Family Relations and Family Law in the Byzantine Countryside of the Eleventh Century:

An Analysis of the Praktikon of 1073

Author(s): Gennadij G. Litavrin
Source: Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 44 (1990), pp. 187-193
Published by: Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1291627
Accessed: 18-05-2019 11:22 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to Dumbarton Oaks Papers

This content downloaded from 31.205.3.142 on Sat, 18 May 2019 11:22:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Family Relations and Family Law in the
Byzantine Countryside of the Eleventh Century:
An Analysis of the Praktikon of 1073
GENNADIJ G. LITAVRIN

The analysis presented here is based primarily the praktikon of 1073 were discussed in my book,
on the famous JEagXTLXOb tfig naCa6o0wg of published more than ten years ago.4
1073.1 This is a detailed inventory of a state prop- To begin with, I am assuming that the praktikon
erty located in the episkepsis (fiscal district) ta Alo- was compiled in accordance with the formulary (or
peka, near Miletos, and transferred to the proto- one of the formularies) used by the Genikon. The
proedros Andronikos Doukas in accordance with a purpose of the state official-the anagrapheus or
chrysobull of Michael VII.2 In its substance, the epoptes-was first of all to safeguard the interests
praktikon forms a fragment of the state tax cadas- of the fisc. To achieve this end he followed, when
ter that, following the emperor's order, takes into listing the families of paroikoi, the uniform outline
consideration all the changes that occurred in the of the model inventory, the main items of which
estate up to the time that the chrysobull was issued. were: (1) the name of the head of the family, i.e.,
The praktikon as a type of official document has the master of the household (stasis), responsible for
been thoroughly studied by many scholars, espe- the payment of fiscal levies; (2) the name of the
cially by Angeliki Laiou in her book on the peas- master's main heir, who had to assume the obliga-
antry in the late Byzantine Empire, in which the tions of the head of the family after his death; (3)
author made a number of extremely valuable de- other persons entitled to succession (in order of
mographic observations concerning the paroikoi.3 priority), who were indicated if special family cir-
My purpose is to develop her observations, since cumstances so required; (4) the status of the head
Laiou dealt primarily with the sources of the of the household (as related to his property and
thirteenth through fifteenth centuries, and only the fisc) as well as the number and kind of livestock
occasionally and comparatively drew upon the owned (horses, donkeys, oxen, cows, pigs); and (5)
eleventh-century documents, including the prak- the amount of tax imposed upon the stasis, ex-
tikon of 1073. pressed in monetary terms.
I will dwell, first and foremost, on the data con- The official, however, combined formalistic and
tained in this source concerning the structure of legalistic principles of documentation with a real-
the paroikos family, family relations, and the law ofistic approach: for instance, he deviated from the
the family. As for the paroikos' right to property standardized model when forced by the peculiari-
and his relations with the fisc and the lord, I will ties of the family in question.5 The importance of
leave these questions aside, since these aspects of the state cadaster, as well as of the fragment ex-
tracted from it, is not limited to the fiscal data it
Translated from the Russian by A. P. Kazhdan contains. The cadaster and the praktikon alike de-
scribe not only the rights of the fisc but also those
ButJcavrTLV6t yyQaLCa Tg tovfig 1IdT[to, B.' AtiooCaov XELt-
TovQyOv, ed. M. Nustazopoulou-Pelekidou (Athens, 1980), pp.
11-13. 4G. G. Litavrin, The Byzantine Society and State in the Tenth and
Eleventh Centuries: Problems of History between 976 and 1081 (in
S BuCaTLVI yy-aY a ti g govflg -IdT[Lot, A.' 'Avtro-
XQaTOQtXd, ed. E. L. Vranouse (Athens, 1980), pp. 4-8. Russian) (Moscow, 1977), 53-66, 217-20, etc.
3Angeliki E. Laiou-Thomadakis, Peasant Society in the Late Byz-
I In this article I do not discuss all the arguments arising from
antine Empire: A Social and Demographic Study (Princeton, 1977).
comparative analysis, since that would be too lengthy.

