第128章（1 / 1）
[87]Cf.the detailed study by C.Mango，‘The Legend of Leo the Wise’，ZRVI 6（1950），59 ff.
[88]M.，lib.Ⅰ-Ⅻ ed.C.Ferrini and J.Mercati，Studi e Testi 25（1914）；lib.ⅩⅢ-ⅩⅩⅢ ed.F.Dolger，ibid.51（1929），lib.ⅩⅩⅣ-ⅩⅩⅩⅦ ed.St.Hoermann and E.Seidl，ibid.107（1943）.Cf.F.Dolger and E.Seidl，‘Beitrage und Berichtigungen zum Tipukeitos’，BZ 39（1939），146 ff.；E.Seidl，‘Die Basilikenscholien im Tipukeitos’，BZ 44（1951）（Dolger-Festschrift），534 ff.
[89]Insufficient account is often taken of this fact，and the Basilica are often accepted as a source for the ninth century without the necessary caution.Cf.A.P.Kazdan，‘Vasiliki kak istoriceskij istocnik’（The Basilica as an historical source），VV 14（1958），56 f.，who rightly emphasizes that the Basilica reflect the political and social situation of the sixth century，not of the ninth.This view is not substantially repudiated by the objections of M.J.Sjuzjumov，‘Vasiliki kak istocnik dlja vnutrennej istorii Vizantii’（The Basilica as a source for the internal history of Byzantium），ibid.67 ff.，and E.E.Lipsic，‘Neskol’ko zamecanij o Vasilikach kak istocnike’（Some observations on the Basilica as a source），ibid.76 ff.
[90]In spite of Spulber，Les Novelles de Léon le Sage（1934），81 f.，the widely-held view that the novels were published before Leo Ⅵ concluded his second marriage still stands，for Novel 90 expressly condemns second marriages.It must however be remembered that Leo Ⅵ did not contract his second marriage until the spring of 898，as Grumel，‘Chronologie’5 ff.，has shown.An earlier date than this is indicated by the fact that the only Patriarch mentioned in the novels of Leo is Stephen who died on 17 May 893.Cf.C.Krzisnik，BZ 37（1937），486 ff.
[91]Nov.46，47 and 78：Zepos，Jus Ⅰ，pp.116，116 f.and 147;Noaille-Dain，Les Novelles de Léon VI le Sage（1944），pp.182，184，270.
[92]It is true that Leo’s laws frequently expatiate on the general good of his subjects，equal justice for all，and so on，but these pious didactic maxims do not justify the conclusions which many modern scholars would like to deduce.Cf.G.Michaélidès-Nouraos，‘Les idées philosophiques de Léon le Sage sur les limites du pouvoir législatif et son attitude envers les coutumes’，Mnemosynon Bizoukidès（1960），27 ff.，who describes the legislation of Leo Ⅵ as being inspired by the spirit of humanity and liberalism，having its roots in public opinion.
[93]The word‘caesaropapism’so frequently used in connection with Byzantium gives a false impression of the actual relations between Church and State in the medieval Byzantine Empire.Cf.my arguments in‘Otnosenie cerkvi i gosudarstva v Vizantii’（Relations between Church and State in Byzantium），Sem.Kond.4（1931），121 ff.Although I do not entirely hold to all my previous views，I am still of the opinion that there was an essential difference between relations between Church and State in the half Roman Empire of the early centuries and in the medieval Byzantine Empire.On the other hand，Dolger，BZ 31（1931），449 f.，considers that relations between Church and State at any given period were determined by the personalities of individual leaders，lay or ecclesiastic.A typical example of the view that the Church was continually subjected to the‘caesaropapist’Byzantine State is to be found in the well-known essay of H.Gelzer，‘Das Verhaltnis von Staat und Kirche in Byzanz’HZ 86（1901），193 ff.My own views on the development of relations between Church and State in Byzantium are fully confirmed by the evidence of representative art;cf.the excellent comments of A.Grabar，Empereur 175 ff.and elsewhere.
