Larissa of Thessaly: A period of Transition from the 12th

-15th

Centuries

Historically, cities had always been crucial to the Byzantine economy, because they

were sensitive to the developments in the agrarian economy, influencing its structures

and orientation. Our basic premise in this announcement is that a city can be defined as

such on the basis of two types of criteria1: a) sociological criteria regarding the general

functions of pre-industrial cities, and, b) what would have constituted a city in the minds

of the Byzantines themselves, based on the terms they used to describe it (city - πόιηο,

township - πνιίρλε, fortified town - πόιηζκα, castle - θάζηξν, fortress - θξνύξην, etc.)

Several academic schools and individual researchers have proposed multiple criteria

in their attempts to distinguish cities from villages. However, rather than focusing on

individual viewpoints, we should point out a number of aspects that seem to be

commonly accepted. These would be a) that cities served as administrative and financial

centres for their regions; b) that their inhabitants displayed a degree of professional

diversification and had different economic orientations; c) that at least a portion of their

inhabitants were involved in commercial and artisan rather than agricultural activities; d)

that cities functioned as trading centres; e) a pronounced social stratification; f) a strong

presence of members of the upper class; g) population density and dense habitation; h)

the existence of fortifications and the function of cities as military centres. Obviously,

these characteristics do not need to appear simultaneously in every settlement that could

be interpreted as a city. In Byzantine – and, since we are concerned with the 15th

century,

Ottoman – perception, a large or smaller city (“πόιηο”, in contrast to a fortified town

“πόιηζκα”, castle “θάζηξν”, fortress “θξνύξην”, or şehir and kasaba) was basically

identified with the administrative – and, in the case of Byzantium, religious – centre of a

larger region.2 However, as noted earlier, Byzantine perception of a city was informed by

socio-economical parameters like trading activity or the presence of nobility.3

1 In this context, see the debate between Evelyne Patlagean (É. Patlagean, Pauvreté économique et pauvreté

sociale à Byzance 4e-7e siècles, Paris 1977) and John Haldon [J. Haldon, On the Structuralist approach to

the Social History of Byzantium, Byzantinoslavica 42 (1981), 203-211] about using contemporary, post-

industrial criteria to analyze and categorise sources. 2 G. Ostrogorsky, Byzantines Cities in the Early Middle Ages, DOP 13 (1959), 45-65. D. Zakythinos, La

Ville Byzantine, Berichte zum XI. Inernationalen Byzantinistenkongress, München 1958, 75-90 [=Byzance:

Etat-société-Économie, Variorum Reprints, London 1973, VII]. A. Harvey, Economic Expansion in the

Byzantine Empire, Cambridge Univ. Press 1989, 198-243. J. Haldon, The Feudalism Debate once More:

The starting point in our attempt to locate the local settlements that can be identified

as cities and fortified towns between the 12th

and 15th

centuries would be certain sources

that include extensive information about the urban network of Thessaly, which is located

in modern Central Greece. The fragmentary nature – and, often, scarcity – of sources

regarding the cities of Thessaly (and all Byzantine and Balkan cities in general) indicates

that we should study their nature using a long-term approach covering the period between

the 12th

and 15th

centuries, in order to fully understand and describe the developments of

certain socio-economic parameters that defined that particular urban network. It is

therefore imperative that we study the locations, positions, phases of development,

functions, and needs of the cities of Thessaly to comprehend the role of the urban

network in the region, particularly regarding the socio-economic developments during the

crucial period between the 12th

and mid-15th

centuries.

By the 9th

century, the Byzantine state had undergone a structural reformation and the

cities of the Greek peninsula enjoyed a revival. The main urban centre in Thessaly at the

time was, undoubtedly, Larissa – a status it retained until the mid-13th

century. During the

10th

and 11th

centuries Larissa was the capital of the Theme of Hellas.4 Also, Larissa was

the Seat of the Metropolis of Larissa, the highest ecclesiastical authority in the region;

Thessaly and other provinces, like Phthiotis, were under its jurisdiction. Typical of the

historical unity between Thessaly and its neighbouring regions is the popular equation of

The Case of Byzantium, The Journal of Peasant Studies 17/ 1 (1989), 16, 28. A. Laiou, Exchange and

Trade, Seventh–Twelfth Centuries, in A. Laiou (ed.), The economic history of Byzantium from seventh

through the fifteenth century, Washington 2002, 698-754. A. Avramea, Ο εθρξηζηηαληζκόο ηεο Θεζζαιίαο

θαη ε νξγάλσζε ηεο εθθιεζίαο έσο ην α΄ κηζό ηνπ Η΄ αηώλα, ΘΗΜ 4 (1983), 6-9. S. Divitçioğlu, Modèle

économique de la société ottomane (les XIVe et XVe siècles), La Pensée 144 (1969), 41-66. Υ. Α.

Levitsky, Problems of methodology of medieval town history (Analyzes on base of the history of West

European town), in La Ville Balkanique XVe-XIXe siècles, Sofia 1970, 8-9. T. Stoianovich, Model and

Mirror of the Premodern Balkan City, in La Ville Balkanique XVe-XIXe siècles, Sofia 1970, 83-110. Ö L

Barkan, Contribution à l‟étude démographique des villes Balkanique au cours des XVe-XVIe siècles, in La

Ville Balkanique XVe-XIXe siècles, Sofia 1970, 181. N. Beldiceanu, Recherches sur la ville ottomane du

XVe siècle, Paris 1973, 15-33. 3 Ioannis Tzetae Epistulae, P.A.M. Leone (ed.), Leipzig 1972, 81-82. Georges Pachymérès relations

historiques, A. Failler (ed.), Paris 2000, IV 637-639. P. Canivet and N. Oikonomides, La Comédie de

Katablattas: Invective byzantine du XVe siècle, Γίπηπρα 3 (1982–83), 53-59. Μηραήι Αθνκηλάηνπ ηνπ

Χωληάηνπ ηα ζωδόκελα, S. Lambros (ed.), Athens 1879 (reprinted: Groningen 1968), I 354-355. K.-P.

Matschke, Late urban economy, thirteenth-fifteenth centuries, in A. Laiou (ed.), The economic history of

Byzantium from seventh through the fifteenth century, Washington 2002, 463-496. 4 A. Avramea, Η Βπδαληηλή Θεζζαιία κέρξη ηνπ 1204. Σπκβνιή εηο ηελ Ιζηνξηθήλ Γεωγξαθία, Athens 1974,

50. B. Krsmanović, The Byzantine Province in Change (On the Threshold Between the 10th

and the 11th

Century), Belgrade-Athens 2008, 53, 134, 147, 190.

the ecclesiastical prefecture of Larissa with the Thessalian provinces ruled by

Sebastokrator John I Doukas and, after the Ottoman conquest, the Trikala sanjak.

