Coronation of the Byzantine emperor
The coronation (
In the 5th–6th centuries the coronation became gradually standardized, with the new emperor appearing before the people and army at the
The ritual was apparently standardized by the end of the 8th century, and changed little afterwards. It involved the homage of the
History of the Byzantine coronation ceremonial
Theory and practice of imperial accessions
In the Roman Empire, accession to the throne was never regulated in a formal manner.[3] In theory, current since the time of Augustus and later formalized in aspects of the Byzantine coronation ceremony, the office of Roman emperor was elective, and the emperor was chosen by the Roman people, the Senate, and the army.[4] The aim was to choose the "best man", but the reality of imperial accessions rarely fitted the idealized theory; as a result, irregular accessions to the throne were retroactively justified as a manifestation of divine favour.[5]
The idea of selecting the "best man" was espoused especially by the Senate, and the continuing Republican tradition of the senatorial aristocracy demanded that a new emperor be chosen by the Senate at Rome.[6] The foundation of the Roman imperial power, however, was the supreme command over the army, embodied in the title of imperator, originally given to the triumphant generals of the Republic.[7] As such, the emperors were frequently chosen by the army in the provinces, with the Senate deprived of any role in the process.[8] Senatorial consent was still required as a matter of form, however, and many emperors who had been proclaimed in the provinces visited Rome to receive it.[9]
Already from the earliest days of the Roman Empire, during the Principate, several ruling emperors were able to designate their own successors, usually a close relative by blood or adoption, but the principle of a dynastic succession was never enshrined in law. The road always remained open for usurpers to successfully claim the throne, provided they were acclaimed by the common people or the army, which signalled their consent.[10][11] The fact that a usurper—usually an army officer—could successfully install himself on the throne and become accepted as a legitimate emperor led modern historians to describe the government of the later Roman Empire as "absolutism tempered by the right of revolution", in the words of Byzantinist Peter Charanis.[12]
This pattern continued in the Eastern Roman or
Election and acclamation ceremonies in the Roman Empire
Due to the irregular nature of imperial accessions, no fixed ceremonial emerged during the Roman Empire.[3] The only constant part of any imperial accession was the acclamation by the Senate, people and the army, which signalled the consent of the ruled;[14] during the Principate, this ritual act of consent was often repeated annually by vows (vota) taken to the emperor on the anniversary (natalis) of his accession.[15] Over the centuries the act of acclamation became increasingly formalized and scripted, but remained a key symbol of popular consent, and hence of an emperor's legitimacy.[14]
During the Principate, apart from the actual act of the election or acclamation, the ceremony of accession only included the conferment of the usual imperial insignia, chiefly the general's cloak (
The first evidence of a coronation ceremony is recorded during the acclamation of
Early period, 5th–6th centuries
The next coronation ceremony recorded is that of
When an emperor was chosen for a vacant throne, the selection of the new ruler fell to the senior court officials (such as the
Coronation of Leo I
The coronation of Leo I took place in Constantinople's
Ceremonial of the 5th–6th centuries
After Leo I, the ceremonies described in the sources took place at the Hippodrome,[31] except for Justinian I, who was crowned in the Delphax hall of the Great Palace.[32] They shared broad similarities:
Arrival at the Hippodrome
Once the election was affirmed by the Senate, the new emperor proceeded from the Great Palace directly to the imperial box (kathisma) in the adjacent Hippodrome via a covered passage, in the company of the patriarch and other high dignitaries.
Raising on a shield
Emperors acceding to a vacant throne were raised on a shield and crowned with a torc by a campiductor, whereupon the military standards were raised and the emperor acclaimed.
