles, Niketas is remarkably accurate, even in the speeches attributed to Isaac I.
Another contemporary of the Asanids revolt was archbishop Eustathios of Thessaloniki. One of his speeches (from 1191) contains a valuable description of the Cumans, the allies of the Vlachs and the Bulgarians, who attacked the city in which he ministered. A concise chronicle from Creation to 1453 (the so-called Pseudo-Kodinos), written by four different authors, is also important because a contemporary, unknown author is responsible for the third part, which covers the reigns of Isaac 11 Angelos and Alexios 111 Angelos.!°
In addition, some information on the conflicts can be found in the speeches delivered by John Syropulos, Euthymios Tornikes, George Tornikes 11, Constantine Stilbes, Sergios Kolyvas, Niketas Choniates and Michael Choniates (the archbishop of Athens and Niketas’ brother).
George Akropolites (1217-1282), who held important civil and military offices in the Byzantine Empire of Nicaea, continued the historical writings of Niketas Choniates. His work was written at a time when the state founded by the Asan brothers was in decline and had completely assumed a Bulgarian identity. He omitted the role of the Vlachs in its creation, although he was otherwise well informed on the contemporary situation (in 1260 he was sent as an emissary to Tsar Constantine Asan in Tarnovo).!
For the same late period, the historical writings of George Pachymeres provide much information, sometimes supplemented by the work of a later author, Nikephoros Gregoras. The universal chronicle compiled by Theodore Skutariotes (in prose) and Ephrem the Monk (in verse) were profusely inspired by Niketas Choniates and George Akropolites. Both texts conveyed selectively and in an abridged manner the information comprised in the historical writings of Niketas Choniates, Thus, they hold little significance for that period, rendering their citation superfluous. However, for the period after 1204, Theodore Skutariotes and even Ephrem provided some information not found in the historical writings of George Akropolites, which is to be taken into account.
In Thessaloniki, the deacon John Staurakios wrote in the late 13th century a version of the miracles of Saint Demetrios, which includes a story of the Vlach, Cuman and Bulgarian attacks on the city. The details he provides are plausible. Another account of the saint’s miracles was written at a later time by Constantine Akropolites, the son of the historian. The poet Manuel Philes (1275-1345) composed a laudatory poem, which includes some information on the Byzantine-Bulgarian conflicts of 1263 and 1278-1279.
Another category of external sources is represented by Western accounts of the Third and Fourth Crusades. For the Third Crusade (1189-1192), the most useful source is Historia de expeditione Friderici imperatoris ascribed to a monk named Ansbertus, who accompanied Emperor Frederic 1 Barbarossa (1155-1190) on his journey to Constantinople, including over lands inhabited by Serbs, Vlachs and Bulgarians." It also contains the emperor’s letter to his son Henry, which provides a more concise description of the events.
Another account, which differs quite largely from Ansbertus’ work, is Historia peregrinorum, written by another German monk who took part in the crusade.!5 Another participant to the crusade, Tageno, dean of the Cathedral in Passau, authored a briefer account which was edited together with other texts in a book published in Augsburg in 1522 (Expeditio Asiatica adversus Turcas et Saracenos Imperatoris Friderici Primi). This text is slightly different from the one inserted in Annales Reicherspergenses.'®
Other informations on the crusaders’ march can be found in the chronicles of the bishop Sicardus of Cremona, written in 1212,!” of Albertus Miliol, notary of Regensburg, who wrote in 1260-1270,'8 as well as in other sources to be mentioned later on.
The Nibelungenlied was written in the same period, right after the Third Crusade. Placed retrospectively in the time of Attila (Etzel), the narrative contains many anachronisms, including ethnic names stemming from the time it was written. The same applies to Vlachia, the country of duke Ramunc, who came with 700 horsemen at Attila’s court (Der herzoge Ramunc uzer Vlachen lant). Vlachs (Vlachen), who had excellent horses, much like the Poles, are mentioned alongside Pechenegs (Pescenaere) and Russians. This is why the reference is usually considered to concern the Romanians settled north to the Danube.!9
It has been established that the epic poem was written around 1200 by a poet at the court of Bishop Wolfger von Erla of Passau.?° At that time, the only country (/ant) who could have been called Viachia was the RomanianBulgarian Empire,?! and the information regarding it could only have come from bishop Diepold or from Tageno, who passed through that region, and not through the lands inhabited by Romanians north of the Danube.
This is a fact which has not been considered hitherto by Romanian historiography, when interpreting the passage in the Nibelungenlied, as well as its continuation entitled Die Klage (“The Lament”), featuring Sigeher von Wallachen, one of the three East European rulers serving Etzel, together with Hermann from Poland and Walber from Turkey.?2 Ramunc is by no means a name inspired by the ethnonym Romanian, as it was speculated,?? because it is attested in the German onomastics of that time.2* As with Sigeher or Walber, the names were randomly chosen by the authors of the epic poems.
