第236頁(第1/4 頁)

[158]on the chronology cf插ranis，&l;short chronicle&r;347 ff，based on lapros-aantos，nr52，22cfal jirecek，archiv fslavphilol14（1892），259giades arnakis，&l;gregory palaas aong the turks and docunts of his captivity as historical urces&r;，specu 26（1951），111 fand&l;gregory palaas，theand the fall of gallipoli&r;b 22（1952），310 ff，attepts to put the capture of gallipoli arch 1355 on the ground of direct evidence，but this is not possible sce it is well establi射d that the city fell to the turks durg john cantacuzen&r;reigncf插ranis，&l;on the date of the oupation of gallipoli by the turks&r;，bs 16（1955），113 ff，who rightly argues that the city was captured arch 1354

[159]detri cydones，igne pg 154，1013

[160]on the rule of the gattisio lesbos which lasted until the turkish nest 1462 cfiller，essays 313 ff

[161]on the date of the fall of john cantacuzen（22 noveber 1354）cfloenertz，lettres de dcydonès 109

[162]cfjyendorff，&l;projet de ncile oecuénie n 1367：u dialogue édit entre jean cantacuzène et le légat paul&r;，dop 14（1958）149 ff

[163]d，34 and 36 the sa way，the offices of the other logothetes，and even the once highly iportant office of city eparch，beca epty titles，ibid35 and 39 f

[164]nicgregoras 1，271，303 and 305it is therefore not possible to agree with dolr，fanzverwaltung 20，that the office of thehad disappeared as early as 1204cfthe oppposite view of ste，&l;untersuchunn&r;33;vlaurent，eo 38（1939），368 ff；ple