Sources from the late 11th

to the late 12th

centuries mention the words fortress

(θξνύξην), castle (θάζηξν), fortified town (πόιηζκα), and city (πόιε).5 What we know

indicates that Larissa was a city of high strategic importance – a fact that had a large

influence on the city‟s design and architecture. Kekaumenos, an army official of the time

with knowledge and experience of the area, wrote a manual titled Strategikon (11th

c.),

which contains useful, if fragmentary, information about the nature of the city of Larissa

and its urban space. Of special interest is a passage which reveals that the Bulgarian

emperor Samuel between 976 and 983 had issued an explicit order forbidding a part of

the local population to leave the city of Larissa to attend to the harvest.6 This could be an

indication that at least a part of the local urban population was involved in agricultural

activities. However, it is also highly probable that the city would have functioned as a

refuge for the rural population during a time of insecurity and uncertainty as that

portrayed by Kekaumenos, especially when we take into account later narrative sources,

which describe Larissa as a fortress or a castle.7 Unfortunately, due to the scarcity of

sources, it is difficult to form a clear picture about the professional division of labour and

economic activities of the local population, except in the case of the Vlachs, for whom

there is adequate information in Kekaumenos‟ Strategikon and Benjamin of Tudela‟s

itinerary (12th

c.). Both these writers refer to the Vlachs in terms of ethnicity but also as

nomadic livestock farmers, and associate them with mountainous areas.8 Also, both texts

5 Ioannis Skylitzae Synopsis Historiarum, I Thurn (ed.), Berlin 1973, 330. Annae Comnenae Alexias, H.G.

Beck, A. Kambylis, R. Keydell (eds.), Berlin 2001, I-II, 157. Ioannis Zonarae epitome historiarum, M.

Pinder, T. Bütner-Wobst (eds.), Bonne 1897, III 735. Ioannis Tzetzae Historiae, P.A.M. Leone (ed.),

Napoli 1968, 530. 6 Cecaumeni Strategicon, B. Wassiliewsky - V. Jernstedt (eds.), Amsterdam 1965, 65.

7 Skylitzes 330. Komnene 157. L. Deriziotis, Σηεξεσηηθέο θαη αλαζηεισηηθέο εξγαζίεο. Σπληήξεζε

ηνηρνγξαθηώλ θαη ςεθηδσηώλ, ΑΓ 31 (1976) Φξνληθά Β΄1, 187, ΑΓ 32 (1977) Β΄1, Φξνληθά, 140, ΑΓ 33

(1978), Β΄1 Φξνληθά, 173, ΑΓ 34 (1979), Β΄1, 231, ΑΓ 35 (1980) Β΄1 296, 297-298. S. Choulia, Ννκόο

Λάξηζαο, ΑΓ 39 (1984), Β΄, 158-159. S. Choulia, Ννκόο Λάξηζαο, Σηεξεσηηθέο-Αλαζηεισηηθέο εξγαζίεο

θαη εξγαζίεο ζπληήξεζεο, ΑΓ 41 (1986) Φξνληθά, 80, ΑΓ 42 (1987) Β΄, 299. A. Ntina, Ννκόο Λάξηζαο.

Σηεξεσηηθέο-Αλαζηεισηηθέο εξγαζίεο, ΑΓ 40 (1985), Φξνληθά, 216. B. Sythiakaki, Αλαζθαθηθέο εξγαζίεο,

ΑΓ 50 (1995) Β΄, 399. 8 Rizos claims that the Vlachs were of Italian origin and believes that they migrated to Larissa in the second

half of the 9th

century [A. Rizos, The Vlachs of Larissa in the 10th

Century, Byz.Slav. 51 (1990), 202-207].

Stavridou-Zafraka took exception to his viewpoint, accusing him of inconsistency, misconception and

ignorance of Byzantine history and everyday reality [A. Stavridou-Zafraka, Μεγάιε θαη Μηθξή Βιαρία,

mention livestock farming activities, which formed a wider economic system and

required the maintenance of large herds. Kekaumenos also says that the Vlachs migrated

extensively within the region – an indication of the degree of the development of

livestock farming activities in the area.9 It appears that certain population groups, like the

Vlachs, were involved in livestock farming.10

This is demonstrated by Kekaumenos‟

commentary11

and, more vividly, in Benjamin‟s description. In his attempt to highlight

the Vlach peoples‟ unique character, Benjamin also mentions their habit of using Jewish

names to underline their distinct identity.12

The Vlachs‟ close association with the city of

Larissa and their involvement in the revolt of 1066 are attested by the mention of Vlach

names like Grigorios Vamvakas, Ioannis Grimianitis, and Sthlavotas Karmalikis: These

were probably prominent and influential members of the local livestock farming

communities or heads of powerful clans. They resided mostly in the city of Larissa and

were involved in the local administration. Also, these sources illustrate Larissa‟s key role

in local livestock farming activities.

As regards population size, the available population data for the period between the

12th

and 15th

centuries are fragmentary. The figures supplied are unlikely to include the

total population for the given time. In total, from the late 10th

c. to the beginning of the

14th

century, only 25 names appear in sources; eleven are from the period between the

late 10th

to late 11th

centuries, three from the 12th

c., eight from the 13th

c., and three from

the 14th

c.

Τξηθαιηλά 20 (2000), 173]. She cites the narratives of Ioannis Kinnamos and Ioannis Apokaukos, bishop of

Nafpaktos, who both believe that the Vlachs originated from Italy, and that of Kekaumenos, who says that

they came from the areas of the Danube and Sava rivers, to conclude that these testimonies do not

constitute reliable evidence. She believes that the Vlachs in the area of Greece were latinized populations

that were incorporated under Roman rule. They partook in aspects of administration and public life,

becoming latinized and bilingual in the process (Stavridou-Zafraka, Μεγάιε θαη Μηθξή Βιαρία 173-174). 9 Kekaumenos 68-69. Η. Ahrweiller, Recherches sur l‟administration de l‟empire byzantine aux IX-XIe

siècles, BCH 84 (1960), 33. Expressing his surprise at the lack of analysis of a sample from the Byzantine

era, Bryer claims that bones and teeth can reveal information about the seasonality of livestock production

and the size of herds [A. Bryer, The Means of Agricultural Production: Muscle and Tools, in A. Laiou

(ed.), The economic history of Byzantium from seventh through the fifteenth century, Washington 2002,

101-113]. 10

Kekaumenos 74. M. Gerolymatou, Αγνξέο, Έκπνξνη θαη Δκπόξην ζην Βπδάληην (9νο

-12νο

αη.), Athens

2008, 83. 11

Kekaumenos 74. 12

The Itinerary of Benjamin of Tudela, M.N. Adler (ed.), London 1907, 14.

Table 1

Anthroponyms Status Date Sources

Grigorios Vamvakas

(Vlach) Archon13 of Larissa

Late 10th-early 11th

c. Kekaumenos 68.

Ioannis Grimianitis

(Vlach) Protospatharios14

Late 10th-early 11th

c. Kekaumenos 68.

Sthlavotas Karmalikis (Vlach) Archon of Larissa

Late 10th-early 11th c. Kekaumenos 71.

Theodoros Skrivon Petastos Archon of Larissa

Late 10th-early 11th c. Kekaumenos 71-72.

Stephanos Metropolitan of Larissa Early 11th c.

Αvramea, Θεζζαιία 193. V.

Laurent, Le corpus des sceaux de l’empire byzantin, Paris 1981, II,

no. 674.

Euthymius Metropolitan of Larissa 11th c.

J. Nesbitt - N. Oikonomides,

Catalogue of Byzantine Seals at

Dumbarton Oaks and in the Fogg Museum of Art, Washington 1994,

II 58 (no. 17.2).

Grigorios Son of Nikoulitzas Delphinas 11th c. Kekaumenos 73.

Dimitrios Brother of Nikoulitzas

Delphinas 11th c. Kekaumenos 67.

Theodoros Brother of Nikoulitzas

Delphinas 11th c. Kekaumenos 67.

Nikoulitzas Delphinas Archon of Larissa 11th c. Kekaumenos 66-73.

