Medieval Academy of America
Review: [untitled]
Author(s): Constantine G. Hatzidimitriou
Reviewed work(s):
Frankish Morea, 1205-1262: Socio-cultural Interaction between the Franks and the Local
Population. by Aneta Ilieva
Source: Speculum, Vol. 69, No. 3 (Jul., 1994), pp. 805-806
Published by: Medieval Academy of America
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3040896
Accessed: 18/07/2009 03:48
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=medacad.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Medieval Academy of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Speculum.
http://www.jstor.org
Reviews
805
FrankishMorea, 1205-1262: Socio-culturalInteractionbetweenthe Franksand
the Local Population. (Historical Monographs, 9.) Athens: S. D. Basilopoulos, 1991.
Paper. Pp. 307.
ANETA ILIEVA,
This study is a revised version of a doctoral dissertation that the author defended in
1989 at the University of Sofia, Bulgaria. In it Ilieva seeks to answer the question of why
the Latin principalities, especially that of Achaia, established in the Morea after the Fourth
Crusade survived for two centuries. Her answer is that the social and cultural interaction
between the conquerors and the conquered at the time of the conquest created conditions
that allowed the Frankish Morea to survive for so long (p. 241). Her methodology utilizes
concepts of "society," "culture," and "civilization" drawn from the social sciences and
what she calls "the possibilities of the anthropological approach to medieval culture and
the related to it [sic] methods of social psychology and linguistics" (p. 10).
The English text, translated by the author and several collaborators, is often awkward
and unclear. The text also contains numerous typographical errors, and on occasion
blank page references appear in the notes. These defects often make Ilieva's arguments
on complex historical and methodological issues difficult to follow.
In order to prove her thesis Ilieva begins with a long introductory first chapter in
which she reviews the historiography on Frankish/Greek interaction and describes the
Byzantine Peloponnese in the twelfth century (pp. 19-106). This is followed by a chapter
on the political and administrative development of the Frankish Morea (pp. 107-54) and
a final chapter focusing on the relations between the Franks and the local population
(pp. 155-240). Ilieva's conclusions are presented on pages 241-46. These are followed
by a bibliography and a summary of her argument in modern Greek (pp. 247-97).
Ilieva starts by summarizing the well-known story of the increasing contacts and gradual
alienation of the Latin West and Byzantine East. This context of hostile and friendly
contacts between East and West is then used as the background for a detailed presentation
of the historiography concerning the Latin conquest and interaction between Greeks
and Latins in the Morea. She discusses the literature and the positions taken by various
scholars on issues concerning the extent and impact of the Latin-Greek interaction in
Frankish Greece with great analytical skill. It is noteworthy that many studies published
in modern Greek and Slavic languages are included and commented upon. However, as
Ilieva admits (p. 41), much of the same material presented in her study has already been
investigated in detail by David Jacoby in two lengthy articles that appeared in 1989. What
Ilieva contributes is a greater sensitivity to the impact of geographic factors upon the
pattern of conquest and interaction. Unfortunately, her theoretical framework and philosophical musings concerning culture and civilization add little to our knowledge of this
process.
Ilieva concludes her historiographical review with a discussion of the literature concerning the various versions of the Chronicle of the Morea and the Assizes of Romania,
which she rightly considers the two most important primary sources we have for the
Frankish Morea. However, unlike Jacoby and others, she treats the chronicle as a reliable
source for events and the nature of the encounter between the conquerors and the
conquered during the initial conquest of the Morea even though it was composed during
the fourteenth century (p. 55). Despite occasional references to other sources, Ilieva
relies rather too heavily upon the chronicle for most of her discussion of examples of
Latin and Greek interaction in the Morea.
In her first chapter Ilieva describes the military, social, economic, and political conditions in the Morea on the eve of the Latin conquest and brings together a large amount
of archaeological and geographic information drawn from specialized works on local
history and geography, thereby updating the older work of Bon on the Byzantine Peloponnese. Ilieva recognizes that geographical factors contributed to Peloponnesian ad-
Reviews
806
ministrative decentralization but takes an extreme view concerning its isolation. After
utilizing travelers' accounts to show that the Morea was little known in the West, she
concludes that even the Byzantines knew little about the region (p. 76)! No reference is
made to D. A. Zakythinos's important studies of Byzantine administration in the Peloponnese based on the famous chrysobull of Alexius III and the Partitio Romanie or his
study of Byzantine Hellas. Similarly, insufficient attention is paid to documentary evidence
concerning commercial contacts, and the full range of Byzantine literary and archaeological evidence referred to in volume 1 of the Tabula Imperii Byzantini is not exploited.
Ilieva's discussion of regionalism, decentralization, urban change, and the rise of provincial archons is an extremely useful distillation of a wide variety of recent studies on
these subjects. That literature is used in an excellent analysis of the role of Leon Sgouros
in opposing the Latin conquest. The sections on archons, administrative decline, and
Sgouros are the best in the entire book.
Ilieva's presentation of the political and military history of the Latin conquest and
establishment in the Morea is straightforward and draws upon recent studies such as
those of Kordoses on central Greece and Kalligas on Monemvasia. Ilieva refers to many
details concerning the conquest as presented in the Chronicleof the Morea and shows an
understanding of the importance of geographic and social factors that aided the conquerors. However, more attention should have been paid to the political acumen of the
conquerors and their exploitation of Byzantine political divisiveness. Boniface of Montferrat, in particular, made maximum use of his marriage alliances and Greek allies.
Similarly, Ilieva fails to take into account the effect of the revolt in 1205 that broke out
in Thrace and Macedonia, which according to Niketas Choniates had repercussions in
occupied Hellas.
Ilieva's discussion of the varied reactions on the part of the indigenous population
towards the conquerors is the main subject of her last chapter. Here she attempts to
determine to what degree the Morea was actually conquered and to what extent the
Greeks were integrated into the new regime. Byzantine reactions ranged from giving the
conquerors active assistance, to offering passive resistance, to outright military opposition. Ultimately, she concludes, it was the integration of local Moreot archons into the
Frankish elite that proved crucial to the new state's survival. Religious differences and
the survival of the Byzantine church on the local level prevented a fuller integration from
taking place among other classes. More use should have been made of Kenneth Setton's
Papacy in the Levant on this important topic.
Despite the limitations I have noted above, this book is a welcome addition to the
literature on Frankish Greece because of the wide variety of recent secondary literature
that it brings together on late Byzantine society, administration, and the Morea. However,
with the exception of the Chronicleof the Morea, it does not sufficiently exploit the wide
variety of primary source material on these important topics, nor does it successfully
challenge accepted views.
CONSTANTINEG. HATZIDIMITRIOU,City University of New York
JORDANUSDE NEMORE,De elementisarithmeticeartis: A Medieval Treatiseon NumberTheory,
1: Text and Paraphrase,ed. H. L. L. Busard. (Boethius, 22/1.) Stuttgart: Franz Steiner,
1991. Paper. Pp. 372.
H. L. L. Busard of Venlo has devoted his life to the preparation of scholarly editions
of the most important texts of medieval mathematics. In the past decades the works of
Gerard of Cremona, Hermann of Carinthia, John of Gmunden, Albert of Saxony, and