PDF- Constantine Porphyrogenitus, inclined to Constantine -Chronological Table of the Middle Byzantine Historians - Springer Link - C. Porphyrogenitus and Ragusan Authors

hyrogenitus and Ragusan Authors



LIII (2006) стр

LIII (2006) pр

02 : 497

Tibor ŽIVKOVIĆ Institute of History Belgrade CONSTANTINE PORPHYROGENITUS AND THE RAGUSAN AUTHORS BEFORE 1611 The work of Constantine Porphyrogenitus De administrando imperio (DAI) was first edited by Johannes Meursius in 1611

but given to it by its first editor,

who based himself on its introduction

although two copies of DAI had been made between 1509 and 1529

The only exceptions in this respect were some Ragusan authors,

who will be considered in the following discussion

But before we enter into an analysis of the use of the material from DAI by the Ragusan authors,

we should say something about the fate of the known manuscripts of this work,

for tracing their trajectories might give us some idea of how these writers came to the information contained in it

The earliest manuscript of DAI,

Codex Parisinus 2009,

is first mentioned in the catalogue of the library of Cardinal Niccolò Ridolfi (1501-1550)

Niccolò Ridolfi possessed 618 1

Constantini Imperatoris Porphyrogeniti,

De Administrando Imperio,

Liber nunquam antehac editus

Ioannes Mevrsivs primus vulgavit,

Latinam interpretationem,

Lvgdvni Batavorvm,

Ex officinâ typographicâ Ioannis Balduini,

impensis verò Ludovici Elzeviri 1611

Constantine Porphyrogenitus De Administrando Imperio I

Jenkins – Gy


Washington D

This is,

merely an introductory remark meant to inform the reader of what he will find in the work,

and it is addressed to the Emperor's son Romanus


this could not have been the title of the entire work


Greek manuscripts,

and item 21 in the list is described as “Constantini Romanorum Imperatoris ad Romanum filium descriptio gentium et locorum,

ac varia historia ad rectam administrationem tendens”

and various stories relating to proper government,

Emperor of Romans,

The work in question was no doubt DAI

The manuscript from Ridolfi's collection was acquired by Pietro Strozzi,

it became a part of the collection of Catherine de Medici

In 1599 it was transferred to the Royal Library in Paris,

Another transcript was made from this copy,

A small part of it was copied by Antony Eparchus and the rest was transcribed by his collaborator Michael Damascene,

the first marked V (Codex Vaticanus Palatinus gr

Manuscript F is based on V,

so that the two transcripts were obviously made sequentially

not without some pride: "We keep that book as a precious thing in our library

The emperor himself relates many things 3

Ridolfi's Catalogue was published by B


Bibliotheca bibliothecarum manuscriptorum nova II,

Parisiis 1739,

This manuscript does not figure,

in the earliest known catalogue of the Ridolfi collection


Inventory of the Library of Cardinal Niccolò Ridolfi,

Manuscripta 45/46 (2003) 55 – 77

16 – 17

This manuscript of DAI was in the possession of Caesar John Ducas,

as it is recorded on the last page of the codex,

and the copyist was his personal secretary Michael Royzak


its editors suggest that it should be dated into the period between 1059 and 1081

It is known,

that John Ducas had to take monastic orders in 1074 and that he spent the rest of his life in a monastery


The Doukai,

London 1968,

In view of this and of the fact that the manuscript was transcribed by his personal secretary,

its dating should be narrowed down to the period 1059 – 1074


Bibliographie hellénique des XVe et XVIe siècles I,

Paris 1962,

21 – 23

7 DAI I,

as the period of the origin of F

Since P was in possession of John Egnatius by 1516 at the latest,

and since F is a literal copy of P,

it may be concluded that both manuscripts date from the same year – i


presumably basing himself on a text which was either in Latin or already translated into Italian

Discussing the devastation of Epidaurus,

which he believed was destroyed by the Goths,

Orbini cites in support of this view,

advanced by Philippo da Bergamo,

a work of Constantine Porphyrogenitus entitled : Foedera,

iura ac societates imperii Romani

No work of this title attributed to Constantine Porphyrogenitus is known,

but it may be inferred from Orbini's quotation that the text in question is in fact DAI

It may be added that in 1516 Johannes Baptista Egnatius had already described DAI as a work which describes : summam totius imperii,

Orbini's text on Ragusa runs: La città di Rausa (dice egli) prese nome questo dal Sasso,

che i Greci chiamano 

Onde prima furono appellati Lausei

ma poi per la mutatione della lettera furono detti Rausei: i quali prima furono Epidaurij da Epidauro città,

la quale col restante della Dalmatia fù presa da gli Slauinis e i cittadini parte furono ammazzati,


che fuggirono da queste ruine,

ritirandosi ne’ luoghi eminenti,

che tiraua mezo miglio di circuito

Li primi Autori di questa furono Gregorio,


Valentino Arcidiacono,


Sono fin’à questa mia età anni cinquecento,

Nella qual’è posto s


Stefano la quale hoggi si vede in mezo della città

Questi Rausei astretti da poco,


De Caesaribus libri III a dictatore Caesare ad Constantinum Palaeologum,

hinc à Carolo Magno ad Maximilianum Caesarem,

Venetiis 1516,

Catalogues des manuscrits grecs de Fontainebleau sous François Ier et Henri II,

Paris 1889,

Pesaro 1601,


che all’ agricoltura de’ campi

Orbini marked off clearly the conclusion of the quotation from Porphyrogenitus by the sentence: Et fino quì parla Costantino

This shows where Orbini actually got his DAI quotation from – from Arpontaco Burdugalense,

an author who has remained unknown to modern scholarship

Two essential differences between the Orbini quotation and DAI are immediately apparent

The first concerns the passage about the gradual expansion of Ragusa,

which Porphyrogenitus describes as a three-stage enlargement of the urban core,

(                  †   †          )

The text of DAI is damaged at this place in all the known manuscripts,

and the wording is not completely clear

In Orbini,

the passage speaks of a two-stage expansion only,

and the description ends with the remark that at length the walls of the town had half a mile in circuit

The other difference between Orbini and Porphyrogenitus is to be found in the concluding sentence of Orbini's quotation: These Ragusans,

being confined within a small area of barren soil,

engage with greater dedication in commerce and maritime trade than in the cultivation of fields

This sentence is missing in the manuscripts of DAI which are known today

In addition to these two discrepancies,

which are not insignificant although they are not so conspicuous

One concerns LAS,

the only Greek word which Orbini takes over

Porphyrogenitus says that the Romaic word for precipice is LAU (          ),



which Rausa is a later corruption

Orbini writes,

Scholars think that LAU is a Dalmatian Romanism derived from Latin labes,

probably does not mean "which is said precipitous lau in Latin",

but "which is said steep rock in Greek"


recorded by Hesychius of Alexandria in the fifth/sixth century,

could not have written this if he had not seen it in the source he used

This could have been written only by someone much more learned and with a good command of Greek

In other words,

LAU is not a Dalmatian-Roman word,

but a local expression of Greek origin,

derived from the Greek word 

but an accepted form of the nominative,

current in the time of Constantine Porphyrogenitus

Hence the sentence "which is said a steep rock in Greek" (referring to the steep slope on which the inhabitants of the original Ragusa dwelt)

It is conceivable that the original name of the settlement on the slope,

which was named Rausa (Ragusa) later,

had been   


and less conspicuous discrepancy concerns the names of the first founders of the town

Porphyrogenitus listed seven of them: (                     )

Orbini left out 12


Aedificaverunt Ragusium et habitaverunt in eo

Tragom najstarijih dubrovačkih zapisa,

Uz početke hrvatskih početaka,

Split 1993,

The expression ,

   “quadrangular stone”

A Greek-English Lexicon I – II,

Liddell – R

Oxford 1973,

On Hesychius of Alexandria see Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium I – III,


Oxford 1991,


Romejski govor i jezik Konstantina VII Porfirogenita,

ZRVI 24/25 (1986) 120

The learned Ragusan author Ignjat Đorđić 1737) also understood  as dicitur Graece praecipitium Lav


Đorđić also considered  as novae Romae idiomate


two of the seven (Victorinus and Valentinus) and replaced protospatharios Stephen with Faventinus,

a priest of the Church of St Stephen

The omission was probably accidental,

and the transformation of protospatharios Stephen into a priest of the Church of St Stephen was presumably a result of the imperfect understanding of the Greek text

It is far more interesting and important that the form Faventinus is also recorded in the earliest manuscript of DAI as 

where it is clearly written 

This shows that Arpontaco Burdugalense,

did not have the copies of Eparch Antonius before him


the error contained in the earliest transcript of DAI existed also in the copy which is richer in detail (the perimeter of the town walls,

the sentence relating to the commercial activity of the Ragusans,

the correction of LAU into LAS),

and which belongs to another manuscript tradition of DAI


it is particularly important that Arpontaco Burdugalense explicitly says that Porphyrogenitus wrote his work in 959

