Editing Manuel I Komnenos (section)

==Notes==
{{refbegin}}
{{Cnote|a|The mood that prevailed before the end of 1147 is best conveyed by a verse [[encomium]] to Manuel (one of the poems included in a list transmitted under the name of Theodore Prodromos in ''Codex Marcianus graecus XI.22'' known as ''[[Manganeios Prodromos]]''), which was probably an imperial commission, and must have been written shortly after the Germans had crossed the [[Bosporus]]. Here Conrad is accused of wanting to take Constantinople by force, and to install a Latin patriarch (''Manganeios Prodromos'', no 20.1).<ref name="M49">Jeffreys-Jeffreys, ''The "Wild Beast from the West"'', 102<br/>* P. Magdalino, ''The Empire of Manuel I Komnenos'', 49</ref>}}
{{Cnote|b|According to [[Paul Magdalino]], one of Manuel's primary goals was a partition of Italy with the German empire, in which Byzantium would get the [[Adriatic coast]]. His unilateral pursuit, however, antagonized the new German emperor, Frederick Barbarossa, whose own plans for imperial restoration ruled out any partnership with Byzantium. Manuel was thus obliged to treat Frederick as his main enemy, and to form a web of relationships with other western powers, including the papacy, his old enemy, the Norman kingdom, Hungary, several magnates and cities throughout Italy, and, above all, the crusader states.<ref name="M194"/>}}
{{Cnote|c|Magdalino underscores that, whereas John had removed the Rupenid princes from power in Cilicia twenty years earlier, Manuel allowed Toros to hold most of his strongholds he had taken, and effectively restored only the coastal area to imperial rule. From Raynald, Manuel secured recognition of imperial suzerainty over Antioch, with the promise to hand over the citadel, to instal a [[Patriarch of Antioch|patriarch]] sent from Constantinople (not actually implemented until 1165–66), and to provide troops for the emperor's service, but nothing seems to have been said about the reversion of Antioch to direct imperial rule. According to Magdalino, this suggests that Manuel had dropped this demand on which both his grandfather and father insisted.<ref name="M67"/> For his part, historian [[Zachary Nugent Brooke]] believes that the victory of Christianity against Nur ad-Din was made impossible, since both Greeks and Latins were concerned primarily with their own interests. He characterises the policy of Manuel as "short-sighted", because "he lost a splendid opportunity of recovering the former possessions of the Empire, and by his departure threw away most of the actual fruits of his expedition".<ref name="Br482">Z. N. Brooke, ''A History of Europe, from 911 to 1198'', 482</ref> According to [[Piers Paul Read]], Manuel's deal with Nur ad-Din was for the Latins another expression of Greeks' [[perfidy]].<ref name="R239"/>}}
{{Cnote|d|Alexios had been ordered to bring soldiers, but he merely brought his empty ships to Brindisi.<ref name="B115"/>}}
{{Cnote|e|In 1155 Hadrian sent legates to Manuel, with a letter for Basil, Archbishop of Thessaloniki, in which he exhorted that bishop to procure the reünion of the churches. Basil answered that there was no division between the Greeks and Latins, since they held the same faith and offered the same sacrifice. "As for the causes of scandal, weak in themselves, that have separated us from each other", he added, "your Holiness can cause them to cease, by your own extended authority and the help of the Emperor of the West."<ref name="AVII">Abbé Guettée, ''The Papacy'', [https://web.archive.org/web/20040322110754/http://www.geocities.com/trvalentine/orthodox/guettee10.html Chapter VII]</ref>}}
{{Cnote|f|This probably meant that Amalric repeated Baldwin's assurances regarding the status of Antioch as an imperial fief.<ref name="M74"/>}}
{{Cnote|g|According to Michael Angold, after the controversy of 1166 Manuel took his responsibilities very seriously, and tightened his grip over the church. 1166 was also the year in which Manuel first referred in his legislation to his role as the disciplinarian of the church (''epistemonarkhes'').<ref name="An99">M. Angold, ''Church and Society under the Komneni'', 99</ref>}}
{{refend}}