[173]Polnoe Sobr.Russk.Letopisej Ⅰ（1926-28），46 ff.；German trans.Trautmann，Die Nestor-Chronik（1931），29 ff.，English trans.by Cross，Russian Primary Chronicle（1953），73 ff.；Dolger，Reg.647.
[174]The statement of Scylitzes-Cedrenus Ⅱ，321，that Constantine Ⅶ ranked last of the co-Emperors of Romanus Lecapenus is incorrect;cf.Theoph.cont.435.
[175]Cf.Scylitzes-Cedrenus Ⅱ，322 ff.
[176]On the chronology cf.G.Ostrogorsky-E.Stein，‘Die Kronungsordnungen des Zeremonienbuches’，B 7（1932），197，note 3;cf.also G.de Jerphanion，‘La date du couronnement de Romain Ⅱ’，OCP 1（1935），490 ff.
[177]Cf.De admin.imp.c.13，149（ed.Moravcsik-Jenkins），where Constantine Ⅶ says：‘The lord Romanus the Emperor was a common illiterate fellow，and not from among those who have been bred up in the palace and have followed the Roman national customs from the beginning;nor was he of imperial and noble stock…’
[178]Zepos，Jus Ⅰ，214 ff.；Dolger，Reg.656.
[179]Zepos，Jus Ⅰ，240 f.
[180]Zepos，JusⅠ，222 ff.；Dolger，Reg.673.
[181]These important rulings are repeated by Constantine Ⅶ，De cerim.695，where it is，however，laid down that the holdings of mounted troops shall be worth five，or at least four，pounds of gold，while those of the imperial marines are to be worth three pounds.
[182]Zepos，Jus Ⅰ，240 ff.
[183]Zepos，Jus Ⅰ243 f.；Dolger，Reg.690.
[184]Cf.De cerim.664 ff.for a detailed description.
[185]A detailed account of the reception of the Princess Olga in the Imperial Palace can be found in the De cerimoniis，594 ff.A thorough analysis of the subject has recently been made by Levcenko，Ocerki，217 ff.，who also discusses the divergent views of scholars on the date and place of Olga’s baptism.Levcenko himself favours the view that Olga was baptized on the occasion of her visit to Constantinople.This is however contradicted by Constantine’s complete silence on the matter，as well as by the fact that Olga’s retinue already included a priest.The Russian chronicles place Olga’s baptism in the year 954 or 955 and this also supports the view that in reality she had adopted Christianity in Kiev before her journey to Constantinople.
[186]Cf.Diehl’s brilliant essay in Figures Ⅰ，217 ff.
[187]Schlumberger，Nicéphore Phocas 25-79，gives a detailed description of the campaign;cf.I.B.Papadopulos，（824-961），Athens 1948，90 ff.
[188]On this title cf.Ch.Diehl，‘De la signification du titre de“proèdre” à Byzance’，Mélanges Schlumberger Ⅰ（1924），105 ff.
[189]Leo Diac.49;Scylitzes-Cedren.Ⅱ，379.
[190]Cf.Schlumberger，Nicéphore Phocas 249 ff.
[191]Zepos，Jus Ⅰ，253;Dolger，Reg.712.
[192]Zepos，Jus Ⅰ，255 f.；Dolger，Reg.721.
[193]Cf.Neumann，Weltstellung 56.
[194]Zepos，Jus Ⅰ，249 ff.；Dolger，Reg.699;cf.Charanis，‘Monastic Properties’56 ff.，where an English translation of the law is given.
[195]This has already been pointed out by Neumann，Weltstellung，24.
[196]This chronology follows Runciman，Bulgarian Empire 303 ff.
[197]On the chronology cf.P.O.Karyskovskij，‘O chronologii russko-vizantijskoj vojny pri Svjatoslave’（The chronology of the Russo-Byzantine war in the time of Svjatoslav），VV 5（1952），136 ff.
[198]On the date（969，not 968）and the circumstances of this alliance cf.D.Anastasijevic，Glasnik Skopskog Naucnog Drustva 11（1932）.51 ff.
[199]Scylitzes-Cedren.Ⅱ，369;Zonaras Ⅲ，507.Considerable work has been done on the question of the tetarteron，a coin of inferior quality issued by Nicephorus Phocas.Cf.especially W.Kubitschek，‘Zum’，Numism.Zeitschr.44（1911），194 ff.；G.Mickwitz，‘Die Organisationsformen zweier byzantinischer Gewerbe im 10.Jahrhundert’，BZ 36（1936），66 ff.；F.Dworschak，‘Studien zum byzantinischen Münzwesen’，Numism.Zeitschr.N.F.29（1936），77 ff.；R.S.Lopez，‘La crise du besant au Xe siècle et la date du Livre du Préfet’，Mélanges Grégoire Ⅱ（1950），403 ff.；A.Christo-philopulos，‘（1939），125 ff.；A.Frolow，’Les noms des monnaies dans le Typicon du Pantocrator’，BS 10（1949），251 f.；V.Laurent，‘Bulletin de Numismatique byzantine’，REB 9（1951），204 f.，who rightly concludes‘A mon sens，rien n’est tranchédans cette question de tetarteron’.But see now the interesting，and in my opinion convincing，attempt at an interpretation of this difficult problem by Hélène Ahrweiler-Glykatzi，‘Nouvelle hypothèse sur le tétarèron d’or et la politique monétaire de Nicéphore Phocas’，ZRVI 8，1（1963），1 ff.According to her，the tetarteron of Nicephorus Phocas contained only one-twelfth less gold than the nomisma of normal weight，and was therefore of 22 carat gold.
[200]Cf.the note in Cod.Vindob.suppl.47 and 48（Zepos，Jus Ⅰ，249，n.1）on Nicephorus Phocas’novel against the monasteries，.Charanis，‘Monastic Properties’61，again puts forward the view that the law of Nicephorus Phocas was not revoked until Basil Ⅱ’s novel of 4 April 988，but he overlooks the fact that the authenticity of this novel is highly doubtful.Cf.Dolger，Reg.772，and below p.307，note 1.Charanis’suggestion that the note in Cod.Vindob.confuses.Tzimisces with Basil Ⅱ is not very convincing.
哦豁，小伙伴们如果觉得52书库不错，记得收藏网址 https://www.52shuku.net/ 或推荐给朋友哦~拜托啦 (>.<)
传送门：排行榜单 | 找书指南 |