第234頁(第2/4 页)

[121]nteporaries of the zealot rule describe it the glooiest ters，but all extant aounts e fro ebittered opponents of the zealotsthe ration that they give about the asures taken by the zealots and their tentions is unfortunately very scantyaounts specialist works and al earlier editions of this book were based the a on a logos of nicholas cabasilasbut sevcenko，nilas cabasilas，81 ff，has shown that this work does not describe zealot rule，but certa asures taken by the iperial governnt，and very probably refers to a later period（cfp478，n8 above）the ual view of the zealot régi and its asures t therefore be revisedth for exaple the reproaches of cabasilas agast the sale of state offices and epispal sees do not refer to the zealotssiilarly his tirade agast the alienation of onastic lands-which fors the a object of his seron and has nseently been regarded as the a ite the zealot progra-does not prove，without support fro other urces，that the zealots stituted asures of secularizationas far as i can see，nicephor gregoras 2，796，15，only says that they deprived the rich of their goods（）cantacuzen 2，234，7，reports that they broke to and destroyed the hoes of the aristocrats who had fled，and robbed the of their goods（）this was obvioly not a estion of the appropriation of landed property，but of the nfiscation of their possessions the city of thessalonica，to which zealot ntrol properly speakg was liitedth the basis of our knowled about the 插racter of the zealot régi，and th