121 SLAVIA časopis pro slovanskou filologii ročník 89, 2020, sešit 2 Methodius between Rome and Constantinople: The Return of the Moravian Archbishop to the Byzantine Capital (Vita Methodii, ch. XIII) 1) Marcello Garzaniti (Firenze) The contribution proposes a detailed interpretation of Vita Methodii (ch. XIII) about the return of the Moravian archbishop to Constantinople and offers a reconstruction of his relationships with the emperor Basilius I and the patriarch Photius in order to better understand the last period of Methodius’s activity in Great Moravia. Keywords: Vita Methodii, Moravian archbishop Methodius, Great Moravia, patriarch Photius, emperor Basilius I In the aftermath of the rise of Photius to the patriarchal chair (878), the revival of Byzan- tine ecclesiastical and missionary policy contributed to consolidating the influence of the empire in the neighbouring regions. 2) Control over the Adriatic put a limit on the incur- sions of the Saracens and the Narentine pirates, and the relationship with the Croatian prince Zdeslav, a precious ally against the Bulgarian khan Boris, was consolidated. 3) The latter had just at that time sent his son Simeon to the Byzantine capital, where he was to be educated (c. 878–c. 886). 4) However, 878 was not a year only of successes. In fact, the Byzantine Empire had to acknowledge the blow of the Arab conquest of Syracuse, which marked the loss of Sicily. As a result, its archbishop Asbestas, a longtime friend of Photius, never returned to his seat (Winkelmann et al. 2000). In this atmosphere between hopes and disappointments, the Constantinopolitan synod of 879–880 marked the reconciliation of Photius with Rome and, rescinding the previous sentence, recognized his new ascent to the patriarchal throne. 5) However, if on the one 1) I wish to thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments on the first version of this essay. The following article stems from our research aimed at retracing the vast project of missionary activities the Byzantine church implemented at the time of Photius’s patriarchate, which went much further than the Moravian Slavic mission. In the past several scholars have voiced their scepticism regarding the fact that the Slavic mission was indeed a Byzantine initiative that later failed. Sceptics consider the absence of Byzantine documents on the Slavic mission (see, in particular, recent studies by Vavřínek 2015; 2017) as evidence for this. The following re search, similar to our other publications in print or forthcoming, endeavors to retrace the different aspects within a wider Byzantine missionary project. Crucial within this research will be the Bulgarian and Moravian issue, studied through a renewed examination of the sources to verify our proposed theses. 2) On the second phase of the patriarchate of Photius and the missionary activity of the Constantinopolitan prelate see Garzaniti 2015. 3) Regarding the Croatian prince Zdeslav, see Dvornik 1970, 232–235 and Fine 2006, 38–39, 43. 4) On the presence of Simeon in Constantinople see the monograph of M. J. Leszka (2013, 25–41). 5) For the canonical dispositions and the acts of the synod see COGD 2013, 51–71 and Mansi 1960–1962, 17, 360–530. The events linked to the reception of this synod have been studied in detail with ample quotations