Coronation with the diadem
After the acclamation, the new emperor assumed the remainder of the imperial garb, namely the purple, ankle-length cloak, decorated with a golden square (tablion) and fastened by a bejeweled fibula clasp. The patriarch said a prayer, and the emperor was crowned with the diadem, which by the 6th century had evolved to an elaborate gem-encrusted circlet. This type of dress is exemplified by the well-known mosaic of Justinian I at the Basilica of San Vitale in Ravenna.[41] When co-emperors were crowned by a reigning emperor, the diadem was emplaced by the latter; otherwise it was the patriarch who placed the diadem on the new emperor.[42] In the case of the coronation of Anastasius I, he retired from the Hippodrome to a nearby hall in the Great Palace for this part of the ceremony, while Leo I and Justin I were crowned with the diadem in the Hippodrome, but covered by the soldiers' shields.[43]
Acclamation and imperial address
The newly crowned emperor returned to the kathisma, and, bearing a shield and lance, was acclaimed by the people as Augustus.[44][45] Unlike Leo I, the later emperors were hailed as Augustus only after the formal coronation by the patriarch, rather than after the first acclamation following the raising on the shield.[46]
A secretary (libellensis) then addressed the assembled people and army in the name of the new emperor, a speech which included the promise of a donative. Invariably, that was the same amount as Julian had promised: five gold pieces and a pound of silver to each man.[47]
Aftermath
Anastasius' coronation also records that he immediately went to the Hagia Sophia, where he took off his diadem in the metatorion (a chamber or series of chambers in the cathedral's upper story) and gave it to the praepositus sacri cubiculi. The latter then returned the diadem to the emperor, who deposited it in the church's altar, and made rich gifts to the church. While this is not explicitly mentioned for the other ceremonies of the period, the practice was probably continued until the coronation itself began to be performed in the Hagia Sophia.[48]
Middle period, 7th–12th centuries
The middle period is characterized by the move of the coronation to churches, and the gradual formalization and definition of the ceremony and the associated ecclesiastical rite.
The ceremonial of the 7th and 8th centuries is unknown, as no detailed description of a coronation has survived.[51] However, by the late 8th century, a specific ecclesiastical rite had emerged. First recorded in the patriarchal euchologion (liturgical book) of c. 795, the liturgy appears to have remained unaltered until the 12th century.[51] In addition to the church liturgy, Constantine VII's De Ceremoniis (I.38–50) contains detailed information about the coronation ceremony itself, though not the entire inauguration ceremony (ἀναγόρευσις).[51]
At the same time, the raising on a shield appears to have been abandoned.
Procession through the Great Palace and homage of the Senate
The emperor, dressed in the
Distribution of coins
The imperial procession then exited the Great Palace and crossed the Augustaion square to the Hagia Sophia in a formal procession, scattering coins to the crowd, perhaps an evolution of the donative. This does not appear in Constantine VII's work.[55]
Donning the coronation dress
Arriving at the Horologion hall of the Hagia Sophia, the emperor changed clothes, putting on the divetesion tunic (now a much more richly embroidered and stiff tunic than its late antique namesake) and the tzitzakion mantle, and re-donning the sagion over them.[55][53]
Accompanied by the patriarch, he entered the main church via the Silver Doors, lighting tapers on the way, proceeded to the holy doors of the sanctuary, where he made his devotions and lighted more tapers.[55]
Coronation
The emperor, again accompanied by the patriarch, mounted the ambo, where the crown and the imperial purple cloak (chlamys) had been deposited.[53][56]
The emperor bowed his head, while the
The patriarch then recited the Prayer over the crown, before taking the crown in both hands and crowning the emperor with it, while proclaiming 'In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost'. The assembled audience responded with 'Holy, holy, holy' and 'Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace' thrice.[59][60] In the case of a co-emperor's or empress' coronation, the patriarch took a second crown, gave it to the emperor, who then crowned the new co-ruler, while the choirs shouted 'worthy!'.[59][58]
Acclamations and homage of the dignitaries
The emperor (and co-emperors) then received the
A series of ritualized laudatory acclamations followed, praising God and the emperor(s). These included the polychronion ('Many years to so-and-so, great emperor and sovereign!').[62][63]
The emperor, wearing the crown, then moved to sit on the throne (sella), and the various dignitaries came and paid homage to him by performing the proskynesis and kissing his knees, in groups of twelve, by order of precedence: first the
