Mesarites as a source

Then and now

Bibliographic Data

ID11883185
AuthorsMichael Angold (corresponding author)
Year2016
Volume40
Issue1
Pages55-68
Publication date2016-04-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueByzantine and Modern Greek Studies (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0307-0131 • E-ISSN: 1749-625X
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/byz.2015.7
OpenAlexW2587549027
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited16

I am guessing, but I suspect that Bryer's first introduction to Nicholas Mesarites was like mine through a very short article by A. A. Vasiliev, entitled ‘Mesarites as a source’, 1 which was a footnote to his much more substantial ‘The foundation of the Empire of Trebizond’, 2 which dominated the field for years. Vasiliev was responding to a criticism by Franz Dölger, who suggested that Vasiliev might have benefited from a perusal of the works of Nicholas Mesarites, which had been edited by his old master August Heisenberg. 3 Vasiliev was adamant Nicholas Mesarites had little to contribute to the early history of the Empire of Trebizond. In his opinion, the Seljuq inscription from the walls of Sinope, which Heisenberg included in his commentary, was far more valuable than anything that could be gleaned from Mesarites’ writings. This rather explains why they remained a neglected source

Ancient history · Archaeology · Art · Criticism · Empire · Field (mathematics · Foundation (evidence · Literature · Political science · Suspect · Textual criticism · Ancient Near East History · Classics · Eurasian Exchange Networks · History · Law · Linguistics and language evolution · Philosophy

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub