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.

Alexios I Komnenos created the title after he came to power in 1081. The emperor had already promised the rank of caesar to Nikephoros Melissenos, but he wanted to give a higher place to his brother Isaac Komnenos. He therefore formed the title sebastokrator from the Greek sebastos, meaning “venerable” or “august,” and autokrator, one of the main parts of the imperial title system. At first, this rank stood just below the basileus, the Byzantine emperor, and it had a strongly family-based and almost imperial character.

In Byzantium, sebastokrator was at first reserved for the emperor’s brothers and sons. Alexios III Angelos broadened its use by giving it to sons-in-law, among them Stefan Nemanjić, the future Stefan the First-Crowned. The title continued in the Empire of Nicaea, but after Byzantine rule was restored in Constantinople in 1261 it slowly lost its family exclusiveness. Constantine Palaiologos was the last brother of a ruling emperor to hold it, and later it was even given to the Rhodope ruler Momchil. The last Byzantine holders came from the Kantakouzenos family, and by the end of the fourteenth century the title was no longer in use.

Outside Byzantium, the title spread in several ways. There is only one certain mention from the Latin Empire: a papal letter calls Conon de Béthune sebastokrator. Stefan the First-Crowned received the rank from a Byzantine emperor, so he cannot be treated as the holder of an independently Serbian title. Serbian rulers only begin appointing sebastokrators after Stefan Dušan was crowned emperor. In both Bulgaria and Serbia, the rank was mainly honorary, and in time it was replaced by the more lasting title of despot.

The first sebastokrator of the Second Bulgarian Empire who can be identified with certainty was Strez, whose title belongs to Boril’s reign. After him came 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 exact meaning of the title are still uncertain. Every securely identified holder was linked by blood or marriage to the ruling family.

Sebastokrator was a title, not a fixed state office. In Byzantine court practice, it did not carry permanent administrative or military duties, although the emperor could separately place a sebastokrator in charge of an army. Some scholars have described the Bulgarian sebastokrators as governors of large frontier provinces with several sebastoi under them, but the sources do not support that idea. Sebastos and sebastokrator were separate titles, connected only by their names and by their position in the same rank order.

Some Bulgarian sebastokrators did hold land and authority over people who depended on them. Michael II Asen’s charter to Dubrovnik, for instance, refers to Peter’s lands and people. Those rights may have come instead from Peter’s own estates and from immunity privileges, which limited the power of ordinary royal officials. They do not prove that the title itself gave provincial rule, judicial power, or military command.

The sebastokrator was probably at first the highest rank below the Bulgarian tsar. After the title of despot was adopted, the order became tsar, despot, and sebastokrator. As in Byzantium, the rank was most likely given personally by the ruler. Strez, Alexander, and Radoslav were royal brothers or close relatives of the dynasty, Peter was the tsar’s brother-in-law, and Kaloyan was the ruling monarch’s cousin.

There is no proof that the title was inherited. The idea that Kaloyan inherited it from his father Alexander depends on rejected family-tree reconstructions and on the old identification of Kaloyan with Koloman II Asen. No Bulgarian sebastokrator is known to have received the rank from his father. In Byzantium, one man could keep or combine several titles, as the case of Momchil shows, but there is no evidence that Bulgarians did this too. Nor is there reliable proof that any Bulgarian sebastokrator lost his title; simply leaving a name out of the Synodikon is not enough to show that.

The Bulgarian investiture ceremony is unknown. In Byzantium, promotion to sebastokrator was treated as similar to promotion to despot or caesar, with the main differences shown in the insignia, that is, the visible signs of rank. At the Byzantine court, a sebastokrator could even be addressed as “ἡ βασιλεία σου,” a phrase 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 linked to the graphē, a written order, and were signed in blue ink; Bulgarian practice may have been similar, but this cannot be shown.

Byzantine insignia show how close the title stood to imperial power. Early sebastokrators wore a circlet set with precious stones and pearls. It was less elaborate than the basileus’s crown and did not have the crown’s closed top. By the middle of the fourteenth century, ceremonial descriptions mention a red-and-gold skiadion, or court hat, a red tunic, and blue stockings and shoes. Eagles on the shoes, horse gear, and other furnishings were also mainly linked with blue. At the same time, the dress of the sebastokrator was increasingly made to look more like that of the despot.