Pagratios Son of Nikoulitzas Delphinas 11th c. Kekaumenos 69, 73.

Vassilios III Metropolitan of Larissa 1084

N Giannopoulos, Δπηζθνπηθνί

θαηάινγνη Θεζζαιίαο, Θενινγία 11 (1933), 341. Nesbitt -

Oikonomides, Byzantine Seals 58

(αξ. 17.1).

Georgios I Metropolitan of Larissa 1107

Giannopoulos, Δπηζθνπηθνί

Καηάινγνη (1933), 341.

Ioannis III Metropolitan of Larissa 1147

Giannopoulos, Δπηζθνπηθνί

Καηάινγνη (1933), 341.

Georgios II Metropolitan of Larissa 26 February 1147 Giannopoulos, Δπηζθνπηθνί Καηάινγνη (1933), 341.

Leo Sgouros Archon of Nafplion Early 13th c.

Nicetae Choniatae Historia, J. A. Van Dieten (ed.), Berlin-N. York

1975, 605-609, 611.

13

“Archontes” are the ruling elite, not only in Constantinople but in the provincial cities as well. L.

Maksimović, The Byzantine Provincial Administration under the Palaiologoi, Amsterdam 1988, 105. The

Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, A. Kazhdan (ed.), New York and Oxford 1991, 160. N. Oikonomides, Les

listes de presedance byzantines de IXe et Xe siècles, Paris 1972, 53, 55, 57, 59. Constantine

Porphyrogenitus De Administrando Imperio, G. Moravcsik (ed.), Washington 1967, 166. Symeon Neos

Theologos Hymnen, A. Kambylis (ed.), Berlin-N. York 1976, 163, 251, 253, 254, 454. Nicephori Gregorae

Historiae Romanae, L. Schopen/ I. Bekker (eds), Bonnae 1829-30, I 316, 440. Ioannis Cantacuzeni

eximperatoris Historiarum, L. Schopen (ed.), Bonnae 1828, I 51, 258. J. Verpeaux, Pseudo-Kodinos, Traité

des offices, Paris 1976, 270. MM V 171-174. Sp. P. Lampros, Παιαηνιόγεηα θαη Πεινπνλλεζηαθά, Athens

1930, IV 121. 14

A dignity of the imperial hierarchy. R. Guilland, Recherches sur les institutions byzantines, Berlin-

Amsterdam 1967, II 99-131. R. Guilland, Les Logothètes, Paris 1971. Oikonomides, Listes 51, 53, 57, 81,

93, 129, 143, 145, 147, 149, 171, 189, 191, 193, 197, 199, 205, 211, 219, 225, 227, 229, 231, 233, 245,

249, 251, 269. ODB 1748. Theophanis Chronographia, C. De Boor (ed.), Leipzig 1883-1885, I-II 243, 398,

438, 445, 453, 463, 465, 466, 468, 491. De Administrando 134, 156, 184, 190, 192, 194, 196, 210, 212,

216, 222, 232, 234, 238, 240, 242, 244, 248, 250, 252, 254, 256. Nicolai, Constantinopolitani

Archiepiscopi, Epistolae, PG 111 (1864), no 53, 69, 70, 77, 84, 93, 103, 127). Ioannis Zonarae epitome

historiarum, M. Pinder, T. Bütner-Wobst (eds), Bonne 1897, III 434, 445, 580. Verpeaux, Traité des offices

138, 161, 182, 300, 307, 309, 321, 335, 345, 348.

William Baron 13th c.

Acta Innocentii III. Romani

Pontificis Regestorum sive Epistolarum libri XVI, PL v. 216,

298.

Thomas Gorianitis Metropolitan of Larissa 13th c.

PLP, 7786. Acta et Diplomata

graeca aevi sacra et profana, F.

Μiklosich-J.Μüller (eds.) Vienna 1860, I 86. D. Sophianos, Ο

κεηξνπνιίηεο Λαξίζεο Θσκάο

Γνξηαλίηεο (13νο αη.), Θεζζαιηθά Χξνληθά 15 (1984), 148-149, 153-

154.

Leo Makros

Dikaios15 and chartophylax16 of

the Metropolis of Larissa June 1212

N. Bees, Unedierte Schriftstücke aus der Kanzlei des Johannes

Apokaukos des Medropoliten von

Naupaktos (in Aetolien), BNJ 21

(1971/1976), 72-73, 125-127.

Kalospitis Metropolitan of Larissa 1222

V. Laurent, Les Regestes des Actes du Patriarcat de Constantinople,

Paris 197134-36.

Alexios Raoul Manuel Komnenos

Kephale17 of Thessaly, Pinkernes18 1276

PLP 24132. Pachymeres I 93, II 581, 611, 613. MM IV, 420.

Nikandros Metropolitan of Larissa 1278-1283 PLP 20249. Pachymeres ΙΙ 650.

Marmaras Pronoiarios,19

protonovelissimos. 20 Late 13th c. PLP 17098. M IV 419.

15

It designated a deputy of the patriarch, an administrator acting on behalf of the patriarch. J. Darrouzès,

Recherches sur les officiaux de l’Eglise byzantine, Paris 1970, 131, 348. V. Leontaritou, Δθθιεζηαζηηθά

αμηώκαηα θαη ππεξεζίεο ζηελ πξώηκε θαη κέζε Βπδαληηλή πεξίνδν, Athens-Komotini 1996, 226-235. ODB

624. J. Darrouzès, Document inédits d’ecclésiologie byzantine: textes édites, traduits et annotes, Paris 1966

388. P. Panagiotakos, Γηθαίνο, in Θξεζθεπηηθή Ηζηθή εγθπθινπαίδεηα, Athens 1966, IV 1214-1215. 16

An ecclesiastical official of Constantinople and the provinces with archival and notarial duties. R.

Guilland, Chartulaire et grand Chartulaire [=Titre et Fonctions de l’Empire byzantin, Variorum Reprint,

London 1976, XVIII] 405. Maksimović, Administration 239. J. B. Bury, The Imperial Administrative

System in the ninth Century: with a revised text of the Kletorologion of Philotheos, New York 1958, 83.

Leontaritou, Δθθιεζηαζηηθά Αμηώκαηα 628-660. ODB 415-416. Theodori Studitae Epistulae, G. Fatouros

(ed.), Berlin 1991-1992, I-II 509 (no 377). Theophanes 295, 382, 473, 484. Nikolaos Mystikos no. 63.

Darrouzès, Officia 19-28, 291, 318, 334-336, 340-341, 529, 538, 569-570. Oikonomides, Listes 251.

Theodoros Balsamon, Μειέηε ράξηλ ησλ δύν νθθηθίσλ, ηνπ ηε ραξηνθύιαθνο, θαη ηνπ πξσηεθδίθνπ, in G.

A. Rhalles-M. Potles (eds), Σύληαγκα ηωλ Θείωλ θαη Ιεξώλ Καλόλωλ ηωλ Αγίωλ θαη Παλεπθήκωλ

Απνζηόιωλ θαη ηωλ Ιεξώλ Οηθνπκεληθώλ θαη Τνπηθώλ Σπλόδωλ θαη ηωλ θαηά κέξνο Αγίωλ Παηέξωλ

Δθδνζέλ, Athens 1852-1859 (reprinted: Athens 1966), IV 534. Pachymeres I 17, 171, 297, II 453, 455, 465,

481, 483, 487, 513, 515, 529, 603, 629, III 27, 39, 105, 113, 133, 279, IV 719. Gregoras Ι 128, 340.

