[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.But in Basil II s reign(976 1025) the Bulgarian Empire was restored under Tsar Samuel (after987 1014), and Basil only finally reconquered it in 1018 after a lengthyseries of campaigns.104 During that period Bogomilism was able to growvirtually unchecked, and by the early eleventh century it had spread intothe Greek-speaking lands of Byzantium.The Byzantine annexation ofBulgaria must have made this easier, and the presence of large numbers102 Soulis, The legacy of Cyril and Methodius to the Southern Slavs , pp.21 43;Vlasto, The entry of the Slavs into Christendom, pp.78, 163 72; Fine, The early medievalBalkans, pp.134 7; Obolensky, Clement of Ohrid , in Six Byzantine portraits, pp.8 33.103 Stoyanov, The hidden tradition in Europe, pp.132 3; Ivanov, Livres et légendes bogomiles.104 Fine, The early medieval Balkans, pp.181 99.31 CHRISTIAN DUALIST HERESIESof Slavs who had been settled in the Asiatic provinces since the mid-seventh century may also have helped the Bogomil missions.105The earliest account we have of Byzantine Bogomilism is the letterwritten in c.1045 by Euthymius of the Periblepton monastery in Con-stantinople [19].Unfortunately, he is not distinguished for his clarity ofexposition indeed, the text of his letter might justly be described asrambling but it does contain a good deal of information about the wayin which Bogomilism was spreading and evolving as a faith in the firsthalf of the eleventh century.Euthymius did not know the Sermon of Cosmas the Priest, written in OldSlavonic, and did not associate the heretics he describes with Bulgaria,but his evidence broadly corroborates that of Cosmas, although thereare some significant differences between the two accounts.One merit ofEuthymius work is that he did not suppose that the Bogomils were thevotaries of an older heresy, and therefore did not attempt to ascribe tothem inappropriate beliefs and practices.But the chief problem inhandling this text is that of trying to separate factual information fromthe excessive anxieties which these heretics inspired in the writer.In thatregard it is, no doubt, an advantage that Euthymius did not have a verysubtle mind.He tells us that the Bogomils called themselves true Christians, but wereknown by various names among the Orthodox: the people of theOpsikion [theme] call.[those] who are members of this most evilblasphemy Phundagiagitae, but towards the Kibbyrhaiot [theme] theycall them Bogomils [19].The name Phundagiagitae has never beensatisfactorily explained: it may be cognate with phunda, a bag , and relateto scrips which these heretics carried.Euthymius discovered a Bogomil cell in his own monastery, but he also gives details of other Bogomils,including John Tzurillas, a heretical minister at Acmonia.MichaelAngold has argued that Tzurillas was not a Bogomil at all, but a followerof Eleutherius of Paphlagonia (d.950), who had practised a kind ofmystical Messalianism.We do not find this view convincing, becausealthough the two movements had certain negative features in common,they differed in one very central way: the followers of Eleutherius wereeach allowed two wives to show how superior they were to carnaltemptations, whereas John Tzurillas and his followers considered it105 Under Constans II, ibid., p.66; Justinian II, Head, Justinian II of Byzantium, pp.414; Constantine V, Anastos, Iconoclasm and imperial rule, p.74.P32 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTIONessential to salvation to separate from their wives, which is a distinctiveBogomil trait.106The chief difference between the Byzantine Bogomils described byEuthymius and the Bulgarian Bogomils described by Cosmas is that theformer had adopted an initiation rite which enabled them to make adistinction between fully professed members of their church and sympa-thizers.There is no clear evidence that this had been the case with theprimitive Bogomils described by Cosmas.Euthymius describes howcandidates were required to undergo a long and rigorous period ofascetic training which culminated in a ceremony at which the Gospelbook was placed on the candidate s head and a hymn was sung.Hebelieved that this ceremony involved the washing off, or renunciation, ofOrthodox baptism, although there is no evidence for this in any othersource.Perhaps he inferred that this took place because he could nototherwise explain how it was possible for Orthodox believers toapostatize.He also cites part of the Bogomils daily liturgy: The leader.takes hisstand and begins by saying: Let us adore the Father, the Son and theHoly Spirit. Those who pray with him answer: It is right and fitting. He begins the Our Father.making a genuflection; they bob theirheads up and down like those who are possessed [19].Euthymius is theearliest witness to the use by the Bogomils of a Ritual, closely related tothe Cathar Rituals and the Bosnian Ritual of Radoslav (Appendix I).He admits that the Bogomils way of life was very austere.All theinitiated were required to live as celibates [ Pobierz caÅ‚ość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl matkasanepid.xlx.pl
