第66章（1 / 2）
[127]The relationship between the provisions of the Farmer’s Law on this matter（§19）and the allelengyon regulations is also referred to by Lipsic，Viz.Krest’janstvo 104，while Kazdan，Gorod i derevnja，169 ff.，and‘K voprosu ob osobennostjach feodal’noj sobstvennosti v Vizantii Ⅷ-Ⅹ vv.’（On the question of the characteristics of feudal holdings in Byzantium from the eighth to the tenth centuries），ⅤⅤ10（156），63 ff.，denies it.
[128]Vita Johannis Ⅴ，c.2 and Vita Cononisc.3.Cf.Hartmann，Byz.Verwaltung 90，171，and Stein，‘Vom Altertum’150，152.
[129]Ostrogorsky，‘Das Steuersystem im byzantinischen Altertum und Mittelalter’，B 6.（1931），229 ff.，where theproblem is also dealt with.Cf.N.A，Constantinescu，‘Réforme sociale ou réforme fiscale?’Bulletin de l’Acad.Roumaine.Section Hist.11（1924），94 ff.，but he incorrectly expounds the nature of the tax reform in question by assuming a capitation tax levied only upon the non-property-owning population.He also goes too far in the assumption that the tax reform not only developed，but even created，the peasants’freedom of movement，and by reviving the old theme of Zacharia，Paparrhegopulos，Vasiljevskij and Uspenskij he assumes that serfdom entirely disappeared from the seventh to the eleventh centuries，without realizing that during this perioswho are serfs are frequently met with.An attempt has re-cently been made to deny the fundamental difference betweenby J.Karayannopulos，‘Die kollektiveStaatsverantwortung in der frühbyzantinischen Zeit’，Vierteljahrschr.f.Sozial u.Wirtschaftsgesch.43（1956），289 ff.But cf.Lemerle，‘Histoire Agraire’，219，37 ff.
[130]Migne，PG 132，1117 ff.
[131]Cf.Vasiljevskij，‘Materialy’，Trudy Ⅳ，319 ff.There is also a detailed study by M.Levcenko，‘Cerkovnye imuscestva Ⅴ-Ⅶ vv.v Vostocno-Rimskoj imperii’（Ecclesiastical property from the fifth to the seventh centuries in the East Roman Empire），ⅤⅤ27（1949），11 ff.
[132]Wroth，Byz.Coins Ⅱ，333 ff.and pl.ⅩⅩⅩⅧ ff.；Grabar，Empereur 164，and Iconoclasme，36 ff.
[133]The effectiveness of such prohibitions should not be overestimated.For instance，the festival of the Brumalia is met later on，and even held at the imperial court;cf.Philotheus（ed.Bury），175.
[134]For instance，he completed the imperial palace and built two enormous and splendid halls which connected the throne room，the Chrysotriclinium，with the palace of Daphne and the Hippodrome;one was called Justinian’s lausiacus and the other his triclinium.Cf.D.Beljaev，Byzantina Ⅰ（1891），45 ff.；J.Ebersolt，Le Grand Palais de Constantinople（1910），77 ff.and 93 ff.；J.B.Bury，‘The Great Palace’，BZ 21（1912），219 ff.
[135]Georg.Mon.Ⅱ，731，17（ed.de Boor）：.M.Levcenko，‘Venety i prasiny v Vizantii v Ⅴ-Ⅶ vv.’（Greens and Blues in Byzantium from the fifth to the seventh centuries），ⅤⅤ26（1947），182，has pointed to this important passage，and has also made excellent use of the oriental sources on Justinian’s struggle with the aristocracy.The passage cited from George the Monk shows that，like Heraclius himself，Justinian Ⅱ supported the Greens and was an opponent of the Blues.It also shows，as Levcenko rightly emphasizes，the error of maintaining that the political activity of the demes ceased in the time of Heraclius，a view which until recently was generally accepted.This must now be rejected，particularly as the valuable evidence which Maricq（‘Partis populaires’63 ff.）has collected from the sources makes it plain that the political significance of the demes persisted until the beginning of the ninth century.
[136]Cf.A.Maricq，‘Partis populaires’66 ff.，on the basis of the anonymous Brussels Chronicle ed.by F.Cumont，Chroniques byzantines du manuscrit 11376（Anecdota Bruxellensia Ⅰ），p.30：’。
[137]Cf.Dujcev，Proucvanija vurchu bulgarskoto srednovekovie（Studies in the Bulgarian Middle Ages），Sofia 1945，5 ff.
[138]Nicephorus 42，23.The information in Theophanes 376，that Justinian Ⅱ broke the peace soon after and attacked the empire of the Bulgars is not reliable，especially as it is established that Tervel’s troops helped Justinian in 711，as they had done in 705.
[139]Cf.A.Vasiliev，The Goths in the Crimea（1936），83 ff.
