[87]cf.the detailed study by c.mango，‘the legend of leo the wise’，zrvi 6（1950），59 ff.
[88]m.，lib.1-Ⅻ ed.c.ferrini and j.mercati，studi e testi 25（1914）；lib.x3-xx3 ed.f.dolger，ibid.51（1929），lib.xx4-xxx7 ed.st.hoermann and e.seidl，ibid.107（1943）.cf.f.dolger and e.seidl，‘beitrage und berichtigungen zum tipukeitos’，bz 39（1939），146 ff.；e.seidl，‘die basilikenscholien im tipukeitos’，bz 44（1951）（dolger-festschrift），534 ff.
[89]insufficient ount is often taken of this fact，and the basilica are often epted as a source for the ninth century without the necessary caution.cf.a.p.kazdan，‘vasiliki kak istoriceskij istik’（the basilica as an historical source），vv 14（1958），56 f.，who rightly emphasizes that the basilica reflect the political and social situation of the sixth century，not of the ninth.this view is not substantially repudiated by the objections of m.j.sjuzjumov，‘vasiliki kak istik dlja vnutrennej istorii vizantii’（the basilica as a source for the internal history of byzantium），ibid.67 ff.，and e.e.lipsic，‘neskol’ko zamecanij o vasilikach kak istike’（some observations on the basilica as a source），ibid.76 ff.
[90]in spite of spulber，les novelles de léon le sage（1934），81 f.，the widely-held view that the novels were publi射d before leo 6 concluded his second marriage still stands，for novel 90 expressly condemns second marriages.it must however be remembered that leo 6 did not contract his second marriage until the spring of 898，as grumel，‘chronologie’5 ff.，has shown.an earlier date than this is indicated by the fact that the only patriarch mentioned in the novels of leo is stephen who died on 17 may 893.cf.c.krzisnik，bz 37（1937），486 ff.
[91]nov.46，47 and 78：zepos，jus 1，pp.116，116 f.and 147;noaille-dain，les novelles de léon vi le sage（1944），pp.182，184，270.
[92]it is true that leo’sws frequently expatiate on the general good of his subjects，equal justice for all，and so on，but these pious didactic maxims do not justify the conclusions which many modern schrs would like to deduce.cf.g.mi插élidès-nouraos，‘les idées philosophiques de léon le sage sur les limites du pouvoir légitif et son attitude envers les coutumes’，mnemosynon bizoukidès（1960），27 ff.，who describes the legition of leo 6 as being inspired by the spirit of humanity and liberalism，having its roots in public opinion.
[93]the word‘caesaropapism’so frequently used in connection with byzantium gives a false impression of the actual rtions between church and state in the medieval byzantine empire.cf.my arguments in‘otnosenie cerkvi i gosudarstva v vizantii’（rtions between church and state in byzantium），sem.kond.4（1931），121 ff.although i do not entirely hold to all my previous views，i am still of the opinion that there was an essential difference between rtions between church and state in the half roman empire of the early centuries and in the medieval byzantine empire.on the other hand，dolger，bz 31（1931），449 f.，considers that rtions between church and state at any given period were determined by the personalities of individual leadersy or lesiastic.a typical example of the view that the church was continually subjected to the‘caesaropapist’byzantine state is to be found in the well-known essay of h.gelzer，‘das verhaltnis von staat und kirche in byzanz’hz 86（1901），193 ff.my own views on the development of rtions between church and state in byzantium are fully confirmed by the evidence of representative art;cf.the excellentments of a.grabar，empereur 175 ff.and elsewhere.
[94]cf.bury，admin.system;bréhier institutions 121 ff.；w.ensslin，‘the emperor and the imperial administration’，baynes-moss，byzantium（1949），268 ff.
[95]cf.the importantments of stein，‘ein kapitel’70 ff.
[96]on the military zones of lesser rank and their significance in the earlier theme organization cf.the excellent treatment by j.ferluga，‘nize vojno-administrativne jedinice tematskog uredjenja’（the military and administrative theme units of lesser rank），zbornik radova viz.inst.2（1953），61 ff.（english résumé）。
[97]the themes of mesopotamia，lycandus，sebastea，leontis，and seleucia are still not mentioned in the cletorologion of philotheus，but they do appear as themes in both the tacticon benesivic and the de thematibus of constantine 7（where however leontis is missing，as are also 插rsianon，cappadocia and dalmatia，for no apparent reason）.mesopotamia is found with the rank of theme in a list of the sries payable to strategi of themes，drawn up about 908-10，which appears in the de cerimoniis（697，3），while the four other zones still appear as kleisurai.for this sry list and the date of itsption cf.j.ferluga，‘prilog datiranju tnog spiska stratega iz de caerimoniis’（furtherments on the dating of the sry list of strategi from the de cerimoniis），zrvi 4（1956），63 ff.
[98]the theme of cyprus mentioned in the de thematibus in reality only existed for a short time under basil 1 and then fell once again into the hands of the arabs（cf.p.238 above）。
[99]cf.stein，‘untersuchungen’19 ff.
[100]see above，p.215，under sources.
[101]on the title of caesar cf.the careful investigations of r.guind，‘?tudes sur l’histoire administrative de l’empire byzantin：le césarat’，ocp 13（1947），168 ff.；see also r.guind，‘et.sur l’hist.admin.de byzance：observation sur le clétorologe de philothée’，reb 20（1962），159 ff.