The reference to 948/949 as the year in which Porphyrogenitus wrote Chapter 29 of DAI is preserved precisely in this chapter

and it would not be surprising if the year 959 was in fact just one of them

if the year is recorded accurately,

this alters radically our knowledge of the date of DAI,

it permits the hypothesis that the Emperor finished the final redaction of DAI in the course of 959,

before 9 November (when he died)

But before I say something about this possibility and adduce some more substantial evidence in support of it,

we should turn to some other Ragusan authors who had used the information contained in Chapter 29 of DAI before Orbini

Constantinus Porphyrogenitus De thematibus et De administrando imperio,


Bonnae 1840,

retains Banentinus in the Latin version of the text,

althought he corrects it into Valentinus ( ) in the Greek text

16 DAI I,


About fifty years before Mavro Orbini,

Niccolo Ragnina (1494-1582) 17 compiled his Annals of Ragusa

a work which had been written not long before Ragnina and which does not contain material from DAI

Thus he inserted,

almost at the very beginning of his narration,

the extract from a Latin text containing data known from Chapter 29 of DAI

Anno Christi 944 Constantinus Imperator,

(qui) ad Romanum filium Caesarem appellatur,

ubi de Dalmatia tractat: Oppidum Rhagusinum dictum a saxo,

quasi in praecipitibus locis et saxosis positi,

postea vero per immutationem litterae Rhagusaei,

quia ante Epidaurii nuncupati sunt

Hoc oppidum a Slavis cum reliqua Dalmatia captum oppugnatumque est,

qui vero calamitatem aufugere potuerunt,

altissima petentes loca oppidulum in vici formam construxere,

quod postea in majus auctum cinxere moenibus quattuor stadiorum ambitu

Condendae urbis auctores hi celebres habentur,





Valentinus archidiaconus,

Faventinus pater s


Quingenti sunt anni ad meam aetatem,

ex quo Salonis profecti oppidum condidere

in quo oppido positus est divus Pancratius in divi Stephani aede,

quae hodie in medio urbis posita conspicitur

in a short prologue preceding this quotation,

that the text which follows is taken from the book of Emperor Constantine to his son Romanus,

from the passage relating to the province of Dalmatia

These 17

Enciklopedija Jugoslavije VII,

Zagreb 1968,

Annali di Ragusa del magnifico ms

Nicolò di Ragnina,

Monumenta spectantia historiam Slavorum Meridionalium,


Zagrabiae 1883,


Monumenta spectantia historiam Slavorum Meridionalium,

Scriptores I,

Zagrabiae 1883,

3 – 163


words show that the note was made by someone familiar with the entire work,

for the fact that the work is dedicated to the Emperor's son Romanus is mentioned only in the Introduction of DAI

It should be also noted that Ragnina mentions that the work dates from 944,

which adds another problem to the interpretation of this extract

The quotation from DAI also has LAS instead of LAU,

but in this case the word is written in Latin,

and it is explicitly stated that LAS is a Greek word: Oppidum Rhagusinum dictum a saxo,


it is stated in the text (as in Orbini's quotation) that the town defence walls were extended in two (not three) stages,

and the conclusion of the sentence reads: until the walls had a perimeter of four stadia

Four stadia correspond to half a mile

It is interesting that the earliest perimeter of Ragusa was,

according to archaeological investigations,

which is only slightly more than half a Byzantine mile (1460 metres)

As regards the names of the first founders of Ragusa,

Ragnina lists all seven of them,

with a slight variation – he writes "sp" instead of "protospatharios",

presumably meant as an abbreviation of "spatharios"

Archdeacon Valentinus is listed,

The additional sentence concerning the disposition of the Ragusans for trade is missing