.But in Basil II s reign(976 1025) the Bulgarian Empire was restored under Tsar Samuel (after987 1014), and Basil only finally reconquered it in 1018 after a lengthyseries of campaigns.104 During that period Bogomilism was able to growvirtually unchecked, and by the early eleventh century it had spread intothe Greek-speaking lands of Byzantium.The Byzantine annexation ofBulgaria must have made this easier, and the presence of large numbers102 Soulis, The legacy of Cyril and Methodius to the Southern Slavs , pp.21 43;Vlasto, The entry of the Slavs into Christendom, pp.78, 163 72; Fine, The early medievalBalkans, pp.134 7; Obolensky, Clement of Ohrid , in Six Byzantine portraits, pp.8 33.103 Stoyanov, The hidden tradition in Europe, pp.132 3; Ivanov, Livres et légendes bogomiles.104 Fine, The early medieval Balkans, pp.181 99.31 CHRISTIAN DUALIST HERESIESof Slavs who had been settled in the Asiatic provinces since the mid-seventh century may also have helped the Bogomil missions.105The earliest account we have of Byzantine Bogomilism is the letterwritten in c.1045 by Euthymius of the Periblepton monastery in Con-stantinople [19].Unfortunately, he is not distinguished for his clarity ofexposition indeed, the text of his letter might justly be described asrambling but it does contain a good deal of information about the wayin which Bogomilism was spreading and evolving as a faith in the firsthalf of the eleventh century.Euthymius did not know the Sermon of Cosmas the Priest, written in OldSlavonic, and did not associate the heretics he describes with Bulgaria,but his evidence broadly corroborates that of Cosmas, although thereare some significant differences between the two accounts.One merit ofEuthymius work is that he did not suppose that the Bogomils were thevotaries of an older heresy, and therefore did not attempt to ascribe tothem inappropriate beliefs and practices.But the chief problem inhandling this text is that of trying to separate factual information fromthe excessive anxieties which these heretics inspired in the writer.In thatregard it is, no doubt, an advantage that Euthymius did not have a verysubtle mind.He tells us that the Bogomils called themselves true Christians, but wereknown by various names among the Orthodox: the people of theOpsikion [theme] call.[those] who are members of this most evilblasphemy Phundagiagitae, but towards the Kibbyrhaiot [theme] theycall them Bogomils [19].The name Phundagiagitae has never beensatisfactorily explained: it may be cognate with phunda, a bag , and relateto scrips which these heretics carried.Euthymius discovered a Bogomil cell in his own monastery, but he also gives details of other Bogomils,including John Tzurillas, a heretical minister at Acmonia.MichaelAngold has argued that Tzurillas was not a Bogomil at all, but a followerof Eleutherius of Paphlagonia (d.950), who had practised a kind ofmystical Messalianism.We do not find this view convincing, becausealthough the two movements had certain negative features in common,they differed in one very central way: the followers of Eleutherius wereeach allowed two wives to show how superior they were to carnaltemptations, whereas John Tzurillas and his followers considered it105 Under Constans II, ibid., p.66; Justinian II, Head, Justinian II of Byzantium, pp.414; Constantine V, Anastos, Iconoclasm and imperial rule, p.74.P32 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTIONessential to salvation to separate from their wives, which is a distinctiveBogomil trait.106The chief difference between the Byzantine Bogomils described byEuthymius and the Bulgarian Bogomils described by Cosmas is that theformer had adopted an initiation rite which enabled them to make adistinction between fully professed members of their church and sympa-thizers.There is no clear evidence that this had been the case with theprimitive Bogomils described by Cosmas.Euthymius describes howcandidates were required to undergo a long and rigorous period ofascetic training which culminated in a ceremony at which the Gospelbook was placed on the candidate s head and a hymn was sung.Hebelieved that this ceremony involved the washing off, or renunciation, ofOrthodox baptism, although there is no evidence for this in any othersource.Perhaps he inferred that this took place because he could nototherwise explain how it was possible for Orthodox believers toapostatize.He also cites part of the Bogomils daily liturgy: The leader.takes hisstand and begins by saying: Let us adore the Father, the Son and theHoly Spirit. Those who pray with him answer: It is right and fitting. He begins the Our Father.making a genuflection; they bob theirheads up and down like those who are possessed [19].Euthymius is theearliest witness to the use by the Bogomils of a Ritual, closely related tothe Cathar Rituals and the Bosnian Ritual of Radoslav (Appendix I).He admits that the Bogomils way of life was very austere.All theinitiated were required to live as celibates [ Pobierz caÅ‚ość w formacie PDF ]