This content downloaded from 31.205.3.142 on Sat, 18 May 2019 11:22:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 188 GENNADIJ G. LITAVRIN

of the paroikoi themselveswidows," that is, their

to their mothers, and five
property andresulted
to
from divisions of households.
succession; they regulate relations within the fam-
ily and protect, among otherOn thethings,
other hand, thethe headsrights
of 23 households
of
remained
the widow, children, and unchanged-they were
grandchildren oflisted
thein the
same way
head of the family from the as in theof
claims survey preceding therel-
collateral most re-
atives and affinal kin. cent cadaster. In other words, the indication con-
cerning the succession of the stasis was inserted
The praktikon of 1073 contains a list of the fam-
ilies of paroikoi of eight villages, usually calledinto the cadaster only once, after the change of
master; in the next survey, the note concerning the
proasteia: 13 households in the oikoproasteion Baris,6
10 in the proasteion Olynthos, 7 in the proasteion former head of the household was omitted.
Gamma, 5 in the proasteion Berboulidion, and 13 If this observation is correct, we acquire a means
in the proasteion Galaides. In three villages prop-of establishing relative age distinctions among the
erty seems to be of smaller scale: two families inheads of households. It goes without saying that
the proasteion Melanoudion, one family in the cadasters have other data that allow us to draw
proasteion Mantrakle, and one nearby (line 276). conclusions concerning the age of members of
The proasteion (also characterized as chorion) Pri-families listed in the inventory: the mention
nos is described as "uninhabited" (line 278). All inof married sons, of the master's grandchildren, of
all, 51 households are listed in the inventory, com-married granddaughters, and so on. But evidence
prising 114 persons of whom 63 are male and 51 of this kind is rare, and if it is absent, the above-
female. Twenty-eight households are each held bymentioned note (or the lack of such a note) in the
a complete conjugal pair which possesses full cadaster concerning the recent replacement of the
rights on the stasis; one of the households includeshead of the stasis remains the only indication that
two conjugal pairs, one of which is subordinate toallows us to establish the approximate age of the
the head of household. Of the other 23 house- head of the family.
holds, twelve are headed by widows (one more Fiscal cadasters in the Byzantine Empire were
usually revised every fifteenth year (fifteen years
widow is listed as living in the family of her
mother-in-law), five by widowers, two by single forming the so-called cycle of indiction). Accord-
men, three by young unmarried men, and one by the head of the family in a stasis that did not
ingly,
an unmarried woman. In other words, 45 percent undergo a change of master before the most re-
of households are held by incomplete families.cent
In fiscal survey coulid not be younger than at
15 households there are no children; as for the least thirty or thirty-five. We may assume that in
households headed by widows, in only one of themour case the most recent cadaster on whose basis
are no children mentioned. the praktikon was compiled had been issued in
Some principles of recording followed by the of- 1072 and the preceding one in 1057. Those who
came into possession of staseis had to be at least
ficial are not evident at first sight. In 28 cases, the
name of the head of household is accompanied by fifteen, reaching the so-called "second age of ma-
a note indicating that he or she is a widow(er), son turity" (the "first age," that of full-fledged legal
or daughter, brother- or son-in-law of a certain rights, being that of twenty-five). Thus, when the
person, whose name is given. The only explana- survey does not indicate replacement of the master
tion of such a selective approach that I can suggest of the stasis, we may assume that the head of the
is that the replacement of the head of householdfamily belonged to an older generation. Unfortu-
took place on the eve of the most recent cadaster; nately, this conclusion cannot be reversed: we have
this supplementary note must indicate from whomno way of calculating the age of the person who
had inherited the household in cases when the sur-
the stasis was inherited or from what family divi-
vey mentioned his or her predecessor-the solu-
sion it originated.7 At the same time, this note
tion must depend on an unknown factor, the age
would legalize the rights of the new master. Thus,
of 28 new heads of households, nine succeeded to at which the preceding master had died. I suggest
their fathers, seven their husbands, seven "the that in approximately 40 percent of cases the
heads of households were relatively young peas-
6The total number is 14 families, but judging by the tax paid ants (under 30-35).
by the entire village, one family of aktemones was missing in In this connection I would like to emphasize a
the cadaster.
7Cf. Laiou, Peasant Society, 78. detail reflected in the praktikon and typical of