A few pages later Ragnina quotes again the text from DAI,

This is not a translation of the previously cited Latin text,

but a quotation which he found somewhere in that form and inserted into his work

Ex libro etiam di Constantino imperatore ad Romano suo fiolo,

Cesare appellato,

in parte dove di statocratia tratta,


New Cognizance on Early Byzantine Dubrovnik in the 6th Century,

Starinar 42 (1991) 146

A Byzantine mile measured 1460 metres



who pointed out in a note (Ragnina,

I have not consulted the manuscript tradition of Ragnina's Annals,

bearing in mind the Latin version quoted by Ragnina only a few pages earlier,

that Nodilo wrongly emended the damaged


La città di Ragusa (è) ditta da sasso,

quasi in elli precipiti et sassosi lochi posti,

poi veramente per la immutation delle litere Ragusei sono chiamati,

quali antiquamente Epidaurini si nominavano

Questa città dalli Slavi,

Et quali veramente la calamità poterono fuggire,

alli altissimi lochi fuggirono,

castello in forma di casale edificarono,

quattro stadj quasi el circuito

Fra li auctori della città questi celeberrimi furono: Gregorio,




Valentino archidiacono,


(che) quivi dalla città di Salona (sono) venuti (e) questa città hanno edificato

Tratta questa istoria in ello libro hactenus

quale Constantino par essere stato al mondo nelli anni di Cristo 940

preserves the Greek LAS and mentions the perimeter of four stadia

Six founders of the town are named protospatharios Stephen is omitted and a full stop is placed after the name of his father Faventinus

Neither this passage retains the sentence with which Oribini concluded his quotation

But there is another interesting point – referring to the destruction of Epidaurus,

the text says that the attackers were the Slavs or the Goths (o vero Goti),

which shows that someone had interpolated this conclusion before Ragnina,

who does not discuss the Goths and Epidaurus

An additional difficulty is posed by Ragnina's explanation that the Emperor wrote this book in 940

Finally we come,

climbing down the chronological ladder,

to Lodovico da Cerva Tubero (d

In his work Commentarii de temporibvs svis,24 which includes an excursus on the earliest history of Ragusa,

Tubero mentions the legend of Pavlimir and of the manner in which exiles from Rome decided to build Ragusa

Ubi intellexit eos maxime,

qui tenuiores genere ac fortunis erant,

which is probably only a translation of the corresponding Latin sentence and which in all likelihood read: dove di Dalmatia tratta

Zagreb 2001 ( = Tubero)


seque malle mercatura ac nauigatione quam cultura sterilis ac asperi circa soli uictum quaerere

which is not found in the known mansucripts of that work Questi Rausei astretti da poco,

con maggior studio attendono alle mercantie,

che all’ agricoltura de’ campi

In his digression on the earliest past of Ragusa Tubero used mostly the Chronicle of the Priest of Doclea,

which he describes as very old,

but not so damaged that it could not be deciphered

as Tubero was called because of his superb mastery of Latin,

combined at least two sources in this passage – the Chronicle of the Priest of Doclea (the legend of Pavlimir) and the version of Chapter 29 of DAI which Orbini quoted from Arpontaco Burdugalense Tubero,

supplies another interesting detail,

not found in the earliest manuscript of the Chronicle of the Priest of Doclea,

the account of the foundation of the Church of St Stephen Protomartyr in the centre of the city: In medio fere oppidi,

regionem hanc nunc incolae Pusternam nuncupant,

Polimirus diui Stephani Protomartyris erigit templum,

Archilei ac Pancratii martyrum,

Petronillaeque ac Domitillae uirginum argento inclusas,

secumque Roma asportatas ibi condit

” It is possible that this detail was based on the verses of the earliest known Ragusan poet Miletius: Ad decus et laudem Stephani Protomartyris extat Castellum: templum fundant,




Quae secum furtim tulerant Roma fugientes It should be pointed out,

that Miletius mentions Nereus,


Domitilla and Petronilla,

but he says nothing about the relics of Pancratius

They are mentioned in this context,



Tubero is also the first author who explicitly says that he uses Docleatem authorem


Church of St Stephen Protomartyr in the middle of the town (in medio fere oppidi ),

only by Constantine Porphyrogenitus in Chapter 29 of DAI (                    )

some other sentences from Chapter 29 of DAI which describe the founding of Ragusa can also be found in Tubero

His sentence: Addunt etiam arcem ipsam,

eo quod in praeruptis saxis posita esset,

uocitatam in quod quidem nomen totam mox urbem abisse traduntm Lauusa in Rhacusam mutata,28 seems to be a mere paraphrase of the Annals of the Priest of Doclea

aedificaverunt civitatem supra mare in ripis marinis,

quas Epidaurii lingua sua “laus” dicunt

Unde ea civitas “Lausium” vocata est,

Ragusium appellata est

Tubero relates again how Ragusa was named Lausa,

which subsequently became Ragusa,

but this time his text resembles the account given by Constantine Porphyrogenitus in Chapter 29 of DAI

ab Epidauriis inditum arbitrantur,

in quibus oppidum constructum est,

eorum lingua Lauusam appellarunt paulatimque pro Lausa Rhacusam esse nominatam,

vulgo per linguae corruptelam literas immutante

but the marked similarity with Porphyrogenitus's statement indicates that the reference is in fact to him