</br>
[88]m.，lib.1-Ⅻ ed.c.ferrini and j.mercati，studi e testi 25（1914）；lib.x3-xx3 ed.f.dolger，ibid.51（1929），lib.xx4-xxx7 ed.st.hoermann and e.seidl，ibid.107（1943）.cf.f.dolger and e.seidl，‘beitrage und berichtigungen zum tipukeitos’，bz 39（1939），146 ff.；e.seidl，‘die basilikenscholien im tipukeitos’，bz 44（1951）（dolger-festschrift），534 ff.
[89]insufficient ount is often taken of this fact，and the basilica are often epted as a source for the ninth century without the necessary caution.cf.a.p.kazdan，‘vasiliki kak istoriceskij istik’（the basilica as an historical source），vv 14（1958），56 f.，who rightly emphasizes that the basilica reflect the political and social situation of the sixth century，not of the ninth.this view is not substantially repudiated by the objections of m.j.sjuzjumov，‘vasiliki kak istik dlja vnutrennej istorii vizantii’（the basilica as a source for the internal history of byzantium），ibid.67 ff.，and e.e.lipsic，‘neskol’ko zamecanij o vasilikach kak istike’（some observations on the basilica as a source），ibid.76 ff.
[90]in spite of spulber，les novelles de léon le sage（1934），81 f.，the widely-held view that the novels were publi射d before leo 6 concluded his second marriage still stands，for novel 90 expressly condemns second marriages.it must however be remembered that leo 6 did not contract his second marriage until the spring of 898，as grumel，‘chronologie’5 ff.，has shown.an earlier date than this is indicated by the fact that the only patriarch mentioned in the novels of leo is stephen who died on 17 may 893.cf.c.krzisnik，bz 37（1937），486 ff.
[91]nov.46，47 and 78：zepos，jus 1，pp.116，116 f.and 147;noaille-dain，les novelles de léon vi le sage（1944），pp.182，184，270.
[92]it is true that leo’sws frequently expatiate on the general good of his subjects，equal justice for all，and so on，but these pious didactic maxims do not justify the conclusions which many modern schrs would like to deduce.cf.g.mi插élidès-nouraos，‘les idées philosophiques de léon le sage sur les limites du pouvoir légitif et son attitude envers les coutumes’，mnemosynon bizoukidès（1960），27 ff.，who describes the legition of leo 6 as being inspired by the spirit of humanity and liberalism，having its roots in public opinion.
[93]the word‘caesaropapism’so frequently used in connection with byzantium gives a false impression of the actual rtions between church and state in the medieval byzantine empire.cf.my arguments in‘otnosenie cerkvi i gosudarstva v vizantii’（rtions between church and state in byzantium），sem.kond.4（1931），121 ff.although i do not entirely hold to all my previous views，i am still of the opinion that there was an essential difference between rtions between church and state in the half roman empire of the early centuries and in the medieval byzantine empire.on the other hand，dolger，bz 31（1931），449 f.，considers that rtions between church and state at any given period were determined by the personalities of individual leadersy or lesiastic.a typical example of the view that the church was continually subjected to the‘caesaropapist’byzantine state is to be found in the well-known essay of h.gelzer，‘das verhaltnis von staat und kirche in byzanz’hz 86（1901），193 ff.my own views on the development of rtions between church and state in byzantium are fully confirmed by the evidence of representative art;cf.the excellentments of a.grabar，empereur 175 ff.and elsewhere.
[94]cf.bury，admin.system;bréhier institutions 121 ff.；w.ensslin，‘the emperor and the imperial administration’，baynes-moss，byzantium（1949），268 ff.
[95]cf.the importantments of stein，‘ein kapitel’70 ff.
[96]on the military zones of lesser rank and their significance in the earlier theme organization cf.the excellent treatment by j.ferluga，‘nize vojno-administrativne jedinice tematskog uredjenja’（the military and administrative theme units of lesser rank），zbornik radova viz.inst.2（1953），61 ff.（english résumé）。
[97]the themes of mesopotamia，lycandus，sebastea，leontis，and seleucia are still not mentioned in the cletorologion of philotheus，but they do appear as themes in both the tacticon benesivic and the de thematibus of constantine 7（where however leontis is missing，as are also 插rsianon，cappadocia and dalmatia，for no apparent reason）.mesopotamia is found with the rank of theme in a list of the sries payable to strategi of themes，drawn up about 908-10，which appears in the de cerimoniis（697，3），while the four other zones still appear as kleisurai.for this sry list and the date of itsption cf.j.ferluga，‘prilog datiranju tnog spiska stratega iz de caerimoniis’（furtherments on the dating of the sry list of strategi from the de cerimoniis），zrvi 4（1956），63 ff.
[98]the theme of cyprus mentioned in the de thematibus in reality only existed for a short time under basil 1 and then fell once again into the hands of the arabs（cf.p.238 above）。
[99]cf.stein，‘untersuchungen’19 ff.
[100]see above，p.215，under sources.
[101]on the title of caesar cf.the careful investigations of r.guind，‘?tudes sur l’histoire administrative de l’empire byzantin：le césarat’，ocp 13（1947），168 ff.；see also r.guind，‘et.sur l’hist.admin.de byzance：observation sur le clétorologe de philothée’，reb 20（1962），159 ff.
</br>