This content downloaded from 31.205.3.142 on Sat, 18 May 2019 11:22:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 FAMILY RELATIONS AND FAMILY LAW 189

the organization and knowledge ofmale

sis of the descendence
Genikon: did not exclud
its functionaries obtained information about the the widow (and mother). Following the death of
name of the peasant responsible for the tax pay- her spouse, it was she who became mistress of the
ment (in other words, the head of household)stasis. dur-It was her name that was put in the cadaster
ing the period of validity (the fifteen-year indic-
right after her husband's. If the name of the wife
does not appear in the list, the only explanation is
tion) of the current cadaster and during the period
of validity of the following fiscal survey (the that
otherthe head of the household had no spouse. Ac-
fifteen years) when the successor (whose name was to the praktikon of 1073, five widows as-
cording
already known) was supposed to be vested with the the place of head of the stasis even before
sumed
rights to the household. It is plausible to surmise
the preceding survey; seven widowed mistresses
that the detailed information stored in the Geni- died in the period between the two surveys; and
kon allowed officials to exercise the rule according
seven women, after having buried their husbands,
to which the master (or his heir) who had aban- were vested with households on the eve of the most
doned an impoverished stasis could return, with- recent cadaster. It happens that the number of
out being deprived of his rights, during the next widows did not change between the two surveys:
thirty-year period.8 there were twelve both at the beginning and at the
The number of successors is defined by the end of the period. They preserved their status as
praktikon in a different way-they can be one, heads of household even if their son or daughter
two, or more; male and female heirs are treated was married.
differently. It is obvious that in each family malesAs for widowers, they can be distinguished from
possessed priority: as a rule, their names precedesingle men (unmarried) only if their children o
those of females. It is obvious as well that the order grandchildren are listed in the praktikon, or if the
of succession was based primarily on the principle text speaks of a priest whose spouse is not named
of lineal descent: from grandfather to father to in the register. However, we can assume that some
son to grandson; the praktikon does not contain a widowers were childless and others had married
single case when a stasis would have been be- their daughters off or gave their sons separate al-
queathed to an uncle, brother, or nephew, that is, lotments. I think that, among the peasants de-
to collateral relatives. Their exclusion from inher- scribed in the praktikon of 1073, five heads of
iting the allotments of paroikoi (and of peasants in households were unquestionably widowers (they
general) seems to be the norm not only in the thir- live with children and/or grandchildren). Two
teenth and fourteenth centuries, but also at thepeasants are single but not young: they are child-
time of this praktikon.9 The right of siblings less (at least, according to the praktikon) but ac-
(brothers and sisters alike) of the head of the quired their staseis long ago. Three masters are
household would come into effect through a claim unmarried young paroikoi who were but recently
on part of the property (via its division) rathervested with their staseis. We can observe a typical
than through inheritance. phenomenon: among the heads of household,
I am confident that families of the paroikoi in- there are two and a half times more widows than
cluded the master's collateral relatives (uncles, widowers. It is plausible to suggest that men died
aunts, nephews), as well as adult brothers and sis- by natural causes or perished earlier than females;
ters, and so on. They simply were not registered it cannot be excluded as well that men entered a
by the surveyors, since they had no right to inheritsecond marriage more frequently than did widows
the stasis and possessed no household of their and that their second wives were not former wid-
own.
ows. The praktikon of 1073 testifies to the fact that
If the family included an older couple, the hus-
the predominant part of the "widow" allotments
band was always considered the head(both
of the stasis.
former, i.e., inherited by children, and ac-
It was not always the case, however, that
tual) hisof
consisted sonstaseis possessed by aktemones. It
(even if he was at hand) became his does
firstnot successor.
seem accidental that two out of three
The principle that arranged inheritance
young on the
single ba- of household inherited their
heads
allotments (characterized as "belonging to akt
8Litavrin, Byzantine Society, 206 f; see also N. Oikonomides,
mones") from widowed mothers. It appears that
"Das Verfalland im 10.-11. Jahrhundert: Verkauf und Besteu-
erung," Fontes Minores 7 (1986), 161-68. poor single man, not only a poor widow, faced o
9Cf. Laiou, Peasant Society, 78, 88. stacles that prevented him from marrying. T