The expression Alii obviously excludes the Annals of the Priest of Doclea as a source of this sentence,

for this work is Tubero's main authority and all the other sources are classed as Alii


Tubero also mentions some events from the reign of Basil I,

when the Slavonic tribes from the eastern shores of the Adriatic took part in an expedition against the Arabs in southern Italy

These events are 27


89 – 90


Zagreb 1950,

30 Tubero,

31 DAI I,


known from Porphyrogenitus's report recorded in as many as three works written (or supervised) by him: DAI,

De thematibus and Vita Basilii

raised their siege of Ragusa on hearing the news of the arrival of an imperial fleet,

crossed to Longobardia and captured the town of Bari

At the Emperor's command,





with all the men from the towns of Dalmatia,

crossed to Langobardia and took Bari

Porphyrogenitus also notes that the Croatian and other Slavonic archontes were transported to Longobardia by the citizens of Ragusa in their vessels

his knowledge is not based on DAI,

whose works had already been published in his time

Cedrenus's work was printed in Basle in 1566,

and Zonaras was published in Venice in 1557

the intervention of the Byzantine fleet under Niceta Oriphos,

the campaign in southern Italy,

who uses the data from the Vita Basilii,35 although they are also found in Chapter 29 of DAI

Even a cursory glance at Orbini's narration shows without doubt that his account of these events was taken over from Cedrenus,

and not from Chapter 29 of DAI

For example,

DAI says that the Ragusans sent an embassy to Emperor Basileus,

while Cedrenus states correctly that the emperor in question was Michael,

De thematibus was first published only in 1588


Geschichte der Byzantinischen Litteratur von Justinian bis zum Ende des Oströmischen Reichs,

München 1897,


33 DAI I,

98 – 115

In De thematibus (Bekkerus,

11 – 62

Theophanes Continuatus,

Ioannes Cameniata,

Symeon Magister,

Georgius Monachus,


Bonnae 1838,

14 – 293

took part in the expedition to Bari,

but it does not mention individual Slavonic tribes

It is only in Chapter 26 of DAI that one can find details on the basis of which it is possible to reconstruct the political position of the Slavs on the eastern Adriatic shores and the Dalmatian towns in relation to the Empire



Bonnae 1839,

16 – 225

36 Orbini,


Having related how Ragusa was built up,

Tubero narrates that the town gradually grew populous and rich because the bareness of the soil taught its people to be industrious37

After that he resumes the story of the Saracens,

who defeated the Calabrians and the Apulians and captured the promontory Gargano

The Ragusans thereupon consulted with the people of Zadar38 and secured the alliance of the other maritime towns of Dalmatia as well

After that they sent emissaries to the Slavs to urge them to attack the Saracens

The Slavonic people,

who had recently (in the time of Pope Hadrian III) adopted Christianity and whose king ruled Dalmatia with the permission of the Emperor of Byzantium,

sailed to Apulia and drove the Saracens from Gargano

but it also contains details which could have been known only to someone familiar with the entire Chapter 29 of DAI


references to the conversion of the Slavs and to the sovereign authority of the Emperor of Byzantium do appear in Chapter 29 of DAI,

Here Tubero merely repeats what he has already said about the sterile soil and the diligence of the Ragusans


90 – 91,

Iam noua urbs opibus ac ciuium multitudine,

soli inopia industriam acuente,

aliquantisper coaluerat,quum iterum Rhacusanorum animis Epidaurii excidii metus obuersari coepit

It should be noted that two statements of Constantine Porphyrogenitus are merged in this passaage: 1

The increase of the number of inhabitants

The sterility of the soil and the industry of the Ragusans

The first statement is based on DAI,

and the other is known only from Orbini's Italian translation of the information contained in Chapter 29 of DAI,

The statement is,

quite correct since Zadar was the seat of the strategos of Dalmatia

39 Tubero,

90 – 91

Blondi Flavii Forliviensis historiarvm ab inclinatione Romanorum libri XXXI,

Basel 1531,

records the military activity of the Saracens from Gargano in Italy,

but he depends on Johannes the Deacon or on the later Andrea Dandolo

Tubero must have combined at least two sources in this passage – Chapter 29 of DAI and Blondi