Kantakouzenos Ι 251, 313. Dukas, Istoria turco-byzantina (1341-1462), V. Grecu (ed.), Boucourest 1958,

267. G. Codinus Curopalata, De Officiis magnae ecclesiae et aulae Constantinopolitan, (Corpus

Byzantinae Historiae, v. 12), Parisiis 1648, 2. 17

A term denoting the highest functionary of provincial administration. Maksimović, Administration 117-

166. ODB 1122. MM III 80, 117, 109, IV 388 V 82, 167. Actes de Lavra, A. Guillou, P. Lemerle, N.

Svoronos, D. Papachryssanthou (eds), Paris 1979, III 16-17. Kantakouzenos ΙΙ 22-24, ΙΙΙ 53. Verpeaux,

Traité des offices 167, 175, 176, 259. 18

Emperor‟s oinochoos/ cup-bearer. From the 13th

c. onward, the pinkernes became a high honorific title

Guilland, Institutions I 396. Oikonomides, Listes 52, 306. Maksimović, Administration 133, 257.

Constantini Porphyrogeniti De Cerimoniis aulae Byzantinae, I. Reiske (ed.), Bonnae 1829-1830, I 725.

Komnene 257. Ioannis Cinnami Epitome rerum ab Ioanne et Alexio Comnenis gestarum, A. Meineke (ed.),

Bonne 1836, 56. Zonaras ΙΙΙ 554. Pachymeres II 413, 581, III 19, 201, 237, IV 599, 603, 665. Gregoras Ι

195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 298, 360. Kantakouzenos Ι 479, ΙΙ 77, 175, 181, 183, 184, 187, 188, 195.

Verpeaux, Traité des offices 130, 137, 155, 156, 175, 207, 218, 300, 305, 307, 309, 320, 334, 344, 347,

344. 19

According to Aggeliki Laiou “The institution of the pronoia consisted of the grant (revocable and

nonhereditary) of the revenues of particular pieces of land on condition of military service. It appeared in

Georgios

Larissaios/Larisseus (From Larissa) Monk residing in Thessaloniki Mid-14th c. PLP 91653.

Ignatius

Priest-monk, Exarch 21of Thessaloniki, Thessaly,

Veroia, Larissa, and Second

Thessaly 1401 PLP 8012. MM II 524.

One question that arises is how many of these officials and title-holders – particularly

those associated with the local diocese – actually resided in Larissa, especially if we

consider that in the beginning of the 13th

c. Pope Innocent III had advised the archbishop

of Larissa to make Farsala22

the Seat of his diocese and that later, in the early 14th

c., the

Seat of the local diocese was transferred to the Marmarianoi Monastery and then to

Trikala, due to the volatile political climate prevailing in Larissa at the time.23

We know

for certain that a civil war between Andronikos II Palaiologos and his grandson,

Andronikos III Palaiologos, raged throughout the 1320‟s, with few periods of respite. In

1341 a new civil war broke out between John V Palaiologos and John VI Kantakouzenos.

The large land-owners of Thessaly sided with Kantakouzenos and he in turn appointed

his cousin and former Epirus governor John Angelos as his representative in Thessaly,

making him lifelong governor of the region.24

These events had such a deep impact on

Larissa that Anthony, bishop of Larissa, felt the need to include explicit references to the

devastation caused by the wars in his mid-14th

century encomium to St. Cyprian. The

devastation was so extensive that wild animals roamed the streets of the city.25

This could

the late eleventh century and spread under Manuel I. Unlike the peasant-soldier of the earlier period, the

pronoia holder (Pronoiarios) was a privileged individual, who paid no taxes, collected the taxes of the

peasants, and also received revenues from rents” (A. Laiou, Political History: An Outline, in A. Laiou (ed.),

The economic history of Byzantium from seventh through the fifteenth century, Washington 2002, 22). 20

A high ranking dignity. Maksimović, Administration 183. Guilland, Logothètes 18, 70, 79, 82. ODB

1489-1490. Oikonomides, Listes 47, 243, 263. De Cerimoniis I 726. P. Magdalino, The Empire of Manuel I

Komnenos 1143-1180, Cambridge Univ. Press 1993, 183. R. Guilland, Titres et fonctions de l’empire

byzantine, London 1976, xxii, 106, 111. Guilland, Institutions I 345. Verpeaux, Traité des offices 308. 21

In ecclesiastical usage the title meant “primate” and was given to both metropolitans and Patriarchs

exercising authority over a wide area. N. Oikonomides, Hommes d’affaires, grecs et latins à

Constantinople: XIIIe-XVe siècles, Paris 1979, 109-111. ODB 767. Darrouzès, Officia 162-163, 308-309.

Oikonomides, Listes 321. V. Laurent, Corpus des sceaux, V 241-245. 22

Acta Innocentii v. 215, n. 1471. 23

ΜΜ Ι 80, 85-88. 24

John Angelos, cousin of John Kantakouzenos, was the governor of Thessaly between 1342 and 1348

(PLP 91038). Kantakouzenos ΙΙ 320. H. Hunger, Urkunden und Memoirentext: Der Chrysoboullos Logos

der Johannes Kantakuzenos für Johannes Angelos, JOB XXVII (1978), 121. D. Nicol, The Despotate of

Epiros 1267-1479, Cambridge 1984, 107. 25

B. Pseftogas, Αληωλίνπ Αξρηεπηζθόπνπ Λαξίζζεο Λόγνη Θενκεηνξηθνί, Γεζπνηηθνί-Αγηνινγηθνί,

Thessaloniki 2002.

be a reflection of the city‟s decline and, as M. Kiel suggested, not to be taken literally; it

is just as likely that only the upper ecclesiastical hierarchy had left the city after the Seat

of the local diocese was transferred elsewhere.26

This, in turn, suggests that from the

beginning of the 14th

c. the people on the list associated with the local diocese did not

reside in Larissa but in Trikala, because the Seat of the local diocese had been transferred

there.27

It is certain that the turmoil described above had a significant effect on Larissa.

According to John Kantakouzenos‟ account, a pestilence broke out in Thessaly in 1348,

facilitating the Serbian conquest of the area. He writes specifically that the unexpected

death of Thessaly governor John Angelos from the disease and the constant internal strife

in Byzantium enabled Serbian King Stefan Dusan to dominate the region28

– a fact which

is also confirmed by the picture of devastation in the encomium to St. Cyprian from the

mid-14th

c. Related to that is the discovery of the Larissa hoard (1955), which consists of

151 deniers tournois and, according to numismatist Yorka Nikolaou, had been concealed

in 1350.29

From this we can deduce two things: First, the turmoil caused by the second

Byzantine civil war and the Serbian conquest led to the concealment of a large number of

26

Kiel suggests that this happened after the Catalans launched a series of raids in the region between the

autumn of 1310 and the spring of 1311, as part of Gautier de Brienne‟s mercenary army (M. Kiel, Das

Türkische Thessalien: Etabliertes Geschichtsbild versus Osmanische Quellen. Ein Beitrag zur ent

mythologisierung der Geschichte Griechenlands, in Die Kultur Griechenlands in Mittelalter und Neu zeit,

Göttingen 1996, 118-119). Rizos attributes the devastation to the rise of the slave-trade and mentions the

pirates of Umur, emir of Karasi, who preyed upon the region in the 1330‟s [A. Rizos, Τν δνπιεκπόξην, ε

εξήκσζε ηεο Αλαηνιηθήο Θεζζαιίαο θαηά ην 14ν αηώλα θαη νη Οζσκαλνί, Ιζηνξηθά 50 (2009), 59-72].

