Sebastokrator

The title was created by Alexios I Komnenos after his accession in 1081. The emperor had already promised the dignity of caesar to Nikephoros Melissenos, but wished to provide a higher place for his brother Isaac Komnenos. He therefore created the name sebastokrator from the Greek sebastos, meaning “venerable” or “august,” and autokrator, one of the principal elements of the imperial titulature. The new dignity originally stood immediately below the basileus, the Byzantine emperor, and possessed a strongly dynastic and almost imperial character.

In Byzantium the dignity of sebastokrator was initially reserved for the emperor’s brothers and sons. Alexios III Angelos widened the circle by granting it to sons-in-law, including Stefan Nemanjić, the future Stefan the First-Crowned. The title survived in the Empire of Nicaea, but after Byzantine rule was restored in Constantinople in 1261 it gradually lost its dynastic exclusiveness. Constantine Palaiologos was the last reigning emperor’s brother to hold the dignity, and it was later granted even to the Rhodope ruler Momchil. The last Byzantine holders belonged to the Kantakouzenos family, and by the end of the fourteenth century the title had fallen out of use.

Outside Byzantium the title was adopted by several different routes. There is only one secure attestation from the Latin Empire: Conon de Béthune is called sebastokrator in a papal letter. Stefan the First-Crowned received his dignity from a Byzantine emperor and therefore cannot be regarded as the bearer of an independently Serbian title. Sebastokrators appointed by Serbian rulers appear only after the imperial coronation of Stefan Dušan. In both Bulgaria and Serbia the dignity remained primarily honorific and was eventually displaced by the more enduring title of despot.

The first securely attested sebastokrator of the Second Bulgarian Empire was Strez, whose title belongs to the reign of Boril. He was followed by Alexander under Ivan Asen II, Peter in 1253, Kaloyan in 1259, and Radoslav at the end of the thirteenth century. In Radoslav’s case, the origin and precise meaning of the title remain open to question. Every securely identified bearer was related by blood or marriage to the ruling family.

The rank of sebastokrator was a title rather than a defined office of state. Byzantine ceremonial practice assigned it no permanent administrative or military duties, although the emperor could separately entrust a sebastokrator with an army. Some interpretations have presented the Bulgarian sebastokrators as governors of large frontier provinces with several sebastoi under their authority. The sources do not support such a system, while sebastos and sebastokrator were separate titles connected only by their names and their place within the same hierarchy.

Some Bulgarian sebastokrators did possess lands and authority over dependent people. Michael II Asen’s Dubrovnik charter, for example, refers to Peter’s territories and people. These rights may instead have arisen from his personal estates and from immunity privileges that restricted the intervention of ordinary royal officials. They do not demonstrate that the title itself conferred provincial government, judicial authority, or military command.

The sebastokrator was probably at first the highest-ranking dignitary below the Bulgarian tsar. After the adoption of the title of despot, the order became tsar, despot, and sebastokrator. As in Byzantium, the dignity was most probably conferred personally by the ruler. Strez, Alexander, and Radoslav were royal brothers or close dynastic relatives, Peter was a brother-in-law of the tsar, and Kaloyan was the reigning monarch’s cousin.

There is no evidence that the title was hereditary. The suggestion that Kaloyan inherited it from his father Alexander depends upon rejected genealogical reconstructions and the former identification of Kaloyan with Koloman II Asen. No Bulgarian sebastokrator is known to have inherited the dignity from his father. In Byzantium one person could retain or combine several titles, as shown by the case of Momchil, but there is no evidence for a similar Bulgarian practice. Nor is there secure evidence that a Bulgarian sebastokrator was deprived of his dignity; omission from the Synodikon is not sufficient proof.

The Bulgarian ceremony of investiture is unknown. Byzantine practice treated the promotion of a sebastokrator as comparable to that of a despot or caesar, with the principal differences lying in the insignia, or visible signs of rank. At the Byzantine court a sebastokrator could even be addressed as “ἡ βασιλεία σου,” a formula with imperial overtones. The only possible Bulgarian official style appears in the Dubrovnik charter: “ВЫСОКОГО СЕВАСТОКРАТОРА ГНА ПЕТРА,” or “the high sebastokrator Lord Peter.” No documents issued by Bulgarian sebastokrators survive. In Byzantium their acts were related to the graphē, a form of written order, and were signed in blue ink; Bulgarian practice may have been similar, but this cannot be demonstrated.

Byzantine insignia reveal the title’s proximity to imperial authority. Early sebastokrators wore a circlet set with precious stones and pearls, less elaborate than the basileus’s crown and lacking its closed covering. By the middle of the fourteenth century ceremonial descriptions specify a red-and-gold skiadion, or court hat, a red tunic, and blue stockings and shoes. Eagles on the shoes, horse equipment, and other furnishings were also predominantly associated with blue. At the same time, there was a noticeable tendency to bring the costume of the sebastokrator closer to that of the despot.