68 – 75

The mention of the subjection of the Slavs to Emperor Heraclius of Byzantium,

is at the very beginning of Chapter 29 of DAI,

and this place is damaged in all the manuscripts of DAI,

so that the enumeration of the Slavonic tribes is not followed by any information on their position with regard to the Empire

The next


must have been familiar with the content of the entire Chapter 29 of DAI,

for else he could not have retold the Slavonic expedition in Longobardia so concisely or explained the political position of the Slavs and the Dalmatian towns in relation to the Empire with such unusual accuracy

It is interesting that Tubero consistently calls the Arabs Saracens,

just as Porphyrogenitus does in Chapter 29 of DAI

whom no known source associates with the conversion of the Slavs

42 Yet,

Hadrian III (17

May 884 – September 885) was a contemporary of Emperor Basil I (867 – 886),

who is explicitly referred to in DAI as the emperor who conducted the second conversion to Christianity of the Serbs,

the Croats and the other Slavs of Dalmatia

Tubero's perception of the time of the conversion of the Slavs and of their subordinated position in relation to the Empire was undoubtedly chronologically associated with Basil I,

who is explicitly mentioned in DAI in the context mentioned above

If Tubero was familiar with the entire Chapter 29 of DAI,

he must have noticed the name of Emperor Basil,

but he decided to omit it from his account

It may be presumed,

that he introduced Basil I's contemporary Pope Hadrian III instead because he wished to preserve the correct chronological bearings

which begins with a reference to the breakaway of these Slavs in the time of Emperor Michael Amorian (820-829) gives some ground for the inference that the conclusion of the preceding sentence was that the Slavs of Dalmatia were subjected to the Empire of the Romans

58 – 66

Vizantiski izvori za istoriju naroda Jugoslavije,


Beograd 1959,

41 DAI I,

Porphyrogenitus calls the Arabs Saracens in many other chapters of DAI as well


he also calls them Arabs () in many places

10 – 11

57 – 59,

mentions Pope Stephen in connection with the conversion of the Slavs of Dalmatia,


48 – 50


This is not based on Dandolo,

for he gives only the name of Cardinal Honorius and makes no meniton of the name of the pope

the Chronicle of the Priest of Doclea

It would seem that Blondi had the Chronicle of the Priest of Doclea at his disposal


Letopis Popa Dukljanina,

Beograd 1928,

who believed that Blondi used Dandolo in his account of the Council at Duvanjsko Polje


Since Tubero spent about twenty years of his life (1484 – 1502) as a monk in a monastery on the islet of St

Andrew off Ragusa,

it may be supposed that his sources and the notes he made were kept in that monastery

the Ragusan Senate appointed him abbot of the Monastery of St Jacob at Višnjica

it may be assumed that they remained either in the Monastery of St Andrew or in the Monastery of St Jacob

In 1592 the prior of St Andrew was Mavro Orbini

If Tubero's books and papers,

remained in the library of the Monastery of St Andrew,

this would explain how Orbini could have quoted the still unpublished Tubero's work in his Kingdom of the Slavs

A careful analysis of Tubero's account of the earliest history of Ragusa reveals that he makes use of several sources

The first and basic source is the Chronicle of the Priest of Doclea

This is also the only source he mentions,

and he refers to it in a number of passages

It may be noticed,

that in his chapter on Ragusa Tubero – who had an exceptional command of Latin45

as if they have been copied or paraphrased from a single source

Another important source,

as the preceding analysis has shown,

was Constantine Porphyrogenitus,

the material from Chapter 29 of DAI

not only the short report on Ragusa

A third source was undoubtedly the earliest known Ragusan poet Miletius,

whose account of the origin of Ragusa is cleverly combined with Porphyrogenitus's report,

as is clearly seen in the passage where Tubero 43

The Monastery of St Jacob had a renowned library,

to which large donations of books were made on several occasions

Thus Sigismund Philochristos bequethed 200 books to it in 1628,

and the Bishop of Ston Jovan Đurđević,

left to it a number of Greek codices (1605-1608)

The library was damaged in the 1667 earthquake,

and it sustained further and particularly severe damage from the Russian-Montenegrin army in 1806,

and during the French occupation in 1808

What was left of it has been preserved mainly in the Franciscan Library in Ragusa