[140]On the second reign of Justinian Ⅱ and his downfall cf.Ch.Diehl，Choses et gens de Byzance（1926），190 ff.
[1] 以下1个段落为本书1969年英文版的新增内容。
↑返回顶部↑
[128]Vita Johannis Ⅴ，c.2 and Vita Cononisc.3.Cf.Hartmann，Byz.Verwaltung 90，171，and Stein，‘Vom Altertum’150，152.
[129]Ostrogorsky，‘Das Steuersystem im byzantinischen Altertum und Mittelalter’，B 6.（1931），229 ff.，where theproblem is also dealt with.Cf.N.A，Constantinescu，‘Réforme sociale ou réforme fiscale?’Bulletin de l’Acad.Roumaine.Section Hist.11（1924），94 ff.，but he incorrectly expounds the nature of the tax reform in question by assuming a capitation tax levied only upon the non-property-owning population.He also goes too far in the assumption that the tax reform not only developed，but even created，the peasants’freedom of movement，and by reviving the old theme of Zacharia，Paparrhegopulos，Vasiljevskij and Uspenskij he assumes that serfdom entirely disappeared from the seventh to the eleventh centuries，without realizing that during this perioswho are serfs are frequently met with.An attempt has re-cently been made to deny the fundamental difference betweenby J.Karayannopulos，‘Die kollektiveStaatsverantwortung in der frühbyzantinischen Zeit’，Vierteljahrschr.f.Sozial u.Wirtschaftsgesch.43（1956），289 ff.But cf.Lemerle，‘Histoire Agraire’，219，37 ff.
[130]Migne，PG 132，1117 ff.
[131]Cf.Vasiljevskij，‘Materialy’，Trudy Ⅳ，319 ff.There is also a detailed study by M.Levcenko，‘Cerkovnye imuscestva Ⅴ-Ⅶ vv.v Vostocno-Rimskoj imperii’（Ecclesiastical property from the fifth to the seventh centuries in the East Roman Empire），ⅤⅤ27（1949），11 ff.
[132]Wroth，Byz.Coins Ⅱ，333 ff.and pl.ⅩⅩⅩⅧ ff.；Grabar，Empereur 164，and Iconoclasme，36 ff.
[133]The effectiveness of such prohibitions should not be overestimated.For instance，the festival of the Brumalia is met later on，and even held at the imperial court;cf.Philotheus（ed.Bury），175.
[134]For instance，he completed the imperial palace and built two enormous and splendid halls which connected the throne room，the Chrysotriclinium，with the palace of Daphne and the Hippodrome;one was called Justinian’s lausiacus and the other his triclinium.Cf.D.Beljaev，Byzantina Ⅰ（1891），45 ff.；J.Ebersolt，Le Grand Palais de Constantinople（1910），77 ff.and 93 ff.；J.B.Bury，‘The Great Palace’，BZ 21（1912），219 ff.
[135]Georg.Mon.Ⅱ，731，17（ed.de Boor）：.M.Levcenko，‘Venety i prasiny v Vizantii v Ⅴ-Ⅶ vv.’（Greens and Blues in Byzantium from the fifth to the seventh centuries），ⅤⅤ26（1947），182，has pointed to this important passage，and has also made excellent use of the oriental sources on Justinian’s struggle with the aristocracy.The passage cited from George the Monk shows that，like Heraclius himself，Justinian Ⅱ supported the Greens and was an opponent of the Blues.It also shows，as Levcenko rightly emphasizes，the error of maintaining that the political activity of the demes ceased in the time of Heraclius，a view which until recently was generally accepted.This must now be rejected，particularly as the valuable evidence which Maricq（‘Partis populaires’63 ff.）has collected from the sources makes it plain that the political significance of the demes persisted until the beginning of the ninth century.
[136]Cf.A.Maricq，‘Partis populaires’66 ff.，on the basis of the anonymous Brussels Chronicle ed.by F.Cumont，Chroniques byzantines du manuscrit 11376（Anecdota Bruxellensia Ⅰ），p.30：’。
[137]Cf.Dujcev，Proucvanija vurchu bulgarskoto srednovekovie（Studies in the Bulgarian Middle Ages），Sofia 1945，5 ff.
[138]Nicephorus 42，23.The information in Theophanes 376，that Justinian Ⅱ broke the peace soon after and attacked the empire of the Bulgars is not reliable，especially as it is established that Tervel’s troops helped Justinian in 711，as they had done in 705.
[139]Cf.A.Vasiliev，The Goths in the Crimea（1936），83 ff.
[140]On the second reign of Justinian Ⅱ and his downfall cf.Ch.Diehl，Choses et gens de Byzance（1926），190 ff.
[1] 以下1个段落为本书1969年英文版的新增内容。
↑返回顶部↑