For the Fourth Crusade (1202-1204), which in fact led to the division of the Byzantine Empire, but also for the following years, the sources are much more consistent, as they concern an important period in the evolution of the Asanid state. Moreover, one of these sources is linked to a key figure in these events, Geoffroy de Villehardouin (about 1150-1213), one of the most important crusade leaders (he became marshal of the Latin Empire).
This great French nobleman was also a writer. Besides its value for the medieval French literature (it is considered the most remarkable chronicle), his work (La conquéte de Constantinople), is a source of first-hand information on the development of the crusade seen through the eyes of someone who had a broad perspective. His account is precise and credible, although Geoffroy attempted to justify the diversion of the crusade towards the Byzantine Empire (on the other hand, he admitted that the defeats suffered had been God’s punishment for the crusaders’ behavior in Constantinople).”5
For the period between 1208 and 1209, his work was continued by the cleric Henri de Valenciennes (it has survived in four of the Geoffroy de Villehardouin’s manuscripts). There is, however, a lacuna for the period September 4th 1207 and May 25th 1208, which has not been addressed by either of the two authors. The analysis of Henri de Valenciennes’s work, which also contains enough detail concerning the development of these events, reveals that he justified the existence of the Latin Empire as defender of papal interests.”6
A French translation of the work of William of Tyre, the First Crusade chronicler, was the basis for the first part of the so-called Chronique d’Ernoul et de Bernard le trésorier, which recounts the deeds carried out in 1099-1232 in Outremer. The narrative focuses on the Third and Fourth Crusades.
The identity of Ernoul remains uncertain, but we know that Bernard, the one who carried on the work, was the treasurer of the Saint Pierre Abbey of Corbie in 1232.7” Bernard broadly recounted the battle of Adrianople on April 14th 1205 and also mentioned the marriage of Latin Emperor Henry 1 of Hainaut (1206-1216) with Johannitsa’s daughter, using other sources than Geoffroy de Villehardouin’s work.”8
The work of the knight Robert de Clari provides the most vivid description of the events between 1198 and 1216, related by a petty nobleman from Picardy. He wrote it after he became a monk in the same abbey in Corbie where the only manuscript, which is not his handwritten original, has been written (only one copy from early 14th century survives in the Royal Library in Copenhagen).?9 Without having the same broad perspective as Geoffroy, Robert is representative for the common soldier mentality, a fervent fighter for the Christian cause, and convinced, on the other hand, that the occupation of Constantinople was justified, signifying the reconquest of the territory that once belonged to Troy, the ancient homeland of the French, according to the contemporary belief (as the nobleman Pierre de Bracheux boasted during a meeting with Johannitsa, recounted by Robert de Clari).
The legend of the Trojan origin, already popular among French noblemen, was used by crusaders to justify the division of the territories taken from the former empire, which would have gone to the rightful heirs, the descendants of the Trojans. This is how they could legitimize abandoning the initial objective of the crusade.®° The same idea of French Trojan origin appears in Historia Regum Francorum, written in verse by Philippe Mousket or Mouskés in the mid-13th century. He imagined a mythical history of the kings of France, descendants of Trojans. In the final part, whichgoes up to 1242 there are some references to blasi/blachi who came into contact with the French conquerors of Constantinople, an information probably originating from some chansons de geste that are now lost.*!
The author was mistakenly identified with a bishop of Tournai (who was in office between 1274 and 1283). In 1845 and 1906, respectively, the philologists B. C. du Mortier and Auguste Molinier ascribed this work to a burgher of Tournai with the same name, a theory which has been recently revived.3? Johannitsa’s conflicts with the Latins have also been mentioned by the Provengal troubadour Raimbaut de Vaqueiras, a companion of the Marquis Boniface of Montferrat, who became king of Thessaloniki in 1204.33
Other Western sources from the period immediately following the Fourth Crusade are the letters of Emperor Henry I of Hainaut, the account of Emperor Baldwin 1 from Corpus Chronicorum Flandriae, the already mentioned chronicle of Sicardus (the author was in Constantinople in 1204), as well as the annals of Ogerio Pane from Genoa (1219), Gesta episcoporum Halberstadensium (1209), and Cistercian abbot Ralph (Radulfus) of Coggeshall’s (1224) Chronicon Anglicanum. They briefly recount the conflict between Johannitsa and the Latin Empire of Constantinople.**
In Flanders, the country of the future first Latin Emperor of Constantinople, count Baldwin 1x of Hainaut or of Flanders (1194-1205), the Chronicle of Baudoin d’Avesnes was written around 1284, containing some information regarding the conflicts with Johannitsa. Recently, it has been reedited and translated by the Bulgarian historian Nikolaj Markov (he observed that Baudoin and Mouskés used the same unknown source).
