23

Kios is a place in the province of ancient Bithynia. About Trnglen and Elegm I cannot give any information: they were probably shtetls in the same area. Kios lay from Lympsak to the east at a considerable distance (note - Mattie).

24

I do not dare to assert who this despot John was, because I do not find satisfactory information about this in Dufresne's Familiae Avgustae Byzantinae. But since the despot occupied the first place after the emperor, it is worth paying attention to the civic courage with which the patriarch reproaches in his letter to the emperor both this unseemly act of the despot John and many other things. (Note – Mattie).

For our part, we will allow ourselves to express our guess about the personality of this despot. In the contemporary letter of the Byzantine historian Pachymeros and the almost contemporary Gregoras, four despots bearing the name of Ioannas are mentioned: the first was the brother of Emperor Michael Palaiologos (Pachym. pp. 187, 299, 309), the second was his son-in-law Johannes Asan, the husband of his daughter Irene (ibid., p. 406), the third John was the ruler of Lazov, his second son-in-law, married to his daughter Eudoxia (ibid., pp. 483, 484 sn. Gregory. p. 195), the fourth is the son of Emperor Andronicus by his second wife Irene (Gregory, p. 226). The first of them died during the lifetime of Michael (Pahim. p. 380), the last in the year of writing the letter was not yet born (see Gregory, pp. 196-197, fn. Pachym. II. p. 32, pp. 276-277), the third after the wedding went to his possessions, where he lived, apparently without leaving; at least, neither in Pachymer nor in Gregoras do we find any indication of the contrary. The second remains, namely the Bulgarian prince John Asan. On the occasion of his marriage to Irene in 1278, he received the title of despot, and in 1279 he went with his wife to reign over Bulgaria; but compelled by his inability to yield his power to his fortunate rival Terterium, he returned to Constantinople in the following year, 1280, and lived there until his death, the year of which, however, is not known. Is it not he who is the Father of John mentioned here?...