Constantine VII's description is at odds with the euchologia, since he implies that a regular mass "according to the custom of festivals" followed after the homage, rather than before, but this may simply be the result of his assuming that the coronation ceremony takes place on a religious festival, whereas the euchologia do not. Indeed, while most new emperors were crowned as soon as possible, festival or no, the coronations of co-emperors or empresses, a specific festival day was chosen.[64]
In case an empress was crowned separately from her husband, almost the identical ceremony was followed, but the crown was imposed on her head by the patriarch rather than the emperor.[65]
Late period, 13th–15th centuries
This period is characterized by the addition of the
Chapter VII of Pseudo-Kodinos' work provides a full description of the Palaiologan-era coronation ritual. A less detailed description is also included in the History (I.41) of John VI Kantakouzenos, while the De Sacro Templo of Symeon of Thessalonica discusses the religious elements of the ceremony from a theological point of view. Unlike for the middle Byzantine period, no source survives for the actual prayers and hymns used during the ceremony, but it can be assumed that the prayers at least had not changed much from the previous era.[68]
According to Pseudo-Kodinos, the person to be crowned spent the night prior to the coronation at the Great Palace, along with his familiars and the court dignitaries.[69] This is exceptional, since the Great Palace at the time was no longer the main residence of the emperors, which had moved to the Palace of Blachernae in the northwestern corner of the city in the late 11th century;[70][71] the Great Palace does not otherwise figure among the ceremonies in Pseudo-Kodinos' work.[72] At dawn on the next day, the imperial relatives, aristocracy, and officials assembled at the Augustaion, the square between the Great Palace and the Hagia Sophia, along with the populace of Constantinople and the army.[68][69]
Coronation oath
At the "second hour" (mid-way between dawn and mid-morning) of the coronation day, the emperor went to the Hagia Sophia, where he handed over to the patriarch a hand-written coronation oath. It began with a pledge of adherence to the Orthodox doctrine and canon law (Pseudo-Kodinos provides a full text, including the Nicene Creed), a promise to respect the privileges of the Church, and to govern with justice and benevolence. The same was repeated orally before the patriarch.[73][74]
Distribution of largess
At the same time, a specially chosen senator—i.e., a holder of a court title or office[75] —mounted the steps of the Augustaion square and began distributing coins to the assembled populace, in the form of small packages (epikombia) with three gold, three silver, and three bronze coins.[76][77]
Raising on a shield and acclamation
After delivering the pledge to the patriarch, the emperor left the Hagia Sophia and went to the hall (triklinos) known as the Thomaites, one of the sections of the patriarchal palace which extended along the eastern side of the Augustaion and was connected to the south gallery of the Hagia Sophia. There he was raised on a shield and thus displayed to those assembled in the Augustaion. The front of the shield was carried by the senior emperor (in case of a co-emperor's coronation) and the patriarch, and behind them were imperial relatives or high officials, from the despots down. Following the acclamations of people and army, the new emperor was lowered and returned to the Hagia Sophia.[76][77]
Donning the coronation dress
Upon entering the cathedral, the emperor changed his clothes in a specially constructed small wooden chamber (equivalent to the earlier metatorion), donning the imperial tunic (sakkos) and the loros, after they were first blessed by bishops. His head was left bare, but he could wear a simplified circlet (stephanos) or "anything else he might think fit".[78][79]
After exiting the chamber, the new emperor (and his father, the senior emperor, depending on the occasion) mounted a wooden platform, constructed next to the chamber and covered in red silk, whereupon a set of special gold thrones of particular height was erected. The emperors sat on the thrones along with their wives. If the empresses had already been crowned, they wore their crown, otherwise the new empress also wore a stephanos.[80]
Unction
In the meantime, the patriarch conducted the liturgy. Before the trisagion hymn, he and other church dignitaries mounted the ambo. Then the liturgy was interrupted and the church fell silent, whereupon the patriarch summoned the emperors to him. The emperor ascended the ambo from the western side, i.e., towards the patriarch recited the prayers for the unction of the emperor. On completion of the prayer, the new emperor removed his headdress, immediately followed by the entire congregation, which stood up. The patriarch proceeded to anoint the new emperor, shouting "holy!", which is echoed thrice by the congregation.[78][81]
Coronation
The crown, which until that point in the ceremony was kept in the sanctuary by the deacons, was then brought to the ambo. The patriarch took it in his hands and placed it on the head of the new emperor, proclaiming him 'worthy' (axios), which again is echoed thrice by the congregation. The patriarch recited another prayer, and the new emperor descended the ambo from the eastern staircase (towards the sanctuary).[78][82]
