[34]r.guind，‘le traitéinédit｀sur l’usure’de nics cabass’，（1935），269-77;migne，pg 150，727-50.on this cf.zakythinos，crise monétaire 120 ff.
[35]until recently，this work was only known in the form of extracts publi射d by tafrali，thessalonique，261 ff.it is now avable in full in the edition by i.sevcenko，‘nics cabass’“anti-zealot”discourse.a reinterpretation’，dop 11（1957），81-171，who also makes it the subject of an important study which goes deep into the problems of byzantine social history.sevcenko shows that cabass’discourse was not written against the rule of the zealots in thessalonica as was previously supposed，but against the imperial government’s measures of secrization for military purposes，i.e.by granting monastds in pronoia.in a further article he examines a number of texts from the ms.parisinus gr.1276，which seem to represent the earlier redactions of the work with corrections and additions in cabass’own hand：i.sevcenko，‘the author’s draft of nics cabass’“anti-zealot”discourse in parisinus graecus 1276’，dop 14（1960）179 ff.since by reason of its watermarks this ms.must be dated to theter decades of the fourteenth century，cabass’discourse was not produced in the fifth decade of this century，as sevcenko had believed in his first article，and consequently was not directed against the government of anne of savoy but against the very extensive alienations of monastic properties and their distribution to pronoiars after the battle of marica in 1371，which seems much more convincing（see below，p.541）.thister dating is undoubtedly a strong argument in favour of sevcenko’s thesis that cabass’discourse has nothing to do with the zealots.
[36]publi射d，with an english trantion andmentary，by i.sevcenko，‘alexius makrembolites and his“dialogue between the rich and the poor”’zrvi 6（1960），187-228.
[37]e.legrand，lettres de l‘empereur manuel paléologue，paris 1893;migne，pg 156，82 ff.
[38]a trantion of part of this work，from the vienna ms.suppl.gr.75 is given by h.hunger，byzantinische geisteswelt，baden-baden 1958，282-6.for the other writings and correspondence of john chortasmenus cf.idem，‘zeitgeschichte in der rhetorik des sterbenden byzanz’，wiener archiv f.gesch.des wentums u.osteuropas 3（1959），152 ff.
[39]cf.the collection of texts in spmpros.，4 vols.，athens 1912-30.the important new edition of g.schrius by e.petit，h.a.siderides and m.jugie，paris 1928 ff.，is not essible to me.
[40]ed.gy.moravcsik，1，budapest 1935.
[41]ed.g.e.heimbach，leipzig 1851.on the asion of the 600 th anniversary of the hexabiblos thew faculty of the university of thessalonica publi射d a number of important historical and legal papers in theirυ，thessalonica 1951.
[42]ed.rhalles and potles，6，athens 1859;serbian trans.ed.st.novakovic，matije stara sintagmat（the syntagma of matthew stares），belgrade 1907.
[43]cf.especially f.dolger，aus den s插tzkammern des heiligen berges，munich 1948;p.lemerle，actes de kutlumus，paris 1945;a.guillou，les archives de saint-jean-prodrome sur le mont ménécée，paris 1955;f.dolger，sechs byzantinische praktika des 14.jahrhunderts für das athoskloster iberon，abh.d.bayer.akad.d.wissensch.n.f.28，1949;v.mosin，‘akti iz svetogorskih arhiva’（documents from the archives of the holy mountain），spomenik srpske akad.nauka 91，1939;v.mosin-a.sovre，supplementa ad acta chndarii，ljublijana 1948.cf.above，p.282，note 2，for details of the most important older publications.a collection of the greek documents of serbian rulers is given by a.solovjev and v.mosin，grcke povelje srpskih dara（greek 插rters of the serbian rulers），belgrade 1936，with a valuablementary on technical terms.
[44]n.jorga，notes et extraits pour servir à l’histoire des croisades au xve siècle，6 vols.，paris 1899-1916.
[45]f.thiriet，régestes des délibérations du sénat de venise concernant romanie 1-3，paris haye，1958-61.
