[87]See the detailed account of his coronation by Peter the Patrician in De cerim.410 ff.Relying on Theophanes I，103 and Symeon Logothetes（Leo Gram.111），W.von Sickel，‘Das byzantinische Kronungsrecht bis zum 10.Jahrh.，BZ 7（1898），517 f.，539 f.，has inferred that Marcian was crowned by the Patriarch，and this view has been generally accepted（as by myself in the first edition of this book）.A different view has been put forward by W.Ensslin，’Zur Frage nach der ersten Kaiserkronung durch den Patriarchen und zur Bedeutung dieses Aktes im Wahlzeremoniell’，BZ 42（1942），101 ff.（completed，Wurzburg 1947）；he has found a more conclusive interpretation of the relevant sources and I now concur in his conclusion that the first imperial coronation in which the Patriarch took an active part was that of Leo I who figures first on the list of the accounts of the old coronations in Constantine’s Book of Ceremonies.
[88]Cf.W.Ensslin，‘Zur Torqueskronung und Schilderhebung bei der Kaiserwahl’，Klio 35（1942），268 ff.
[89]On chronology see E.W.Brooks，‘The Emperor Zenon and the Isaurians’，EHR 8（1893），212 and note 16;Bury，Later Rom.Emp.Ⅰ2，318 and note 2.
[90]Cf.L.Schmidt，Geschichte der Wandalen（1942），89 ff.；C.Courtois，Les Vandales et l’Afrique，Paris 1955，201 ff.
[91]Cf.E.W.Brooks，‘The Emperor Zenon and the Isaurians’，EHR 8（1893），216，with references to sources.
[92]Cf.L.Schmidt，Die Ostgermanen，88 ff.，337 ff.；W.Ensslin，Theoderich der Grosse，2nd ed.，Munich 1959.
[93]The text of the imperial letter is in Evagrius，ed.Bidez-Parmentier，pp.101-4.For the repudiation which Basiliscus was soon forced to make，but which could not save him，see ibid.107.
[94]Evagrius，111-14.
[95]De cerim.418 and 419.
[96]Cf.E.W.Brooks，CMH I（1911），484;Bury，Later Roman Emprie Ⅰ2.441 ff.；Stein，Studien，146 and Bas-Empire，192 ff.
[97]Cf.R.P.Blake，‘The Monetary Reform of Anastasius I and its Economic Implications’，Studies in the History of Culture 1942，84 ff.
[98]John Malalas 394：.See also Evagrius，ed.Bidez-Parmentier，p.144.Cf.the remarks of W.Ensslin，BZ 42（1942），260，whose interpretation is to be accepted in spite of the disagreement of Karayannopulos，‘Die Chrysoteleia der iuga’，BZ 49（1956），72 ff.
[99]The coemptio-became very widespread and resembled a tax in character，with the result that finally in the middle Byzantine period（as I was able to show in my‘Steuergemeinde’50）it came to denote the land tax which was by then naturally paid in gold.Cf.also H.Geiss，Geld-und naturalwirtschaftliche Erscheinungsformen im staatlichen Aufbau Italiens wahrend der Gotenzeit，Breslau 1931，1 ff.；and Stein，Bas-Emprie，200.This is not of course to maintain that the coemptio was not introduced until the reign of Anastasius Ⅰ，as Karayannopulos，op.cit.，75 ff.，wrongly maintains.
[100]Procopius，Anecdeta（ed.Haury，OperaùⅢ，1），121.
[101]The demes are regarded merely as circus factions not only by Gibbon（ed.Bury），Ⅳ，220，but also by Wilken，Die Parteien der Rennbahn，vornehmlich im byzantinischen Kaiserthum，Abh.d.Preuss.Akad.1827，217 ff.，Rambaud，De byzantino hippodromo et circensibus factionibus（1870;French summary in Revue des deux Mondes 1871=Etudes sur l’hist.byz.2[1919]，3 ff.）and even Monnier，‘Epibolé’16（1892），504 f.It was Uspenskij（‘Partii’1 ff.）who first stressed their political significance and this view was soon adopted by scholars，but it is only recently that research on this subject has begun to make greater progress（see below）。
[102]Cf.Bury’s admirable phrase‘The demes were the urban populace organized as a local militia’，Admin.System，105，n.2.Uspenskij，‘Partii’，had already supported a similar view.In this respect it is characteristic that the number of the active members of the demes appears from the sources to have been small;the contemporary account of Theophylact Simocattes（ed.de Boor，207）was based on official statistics and for the year 602 stated that there were 1，500 Greens and 900 Blues in Constantinople.According to the late account of Codinus（De signis 47）the two demes numbered 8，000 men at the time of Theodosius Ⅱ，which would have been only a very small proportion of the population of Constantinople.
[103]This is the view of Manojilovic，‘Peuple de Constantinople’。
[104]See Djakonov，‘Viz.dimy’，and also M.Levcenko，‘Venety i prasiny v Vizantii v Ⅴ-Ⅶ vv.’（Greens and blues in Byzantium from the fifth to the seventh centuries），ⅤⅤ26（1947），164 ff.，who summarizes the results of Djakonov’s important work.
[105]In addition to bibliography already cited see Bury，Later Rom.Empire Ⅰ2，84 ff.，and also Bratianu，Privilèges，46 ff.；H.Grégoire，‘Le peuple de Constantinople ou les Bleus et les Verts’，Comptes rendus de l’Acad.des Inscr.et Belles Lettres 1946，568 ff.；F.Dvornik，‘The Circus Parties in Byzantium’，Byzantina-Metabyzantina 1（1946），119 ff.Particularly important is the recent work by A.Maricq，‘La durée du régime des partis populaires à Constantinople’，Bull.de l’Acad.de Belgique 35（1949），63 ff.，and‘Factions du cirque et partis populaires’，ibid.36（1950），396 ff.
[106]Like Odoacer，Theodoric the Great had the title of magister militum and his coins always showed the portrait and name of the Emperor.He never promulgated leges，only edicta，which was within the competence of the higher imperial officials，as for instance the pretorian prefects.Cf.Mommsen，‘Ostgotische Studien’，Ges.Schr.Ⅳ，334 ff.；Bury，Later Rom.Empire Ⅰ2，453 ff.
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 |