If the new emperor had a consort, she was crowned at this point. The consort stood up from the platform, where the imperial family sat, and went to the soleas, a walkway connecting the ambo to the sanctuary. She was held on either side by two close relatives or, failing that, two court eunuchs. After being himself crowned, the new emperor took the empress' crown—likewise held by two relatives or eunuchs, and blessed by the patriarch—from the patriarch's hands, descended the stairs, and crowned her. The new empress immediately performed the proskynesis in sign of submission, and the patriarch read another prayer for the imperial couple and their subjects.[78][83] Otherwise, if a consort married an already crowned emperor, she was crowned during the marriage ceremony in a similar procedure.[84]
Great Entrance
After the coronation, both emperor and empress mounted the imperial platform and sat on their thrones, the emperor holding a cross and the empress a baion[84] (a gilded staff decorated with pearls and gems in the shape of a palm branch).[85] The imperial couple remained seated in the rest of the liturgy, except when the trisagion was sung or the Epistles and Gospels read.[84]
When the hymns to the
Communion
The emperor remained at the platform, seated except for the recitations of the Nicene Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and the Elevation. Following the Elevation, if the emperor was not prepared to commune, he sat down until the end of the liturgy.[88][89]
If the emperor wanted to partake of the communion, the principal deacons summoned him to the sanctuary. Taking a censer, he censed the altar crosswise, and then censed the patriarch. The latter saluted the emperor, took the censer, and in turn censed the emperor. Then the emperor removed his crown and handed it to the deacons.[88][89]
The communion of the emperor took place in the manner reserved for the clergy: at some point in the 13th/14th centuries, the practice was established that the laity began receiving the communion (consecrated bread and wine) mixed together in a chalice from a spoon, but the emperor and clergy retained the older practice of receiving the bread and wine separately.[88][90] The patriarch, after communicating himself, communicated the emperor, delivering a piece of the bread into his hands; and after communicating in the chalice, the patriarch likewise communicated the emperor, holding the chalice while the emperor drank from it. The emperor then put on his crown again and exited the sanctuary.[91][92]
Departure and aftermath
At the end of the liturgy, the emperor received the bread known as
After the acclamation was finished, the imperial party descended from the platform, and led the procession to the Great Palace. The emperors and empresses, wearing their crowns, were mounted, while the rest of the dignitaries proceeded on foot. Pseudo-Kodinos notes that the emperors' horses used to be decorated with covers around the neck and hind quarters (chaiomata), and red silk streamers above their
At the Great Palace, the coronation banquet took place, for the imperial family only, while the lower court dignitaries attended, but did not dine. The
Religious elements
Starting in the 5th and 6th centuries, the coronation ceremonies were infused more and more with Christian religious symbolism: apart from the presence of the patriarch, the emperor's speech and the responses of the crowd came to feature religious invocations.[99]
Role of the Patriarch of Constantinople
The act of imposition of the crown by the Patriarch of Constantinople was introduced at the coronation of Emperor Leo I the Thracian in 457—and not, as asserted in later Byzantine tradition and still repeated in older scholarship, at the coronation of Marcian in 450.[100][101] The Patriarch of Constantinople's role in the ceremony, and its possible constitutional significance, has been the subject of considerable scholarly speculation.[2]
Examining the 5th-century coronations, the German legal historian Wilhelm Sickel considered that the patriarch was acting as a state functionary, namely as the foremost non-imperial personage of the capital, and that the act of conferring the crown by a cleric was preferred as less likely to arouse jealousies than if a secular official had done the same.[102][101] Even though it is generally acknowledged that the Byzantines conceived of imperial power as a "gift from God", many modern scholars follow Sickel's opinion, and stress that although coronation by the patriarch granted prestige and legitimacy, from a constitutional point of view, it was not strictly necessary.[103] This view was summarized by the historian Wilhelm Ensslin in his chapter on the Byzantine government in The Cambridge Medieval History: the acclamation was the "decisive act in appointing an emperor", but unlike the Pope's role in coronations in the Holy Roman Empire, "in the East the Patriarch at first acted as the representative not of the Church but of the electors, and his participation was not regarded as an essential element in making an imperial election constitutionally valid". Even so, Ensslin conceded that over time, the coronation ceremony "took on an increasingly ecclesiastical complexion," and that the patriarch's role "came increasingly to be regarded as a usage sanctified by custom".[104]