This content downloaded from 31.205.3.142 on Sat, 18 May 2019 11:22:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
190 GENNADIJ G. LITAVRIN

observation sheds some light of Berboulidion

on the (line 163); Leo and John, sons of
"geography"
of "widow" lands. The richest George Sideras (line
village in 170);
our and Leo and George,
prak-
tikon was Galaides: of twelve households there, sons of Maurogeorgios (line 172), in the village of
nine belonged to zeugaratoi, and only three to ak- Galaides. Is it possible to assume that, first, only in
temones. In this village, not a single stasis was held twenty-one families (of a total of 52) were there
by a widow. Some time earlier, two widows lived insons living together with parents; that, second,
the village, but both had died before the latest sur-only in three families were there two sons; and
vey and both left behind indigent ("of aktemones") third, that in no family on the entire estate were
households. One may wonder whether this was thethere three sons or more? Certainly, there must
reason why the widows' sons remained single- have existed quite a few families in which the adult
they could not afford to have a family. On the con-sons left their nests and formed their own house-
trary, Gamma, one of the poorest villages, con-holds. Nevertheless, I suspect that the survey did
sisted almost entirely of "widow" allotments (five not register all the sons of the families. We must
out of seven); they represent, however, a broader take into account that in all the cases in which the
gamut: two households were held by zeugaratoi,names of two sons are given we cannot observe re-
one by a boidatos, and two by aktemones; one moreplacement of the head of the household, that is,
household, also possessed by an aktemon, had re-the heads of families are not young, and accord-
cently belonged to a widow. ingly their sons are probably not minors, and are
As mentioned above, the wife of the head of the able to work. This is why their names were regis-
household was his first heir. The fiscal official, tered in the cadaster, most probably in order of
however, was instructed to indicate at least one seniority. As for their minor siblings, these were
more of the elder couple's principal heirs (besides not included in the list if at least one brother able
the potential widow or widower). First and fore- to work lived in the household.
most, that was the son. It is far from clear, how- Now we must briefly analyze the situation of the
ever, whether minors and infants were regis- wives of adult sons who lived together with their
tered-the question remains open to discussion.'0 parents or with one of them. In the praktikon
The task of the fiscal functionary was to ascertain there is not a single mention of daughters-in-law.
the continuous functioning of the stasis as a fiscal However, it would be misleading to jump to the
unit; this task could not be achieved had the suc- conclusion that all married sons left their parental
cessor (minor or infant) been unable to work on abode. An exceptional case is to be found in the
the land. On the other hand, a minor or an infant survey of the village Gamma: Kale, a widow, lives
could not be deprived of his (her) legal rights to together with her daughter-in-law (nymphe) Anna
the allotment. My analysis of the praktikon of 1073 and grandson John (line 158); it is quite plausible
allows us to surmise that an only son of a paroikos, that Anna's husband (Kale's son) was dead. It is
regardless of his age, was mandatorily listed in the worth noting that Anna's name is placed ahead of
cadaster as his parents' principal heir. If he was a John's, which means that she was thought to have
minor and accordingly unable to work on the land, prior right to the inheritance." This family struc-
the praktikon obligatorily included one more ture may probably be explained by the concur-
member of the family, who was entitled to the in- rence of several factors: the grandson is a minor
heritance after the only son. Such a case is de- or an infant; the widow's household is large ("of
scribed in the paragraph on the village Gamma: zeugaratos"), and the daughter-in-law is the main
the widow Stratego is said to have not only a son laborer in the household who secures the stasis'
(George) but also a daughter (Anna) (line 157)-I ability to pay taxes. It is not the grandson but the
consider her to be George's older sister, already daughter-in-law who assumed the rights of the de-
able to work. ceased son of the household to the potential inher-
Let us now investigate a case of a family withitance. As the mother of a minor, who was (also)
several sons. Can we assume that all of them were entitled to his grandmother's (i.e., his father's)
named in the survey? The praktikon of 1073 con- stasis, she did not threaten her son's situation: even
tains three clauses indicating the names (unques- in the case of a second marriage and the birth of
tionably, in order of seniority) of two male siblings:
Leo and Basil, sons of John Skrinos, in the village"Cf. the observations of Laiou on the 13th-14th century ca-
dasters (the daughter-in-law is always named after her son):
100n the discussion see ibid., 268-69, 293-95. ibid., 106.