[46]illibro dei conti di gio badoer，ed.u.doriniand t.bertelè，rome，1956.an interesting source for economic conditions and the currency of thete byzantine period is to befound in ein byzantinisches rechenbuch des 15.jahrhunderts，ed.h.hunger and k.vogel，denkschriften der?sterr.akad.d.wissensch.philos.-hist.kl.，vol.78，pt.2.vienna 1963.
[47]information on the rights and authority of the co-emperor is given in mi插el 8’s prostagma of november 1272;cf.above，pp.422 and 457.
[48]pseudo-codinus 86.on this cf.f.dolger，bz 33（1933），141，ostrogorsky，‘avtokrator’108 ff.，117 ff.，and annales de l’institut kondakov 10（1938），179 ff.，where it is shown that the title of autocrator was not applied to co-emperors before the peologian period.
[49]nic.gregoras 1，243 ff.on this see mskaris，viz.princeze 73，and m.dinic‘odnos izmedju kralja milutina i dragutina’（rtions between king milutin and dragutin）zrvi 3（1955），77 ff.who ces this episode in the period around 1315.
[50]cf.the excellentments of stein，‘untersuchungen’20 ff.
[51]cf.especially p.插ranis‘on the social structure and economic organization of the byzantine empire in the thirteenth century andter’bs 12（1951），94 ff.；a.p.kazdan，agrarnye otnosenija v vizantii xiii-xivvv.（agrarian rtions in byzantium in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries），moscow 1952;g.rouird vie rurale dans l’empire byzantin，paris 1953;ostrogorsky，paysannerie;b.t.gorjanov，pozdnevizantijskij immunitette byzantine immunity），vv 11（1956），177 ff.，12（1957），97 ff.；g.a.ostrogorsky，‘k istorii immuniteta v vizantii’，vv 13（1958），55 ff.（tr.‘pour l’histoire de l’immunité à byzance’，b 28（1958），165 ff.）；d.angelov，agrarnite otnosenija v severna i sredna makedonija prez xivvek（agrarian rtions in northern and central macedonia in the fourteenth century），sofia 1958.
</br>
[35]until recently，this work was only known in the form of extracts publi射d by tafrali，thessalonique，261 ff.it is now avable in full in the edition by i.sevcenko，‘nics cabass’“anti-zealot”discourse.a reinterpretation’，dop 11（1957），81-171，who also makes it the subject of an important study which goes deep into the problems of byzantine social history.sevcenko shows that cabass’discourse was not written against the rule of the zealots in thessalonica as was previously supposed，but against the imperial government’s measures of secrization for military purposes，i.e.by granting monastds in pronoia.in a further article he examines a number of texts from the ms.parisinus gr.1276，which seem to represent the earlier redactions of the work with corrections and additions in cabass’own hand：i.sevcenko，‘the author’s draft of nics cabass’“anti-zealot”discourse in parisinus graecus 1276’，dop 14（1960）179 ff.since by reason of its watermarks this ms.must be dated to theter decades of the fourteenth century，cabass’discourse was not produced in the fifth decade of this century，as sevcenko had believed in his first article，and consequently was not directed against the government of anne of savoy but against the very extensive alienations of monastic properties and their distribution to pronoiars after the battle of marica in 1371，which seems much more convincing（see below，p.541）.thister dating is undoubtedly a strong argument in favour of sevcenko’s thesis that cabass’discourse has nothing to do with the zealots.
[36]publi射d，with an english trantion andmentary，by i.sevcenko，‘alexius makrembolites and his“dialogue between the rich and the poor”’zrvi 6（1960），187-228.
[37]e.legrand，lettres de l‘empereur manuel paléologue，paris 1893;migne，pg 156，82 ff.
[38]a trantion of part of this work，from the vienna ms.suppl.gr.75 is given by h.hunger，byzantinische geisteswelt，baden-baden 1958，282-6.for the other writings and correspondence of john chortasmenus cf.idem，‘zeitgeschichte in der rhetorik des sterbenden byzanz’，wiener archiv f.gesch.des wentums u.osteuropas 3（1959），152 ff.