Other scholars, such as J. B. Bury (who notably vacillated in his views), Gavro Manojlović, George Ostrogorsky, André Grabar, and Peter Charanis, have voiced the different opinion that the patriarch's participation had a constitutional significance, to the effect that the new ruler had to be a Christian, and that the conferment of the crown signalled the Church's acceptance of him.[105][106] The common view remains that the patriarch's participation reflected "the church's prestige and individual patriarchs' political stature",[2] but Charanis has pointed out that throughout Byzantine history there are numerous indications that a patriarchal coronation alone conferred full legitimacy to an emperor. Thus in 1143, Manuel I Komnenos, although already crowned by his father, John II Komnenos, in the field, repeated the coronation upon his return to Constantinople. After the Fourth Crusade, Theodore I Laskaris, founder of the Empire of Nicaea, was unable to be crowned emperor until he had filled the vacant position of Patriarch of Constantinople; in 1261, the coronation of Michael VIII Palaiologos in Constantinople gave him enough legitimacy for the removal of the rightful dynastic emperor, John IV Laskaris, from power; in the civil war of 1341–1347, John VI Kantakouzenos crowned himself emperor in 1341 in the presence of the Patriarch of Jerusalem, but had to repeat the ceremony after his victory in the war, in Constantinople, after installing a willing patriarch there; and a few years later, the coronation of John VI's son Matthew Kantakouzenos as co-emperor had also to be postponed until a new, more pliable patriarch was found.[107] Another significant case demonstrating the leverage afforded a patriarch due to the necessity of a patriarchal coronation was the refusal of Patriarch Polyeuktos to crown the usurper John I Tzimiskes, who came to the throne by assassinating Nikephoros II Phokas in 969. Polyeuktos demanded that he cast off Phokas' empress, Theophano, who had conspired with Tzimiskes, reveal the name of the assassin, and repeal Phokas' laws restricting the autonomy of the Church, before consenting to crown Tzimiskes emperor.[108]
The last Byzantine emperor,
The perception of patriarchal participation being a prerequisite for an imperial coronation also carried over into the states influenced by Byzantium. In 913, in an attempt to prevent him from attacking Constantinople, Patriarch
Apart from the act of coronation itself, the patriarch played another important role through the coronation oath demanded of a new emperor. The oath is first recorded in the coronation of Anastasius I in 491, when Patriarch
Charanis points to the acceptance by emperors of terms set by the patriarchs, as a clear sign that they regarded a coronation by the patriarch "an act necessary for the completion of [their] enthronement", and argues that "it is difficult to draw any other inference than that the coronation of a newly designated emperor was an ecclesiastical act essential for the completion of his enthronement and was performed by the patriarch in his role of the highest official of the church".[120] Charanis also argues that the papal coronation of Charlemagne as emperor in 800 is another piece of evidence in supporting the view that the coronation ceremony was both religious and necessary for the conferment of the imperial dignity, since the Pope was evidently following Byzantine precedent.[121]
Introduction of the unction
The act of unction during a coronation followed well-known Biblical tradition, namely the anointing of David.
While the mention of an unction for Manuel I Komnenos is generally regarded as a metaphor or word-play,
The substance used in the unction was also debated: in the 1220s, the Archbishop of Ohrid, Demetrios Chomatenos, who crowned Theodore Komnenos Doukas, was also engaged in a dispute with the Patriarch of Constantinople (in exile at the Nicaean court) over whether the emperor was to be anointed with oil (elaion)—according to Chomatenos, this was the traditional way—or chrism (myron) such as used during baptism, and used in the coronation of Theodore I Laskaris. The use of chrism was definitely adopted by the end of the 13th century.[131] Unlike Western practice, where the body was anointed with chrism and the head with oil, the Byzantine unction of the emperor consisted simply of the patriarch tracing the sign of the cross on the emperor's head.[132] According to the Byzantine authors, this signified the emperor's status as the "anointed of Christ" and head of all Christendom. The act sanctified the emperor, highlighted by the repeated exclamation 'holy!' (hagios!) by the patriarch and the people during the coronation ceremony.[133]
Representation of coronations in art
Imperial coronations are often found in
Influence
The coronation of
Citations
- ^ Tsamakda 2002, pp. 179, 286.
- ^ a b c d e ODB, "Coronation" (M. McCormick), pp. 533–534.
- ^ a b MacCormack 1981, p. 164.
- ^ MacCormack 1981, p. 224.
- ^ MacCormack 1981, pp. 161–165.
- ^ MacCormack 1981, p. 161.