This content downloaded from 31.205.3.142 on Sat, 18 May 2019 11:22:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 FAMILY RELATIONS AND FAMILY LAW 191

more children, his primogeniture

survey, probably and property
only owing to the fact that the
father-in-law helped, at his daughter's marriage, to
rights could not be questioned.
I am convinced that in the set up the newin
family stasis by givingthe
which a dowry; the fiscal
official, by
married son lived together with hisnoting the relationship
father or his of Phatyris and
father's widow, other relatives-his spouse,
"Constantine, his son-in-law," stressed the
that the new
daughter-in-law of the elder
stasis
couple,
originated as
fromwell
the father-in-law's
as the material
children of the younger couple (the
assistance. Three other master's
cases are those of the sons-
grandchildren being subordinate
in-law "patrilocally"
members settled:
of thetwo were married to
household)-were not listed in
thethe cadaster.
daughters (lines 144From
and 258) and the third to
a granddaughter
the fiscal point of view, it sufficed to list, of the headthe
besides of the stasis (line
name of the head of the family, the
276). In the name
latter of family
case, the his property is no
wife and their eldest son, the main successors.
described-the praktikon onlyThe
characterizes th
spouse of the son of the family
peasant,and their
George children
Anemotriches, as paroikos proska
will appear in the cadaster only when
themenos, a termhe
thathimself,
could designate (although n
after the death of his parents, becomes
necessarily) a recently an inde-
settled paroikos. Three
pendent head of a household. other mentions of gambroi refer to well-off fam
The legal situation appears lies
betterof zeugaratoi.
attested. I assumeI as-that the praktiko
sume that even the name oflisted
theallelder daughter
the sons-in-law living on (or
the estate. If th
daughters) of the head of the stasis is
assumption entered
correct, one the can ca-
conclude that well
daster only in three cases: when shefamilies
off peasant was the only
had better chances of marry
heiress; when her brothering (who always
off their daughters enjoyed
and finding gambroi.
priority in the right of succession
Let us nowregardless
return to theof his
status of daughters in
age) was a minor; and finally,
the when
family. Asshe got mar-
mentioned above, they were infre
ried and her husband settledquently
in the family
included in theof list his
of family member
in-laws. In such families, after the two
aside from deathmarriedofdaughters,
the only six othe
head of the household, the right
thygaterestoappear
theinstasis ac- which names a
the praktikon
corded by law to the daughterleast was
twentytransferred
sons. This enormous todisproportion o
the son-in-law, her husband,thewho, in the new
sex composition (8:21)cir-
cannot be explained
cumstances, became the head of by
either the family.
higher I sur-(boys were bett
female mortality
mise that the son-in-law livingcared
withfor)his
or by reference
wife's to the "sex ratio" (in th
family
was, unlike the daughter-in-law, necessarily
area of Thessalonica in the men-
fourteenth century th
tioned in the cadaster: first, sex because of the
ratio vacillated need
between 115to and 108).12 In
note in the survey the name of
other the
words, thefuture head
number of women ofin the
enrolled
the stasis, and second, because of the
praktikon of 1073need to pro-
is understated at the expense,
tect the rights of his wife, the daughter
first of of
all, of daughters andthe for-
daughters-in-law who
mer master and the mother continued of their to livegrandchildren
patrilocally. In my opinion, about
who were, together with her, legitimate
half heirs isto
of the female population the
missing from the
household. Had his wife died and the former son- praktikon.
in-law married a second wife, the threat to the chil- Grandsons and granddaughters are rarely men-
dren of the first marriage would be more consid-tioned as well: only one grandson and one grand-
erable than in the case of the daughter-in-lawdaughter appear in the entire praktikon. This ab-
(whose chances for a second marriage were low), normality can hardly be believed to reflect reality.
and therefore his legal status (son-in-law livingIt is noteworthy that both representatives of the
with the parents of his wife) should be indicated third generation are named in special circum-
from the very beginning, right after his entry intostances: in the village of Gamma, engonos John is
the new household, that is, during the first fiscalpreceded by his female relatives only-nymphe
survey. In such cases the son-in-law's name ap- Anna and the head of the stasis, Kale (line 158); it
peared at the end of the list of family members. is most probable that both his father (Kale's son)
The praktikon of 1073 registers the names of and his grandfather Photeinos died, and John be-
four sons-in-law (gambroi). One case is exceptional:
came the legitimate heir to the household. In the
Constantine, gambros of George Phatyris (line 168),other case, granddaughter Anna is mentioned to-
has an independent household, and the relation-
ship between the two men was mentioned in the 12Cf. ibid., 269, 295.