27 ΜΜ Ι 80, 85-88. Hieroclis Synecdemus et Notitiae Episcopatuum, G. Parthey (ed.), Napoli 1847,

(reprinted: Amsterdam 1967), 260: ὁ Τριάνης ἡνομένη τῇ μητροπόλει (From an early 15th

century

Episcopal list). Koder and Hild believe that the term Τξηάλεο is a corruption of the bishopric of Trikala [J.

Koder-Fr. Hild, Hellas und Thessalia (Veröffentlchungen der Tabula Imperii Byzantini 1), Wien 1976,

278]. 28

Kantakouzenos ΙΙΙ 147: …ἢν ἐν τῷ αὐτίκα διαφθείρεσθαι ὑπὸ λιμοῡ. ὕστερον δὲ Ἀγγέλου τοῡ

ἐμοῡ τετελευτηκότος ἀνεψιοῡ, ὃς ἧρχεν ὑπ’ ἐμοῡ πεμφθεὶς ἁρπάσας τὰς ἐπαρχίας ἔχεις. Nicol,

Despotate of Epiros 130. Stathakopoulos has demonstrated that in times of social and military upheaval

infectious diseases can spread rapidly. D. Stathakopoulos, Famine and Pestilence in the Late Roman and

Early Byzantine Empire, Birmingham 2004, 46-48. 29

G. Nikolaou, Ννκηζκαηηθή θπθινθνξία ζηε βπδαληηλή Θεζζαιία, in Τν λόκηζκα ζην Θεζζαιηθό ρώξν,

Athens 2004, 585-586. D.M. Metcalf, Coinage of the Crusades and the Latin East in the Ashmolean

Museum Oxford, London 1995, 350. D.M. Metcalf, The currency of Derniers Tournois in Frankish Greece,

ABSA 55 (1960), 38: From the mid 14th

century, the deniers tournois was the standard numismatic unit in

Attica, Boeotia, Peloponnesus and several Aegean islands. They were coined in large quantities at the mints

of the Achaia principality and the Duchy of Athens. The tornesi coins are mentioned several times in the

13th

century Codex 302 of the Metamorphosis monastery in Meteora (N. Bees, Τα Χεηξόγξαθα ηωλ

Μεηεώξωλ, Athens 1998, I 318).

coins and, second, that at least until the mid-14th

c. Larissa was inhabited by people who

used currency for transactions. It would appear, therefore, that the encomium to St.

Cyprian not only reflects certain perceptions about the turbulent political conditions

prevailing at the time, but also attempts to promote specific stereotypes and strengthen

the ideological hold of the local monasteries and the Church in general by overstating the

effects of the upper clergy‟s departure from the city. Also, we know for a fact that one of

the city‟s main functions up until the mid-13th

century was as an ecclesiastical centre

serving Thessaly and its surrounding areas.30

The jurisdiction of the diocese of Larissa

included Eastern and Western Thessaly and the province of Magnesia; this means that all

the political, social, and economic developments in Larissa would have impacted not only

the city itself but the entire region as well.

The Ottoman register of 1454/55 (ΒΒΑ/ΜΜ 10), is a much richer source of

information about the city of Larissa than Byzantine sources. However, contrary to other

Thessaly cities, in the case of Larissa it would be precarious to suggest that the available

data from the 15th

century accurately reflects certain characteristics of the late Byzantine

city, because, in many ways, Larissa became a “new city” after the Ottoman conquest, as

its Turkish name would suggest (Yeni Şehir). We know that the city‟s decline had begun

in the late 13th

c. and continued throughout the 14th

c.; we also know that Thessaly

surrendered to the Ottomans by treaty. We could therefore assume that the conquerors

had probably found a heavily decimated, if not completely deserted, city and, wanting to

benefit from the existing urban structure, did not destroy it but reestablished it as a

Turkish city.

The numismatic evidence mentioned earlier suggests that the city was not completely

deserted until the middle of the 14th

century. Larissa was probably still populated,

although sparsely, at the time of the Ottoman conquest, even though we cannot be

absolutely sure about it. Based on topographic data from the 15th

c., M. Kiel argues that a

portion of Larissa‟s Byzantine population remained in the new Ottoman city after the

conquest. According to Kiel, the Ottomans founded the “New City” on the Larissa plain,

30

Darrouzès, Notitiae 396, 402, 407, 413, 417, 419, 421.

while the remaining Christians continued to reside on the hill, around the city‟s former

cathedral.31

Records from the middle of the 15th

c. reveal that at the time Larissa had 11 Muslim

quarters housing 355 families and 12 widows, and only one Christian quarter, housing 66

families and 17 widows.32

It was a relatively large city, equivalent in size to the

provincial capital of Trikala, which functioned as a trading and commercial centre for

northeastern Thessaly, just like Larissa had done in the Byzantine period, up to the

middle of the 13th

c. In an attempt to formulate a rough estimate of the total population,

Ν. Beldiceanu and I. Beldiceanu-Steinherr suggested that each Christian family included

four persons and each Muslim at least six, with widows being considered as two persons,

because they possibly had children.33

Taking these factors into account, the total

population number is roughly estimated to have been between 2400 to 2500 people, of

which 87.85% were Muslim (81.56% of the total families). The eleven Muslim quarters

were as follows: the Mosque quarter (câmi), the Hatib Hoca quarter, the Sati quarter, the

Tekeli imami quarter, the Kirişçi Haci quarter, the Bedreddin Hoca quarter, the tanners‟

quarter (Tabbâgân), the Haci Imbrahim quarter, the son of Reis quarter (Veled Reis), the

blacksmiths‟ quarter (Demürcü), and the Yegân oğlu quarter.34

The fact that two of these

quarters are named after the professions of their residents shows that professional

occupation played a part in shaping the topography of the city.35

The majority of the

city‟s quarters, however, are named after prominent members of their respective

communities. A small part of the local population had probably converted to Islam, as

evidenced by the names of fourteen people, eleven of whom were freedmen (azade).36

The relatively substantial number of freedmen speaks volumes about the Muslim

population‟s economic prosperity, because it suggests that (unregistered) slaves were

31

Kiel, Türkische Thessalien 110, 114, 153. M. Kiel, The incorporation of the Balkans into the Ottoman

Empire, in The Cambridge History of Turkey, Cambridge University Press 2009, Ι 172-173. 32

M. Delilbaşi - M. Arikan, Hicrî 859 Tarihli sûret-i Defter-i Sancak-i Tirhala, Ankara: Τürk Tarih

Kurumu 2001, 31. 33

N. Beldiceanu - Ir. Beldiceanu-Steinherr, Recherches sur la Morée (1461-1512), Südost Forschungen 39

(1980), 46-47. 34

Delilbaşi - Arikan, Defter 27-30. 35

It is no accident that tanneries and blacksmiths were situated in specific areas of the city, because of the

smell and pollution they caused. 36

Delilbaşi - Arikan, Defter, Defter 27-30.

used as domestic servants or artisans. The names of some Muslim inhabitants reveal their

origin in Asia Minor: Menteselü, Germiyanı, Karamanı, Aydinlü, 'an Anadolulu.37

A question that arises regarding the prosopographic and anthroponymic data for the