- ^ Sickel 1898, pp. 511–512.
- ^ MacCormack 1981, pp. 161–162.
- ^ MacCormack 1981, p. 34.
- ^ Sickel 1898, pp. 511–513.
- ^ Brightman 1901, pp. 359–364.
- ^ Charanis 1974, p. 77.
- ^ ODB, "Emperor" (M. McCormick), pp. 692–693.
- ^ a b ODB, "Acclamation" (M. McCormick), pp. 10–11.
- ^ MacCormack 1981, pp. 165–169.
- ^ Brightman 1901, pp. 364–365.
- ^ Brightman 1901, p. 365.
- ^ Sickel 1898, pp. 513–516.
- ^ MacCormack 1981, pp. 46–48, 175–176, 212.
- ^ Brightman 1901, pp. 365–366.
- ^ a b c d ODB, "Shield-raising" (M. McCormick), p. 1888.
- ^ Brightman 1901, pp. 366–367.
- ^ Sickel 1898, p. 516.
- ^ Boak 1919, pp. 37–41 provides brief translations of these ceremonies in English.
- ^ Brightman 1901, p. 369.
- ^ Boak 1919, pp. 42–44.
- ^ Boak 1919, p. 44.
- ^ Boak 1919, pp. 37–38.
- ^ Brightman 1901, pp. 368–369.
- ^ a b Brightman 1901, p. 374.
- ^ a b Boak 1919, p. 38.
- ^ a b Boak 1919, p. 41.
- ^ Brightman 1901, pp. 371, 377.
- ^ Boak 1919, pp. 38–41.
- ^ Brightman 1901, p. 373.
- ^ Brightman 1901, pp. 375–377.
- ^ Tsamakda 2002, pp. 44–45.
- ^ Boak 1919, pp. 39–40.
- ^ Brightman 1901, pp. 371, 374–375.
- ^ Boak 1919, p. 40.
- ^ Brightman 1901, pp. 375–376.
- ^ Brightman 1901, pp. 369, 376.
- ^ Brightman 1901, pp. 376–377.
- ^ Brightman 1901, pp. 371, 376–377.
- ^ Boak 1919, pp. 39–41.
- ^ Boak 1919, pp. 44–45.
- ^ Brightman 1901, pp. 371–372, 373, 377.
- ^ Brightman 1901, pp. 372, 377.
- ^ a b Brightman 1901, p. 360.
- ^ a b Brightman 1901, p. 377.
- ^ a b c Brightman 1901, p. 378.
- ^ Ostrogorsky 1955, pp. 252–254.
- ^ a b c d e The Book of Ceremonies, p. 192.
- ^ Guilland 1967, pp. 269, 271.
- ^ a b c Brightman 1901, p. 379.
- ^ Brightman 1901, pp. 379–380.
- ^ a b c Brightman 1901, p. 380.
- ^ a b c The Book of Ceremonies, p. 194.
- ^ a b Brightman 1901, p. 381.
- ^ a b The Book of Ceremonies, p. 193.
- ^ Brightman 1901, pp. 381–382.
- ^ a b Brightman 1901, p. 382.
- ^ The Book of Ceremonies, pp. 193, 194–196.
- ^ Brightman 1901, pp. 382–383.
- ^ Brightman 1901, p. 383.
- ^ a b c ODB, "Anointing" (M. McCormick), p. 107.
- ^ Ostrogorsky 1955, pp. 254–256.
- ^ a b Brightman 1901, p. 387.
- ^ a b Macrides, Munitiz & Angelov 2013, p. 211.
- ^ Macrides 2011, p. 226.
- ^ ODB, "Great Palace" (C. Mango), pp. 869–870.
- ^ Macrides, Munitiz & Angelov 2013, p. 211 (note 599).
- ^ Brightman 1901, pp. 387–388.
- ^ Macrides, Munitiz & Angelov 2013, pp. 210–215.
- ^ Macrides, Munitiz & Angelov 2013, pp. 296–297.
- ^ a b Brightman 1901, p. 388.
- ^ a b Macrides, Munitiz & Angelov 2013, pp. 214–217.
- ^ a b c d Brightman 1901, p. 389.
- ^ Macrides, Munitiz & Angelov 2013, pp. 218–219.
- ^ Macrides, Munitiz & Angelov 2013, pp. 218–221.