[94]Cf.Bury，Admin.System;Bréhier Institutions 121 ff.；W.Ensslin，‘The Emperor and the Imperial Administration’，Baynes-Moss，Byzantium（1949），268 ff.
[95]Cf.the important comments of Stein，‘Ein Kapitel’70 ff.
[96]On the military zones of lesser rank and their significance in the earlier theme organization cf.the excellent treatment by J.Ferluga，‘Nize vojno-administrativne jedinice tematskog uredjenja’（The military and administrative theme units of lesser rank），Zbornik radova Viz.Inst.2（1953），61 ff.（English résumé）。
[97]The themes of Mesopotamia，Lycandus，Sebastea，Leontocomis，and Seleucia are still not mentioned in the Cletorologion of Philotheus，but they do appear as themes in both the Tacticon Benesivic and the De Thematibus of Constantine Ⅶ（where however Leontocomis is missing，as are also Charsianon，Cappadocia and Dalmatia，for no apparent reason）.Mesopotamia is found with the rank of theme in a list of the salaries payable to strategi of themes，drawn up about 908-10，which appears in the De cerimoniis（697，3），while the four other zones still appear as kleisurai.For this salary list and the date of its compilation cf.J.Ferluga，‘Prilog datiranju Platnog spiska stratega iz De caerimoniis’（Further comments on the dating of the salary list of strategi from the De cerimoniis），ZRVI 4（1956），63 ff.
[98]The theme of Cyprus mentioned in the De thematibus in reality only existed for a short time under Basil Ⅰ and then fell once again into the hands of the Arabs（cf.p.238 above）。
[99]Cf.Stein，‘Untersuchungen’19 ff.
[100]See above，p.215，under Sources.
[101]On the title of Caesar cf.the careful investigations of R.Guilland，‘?tudes sur l’histoire administrative de l’Empire byzantin：le césarat’，OCP 13（1947），168 ff.；see also R.Guilland，‘Et.sur l’hist.admin.de Byzance：Observation sur le Clétorologe de Philothée’，REB 20（1962），159 ff. ↑返回顶部↑
[88]M.，lib.Ⅰ-Ⅻ ed.C.Ferrini and J.Mercati，Studi e Testi 25（1914）；lib.ⅩⅢ-ⅩⅩⅢ ed.F.Dolger，ibid.51（1929），lib.ⅩⅩⅣ-ⅩⅩⅩⅦ ed.St.Hoermann and E.Seidl，ibid.107（1943）.Cf.F.Dolger and E.Seidl，‘Beitrage und Berichtigungen zum Tipukeitos’，BZ 39（1939），146 ff.；E.Seidl，‘Die Basilikenscholien im Tipukeitos’，BZ 44（1951）（Dolger-Festschrift），534 ff.
[89]Insufficient account is often taken of this fact，and the Basilica are often accepted as a source for the ninth century without the necessary caution.Cf.A.P.Kazdan，‘Vasiliki kak istoriceskij istocnik’（The Basilica as an historical source），VV 14（1958），56 f.，who rightly emphasizes that the Basilica reflect the political and social situation of the sixth century，not of the ninth.This view is not substantially repudiated by the objections of M.J.Sjuzjumov，‘Vasiliki kak istocnik dlja vnutrennej istorii Vizantii’（The Basilica as a source for the internal history of Byzantium），ibid.67 ff.，and E.E.Lipsic，‘Neskol’ko zamecanij o Vasilikach kak istocnike’（Some observations on the Basilica as a source），ibid.76 ff.
[90]In spite of Spulber，Les Novelles de Léon le Sage（1934），81 f.，the widely-held view that the novels were published before Leo Ⅵ concluded his second marriage still stands，for Novel 90 expressly condemns second marriages.It must however be remembered that Leo Ⅵ did not contract his second marriage until the spring of 898，as Grumel，‘Chronologie’5 ff.，has shown.An earlier date than this is indicated by the fact that the only Patriarch mentioned in the novels of Leo is Stephen who died on 17 May 893.Cf.C.Krzisnik，BZ 37（1937），486 ff.
