ABSTRACT
The evolution in the visibility of women which can be noted through a consideration of imperial titles and kinship is equally clear when the same women are investigated as patrons. This book has already chronicled the metamorphosis from 1080, when there was a woman with an official tide of her own who overtly arranged marriage alli ances, through the twelfth century when the absence of an augousta was no t thought worthy of note, to the reign of Manuel when m others’ protests about the marriage of their children were ignored. A study of imperial women as patrons reveals the same pattern. But why address the question of patronage? Firstly, Byzantinists are unanim ous that the Byzantine em pire worked through personal patronage in the absence of an impersonal state machine of edu cation and prom otion. In Angold’s words, ‘A m an’s standing in Constantinopolitan society depended upon his his rank at court and the clientele that his largesse secured.’1 Since patronage was so im portant in the running of the empire, the power of women as patrons is an obvious area of enquiry. This book has already considered the effect of rank on the power of women of the court: the clientele is the subject of this chapter. Patronage was also the visible practice of the imperial virtue of philanthropia: m ore than a personal inclination, it indicated the concern of the ruler for the people. It is particularly pertinent for the second reason: all the women included in this book have been credited by Byzantinists with being either personal or literary patrons. No study to date has brought them together as members of one elite and one dynasty in order to compare them.
