The idea that the Neorion at the Heptascalon was the same harbour as the Kontoscalion raises serious difficulties. In fact, the objections to this theory are as strong as, and perhaps even stronger than, those against identifying the Neorion with the Harbour of Julian and Sophia.
The first and most important objection comes from the writings of Emperor John VI Cantacuzene himself. In his historical work, he mentions both the Neorion at the Heptascalon and the Kontoscalion. He does so within the same section of his narrative, discussing related events, and in passages that are not far apart from one another. Yet, he gives no indication at all that these two names refer to the same harbour. If they were indeed the same place, it would be natural to expect some explanation or clarification. The absence of such a hint strongly suggests that Cantacuzene understood them as two distinct harbours Sofia Tour Guide.
The Meaning of the Names
A second objection arises from the meanings of the names themselves. The name Kontoscalion refers to a “short pier” or a harbour characterized by a single, short jetty. On the other hand, Heptascalon literally means “seven piers” or “seven landing places.” These meanings stand in direct opposition to each other. A harbour defined by a single short pier cannot reasonably be the same as one known for having seven piers. The difference in terminology reflects a difference in structure, and therefore in identity.
Different Conditions of the Harbours
Another strong argument comes from the way Cantacuzene describes the condition of these two harbours during his reign. His accounts of the Neorion at the Heptascalon and of the Kontoscalion are not the same. The differences in description imply that he is speaking about two separate ports, each with its own situation and state of repair. If the two harbours were identical, we would expect a consistent description of their condition, which is not the case.
The Evidence of the Church of St. Acacius
Further clues about the location of the Neorion at the Heptascalon come from references to the Church of St. Acacius. Several sources provide indications of where this church stood. First, it is clearly stated that the church was located “at the Heptascalon.” Second, it was near the Church of St. Metrophanes. Third, it stood close to the residence of a person named Mosele and near a monument called the Christocamaron, which took its name from a gilded icon of Christ displayed upon it.
Many scholars believe that the Christocamaron was the same monument as the Chrysocamaron. According to this view, the Chrysocamaron stood behind the Myrelaion. The Myrelaion itself is well known and is generally identified with the building now called Boudroum Djamissi. If this chain of identifications is correct, then the Church of St. Acacius must have stood behind, or to the east of, Boudroum Djamissi The Question of the Neorion at the Heptascalon.
Problems with This Chain of Reasoning
However, this argument is not without weaknesses. The Byzantine writer Codinus distinguishes between the Christocamaron and the Chrysocamaron, suggesting they were not the same monument. He also speaks of two different places in Constantinople that bore the name Myrelaion. These points introduce uncertainty and prevent absolute conclusions.
Despite these difficulties, the overall evidence weighs heavily against identifying the Neorion at the Heptascalon with the Kontoscalion. Differences in naming, meaning, description, and location all point to the conclusion that they were separate harbours. While some details remain unclear, the balance of historical and topographical evidence supports the view that the Neorion at the Heptascalon was a distinct port, different from the Kontoscalion and from other well-known harbours of Constantinople.