The Chronique de Flandre (Istore et chronique de Flandre or Chronique de Flandres) is a later source, written in French in the mid-14th century. In contrast with the chronicle of Baudoin d’Avesnes, covering the years 792-1342, it does not derive from Geoffroy de Villehardouin’s accounts, but was instead based on certain traditions preserved by the local nobility. Nevertheless, the chronicle of Flanders has been seldom used by historians concerned with the conflict between the crusaders and Johannitsa.3®
The Chronicle of Morea was first written in Greek in 1320-1330 and altered over time. It was preserved in four versions in verse (Greek, French, Italian and Aragonese). It recounts the conquest of Peloponnesus (also called Morea) by the Western lords participating in the Fourth Crusade, and the history of the princedom founded there in 1205 by Geoffroy de Villehardouin, the nephew of the aforementioned chronicler. It also contains information on the conflict between the Latin Empire of Constantinople and Johannitsa, transmitted through oral tradition.>®
Another category of Western external sources is represented by some universal chronicles written later on, in the 13th and 14th centuries, particularly in monasteries (Albericus Trium Fontium, Robert de Auxerre, Johannes Longus de Ypre) or in the cities (Albertus Miliol). The information contained, although scarce, sometimes includes details otherwise not found in the main Western sources.
Constantin Serban?’ brought into discussion the work of Flavio Biondo (1392-1463), Historiarum ab Inclinatione Romanorum Imperii, also known as Decades, published first in 1483 in Venice. Although important in itself for the evolution of the Renaissance historiography, the brief passage mentioning the Vlachs as participants in the battle of Adrianople?® is not particularly useful, since Flavio Biondo knew nothing about the Vlachs south of the Danube. He mistook them for Romanians north of the Danube, some of whom he had personally met in Rome.*9 In fact, Flavio Biondo took the passage in question from Bartolomeo Platina (1421-1481), the author of a compilation relating the lives of the popes, first published in 1474, and then reprinted several times.*°
De Bello Constantinopolitano, another compilation by the Venetian Paulo Ramusio from 1572, is equally meaningless, as it is only significant for the way in which the information from French and Byzantine writings was received.*! There are in fact several Venetian chronicles from the 14th to 16th century which mention the conflicts of the Latin Empire of Constantinople with Johannitsa, Boril and John Asan 1, but do not convey information from other lost sources, contemporary with the events. Other Venetian chronicles anachronistically place Vlachs, Bulgarians and Cumans in the narrative about the life of Attila, because Johannitsa’s image was eventually identified with the figure of Attila.42 Only two Venetian historical works are truly useful for the period of the Latin Empire, those written by Marino Sanudo Torsello in 1321, and by Andrea Dandolo in 1350, both based on older sources.
In addition to these categories of narrative sources, there are the letters. Most important of all is the correspondence of Pope Innocent 111 with Johannitsa and his Archbishop Basil, with Emeric, the King of Hungary, as well as with the Latin Emperor of Constantinople, Henry 1 de Hainaut. Equally important is the correspondence of Pope Gregory Ix with the Latin emperor of Constantinople, Baldwin 11 (1228-1261), with the Hungarian king Béla Iv (1235-1270), and with Hungarian clergymen. These letters contain references to Bulgaria under John Asan 11. The three letters of Emperor Henry 1 of Hainaut from 1205, 1206 and 1212, recounting in detail the conflicts with Johannitsa and Boril, which have seldom been mentioned in Romanian historiography, are also of great importance.*5
Some unique information about the reign of Johannitsa and Boril can only be found in Serbian sources: the biography of the grand Zupan Stephen Nemanja, written in 1216 by his son Stephen the First-Crowned, and in the two versions of the life of Saint Sabbas, the other son of the grand zupan (his layman name was Rastko). The former was written by Domentian in 1254, and the latter by Theodosij of Hilandar in 1292.46 There is also some information from Hungarian sources (Rogerius’ account of the Mongol invasion, the 14th century chronicles, and some royal documents).
After the 1241-1242 Mongol invasion, which also affected Bulgaria, this state is mentioned in some eastern sources: “General History” (Djami ot- Tevarikh), written by the Persian scholar and vizier Fazlallah Rashid ad-Din (1247-1318) in 1310*7 and “The history of al-Malik al-Zahir Baybars reign in Egypt’, by Ibn Taghribirdi (1410-1470), who drew information from the lost book of Ibn Shaddad, a contemporary of the events.*®
The Asanid state has also been mentioned by the Franciscan friar William of Rubruck, who was an envoy in 1253 to the court of Khan Méngke. Describing the immensity of the Mongol empire, he stated that Asan’s Vlachia paid tribute to the Mongols. The great Armenian scholar Vardan Arewelc’i or Areveltsi (1198-1271) mentioned the Vlachs in connection with the Third Crusade.
The passage which appears in the history that he wrote in 1267 was brought to scholarly attention by Aurel Decei, who used Edouard Dulaurier’s old edition (Recueil des historiens des Croisades, publié par les soins de [Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres. Documents arméniens, tome I, Paris, 1869). A new English translation, based on comparisons between several manuscripts, is now available.*9
Link
Press Here
0 التعليقات :
إرسال تعليق