Christian population is whether the Christian inhabitants of the 15th

c. were descendants

of the earlier Byzantine population, which would mean that the city was populated during

the Ottoman conquest. However, the available anthroponymic data are not particularly

helpful.38

The names and surnames of Larissa‟s Christian inhabitants in the 1454/55

register are completely different to the ones that appear in past Byzantine sources. Of

course, this is rather to be expected, since there had been a considerable time lapse

between the last anthroponymic listing in Byzantine sources and the drawing of the

BBA/MM 10 tax register in the mid-15th

c. Only two surnames from the mid-15th

c.

document reveal any connection with Larissa‟s Byzantine urban heritage: Primmikiris

and Lagatoris, which derive from Primicerius and Allagator, the respective titles of two

church and army officials from the late Byzantine period.39

These officials would have

probably resided in cities rather than rural areas, so since there were people with those

names residing in Ottoman Larissa, one could assume that they were descendents of

former officials from the Byzantine period, whose families had remained in Larissa after

the Ottoman conquest, although this is just speculation. Apart from any descendents of

the Byzantine population, there were several Christian inhabitants in mid-15th

c. Larissa

that had migrated there, probably attracted by the promise of a new Ottoman city. Four

people are named Petriotis (from Petra in Pieria) and there is also an Arvanitis, but we do

not know whether this indicates ethnicity or geographic origin.40

The available economic data from the late Byzantine period is fragmentary.

Fortunately, the Ottoman tax register from 1454/55 paints a much clearer picture of

Larissa‟s economy during the mid-15th

c. An analysis of the city‟s tax revenue – 48646

aspra in total – shows that trade and crafts were the main occupations of the region‟s

inhabitants.

37

Delilbaşi - Arikan, Defter 27, 29. 38

The names of Larissa‟s Christian inhabitants were omitted from Delilbaşı and Arıkan‟s publication. They

were copied from the original document and handed to me by Konstantinos Moustakas, whom I would here

like to thank. 39

The people bearing these surnames are Manolis Lagatoris, Lagatoris‟ widow and Primmikiris‟ widow.

ΒΒΑ/ΜΜ 10, 58a. 40

ΒΒΑ/ΜΜ 10, 57b, 58a.

Table 2a41

(Taxes and fines levied on trade and crafts)

Trade and crafts activities Revenue

(in aspra) Percentage

Kist-i bazâr ve niyâbet ve ihtisâb 36500 75.03%

Niyâbet-i vilâyet-i mezkûr 1800 3.7%

Ma' ber der âb-i Likostem 3300 6.7%

Table 2b42

(Taxes levied on Muslim farmers)

Quantity

Revenue (in

aspra) Percentage

Wheat 81 kile 648 1.33%

Barley 72 kile 360 0.74%

Cotton 60 0.12%

Vineyards 720 1.48%

Apiaries 183 0.37%

Mills (2) 50 0.10%

Total revenue (in

aspra) 2021

4.15% on a total

of 48646 aspra

Table 2c43

(Taxes levied on Christian farmers)

Quantity Revenue Percentage

Wheat 120 kile 960 1.97%

Barley 50 kile 250 0.51%

Vetch 62 kile 310 0.63%

Vineyards 1675 3.44%

Mills (1) 35 0.07%

Ispence 1795 3.68%

Total revenue (in

aspra) 5025

10.32%on a

total of

48646 aspra

Kist-i bazaar,44

niyâbet,45

and ihtisâb46

are taxes and fines levied on trade activities.

Most of the tax revenue from the city‟s agricultural production comes from grain and

vineyard cultivation. There are only three mills because of low grain production and

41

Delilbaşi - Arikan, Defter 27 (tables are based on data from the Ottoman register of 1454/55). 42

Delilbaşi - Arikan, Defter 31. 43

Delilbaşi - Arikan, Defter 31. 44

Beldiceanu, Ville 107: Dues levied on market transactions: bāc (transaction fee). Ihtisāb was a type of tax

levied by an official called a muhtesib, who supervised transactions. 45

Beldiceanu, Ville 107: Fines for offences and crimes: bad-i havā [=fine imposed on epylides offenders

(New Redhouse Turkish-English Dictionary, Instabul 1968, 116)], gürm [=debt (Redhouse Dictionary,

417)]. 46

Beldiceanu, Ville 107: This tax was levied at the time of the transaction (bāc) by the muhtesib who

supervised it and was considered a substantial source of income for these officials.

because first grinding or milling usually took place at the site of production, so that it was

not necessary for rural farmers to carry agricultural production to the city for processing –

they could do that in their own villages. Apiculture is exclusively the domain of Muslim

families, while vetch appears to have been cultivated by Christians. Other dues are the

ispence tax,47

and the niyabet ve arusi (fines and bridal tax). What these taxes show is

that Larissa‟s economy was primarily based on trade and crafts, with 75.03% of the total

tax revenue coming from these activities. It is worth noting that the total revenue levied

from Muslim farmers amounts to 2021 aspra. This gives a clear picture of the importance

of ethnicity in professional orientation: trade and crafts were almost exclusively practiced

by Muslims, as was cotton cultivation, which involved a highly “industrialized” system

of production. There is, therefore, considerable differentiation in economic activity

between Muslims and Christians.

In most instances, Muslims are listed along with their occupation. Beldiceanu and

Nasturel grouped them in the following categories: 64 families were involved in textiles

(5 silk spinners, 18 seamsters, 27 weavers, 11 sellers of knitting products, 1 textile maker,

and 2 dyers). 43 families were involved in leather processing (13 tanners, 4 shoe makers,

3 slipper makers, 13 sandal makers, and 10 saddle makers). There are also 2 bowl

makers, 1 potter, 1 empirical doctor, 10 butchers, 2 tradesmen, 11 retailers, 1 grocer, 4

herb sellers, 1 salt trader, 2 water-sellers, 7 farriers, 2 boiler makers, 1 tinker, 4 boza

manufacturers and sellers (boza is a type of malt drink made from millet), and 4 halvah

makers.48

This list by Beldiceanu and Nasturel is incomplete. The register that was

published by Delilbaşı and Arıkan also includes 8 blacksmiths, 1 gunsmith, 3 soap

makers, 1 miller, 3 perfumers, 1 “masseur” (in baths), 1 baker, and 1 innkeeper. In total,

179 Muslim households are directly involved in trade and crafts (50.42% of all Muslim

47

Beldiceanu-Beldiceanu/ Steinherr, Morée 56: Annual land tax on Christians, levied in advance each May.

Its counterparts were the resm-i raiyyet, levied on Muslim taxpayers, and the resm-i çift, levied on the

Muslim re„aya. The ispence was levied on all adult male Christians and amounted to the fixed rate of 25

aspra per year, whereas the resm-i raiyyet was calculated on the basis of the total surface of arable land and

the type of occupation [S. Asdrachas, Μεραληζκνί ηεο αγξνηηθήο νηθνλνκίαο ζηελ Τνπξθνθξαηία (ΙΔ΄-ΙΣΤ΄

αηώλαο), Athens 1978, 33, 44-45. Beldiceanu, Ville 298-299]. These taxes were imposed by the state on its

subjects and represented a form of statute labour. They can also be considered as personal taxes, since they

were unrelated to any productive activity. But whereas the ispence was effectively a second poll tax levied

on the entire Christian population, whether urban or rural, these taxes were levied only on the rural Muslim

population. 48

N. Beldiceanu- P. S. Nasturel, La Thessalie entre 1454/55 et 1506, Byzantion LIII (1983), 140-141.

households), and the same must have been true of the rest, given the lack of agricultural

activities in the region, especially among Muslims (only one miller is listed, even though

there were three mills – two were owned by Muslims and one by a Christian). Christians

were more involved in agriculture than Muslims. Christian communities were not

unlikely to have been involved in trade and crafts, but this is not confirmed by the data.