- ^ Macrides, Munitiz & Angelov 2013, pp. 220–223.
- ^ Macrides, Munitiz & Angelov 2013, pp. 222–223.
- ^ Macrides, Munitiz & Angelov 2013, pp. 222–227.
- ^ a b c d Macrides, Munitiz & Angelov 2013, pp. 226–227.
- ^ Macrides, Munitiz & Angelov 2013, pp. 223 & 225 (note 648).
- ^ Brightman 1901, pp. 389–390.
- ^ Macrides, Munitiz & Angelov 2013, pp. 226–233.
- ^ a b c Brightman 1901, p. 390.
- ^ a b Macrides, Munitiz & Angelov 2013, pp. 232–233.
- ^ Macrides, Munitiz & Angelov 2013, pp. 232–235 (esp. note 680).
- ^ Brightman 1901, pp. 390–391.
- ^ Macrides, Munitiz & Angelov 2013, pp. 232–235.
- ^ a b c Brightman 1901, p. 391.
- ^ Macrides, Munitiz & Angelov 2013, pp. 234–237.
- ^ Macrides, Munitiz & Angelov 2013, pp. 236–237.
- ^ Macrides, Munitiz & Angelov 2013, pp. 236–239.
- ^ Macrides, Munitiz & Angelov 2013, pp. 238–239.
- ^ Macrides, Munitiz & Angelov 2013, pp. 238–241.
- ^ a b Brightman 1901, pp. 371, 373–375.
- ^ Ensslin 1942, pp. 101–115.
- ^ a b Charanis 1974, p. 78.
- ^ Sickel 1898, p. 518.
- ^ Charanis 1941, pp. 51–52.
- ^ Charanis 1974, p. 80.
- ^ Charanis 1941, pp. 50–51.
- ^ Charanis 1976.
- ^ Charanis 1941, pp. 60–64.
- ^ Charanis 1974, pp. 84–85.
- ^ a b c Runciman 2009, p. 77.
- ^ Nicol 1992, pp. 36–37.
- ^ a b Nicol 1992, p. 37.
- ^ Charanis 1941, p. 65.
- ^ Hupchick 2017, pp. 171–172.
- ^ Soulis 1984, pp. 28–29, 30–31.
- ^ Charanis 1941, pp. 65–66.
- ^ Soulis 1984, pp. 31–32.
- ^ ODB, "Anastasios I" (T. E. Gregory), pp. 86–87.
- ^ Macrides, Munitiz & Angelov 2013, p. 211 (note 605).
- ^ Charanis 1941, pp. 56–60.
- ^ Charanis 1974, pp. 83–85.
- ^ Charanis 1974, pp. 85–88.
- ^ Brightman 1901, pp. 383–385.
- ^ Ostrogorsky 1955, p. 246.
- ^ Brightman 1901, p. 385.
- ^ a b Ostrogorsky 1955, pp. 247–248.
- ^ a b Nicol 1976, pp. 37–38.
- ^ Nicol 1976, pp. 38–39.
- ^ Ostrogorsky 1955, pp. 248–252.
- ^ Angelov 2007, pp. 384–392.
- ^ Nicol 1976, pp. 38–44, 50–52.
- ^ Nicol 1976, pp. 44–49.
- ^ Nicol 1976, pp. 48–49.
- ^ Nicol 1976, pp. 46–49, 51–52.
- ^ a b c ODB, "Coronation. Representation in Art" (I. Kalavrezou), p. 534.
- ^ Miller 1967, pp. 570–571.
- ^ Miller 1967, pp. 571–574.
- ^ Majeska 1978, pp. 354, 356–357.
Sources
- Angelov, Dimiter (2007). Imperial Ideology and Political Thought in Byzantium, 1204–1330. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-85703-1.
- Boak, A. E. R. (1919). "Imperial Coronation Ceremonies of the Fifth and Sixth Centuries". Harvard Studies in Classical Philology. 30: 37–47. JSTOR 310612.
- Brightman, F. E. (April 1901). "Byzantine Imperial Coronations". The Journal of Theological Studies. 2 (7): 359–392. JSTOR 23949289.
- Charanis, Peter (1941). "Coronation and Its Constitutional Significance in the Later Roman Empire". Byzantion. 15: 49–66. JSTOR 44168516.