This content downloaded from 31.205.3.142 on Sat, 18 May 2019 11:22:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 192 GENNADIJ G. LITAVRIN

gether with her husband John In my opinion,

(line the276),
praktikonandcontains
wefour in-
have seen above that thedisputable son-in-law living
cases of family in one
division and the that can
house of his parents-in-law was
be questioned. Thementioned to-
first division took place in the
gether with (and after) his village
wife.of Olynthos:
Gambros George,Johnthe son of
was John Sa
the potential head of the ponas ("soap-maker")-probably
household, the more the elder
so son
that Anna's father Michael separatedand
from theAnna's grand-
family, presumably during hi
father George Anemotriches were
father's lifetime widowers
because of his marriage(at(he has a
any rate, their spouses are not
wife and mentioned
daughter); instasis
then his father's the was in
praktikon). It is quite possible herited by histhat
widowedthe rights
mother Maria, whoof lived
men married into their wives' families were in di- there with her (younger?) son Michael; both stas-
rect dependence upon the situation of their wives eis-the paternal one and that of George, th
and children. separate one-are well-off, each posesssing a zeu
Summing up this analysis of the structure of garion
the (lines 149-50), whatever that means. We can
paroikoi families described in the praktikonassume
of that the late John Saponas owned two zeu-
garia. Even though both staseis are "of zeugaratoi,
1073 and of family law as revealed by it, I would
the filial share seems to be less well-off than the
like to emphasize once more that the cadaster
omitted a substantial number of both blood rela- paternal one. (The paternal stasis pays three nom-
ismata, three miliaresia, and ten folleis, whereas
tives and relatives by affinity of the heads of house-
hold; they were omitted because they were we ex-can calculate that the payment of the filial share
cluded from the right of succession or because, was
at only a nomisma and a half).
this time, it was premature to define them as up-The second case appears in the same village of
coming successors-either they were minors, Olynthos.
or The survey for this village mentions
those who had priority were still alive. The cadas-
four times the horophylakes ("guardians of the
boundary/landmark"): the late Basil horophylax;
ter omitted all the collateral relatives (both male
Kyriakos horophylax, who had a wife and a son,
and female), the wives of the sons who lived in the
households of their parents and grandparents, the George; John, Basil's son, who owned-after his
sisters of adult brothers and the sisters of older father's (recent) demise-the paternal household
heiresses, the children of subordinate couples andand lived there with his son, also named Kyriakos;
grandchildren of the heads of households (save forand finally, a certain George, the son of the horo-
exceptional cases), and so on. The omission of thephylax (lines 151-52). Who is this "horophylax"
female section of the household seems to have named in the latter clause? Obviously he is not
Kyriakos, whose son George is separately men-
been more significant than that of its male coun-
terpart. Therefore I suppose that first of alltioned-it
the would not be possible for two sons of
real ratio of the male and female population thewas
same Kyriakos to bear the same first name. It
is hard
not 55.2:44.8 (as it follows from the figures of the to believe that in the small proasteion there
was
praktikon accepted at their face value) but another "horophylax" besides Basil, whether
was
closer to the regular sex composition, that is,we interpret the word as denoting an office or as a
fe-
sobriquet (family name). It is also hard to accept
males prevail over males by one or two percent,
and second, that the real number of paroikoithat
whothe fiscal official who tried to achieve clarity
lived on the estate was at least twice that listed in and precision in the document of taxation (the
the praktikon: not 114 but 220-250 men andclause "George, the son of the horophylax" was to
women. In other words, the average size of the pa-indicate the new tenant, and the note "son of X"
roikoi family calculated by Laiou as consisting of must unequivocally define from whom and on
four persons in the thirteenth and fourteenthwhich ground the stasis was transferred) kept in
centuries'3 appears, in the light of this analysis, to mind an alien person and described him in such a
be a low rather than a high estimate. slovenly way. Therefore I suggest that both George
In conclusion, I would like to touch upon two and John were sons of the late "horophylax" Basil
topics: the nature of the division of paroikoi fami- and that George separated himself during his fa-
lies and a certain evidence of the survival of the ther's lifetime. John, a widower (his son, Kyriakos,
lived with him), inherited the paternal stasis,
village community in the estate conferred upon
Andronikos Doukas. whereas George was single-a childless widower
or unmarried man. So far as the paternal stasis is
13Ibid., 7, 40 f. concerned (it now belongs to John), the praktikon