Several Christian inhabitants bear names that reflect their profession or occupation, such

as Chalkomatas (coppersmith), Amaksas (carter), Raftis (tailor), Sapounas (soap maker),

and Tsoukalas (potter),49

but it is not clear whether these were their actual occupations or

just family names that had nothing to do with one‟s own profession. One would assume,

though, that the actual profession would have been listed in Turkish rather than Greek.

The register mentions a vakif founded by Turahan Bey; this included a public bath, a

shop selling heads of lambs, a shop selling entrails, a farrier workshop and several other

stores that generated a total income of 13316 aspra.50

The earliest evidence of the

founding of a vakif in Larissa and Trikala appears on an endowment deed by Turahan

Bey from Jumada al-awwal 850 [25 July to 23 August 1446].51

According to it, Turahan

Bey founded charitable institutions – including a mosque, a seminary, and a zawiya – in

Larissa and endowed them with property and assets for their upkeep.52

The assets in

Larissa are listed as follows: 31 workshops, 54 tsiardakia,53

1 butcher‟s shop, 1 kitchen, 1

brass foundry, 1 tented food stall, 1 bath, and 2 sites for workshops.54

There are also other

workshops, butchers‟ shops, residences, inns, and building plots, but their exact numbers

are unavailable.55

The document does not list the annual income from the vakif, only the

expenses for its upkeep and the wages of the administrators – a total of 15512 aspra.56

A

later unpublished register (BBA/TT 36) from 1506 reveals that the vakif had yielded an

49

ΒΒΑ/ΜΜ 10, 57b, 58a. 50

Delilbaşi - Arikan, Defter 35. 51

Greek translation of a document found in the archives of Larissa notary Agathangelos Ioannidis. His

archives also include Greek translations of two endowment deeds by memberts of the Turahan family,

namely Omer, son of Turahan, and Hassas, son of Omer (S. Gouloulis, Τα αθηεξωηήξηα ηωλ Τνπξαραληδώλ,

Larisa 2003, 7, 13). The documents were initially published by Ep. Pharmakidis and later by St. Gouloulis.

Here emphasis will be placed on the deeds by Turahan and Omer, because of their temporal proximity to

the 1454/55 register. 52

The document contains a detailed list of all foundations and assets in the Thessaly region. 53

Sheds (Gouloulis, Αθηεξσηήξηα Τνπξαραλίδσλ 63-64). 54

Gouloulis, Αθηεξσηήξηα Τνπξαραλίδσλ 53-61. 55

Gouloulis, Αθηεξσηήξηα Τνπξαραλίδσλ 53-61. 56

Gouloulis, Αθηεξσηήξηα Τνπξαραλίδσλ 64.

income of 32940 aspra. It also mentions 62 shops, 19 ferrier workshops, and several

uncovered stalls in the city‟s market.57

Two endowment deeds from 1474 and 1484

mention another vakif by Omer Bey, Turahan Bey‟s son. The 1474 document contains

information about two charitable foundations in Larissa – the mosque of Friday and a

zawiya – and lists further property and assets, including 2 public baths, an older and a

newer one, 7 workshops, 3 inns, 18 residences, and an unspecified number of butchers‟

shops and more inns.58

The 1484 endowment deed lists one more charitable foundation, a

mosque (mesjid), while the vakif properties appear to have been further expanded, since

now there are 2 baths, 1 pottery workshop, 3 saddle-making workshops, 54 workshops, 1

old inn (Buz Khan), 14 residences, and an unspecified number of additional workshops

(patsa restaurants and tanneries, among others), inns, and orchards.59

In 1474 the income

from the Larissa vakif amounted to 18645 aspra, while in 1484 it rose to 24777.5 aspra.60

According to the BBA/TT 36 register as cited by M. Kiel, in 1506 the total income from

Omer Bey‟s vakif in Thessaly amounted to 207474 aspra.61

It is interesting to compare the data from this tax register with data obtained from the

middle and late Byzantine period. By the late Byzantine period division of labour was

already advanced: Apart from agriculture, the inhabitants of the city also engage in trade

activity, and there are several references to the region‟s products. It would appear that

division of labour and the development of trade were the driving forces behind the

emergence of a local aristocracy that became involved in trade and crafts. Kekaumenos

reveals that although their income came mostly from rural farming estates, several

members of the local aristocracy resided in Larissa or in neighbouring areas62

. Apart from

Nikoulitzas Delphinas, Kekaumenos also mentions Theodoros Skrivon Petastos, archon

of Larissa.63

It is worth noting Kekaumenos‟ attempt to persuade the local aristocracy to

make certain improvements in their farms in order to increase agricultural production. He

urges them to buy tools and animals for ploughing, build mills and workshops, and plant

57

Beldiceanu- Nasturel, Thessalie 123. 58

Gouloulis, Αθηεξσηήξηα Τνπξαραλίδσλ 71-79. 59

Gouloulis, Αθηεξσηήξηα Τνπξαραλίδσλ 89-107. 60

Gouloulis, Αθηεξσηήξηα Τνπξαραλίδσλ 82, 110-111. 61

Kiel, Türkisches Thessalien 143. 62

Kekaumenos 66. After Samuel seized the city, the Nikoulitzas family evacuated Larissa and moved to

other areas. We know, however, that the Nikoulitzas family returned to Larissa during the revolt of 1066. 63

Kekaumenos 71.

fruit-bearing trees.64

Despite the fact that the writer himself advocated self-sufficiency in

the form of a steady income with the least possible expenses, his suggestions were

guaranteed to increase production.65

We must also remember that the revolt of 1066, led

by Nikoulitzas Delphinas, has been interpreted as the result of the rebels‟ growing

dissatisfaction with the increased tax demands made by the Byzantine state.66

Already by

the beginning of the 13th

century there are reports about grants of pronoia to a new class

of land-owners in and around Larissa, in exchange for their military services.67

Unfortunately, we know nothing about the dynamics of their financial activities; only

fragmentary information survives in the form of a letter by pinkernes Raoul from the late

13th

c., where he mentions a dispute between pronoiarios and protonovelissimos

Marmaras and the New Petra monastery over the area of Vrastos.68

Apart from the economic factor, the administrative developments that took place in

the region played an increasingly important role in the process of social stratification. The

fact that Grand Jurists (dikaiophylakes) Manuel and Michael Kavaris were stationed in

the Larissa diocese in the late 14th

c. shows that disputes among the local population were

settled collectively by church tribunals, whose rulings tended to uphold the

socioeconomic status quo, especially during times of crisis. One such example would be

the ruling in the case of pronoiarios Marmaras vs the New Petra monastery, which

64

Kekaumenos 36: Ποίησον σεαυτῷ αὐτουργίας, οἷον μυλῶνας καὶ ἐργαστήρια, κήπους τε καὶ

ἄλλα ὅσα σοι ἐπιδώσουσι τοὺς αὐτῶν καρποὺς ἐτησίως, διά τε πάκτου καὶ καρποῡ. Φύτευσον

δένδρα παντοĩα καὶ καλαμῶνας, δι’ῶν ἔσται σοι εἴσοδος μὴ ἔχουσα κατ’ ἔτος κόπον… κτήνη δὲ

ἔστωσαν σοι οἷον βόες ἀροτῆρες καὶ χοĩροι καὶ πρόβατα καὶ ἄλλα ζῷα ἅτινα κατ’ ἔτος

γεννῶνται, αὐξάνονται καὶ πληθύνονται. Of interest here is the reference to “pakton”, a special kind

of agreement between landowners and tenant farmers (A. Laiou, The Agrarian Economy, Thirteenth-

Fifteenth Centuries, in A. Laiou (ed.), The economic history of Byzantium from seventh through the

fifteenth century, Washington 2002, 337). 65

Kekaumenos 36: ταῡτα γὰρ παρέξουσίν σοι ἀφθονίαν ἐν τῇ τραπέζῃ σου. 66

Kekaumenos 70: Ἦν γὰρ πολλῶν νομισμάτων αὐξήσεις ποιήσας. Nikolaou, Κπθινθνξία 577, 579,

580: Numismatic evidence from as early as the 10th

century indicates that a number of transactions in the

local market were made with money. 67

Concession of lands was common under Latin rule as well. Boniface, King of Thessalonica, had granted

William a large fiefdom that included Almyros and Larissa. William then became known as William de

Larissa. G. Koulouras, Η πεξηνρή ηνπ Παγαζεηηθνύ θαηά ηνπο κέζνπο ρξόλνπο (Γ΄-ΙΓ αη.), (unpublished Phd

dissertation), University of Ioannina, 94. Acta Innocentii v. 216, n. 298. 68

MM IV 419: ὁ πλεονέκτης ἀεὶ μέμηνε περὶ τὸ πλουτεῑν καὶ ὧδε κἀκεῑσε τείνει τὴν χεῑρα πρὸς

τὸ τὰ ἀλλότρια ἑλεῑν καὶ πλουτῆσαι πλοῡτον τὸν οὐ χρηστὸν…κατεβοῶντο τοῡ Μαρμαρᾱ

πρωτονωβελλισίμου παρόντος καὶ τούτου ἡμῶν ἐνώπιον λέγοντες τοιαῡτα…ἔχει διὰ προνοίας

καὶ ὁ Μαρμαρὰς χωρίον τὸν Τρίνοβον ἰδιοπεριόριστον ὂν παρὰ τὸν Βραστόν, καὶ ἀδίκῳ γνώμῃ

χρώμενος καὶ χειρὶ πειρᾱται σὺν τῷ Τρινόβῳ καὶ τὸν Βραστὸν ἑλεῑν.

confirmed the ownership rights of the monastery.69

In this respect, the appointment of

chartophylax Leo / Manuel Makros to the Metropolis of Larissa in 1212 suggests that

there was a need for someone to draw up notarial deeds and organize the archives of the

local diocese.

The presence of several high-ranking – and probably middle-class – church officials

in the city had a significant effect in the shaping of the local society. These were probably

persons of high regard who resided in Larissa and were part of the local administration.

One such high-ranking official was Ignatius, Exarch of Thessaloniki, Thessaly, Veria,

Larissa, and Second Thessaly, who was appointed by the Patriarchate to exert further

control over Larissa and its surrounding area. Another was bishop Kalospitis, the subject

of a 1222 epistle by patriarch Manuel Sarantenos; in it, Manuel asks Ioannis Apokaukos,

bishop of Nafpaktos, if he believes that Kalospitis can handle his duties as bishop of

Larissa.70

Writing back, Ioannis Apokaukos opines that Kalospitis is indeed fully capable

of physically performing his duties71

– hardly surprising, considering that Apokaukos was

friends with Kalospitis, as evidenced by an epistle of his addressed to the bishop of

Larissa, where he discusses his visit there in an amicable manner, complaining of

insufferable heat and bad quality water.72

Although scarce and fragmentary, the available evidence from the Byzantine era

reveals several facts about Larissa: a) the city‟s communities practised division of labour.

Apart from agricultural activities, inhabitants were also involved in trade, as suggested by

Kekaumenos‟ appeal to large land-owners to increase production by modernizing their

farms. An increased production would suggest some kind of trading activity, especially if

we consider Kekaumenos‟ account, which says that the rural provinces of Larissa

generated a surplus of agricultural goods, ensuring long-term food sufficiency for the

city‟s population. We also know that Larissa had storage facilities large enough to house

these products· b) Larissa functioned as a political, religious, and military centre – it is

repeatedly referred to as a “fortress” or a “castle”, due to its strategic location – and had

been the Seat of the local diocese until the middle of the 13th

c.

69

MM IV 420. 70

V. Vasilievskiji, Epirotica Saeculi XIII, Viz. Vrem 3 (1896), 268-269. 71

Vasilievskiji, Epirotica 272. 72

Bees, Unedierte 138.

Data from the Ottoman register reveal that the local market eventually resumed

operation even though agricultural production had decreased, necessitating the import of

certain products (cotton) from other regions. Local agricultural activity was mostly

focused on the cultivation and processing of grain and the development of apiculture.73

However, given that the city of Larissa was characterized as a “new” city, we must re-

examine all available population data. The strong Muslim presence in the area implies

that there was a surge of Muslim migration there after the Ottoman conquest. This can be

related to the demographic developments that took place during the preceding Byzantine

period. It would appear that, following the Ottoman conquest, Larissa continued to retain

certain characteristics from the preceding period. These are: a) division of labour. Apart

from a limited agricultural production there are reports about the local population‟s

involvement in trading and craft activities· b) A strong local market. The agricultural

surplus from eastern Thessaly continued to be collected and distributed in Larissa,

underlining the city‟s status as an important ecomonic centre· c) Larissa continued to

function as an administrative and religious centre, but now for the Islamic faith, as

suggested by the presence of ecclesiastical officials like imams,74

khatibs,75

fakihs,76

and

hodjas77

in the city. Due to Larissa‟s new status as a Turkish Muslim city, the Seat of the

local Christian diocese remained in Trikala. Among the Christian inhabitants of the city

in the mid-15th

c. were a priest and a priest‟s widow.78

The local Christian community

must have been quite small, because the duties of the pastoral office were performed by

no more than one or two priests.

73

A letter by Ioannis Apokaukos (early 13th

c.) mentions fishmongering and candle production: ἰχθύων

ὀπτῶν… μελισσείου κηρίου [A. Papadopoulos-Kerameus, Αζελατθά εθ ηνπ ΙΒ΄ θαη ΙΓ΄ αηώλνο, Αξκνλία

3, αξ. 6 (1902), 288]. 74

H. Inalcik, From Empire to Republic, Istanbul 1995, 127. Beldiceanu, Ville 44: Prayer leader in a

mosque. 75

N. Beldiceanu, Le timar dans l’Etat ottoman (début XIV-début XVI siècle), Wiesbaden 1980, 41.

Beldiceanu, Ville 163: Person who delivered the sermon in a mosque, occasionally in exchange for a timar. 76

M. F. Köprülü, Islam in Anatolia after the Turkish Invasion (Prolegomena), tr. G. Leiser, Salt Lake City

1993, 28: Person of great learning; a term that could also be attributed to a theologian or a jurist – which

was the literal meaning of the word fakih, although by the late 13th and 14th

centuries it had come to signify

an imam (prayer leader). 77

Beldiceanu, Ville 158: Muslim teacher or scholar. 78

BBA/ΜΜ 10, 57b, 58a.