[91]Nov.46，47 and 78：Zepos，Jus Ⅰ，pp.116，116 f.and 147;Noaille-Dain，Les Novelles de Léon VI le Sage（1944），pp.182，184，270.
[92]It is true that Leo’s laws frequently expatiate on the general good of his subjects，equal justice for all，and so on，but these pious didactic maxims do not justify the conclusions which many modern scholars would like to deduce.Cf.G.Michaélidès-Nouraos，‘Les idées philosophiques de Léon le Sage sur les limites du pouvoir législatif et son attitude envers les coutumes’，Mnemosynon Bizoukidès（1960），27 ff.，who describes the legislation of Leo Ⅵ as being inspired by the spirit of humanity and liberalism，having its roots in public opinion.
[93]The word‘caesaropapism’so frequently used in connection with Byzantium gives a false impression of the actual relations between Church and State in the medieval Byzantine Empire.Cf.my arguments in‘Otnosenie cerkvi i gosudarstva v Vizantii’（Relations between Church and State in Byzantium），Sem.Kond.4（1931），121 ff.Although I do not entirely hold to all my previous views，I am still of the opinion that there was an essential difference between relations between Church and State in the half Roman Empire of the early centuries and in the medieval Byzantine Empire.On the other hand，Dolger，BZ 31（1931），449 f.，considers that relations between Church and State at any given period were determined by the personalities of individual leaders，lay or ecclesiastic.A typical example of the view that the Church was continually subjected to the‘caesaropapist’Byzantine State is to be found in the well-known essay of H.Gelzer，‘Das Verhaltnis von Staat und Kirche in Byzanz’HZ 86（1901），193 ff.My own views on the development of relations between Church and State in Byzantium are fully confirmed by the evidence of representative art;cf.the excellent comments of A.Grabar，Empereur 175 ff.and elsewhere.
[94]Cf.Bury，Admin.System;Bréhier Institutions 121 ff.；W.Ensslin，‘The Emperor and the Imperial Administration’，Baynes-Moss，Byzantium（1949），268 ff.
[95]Cf.the important comments of Stein，‘Ein Kapitel’70 ff.
[96]On the military zones of lesser rank and their significance in the earlier theme organization cf.the excellent treatment by J.Ferluga，‘Nize vojno-administrativne jedinice tematskog uredjenja’（The military and administrative theme units of lesser rank），Zbornik radova Viz.Inst.2（1953），61 ff.（English résumé）。
[97]The themes of Mesopotamia，Lycandus，Sebastea，Leontocomis，and Seleucia are still not mentioned in the Cletorologion of Philotheus，but they do appear as themes in both the Tacticon Benesivic and the De Thematibus of Constantine Ⅶ（where however Leontocomis is missing，as are also Charsianon，Cappadocia and Dalmatia，for no apparent reason）.Mesopotamia is found with the rank of theme in a list of the salaries payable to strategi of themes，drawn up about 908-10，which appears in the De cerimoniis（697，3），while the four other zones still appear as kleisurai.For this salary list and the date of its compilation cf.J.Ferluga，‘Prilog datiranju Platnog spiska stratega iz De caerimoniis’（Further comments on the dating of the salary list of strategi from the De cerimoniis），ZRVI 4（1956），63 ff.
[98]The theme of Cyprus mentioned in the De thematibus in reality only existed for a short time under Basil Ⅰ and then fell once again into the hands of the Arabs（cf.p.238 above）。
[99]Cf.Stein，‘Untersuchungen’19 ff.
[100]See above，p.215，under Sources.
[101]On the title of Caesar cf.the careful investigations of R.Guilland，‘?tudes sur l’histoire administrative de l’Empire byzantin：le césarat’，OCP 13（1947），168 ff.；see also R.Guilland，‘Et.sur l’hist.admin.de Byzance：Observation sur le Clétorologe de Philothée’，REB 20（1962），159 ff. ↑返回顶部↑