Benediktinci II,

Split 1964,




XXXVIII) was the first to draw attention to DAI as a possible source of Tubero


mentions the saints' relics and interpolates the name of Pancratius,

as well as in the reference to the location of the Church of St Stephen Protomartyr in the centre of the town – both details known from Constantine Porphyrogenitus only

A fourth source or group of sources might be the writings of the Italian historian Flavio Biondi (1392-1463) and Marco Antonio Sabellico (1436 – 1508),

both published at the end of the fifteenth or the beginning of the sixteenth century and were certainly accessible to Tubero

once in connection with the already mentioned detail concerning Ragusa,

and the other time in his account of how the women of Dalmatia hurled their children at the enemy during the siege of their town

Even if such an author,

how are we to explain that he is known only to Orbini

? This important detail shows that the Trattato delle mutationi de gli Stati may have been a manuscript kept in the library in which Orbini worked,

Another possibility is that this manuscript was a part of Tubero's legacy and that he had acquired it during his stay in France

It is remarkable that neither reference to Arpontaco Burdugalense specifies the chapter or title of his 47

The best known works of Sabellico are Historia rerum Venetarum ab urbe condita ad obitum ducis Marci Barbadici,

Venetia 1487

Rhapsodiae historicarum,

Venetia 1498

Judging by what Rastić says (I have not been able to consult Sabellico's work),

he makes no mention of the conflict between the Saracens,

the Byzantines and the Slavs in southern Italy

Croniche di Ragusa opera di Giugno Resti senatore di Ragusa,

Monumenta spectantia historiam Slavorum Meridionalium,


Zagrabiae 1893,

More interesting is the fact that Resti refers here to Giovanni Battista Egnatius (sebben Gio


che Ragusa fosse stata espugnata da’Saraceni),

who is the selfsame Giovanni Ignatius for whom Eparch Antonius copied the earliest mansucript of DAI in 1509,

and who published a book on the Roman emperors from Caesar to Constantine Palaeologus in 1516

Mavro Orbini Kraljevstvo Slovena,


Beograd 1968,

Mavro Orbini Kraljevstvo Slavena,


Zagreb 1999,

49 Orbini,


although Orbini often supplies this information when he quotes from printed works


it is possible that Tubero had only excerpts from Arpontaco's work,

In any case,

Arpontaco Burdugalense remains a mystery which deserves a separate inquiry

Tubero studied in Paris,

where he was awarded the doctor's degree in

We know nothing of his life in that period

Who were his friends,

were there any learned humanists among them – all this remains obscure

Arpontaco was most probably also in France

There need not have necessarily been a direct connection between Tubero and Arpontaco Burdugalense,

but both of them might have had access to the same manuscript of DAI

If the manuscript of DAI used by Arpontaco Burdugalense and Tubero dates indeed from 959,

than it represents the final redaction of DAI

This might clarify a very important question: why there is no mention of the theme of Dalmatia in De thematibus

If De thematibus was completed in 945/955,50 and the final version of DAI was completed in 959,

for Porphyrogenitus still had two versions of the text relating to the theme of Dalmatia in the manuscript of 949 and had not yet decided which one to use in the final version

The other detail from Arpontaco Burdugalense,

the story of the Dalmatian women,

may also have been taken from the final redaction of DAI and probably concerned a more circumstantial story of the fall of Salona

There is another important indication that Porphyrogenitus had not completed DAI by 949-952

There are a numerous passages which open with the characteristic conjunctions   ,

indicating that the passage is merely an extract,

Some chapters are obviously finished,

but a number of chapters contain points which are not developed

No such conjunctions appear in De thematibus or in Vita Basilii,

which is a clear indication that these works are finished

Even the passage concerning Ragusa also begins     

The section on Ragusa in the final redaction of DAI was to include the 50


Sur la date du De thematibus,

REB 31 (1973) 299 – 305


Sur la date De thematibus de Constantin VII Porphyrogénète,

TM 8 (1981) 1 – 5


remark that the overall length of the city walls was four stadia,

a sentence on the economic activity of the Ragusans,

as well as a new etymology for LAU,

As regards the other parts of the chapter,

an addition seems to have been included concerning Zadar as the chief town of the Byzantine province,

as well as the inclusion of a more detailed story of the fall of Salona – this is what can be concluded from the texts of Orbini,

