第148章（1 / 2）
[11]C.Will，Acta et scripta quae de controversiis ecclesiae graecae et latinae saec.Ⅺcomposita extant，Leipzig and Marburg 1861，pp.150-2.
[12]Ibid.172-204.
[13]Ibid.85-9;65-85;89-92;168-71.
[14]Michel，Kerullarios Ⅰ，44 ff.
[15]Michel，Kerullarios Ⅰ，76 ff.，and Ⅱ，41 ff.The authorship of the Panoplia is disputed：Ⅴ.Laurent，EO 31（1932），105 ff.，and M.Jugie，B 8（1933），323 ff.，regard it as the work of a contemporary of the Council of Lyons.Cf.，however，Michel’s reply，‘Von Photios zu Kerullarios’，Rom.Quartalschr.41（1933），125 ff.，and especially‘Die Echtheit der Panoplia des Michael Kerullarios’，Oriens Christ.36（1941），168 ff.
[16]De cerim.264 and 528.Psellus Ⅰ，30（ed.Renauld），。
[17]On Zoe’s age and the date of the accession of Romanus Ⅲ（15 November 1028）cf.Skabalanovic，Viz.gosudarstvo 11，note 2，and 14，note 1.For further chronological data cf.also Skabalanovic’s careful statements.
[18]Scylitzes-Cedren.Ⅱ，486，7，.Scylitzes’statement（Ⅱ，486，8）that Constantine Ⅷ had already resolved to abolish the allelengyon is also significant.
[19]Dolger，‘Das Fortbestehen der Epibole in mittel-und spatbyz.Zeit’，Studi Albertoni Ⅱ（1934），3 ff.，und BZ 35（1935），14，maintains，in opposition to my statements in‘Steuergemeinde’1 ff.and B 6（1931），227 ff.，that the epibole survived into the later period.This is in contradiction to the plain statements of the sources and is further disproved by the new material brought forward by G.Rouillard.‘L’épiboléau temps d’Alexis Comnéne’，B 10（1935），81 ff.，in spite of Dolger’s arguments，BZ 36（1936），157 ff.Cf.also the texts since published by G.Rouillard-P.Collomp，Actes de Lavre Ⅰ（1937），Nos.43，48，53，where the word epibole is frequently met with in the sources of the later period，but is always used in the general sense of a tax levied or a distribution of land（as rightly indicated by Bréhier，Institutions 260）。
[20]This is clearly shown by the Ashburner Treatise§§12 and 14（ed.Dolger，Finanz-verwaltung 119）.Cf.Ostrogorsky，‘Steuergemeinde’31.
[21]Cf.the legal rulings of Magister Eustathius in the Peira，Zepos，Jus Ⅳ，32（Ⅷ，1）and 38（Ⅸ，1）；cf.also 51 ff.（ⅩⅤ，10）；167（ⅩL，12）；228（LⅦ，1）。
[22]Cf.R.Janin，‘Un ministre byzantin：Jean l’Orphanotrophe’，EO 30（1929），431 ff.
[23]Scylitzes-Cedren.Ⅱ，521，says that there were then so many different kinds of tax that he was ashamed to enumerate them.
[24]Psellus Ⅰ，57（ed.Renauld;trans.Sewter，60）。
[25]Cf.Zlatarski，‘Wer war Peter Deljan?’Annales Acad.Scient.Fennicae 27（1932），354 ff.，and Istorija Ⅱ，41 ff.，who argues that he was in fact a grandson of Samuel（the son of Gabriel Radomir by his marriage to a Hungarian princess）.But cf.Litavrin，Bolgarija i Vizantija 379 ff.，who is rightly cautious.
↑返回顶部↑
[12]Ibid.172-204.
[13]Ibid.85-9;65-85;89-92;168-71.
[14]Michel，Kerullarios Ⅰ，44 ff.
[15]Michel，Kerullarios Ⅰ，76 ff.，and Ⅱ，41 ff.The authorship of the Panoplia is disputed：Ⅴ.Laurent，EO 31（1932），105 ff.，and M.Jugie，B 8（1933），323 ff.，regard it as the work of a contemporary of the Council of Lyons.Cf.，however，Michel’s reply，‘Von Photios zu Kerullarios’，Rom.Quartalschr.41（1933），125 ff.，and especially‘Die Echtheit der Panoplia des Michael Kerullarios’，Oriens Christ.36（1941），168 ff.
[16]De cerim.264 and 528.Psellus Ⅰ，30（ed.Renauld），。
[17]On Zoe’s age and the date of the accession of Romanus Ⅲ（15 November 1028）cf.Skabalanovic，Viz.gosudarstvo 11，note 2，and 14，note 1.For further chronological data cf.also Skabalanovic’s careful statements.
[18]Scylitzes-Cedren.Ⅱ，486，7，.Scylitzes’statement（Ⅱ，486，8）that Constantine Ⅷ had already resolved to abolish the allelengyon is also significant.
[19]Dolger，‘Das Fortbestehen der Epibole in mittel-und spatbyz.Zeit’，Studi Albertoni Ⅱ（1934），3 ff.，und BZ 35（1935），14，maintains，in opposition to my statements in‘Steuergemeinde’1 ff.and B 6（1931），227 ff.，that the epibole survived into the later period.This is in contradiction to the plain statements of the sources and is further disproved by the new material brought forward by G.Rouillard.‘L’épiboléau temps d’Alexis Comnéne’，B 10（1935），81 ff.，in spite of Dolger’s arguments，BZ 36（1936），157 ff.Cf.also the texts since published by G.Rouillard-P.Collomp，Actes de Lavre Ⅰ（1937），Nos.43，48，53，where the word epibole is frequently met with in the sources of the later period，but is always used in the general sense of a tax levied or a distribution of land（as rightly indicated by Bréhier，Institutions 260）。
[20]This is clearly shown by the Ashburner Treatise§§12 and 14（ed.Dolger，Finanz-verwaltung 119）.Cf.Ostrogorsky，‘Steuergemeinde’31.
[21]Cf.the legal rulings of Magister Eustathius in the Peira，Zepos，Jus Ⅳ，32（Ⅷ，1）and 38（Ⅸ，1）；cf.also 51 ff.（ⅩⅤ，10）；167（ⅩL，12）；228（LⅦ，1）。
[22]Cf.R.Janin，‘Un ministre byzantin：Jean l’Orphanotrophe’，EO 30（1929），431 ff.
[23]Scylitzes-Cedren.Ⅱ，521，says that there were then so many different kinds of tax that he was ashamed to enumerate them.
[24]Psellus Ⅰ，57（ed.Renauld;trans.Sewter，60）。
[25]Cf.Zlatarski，‘Wer war Peter Deljan?’Annales Acad.Scient.Fennicae 27（1932），354 ff.，and Istorija Ⅱ，41 ff.，who argues that he was in fact a grandson of Samuel（the son of Gabriel Radomir by his marriage to a Hungarian princess）.But cf.Litavrin，Bolgarija i Vizantija 379 ff.，who is rightly cautious.
↑返回顶部↑