- Charanis, Peter (1974). "Church-State Relations in the Byzantine Empire as Reflected in the Role of the Patriarch in the Coronation of the Byzantine Emperor". In Blane, Andrew; Bird, Thomas E. (eds.). Russia and Orthodoxy: Essays in Honor of Georges Florovsky, Vol. 3: The Ecumenical World of Orthodox Civilisation. The Hague and Paris: Mouton. pp. 77–90.
- Charanis, Peter (1976). "Imperial Coronation in Byzantium: Some New Evidence". Byzantina. 8: 37–46. ISSN 1105-0772.
- Constantine Porphyrogennetos: The Book of Ceremonies. Byzantina Australiensia. Translated by Ann Moffatt and Maxeme Tall. Leiden and Boston: Brill. 2017. ISBN 978-18-76-50342-0.
- Ensslin, W. (1942). "Zur Frage nach der ersten Kaiserkrönung durch den Patriarchen und zur Bedeutung dieses Aktes im Wahlzeremoniell". Byzantinische Zeitschrift (in German). 42: 101–115. S2CID 194042002.
- OCLC 878894516.
- Hupchick, Dennis P. (2017). The Bulgarian-Byzantine Wars for Early Medieval Balkan Hegemony. Silver-Lined Skulls and Blinded Armies. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-3-319-56205-6.
- ISBN 0-19-504652-8.
- MacCormack, Sabine G. (1981). Art and Ceremony in Late Antiquity. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-03779-0.
- Macrides, Ruth (2011). "Ceremonies And The City: The Court In Fourteenth-Century Constantinople". In Duindam, Jeroen; Artan, Tülay; Kunt, Metin (eds.). Royal Courts in Dynastic States and Empires: A Global Perspective. Brill. pp. 217–235. S2CID 187729379.
- Macrides, Ruth; Munitiz, J. A.; Angelov, Dimiter (2013). Pseudo-Kodinos and the Constantinopolitan Court: Offices and Ceremonies. Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate. ISBN 978-0-7546-6752-0.
- Majeska, George P. (1978). "The Moscow Coronation of 1498 Reconsidered". Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas. 26 (3): 353–361.
- Miller, David B. (1967). "The Coronation of Ivan IV of Moscow". Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas. 15 (4): 559–574. JSTOR 41045749.
- S2CID 161949164.
- ISBN 978-0-511-58369-8.
- JSTOR 4434456.
- ISBN 978-1-84511-895-2.
- Sickel, Wilhelm (1898). "Das byzantinische Krönungsrecht bis zum 10. Jarhundert". Byzantinische Zeitschrift (in German). 7 (3). Leipzig: 511–557. S2CID 191571621.
- Soulis, George C. (1984). The Serbs and Byzantium During the Reign of Emperor Stephen Dušan (1331–1355) and his Successors. ISBN 0-88402-137-8.
- Tsamakda, Vasiliki (2002). The Illustrated Chronicle of Ioannes Skylitzes in Madrid. Leiden: Alexandros. ISBN 978-9-0806-4762-6.
Further reading
- Beihammer, Alexander; Constantinou, Stavroula; Parani, Maria, eds. (2013). Court Ceremonies and Rituals of Power in Byzantium and the Medieval Mediterranean: Comparative Perspectives. Leiden and Boston: Brill. ISBN 978-90-04-25686-6.
- Christophilopoulou, Aikaterini (1956). Ἐκλογή, ἀναγόρευσις καὶ στέψις τοῦ Βυζαντινοῦ αὐτοκράτορος [Election, Proclamation and Coronation of the Byzantine Emperor] (in Greek). Athens: Academy of Athens.
- Hebblewhite, Mark (2017). The Emperor and the Army in the Later Roman Empire, AD 235–395. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-4724-5759-2.
- Kaldellis, Anthony (2015). The Byzantine Republic: People and Power in New Rome. Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London: Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-36540-7.
- Nelson, J. (1976). "Symbols in Context: Rulers' Inauguration Rituals in Byzantium and the West in the Early Middle Ages". Studies in Church History. 13: 97–119. S2CID 156833803.
- Walter, Christopher (1975). "Raising on a Shield in Byzantine Iconography". Revue des études byzantines. 33: 133–176. .
- Walter, Christopher (1976). "The Significance of Unction in Byzantine Iconography". Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies. 2: 53–73. S2CID 162205868.