Tubero and Arpontaco Burdugalense


ГОДИНЕ Резиме У делу Мавра Орбина Il Regno de gli Slavi објављеном у Пезару 1601

године поменуто је дело Константина Порфирогенита De Foedera,

iura ac societates imperii Romani

На основу цитата из овог дела,

који Орбини наводи према Арпонтаху из Бордоа и његовом делу Trattato delle mutatione de gli Stati,

јасно је да је у питању De Administrando Imperio (DAI) византијског цара Константина VII Порфирогенита,

односно подаци из 29

главе у којој се говори о најстаријој прошлости Дубровника

Будући да је DAI први пут објављен 1611

године поставља се питање како је Мавро Орбини могао користити ове податке десет година раније

Разлика у 29

глави DAI и Орбиновог цитата показује да није реч о оном предлошку DAI који је 1611

године послужио првом издавачу Meursiusu

Основна разлика јесте прецизно навођење обима градских бедема,

пола миље,

који у сачуваном рукопису DAI не постоји

Друга разлика

На основу увида у текстове дубровачке Николе Рањине који такође у два наврата цитира податке из 29

главе 162


DAI средином 16

века као и на основу чињенице да Туберон почетком 16

века располаже податцима о Дубровнику које преноси и Орбин,

издваја се закључак да је дубровачким писцима у 16

веку била позната верзија DAI која је данашњој науци недоступна

Разлике које су уочене као и Орбинове тврдње да је дело De Foedera,

iura ac societates imperii Romani цар написао 959


отвара могућност за веома известан закључак да је Константин Порфирогенит пред сам крај живота сачинио можда и коначну верзију списа De Administrando Imperio

C. Portantiero - La sociología clásica Durkheim y Weber


teoriasdelacomunicacion1unlam files wordpress

C# Pour les Nuls

Apprendre A Programmer En C Pour Les Nuls - Thank you for

PDF Apprenez rapidement et simplement les bases du langage C essai essai rnu tn Ebook Informatique lelanguagec2 pdf PDF Les bases de la programmation en Clsc univ evry ~otmane Poly UEL RAN Informatique pdf PDF Le C en 20 heures

c++ Practical File

C++ programming - CERN Indico

PRACTICAL file Department Computer Science and Engineering Session July December Subject Object Oriented Programming Using C++ Lab Write a C++ program to calculate the multiplication of 2 D matrix 2 Write a C++ program to calculate the summation of

c) Problemas de Programacion Lineal Resueltos

Problemas de Programación Lineal: Método Simplex

PDF Colección de problemas de formulación de modelos de iol etsii upm es arch pl problemas tecnicas pdf PDF cien problemas de programación lineal Universidad Nacional de bdigital unal edu co 5037 guillermojimenezlozano 2006 Parte1 pdf PDF Programación

C Programming Language

C programming I - University of Wisconsin–Madison

pubweb eng utah edu ~bigham ctext pdf The first is to introduce the C program ming language C is a practical and still current software tool; it remains one of the most popular programming languages in existence, particularly in areas such as embedded systems C facilitates writing

C Programming Multiple Choice Single Answer

100 Multiple Choice Questions In C Programming - Kronoscode

PDF C Language Multiple Choice Questions With Answers Savvy Studiosmail01 savvystudios br c language multiple choice questions with answers pdf PDF C Language Multiple Choice Questions With Answers Free AAA dev teendriving aaa c language multiple choice questions with answers

C# Programming - Rob Miles

The C Programming Yellow Book - Kronoscode

PDF C Programmingstudent itee uq edu au courses csse2310 CProgrammingNotes pdf PDF Yellow Book Squarespace static1 squarespace CSharp+Book+2016+Rob+Miles+8 2 pdf PDF The C Programming Yellow Book Book Libraryadmin ifj the c programming yellow book

C++ Programming Slides from INFOSYS 01

V121 - GRID - ETSI

PDF 1 of 34 Infosys Campus Connectcampusconnect infosys Inspire Briefing PPT V3 pdf PDF faculty institution infosys Infosys Campus Connectcampusconnect infosys homedownloads Briefing 20Kit1 pdf PDF Programming In C Developers Library Stephen G Book

C Programming

The Basics of C Programming - University of Connecticut

kciti edu wp content uploads 2017 07 cprogramming About The Tutorial C is a general purpose, procedural, imperative computer programming language developed in 1972 by Dennis M Ritchie at the Bell Telephone Laboratories to develop the UNIX operating system C is the most widely used computer language

Home back Next