[39]cf.the collection of texts in spmpros.，4 vols.，athens 1912-30.the important new edition of g.schrius by e.petit，h.a.siderides and m.jugie，paris 1928 ff.，is not essible to me.
[40]ed.gy.moravcsik，1，budapest 1935.
[41]ed.g.e.heimbach，leipzig 1851.on the asion of the 600 th anniversary of the hexabiblos thew faculty of the university of thessalonica publi射d a number of important historical and legal papers in theirυ，thessalonica 1951.
[42]ed.rhalles and potles，6，athens 1859;serbian trans.ed.st.novakovic，matije stara sintagmat（the syntagma of matthew stares），belgrade 1907.
[43]cf.especially f.dolger，aus den s插tzkammern des heiligen berges，munich 1948;p.lemerle，actes de kutlumus，paris 1945;a.guillou，les archives de saint-jean-prodrome sur le mont ménécée，paris 1955;f.dolger，sechs byzantinische praktika des 14.jahrhunderts für das athoskloster iberon，abh.d.bayer.akad.d.wissensch.n.f.28，1949;v.mosin，‘akti iz svetogorskih arhiva’（documents from the archives of the holy mountain），spomenik srpske akad.nauka 91，1939;v.mosin-a.sovre，supplementa ad acta chndarii，ljublijana 1948.cf.above，p.282，note 2，for details of the most important older publications.a collection of the greek documents of serbian rulers is given by a.solovjev and v.mosin，grcke povelje srpskih dara（greek 插rters of the serbian rulers），belgrade 1936，with a valuablementary on technical terms.
[44]n.jorga，notes et extraits pour servir à l’histoire des croisades au xve siècle，6 vols.，paris 1899-1916.
[45]f.thiriet，régestes des délibérations du sénat de venise concernant romanie 1-3，paris haye，1958-61.
[46]illibro dei conti di gio badoer，ed.u.doriniand t.bertelè，rome，1956.an interesting source for economic conditions and the currency of thete byzantine period is to befound in ein byzantinisches rechenbuch des 15.jahrhunderts，ed.h.hunger and k.vogel，denkschriften der?sterr.akad.d.wissensch.philos.-hist.kl.，vol.78，pt.2.vienna 1963.
[47]information on the rights and authority of the co-emperor is given in mi插el 8’s prostagma of november 1272;cf.above，pp.422 and 457.
[48]pseudo-codinus 86.on this cf.f.dolger，bz 33（1933），141，ostrogorsky，‘avtokrator’108 ff.，117 ff.，and annales de l’institut kondakov 10（1938），179 ff.，where it is shown that the title of autocrator was not applied to co-emperors before the peologian period.
[49]nic.gregoras 1，243 ff.on this see mskaris，viz.princeze 73，and m.dinic‘odnos izmedju kralja milutina i dragutina’（rtions between king milutin and dragutin）zrvi 3（1955），77 ff.who ces this episode in the period around 1315.
[50]cf.the excellentments of stein，‘untersuchungen’20 ff.
[51]cf.especially p.插ranis‘on the social structure and economic organization of the byzantine empire in the thirteenth century andter’bs 12（1951），94 ff.；a.p.kazdan，agrarnye otnosenija v vizantii xiii-xivvv.（agrarian rtions in byzantium in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries），moscow 1952;g.rouird vie rurale dans l’empire byzantin，paris 1953;ostrogorsky，paysannerie;b.t.gorjanov，pozdnevizantijskij immunitette byzantine immunity），vv 11（1956），177 ff.，12（1957），97 ff.；g.a.ostrogorsky，‘k istorii immuniteta v vizantii’，vv 13（1958），55 ff.（tr.‘pour l’histoire de l’immunité à byzance’，b 28（1958），165 ff.）；d.angelov，agrarnite otnosenija v severna i sredna makedonija prez xivvek（agrarian rtions in northern and central macedonia in the fourteenth century），sofia 1958.
</br>