This content downloaded from 31.205.3.142 on Sat, 18 May 2019 11:22:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 FAMILY RELATIONS AND FAMILY LAW 193

states that "it used to be of boidatos," ilies in the that is, of

praktikon it1073
be- are at the same time
came (as we can judge on the basis the mostofprolific,
the possess more manpower; this
payment)
"of aktemon." This means that its status decreased. statement also refers to well-off staseis ("of zeuga-
The separated stasis owned by George is alsoratos") "of that belonged to widows. The accommoda-
aktemon." It is quite plausible to assume thattion theof sons-in-law by households of this kind re-
division of the stasis, in this case also, led to the flects an understandable desire to avoid the
decrease of the peasants' material status. division of property. The rich household ha
The third case of family division has already ability to attract and absorb new manpower.
been described: George Phatyris, from the village Finally, the last question: whether we find
of Galaides, married his daughter Eirene to a cer- of the village community in the estate conf
tain Constantine (line 168) and provided his son- upon Andronikos Doukas. Contrary to my
in-law with the means of starting a new household. ous opinion (I questioned the existence of de
Even though both families are well-off, the pater- signs of the village community in the prakt
nal stasis seems to be richer and pays higher taxes: 1073),15 I am now inclined to give a positive
3 against Constantine's 21/2 nomismata. In any to this question. The evidence for this m
event, the division weakened the initial household. debated institution I now see in the office of the so-
The fourth case also took place in the village of called horophylax that used to be held by boidatos
Galaides: Leo, brother of Sideras ("ironsmith"), Basil, who was replaced by 1073 by Kyriakos. I hy-
married and, probably because of this, separated pothesize that Kyriakos was elected to this com-
from George Sideras, who lived with two sons. Pre- munity assignment after Basil's death. This office,
sumably, in this case also, the division accounts for testified to in Egyptian papyri,16 denoted a "guard-
the subsequent weakening of the economic unit. ian of a boundary/landmark" (Grenzwdichter, ac-
The fifth case is more problematic. My sugges- cording to Preisigke). Due to the paucity of
tion is based only on the analysis of the names of sources, the interpretation of the term is difficult.
the paroikoi involved. In the proasteion Berbouli- I surmise that the "guardian of a boundary,"
dion there was the stasis of a certain John Tza- elected at the community meeting, had to keep
mines, married to an Anna, and another stasis safe not the estate as a unit (owned previously by
held by a widow Anna Tzaminena who lived with- the fisc and, from 1073 onward, by Andronikos
out dependents (lines 164-65); John is character-Doukas), nor the boundaries between those fields
ized as boidatos and Anna possessed a zeugarion. of the peasants that were assigned by the lord to
Anna lost her husband long ago, and John is alsohis paroikoi (this was the function of the lord's bail-
an old tenant. A question arises concerning theiff and not of the paroikoi themselves), but the in-
kind of relationship between John and Anna Tza- tegrity of parcels and pastures owned by the pa-
minena, whose second name testifies to the fact roikoi, that is, the land that peasants (at any rate,
that her husband was a Tzamines. Who was this the zeugaratoi and boidatoi) as hypostatikoi held at
late Tzamines-John's father, brother, uncle, their or full disposal.
nephew? Any of these is possible, since the widow If this is correct, it supports the idea that I de-
Anna could be John's mother, sister-in-law, aunt, et
veloped in my book on Byzantine society and the
cetera. The scarce data contained in the praktikon state in the tenth and eleventh centuries: the pa-
is insufficient to solve this problem. If one of the
roikoi held land under two different conditions. A
two first assumptions is valid, we must conclude part was held from the lord, and for that they paid
that these clauses record a family division and that
him choropakton; another part was held from the
it took place a long time ago. We must concludestate,
as and for that they were obliged to pay a tax.
well that this case reveals a general tendency to-
ward impoverishment and that the separated stasis Academy of Sciences, Moscow
(that of John) was weaker than the "maternal" one.
14 Ibid., 87.
Thus family divisions resulted, as a rule, in an
5See Litavrin, Byzantine Society, 65.
impoverishment of the paroikoi families. To some
16eF. Preisigke, W6rterbuch der griechischen Papyrusurkunden, II
extent, it explains the fact that the wealthiest fam-
(Berlin, 1927), 202.

This content downloaded from 31.205.3.142 on Sat, 18 May 2019 11:22:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms