第233頁

　　  [91]Cf.K.M.Setton，Catalan Domination of Athens，1311-88，Cambridge，Mass.1948.

　　  [92]Nic.Gregoras Ⅰ，268.Cf.also Andronicus Ⅱ’s chrysobull to Chilandari of October 1213，‘Actes de l’Athos’17，Nr.26.

　　  [93]Jirecek，Geschichte Ⅰ，346 ff.M.Dinic，‘Odnos izmedju kralja Milutina i Dragutina’，ZRVI 3（1955），77 ff.

　　  [94]A chrysobull，no longer extant，was granted to the city by Mi插el Ⅷ，probably soon after the reconquest of Constantinople（Dolger，Reg.1897）.It received a further chrysobull from Andronicus Ⅱ in 1284：Miklosich-Müller Ⅴ，154/55（Reg.2102）.The date of the very important chrysobull，only preserved in the Chronicon Maius of Sphrantzes（ed.Bonn，400-4），which lists the privileges of the mer插nts of Monemvasia with great detail and accuracy，is uncertain.Za插riae，Jus Ⅲ，634-8（=Zepos，Jus Ⅰ，538-41），and Miklosich-Müller Ⅴ，165-8，treat it as a chrysobull of Andronicus Ⅱ of Nov.1317（more correctly 1316）.F.Dolger（Facsimiles byz.Kaiserurk.，Sp.34，Reg.1897 and BZ 34（1934），126 f.）has several times put forward the view that it is a chrysobull of Andronicus Ⅲ of 1336 but in his Reg.IV he refers to it as a chrysobull of Andronicus Ⅱ of Nov.1316，abandoning his earlier view，and giving detailed reasons for his 插nge of opinion（Reg.2383）.However，it follows from Miklosich-Müller Ⅴ，166，5，that this is the first time that the person granting this chrysobull has given a privilege to Monemvasia.Therefore-quite apart from other by no means minor difficulties-this chrysobull cannot have been granted by Andronicus Ⅱ，the author of the chrysobull of 1284，but should be dated to Andronicus Ⅲ，if not to Andronicus Ⅳ in 1376.It is true that its peculiarities fit neither the one nor the other in evey respect and one would also have to make certain corrections to the date that is attached to it-quite considerable corrections in the case of Andronicus Ⅲ.But in any case there is no question as to the authenticity of this valuable document.  

　　  [95]Cf.Ferjancic，Despoti，47 f.

　　  [96]Nic.Gregoras Ⅰ，229 ff.，278 f.Cf.I.Sokolov，‘Krupnye i melkie vlasteli v Fessalii’（Great and lesser nobles in Thessaly），VV 24（1923-6），35 ff.；A.Solovjev，‘Fessalijskie archonty v XIVv.’（The magnates of Thessaly in the fourteenth century），BS 4（1932），159 ff.

　　  [97]Nic，Gregoras Ⅰ，302，3 and 426，3.

　　  [98]Nic.Gregoras Ⅰ，319，14.

　　  [99]Cf.Papadopulos，Genealogie der Palaiologen Nr.38.

　　  [100]On the date cf.插ranis，‘Short Chronicle’341 f.，who uses the anonymous chronicle of 1391（Lampros-Amantos，Nr.52，5）。  

　　  [101]Cf.Za插ria，Geschichte 385 ff.，and L.Petit，‘La réforme judiciaire d’Andronic Paléologue（1329），EO 9（1906），134 ff.，and above all the important contributions of Lemerle who has done really detailed work on this subject for the first time.Cf.P.Lemerle，‘Le Juge général des Grecs et la réforme judiciaire d’Andronic Ⅲ’，Mémorial L.Petit（1948），292-316;‘Recherches sur les institutions judiciaires à l’époque des Paléologues.Ⅰ：Le tribunal impérial’，Mélanges Grégoire Ⅰ（1949），369-84;‘Recherches sur les institutions judiciaires à l’époque des Paléologues.Ⅱ；Le tribunal du patriarcat ou tribunal synodal’，Mélanges Peeters（1950），320-3.Cf.also Ⅰ.Sevcenko，‘Léon Bardalès et les juges généraux ou la corruption des incorruptibles’，B 19（1949），247 ff.  

　　  [102]Cantacuzenus Ⅱ，58 ff.，expressly maintains this for 1341.

　　  [103]Jirecek，Geschichte Ⅰ，361 ff.；A.Bu·rmov，‘Istorija na Bulgarija prez vremeto na Sismanovci’（History of Bulgaria in the time of the Sisman dynasty），Godisnik na Sofijskija Univ.43（1947），40 ff.

　　  [104]Cf.G.Ostrogorsky，‘Dusan i njegova vlastela u borbi sa Vizantijom’（Dusan and his nobles in the struggle with Byzantium），Zbornik…cara Dusana Ⅰ（1951），79 ff.

　　  [105]Jirecek，Geschichte Ⅰ，367 ff.M.Dinic，‘Za hronologiju Dusanovih osvajanja，vizantiskih gradova’（On the chronology of Dusan’s conquest of Byzantine towns），ZRVI 4（1956），7.  

　　  [106]On the date cf.Sp.Lampros，7（1910），154=Lampros-Amantos，Nr.26，4.It is given as 1 March 1331 in the chronicle publi射d by Gorjanov，VV 2（1949），283，86;on this cf.V.Laurent，REB 7（1950），209.

　　  [107]On the capture of Nicomedeia in 1337 cf.G.Arnakis，Athens 1947，197，and Ⅴ.Laurent，REB 7（1949），211.

　　  [108]Cantacuzenus Ⅰ，474，describes them as．

　　  [109]This chronology follows Florinskij，‘Andronik i Kantakuzin’，vol.204，241 f.，note 3.

　　  [110]Cantacuzenus Ⅰ，504.

　　  [111]On the date of John V’s birth（November 1331）cf.插ranis，‘Short Chronicle’344，based on Lampros-Amantos，Nr.47，11.  

　　  [112]Cantacuzenus Ⅱ，80.

　　  [113]Apparently for a time the Empress-mother Anna was formally recognized as senior sovereign in Constantinople.Cf.the seals and coins in T.Bertelè，Monete e sigilli di Anna di Savoia，imperatrice di Bisanzio（Rome 1937），and the comments on these by F.Dolger，BZ 38（1938），195 f.Cf.also Dolger，‘Johannes Ⅵ.Kantakuzenos als dynastischer Legitimist’，Annales de l’Inst.Kondakov 10（1938），19 ff.（Paraspora，p.194 ff.）。

　　  [114]Cf.K.Holl，Enthusiasmus und Bussgewalt beim griechischen Monchtum.Eine Studie zu Symeon dem neuen Theologen，Leipzig 1898;further bibliography in Beck，Kirche，585 ff.