Aniketos metropolitan of Tomis (tenth/eleventh century)
Obverse
Potent cross with two transverse bars (X at first crossing); cross standing on three steps with fleurons rising from base (to first transverse bar). Traces of a circular inscription along circumference. Border of dots.
ΣΩ.Λ,
Κύριε βοήθει τῷ σῷ δούλῳ
Reverse
Inscription of four lines, decoration above. Two pellets between lines 2 and 3. No visible border.
·
ΑΝΙ
ΚΗΤΜΗ
··
ΤΡΟΠΟΛΙ
ΤΟΜΕΣ
Ἀνικήτῳ μητροπολίτῃ Τόμεως
Obverse
Potent cross with two transverse bars (X at first crossing); cross standing on three steps with fleurons rising from base (to first transverse bar). Traces of a circular inscription along circumference. Border of dots.
ΣΩ.Λ,
Κύριε βοήθει τῷ σῷ δούλῳ
Reverse
Inscription of four lines, decoration above. Two pellets between lines 2 and 3. No visible border.
·
ΑΝΙ
ΚΗΤΜΗ
··
ΤΡΟΠΟΛΙ
ΤΟΜΕΣ
Ἀνικήτῳ μητροπολίτῃ Τόμεως
| Accession number | BZS.1955.1.4801 |
|---|---|
| Diameter | 20.0 mm |
| Previous Editions | DO Seals 1, no. 80.1. |
Translation
Κύριε βοήθει τῷ σῷ δούλῳ Ἀνικήτῳ μητροπολίτῃ Τόμεως.
Lord, help your servant Aniketos metropolitan of Tomis.
Bibliography
- Catalogue of the Byzantine Seals at Dumbarton Oaks and at the Fogg Museum of Art, Vol. 1: Italy, North of the Balkans, North of the Black Sea (Open in Zotero)
- Nicephori archiepiscopi Constantinopolitani Opuscula historica (Open in Zotero)
- Oriens Christianus (Open in Zotero)
- Notitiae Episcopatuum Ecclesiae Constantinopolitanae (Open in Zotero)
- De Administrando Imperio (Open in Zotero)
- Ioannis Scylitzae Synopsis historiarum (Open in Zotero)
- Byzantinische Bleisiegel aus Rumänien (Open in Zotero)
Commentary
We know little about the medieval history of this Black Sea port town (near present-day Constanța). It is called a χωρίον by Patriarch Nikephoros (Opuscala, 41). Lequiens's Oriens christianus mentions no prelate after the sixth century, yet the see continued to be mentioned as the archbishopric of Scythia Minor in the ninth century: notitia no. 5, Darrouzès, Notitiae, 265, line 45; all later notitiae ignore it. With the advance of John Tzimiskes against the Russians in Bulgaria (971), we know that the inhabitants of Konstanteia (a port mentioned in De Adm. Imp., chap. 9, line 99) submitted to the emperor (Skylitzes, 301). The archaeological remains also indicate a new Byzantine occupation o fTomis/Constanța after 971, but the Byzantine presence was then of much less importance than in the early Byzantine period: for example, there are only three seals from the tenth-twelfth centuries, as opposed to about a hundred and fifty for the period before the seventh century: I. Barnea, "Byzantinische Bleisiegel aus Rumänien," Βυζατντινά 13/1 (1985) 298-300.
This is flimsy evidence. And a "metropolis" of Tomis is attested only in the problematic iconoclastic notitia (Darrouzès, Notitiae, no. 3, line 642). But since the testimony of our two seals of metropolitans of Tomis is unequivocal, we must assume that this was a new metropolis, whose name never entered the official lists of Constantinople--as was nearly the case with the orthodox see of Hungary, Τουρκία, cf. DO Seals 1, § 36.