For Bulgaria, the only detailed image 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, in dark blue or dark green. The garment is fastened with a belt of metal plaques and has decorated bands around the sleeves. His wife Desislava is shown with a circlet, pearls, and a richly decorated robe. The fact that green is so prominent does not prove that Bulgaria had its own separate system, since green sebastokratorial clothing is also known in Byzantium.

In Bulgaria, the title helped bring powerful relatives into the circle around the throne. That did not mean its holder shared the tsar’s highest authority. Strez ruled with considerable freedom in Macedonia, and Peter held an unusually strong position under Michael II Asen, but neither is shown as a co-ruler. The rank gave status and dynastic prestige; any real political or territorial power came from the holder’s own circumstances.

Strez belonged to the Asen dynasty, was Tsar Kaloyan’s nephew through his sister, and was probably Boril’s brother. There is no evidence that he held a high rank before 1207, and the claim that Kaloyan named him as heir is not supported by 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 ritual brotherhood with him, and helped him establish himself in the fortress of Prosek. A large part of southwestern Bulgaria and Macedonia then went over to the claimant.

Strez later broke with Serbia and came to an agreement with Boril, whose supremacy he probably recognized only in form. He stayed an independent regional lord and more often acted as an ally than as a subordinate official. Church records from Macedonia preserve memories of his rule and his harsh methods. In 1212 the Latin emperor Henry counted him among his most dangerous enemies. 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 after, probably by violence. His lands covered 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 likely granted by Boril as a way to repair political relations.

Sebastokrator Alexander belonged to the family of Ivan Asen I and was the brother of Ivan Asen II. He probably went with the future tsar into exile after Boril came to power and took part in recovering the throne in 1218. One uncertain interpretation places him in command of Bulgarian forces resisting a Hungarian attack in 1232. He certainly held a very high place at his brother’s court, and references in the Synodikon and in several commemorative lists suggest that he had unusual influence. His title was probably given 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 ruled 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 because of that marriage. The document places him as the second man in the state: his name appears beside the tsar’s, and his lands and people are listed separately. His possessions were probably west of Tarnovo. Peter may have served as regent or chief adviser to the young ruler, but that remains only a guess. He disappears from the sources after 1253 and may have died before Michael II Asen was murdered. His daughter married Shishman, the lord of Vidin, and from that marriage came 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 taken to mean Stefan the First-Crowned. Kaloyan probably supported Constantine Tikh in the struggle for the throne and received his title and his lands around Sredets from him. His wife Desislava is shown with him, but their background and any possible children are unknown. Kaloyan should not be identified with Koloman II Asen, and there is no basis for treating him as the son of Sebastokrator Alexander. His case therefore does not prove that the title could pass from father to son.

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. Leading Byzantine troops, he attacked the lands of Despot Eltimir near Kran, but was defeated, captured, and blinded before being sent back 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, says that Andronikos II Palaiologos confirmed his dignity. This allows the title to be read as Bulgarian and as originally granted by Smilets, though the matter cannot be settled for certain.

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 promotion of a despot and caesar also leaves out the sebastokrator, but that silence is not conclusive because the title is also missing from the Serbian version even though Serbian holders are securely known. The dignity was probably never officially abolished. Instead, it simply stopped being granted in fourteenth-century Bulgaria and was gradually replaced by the title of despot.

This very high rank was created in 1081 by Emperor Alexios I Komnenos. He made it for his brother Isaac, so he could stand just below the emperor. At first, it was mostly for close family members of the ruler.

Later, the rank spread beyond Byzantium. In the Second Bulgarian Empire, it was given to royal relatives such as brothers, cousins, and sons-in-law. It was mostly a sign of honor and family status, not a fixed job. Some holders had land and power of their own, but the rank itself did not make them governors.

The rank was important in the 1200s, especially in Bulgaria. By the late 1300s it had fallen out of use and was replaced by another high court title.