For Bulgaria, the only detailed representation of such clothing is the donor portrait of Sebastokrator Kaloyan in the Boyana Church. He wears a circlet with a raised ornament and a precious stone, a green mantle, and a long divitision, or ceremonial tunic, of dark blue or dark green. The garment is fastened with a belt of metal plaques and has decorated bands around the arms. His wife Desislava is shown with a circlet, pearls, and a richly ornamented robe. The predominance of green is insufficient evidence for a distinct Bulgarian system, since green sebastokratorial clothing is also attested in Byzantium.

In Bulgaria the title served to incorporate influential relatives into the circle around the throne. This did not mean that its holder shared the tsar’s supreme authority. Strez ruled with considerable independence in Macedonia, while Peter enjoyed an exceptionally powerful position under Michael II Asen, but neither is attested as a co-ruler. The dignity conferred rank and dynastic prestige; the actual political or territorial power of an individual holder arose from his particular circumstances.

Strez belonged to the Asen dynasty, was a nephew of Tsar Kaloyan through his sister, and was probably Boril’s brother. There is no evidence that he held high rank before 1207, and the claim that Kaloyan designated him as heir lacks support in the sources. After the tsar’s death, Strez opposed Boril and fled with his followers to Stefan the First-Crowned. The Serbian ruler protected him, entered into a ritual brotherhood with him, and helped him establish himself in the fortress of Prosek. A substantial part of southwestern Bulgaria and Macedonia then went over to the claimant.

Strez later broke his alliance with Serbia and reached an understanding with Boril, whose supremacy he probably acknowledged only formally. He remained an autonomous regional lord and acted more often as an ally than as a subordinate official. Ecclesiastical documents from Macedonia preserve memories of his rule and harsh methods. In 1212 the Latin emperor Henry counted him among his most dangerous opponents. After unsuccessful operations against the Kingdom of Thessalonica, Strez joined the allied campaign against Serbia in 1214. St Sava visited his camp, and Strez died soon afterwards, probably by violence. His lands encompassed much of Macedonia between the regions of Veroia and Skopje. His title is recorded only in a copy of the Bulgarian Synodikon and was most probably granted by Boril as an instrument of political reconciliation.

Sebastokrator Alexander belonged to the family of Ivan Asen I and was the brother of Ivan Asen II. He probably accompanied the future tsar into exile after Boril’s accession and took part in the recovery of the throne in 1218. An uncertain interpretation places him in command of Bulgarian forces resisting a Hungarian incursion in 1232. He unquestionably occupied a very high position at his brother’s court, while references in the Synodikon and in several commemorative lists suggest exceptional influence. His title was probably granted by Ivan Asen II and at that time stood directly below the tsar, since no Bulgarian despots are known from the same period. There is no reliable evidence that Alexander governed the region of Sredets.

Sebastokrator Peter is known only from Michael II Asen’s treaty with Dubrovnik of 1253. He was married to the tsar’s sister Anna-Theodora and probably received his title in connection with the marriage. The document presents him as the second man in the state: his name appears beside that of the tsar, and his lands and people are mentioned separately. His possessions were probably situated west of Tarnovo. Peter may have acted as regent or chief adviser to the young ruler, but this remains conjectural. He disappears from the sources after 1253 and may have died before the murder of Michael II Asen. His daughter married Shishman, the lord of Vidin, and from that union descended the later Shishman ruling line.

Sebastokrator Kaloyan is known from the inscriptions and donor portraits in the Boyana Church, completed in 1259. The inscription calls him a cousin of Constantine Tikh Asen and a grandson of “the holy Stefan, king of Serbia,” usually identified as Stefan the First-Crowned. Kaloyan probably supported Constantine Tikh in the struggle for the throne and received his title and possessions around Sredets from him. His wife Desislava is portrayed beside him, but their origins and any possible descendants remain unknown. Kaloyan should not be identified with Koloman II Asen, and there is no basis for regarding him as the son of Sebastokrator Alexander. His case therefore provides no evidence for hereditary transmission of the title.

The position of Sebastokrator Radoslav is less clear. He was a brother of Tsar Smilets and sought support in Byzantium after the ruler’s death. At the head of Byzantine troops he attacked the lands of Despot Eltimir near Kran, but was defeated, captured, and blinded before being returned to his wife at the imperial court. The Byzantine account calls him “τῶν Βουλγάρων σεβαστοκράτωρ,” which could also mean “sebastokrator of the Bulgarians.” The same text, however, states that Andronikos II Palaiologos confirmed his dignity. This permits the title to be understood as Bulgarian and as originally granted by Smilets, although the matter cannot be considered definitively settled.

No Bulgarian sebastokrator is securely attested after the end of the thirteenth century. The regional rulers of fourteenth-century Macedonia belonged to the Serbian political and court system and cannot be counted among the dignitaries of the Tarnovo Empire. A Slavonic rite for the investiture of a despot and caesar likewise omits the sebastokrator, but this silence is not decisive because the title is also absent from the Serbian version despite securely attested Serbian holders. The dignity was probably never formally abolished; rather, it ceased to be granted in fourteenth-century Bulgaria and was gradually displaced by the title of despot.