A
anaveno
Гостин
Avenarius's meticulous discussion of the Cyrillic-Methodian tradition in Croatia illuminates the context and the reasons for the exceptional body of Glagolitic manuscripts written in the northwestern Balkans during the High Middle Ages. Ultimately, though, Avenarius's account points to the ambiguity of this tradition, as the synod of 1060 declared Methodius a heretic for having devised the "Gothic" (i.e., Glagolitic) script and falsely taught in Old Church Slavonic against the dogma of the Roman church (p.148). Equally interesting is the discussion of the relationship between the Ochrid school and the Cyrillic-Methodian tradition, one of the best sub-chapters of this book (pp.154-161). It has long been noted that the works produced by this school established by Methodius' disciples expelled from Moravia fall into two major categories: commemorative speeches (the so-called pouchitel'nye slova) and sermons. Avenarius explains this homiletic bias by means of the "politics of conversion," which in the case of tenth-century Bulgaria, was aimed at common people, not elites (p.154). This may also explain the motif of "Adam, the archetypal sinner," which dominates Clement of Ochrid's homiletics, as well as his use of general, moral topics, rather than specific themes associated with the festivals of saints. Clement was obsessed with eradicating drunkenness, perjury, false accusations, and ill intentions. In his panegyrics on Constantine/Cyril and Methodius, Clement of Ochrid, like Constantine, drew heavily on the patristic tradition, especially on Gregory Nazianzen, but followed the lines of the Cyrillic-Methodian hagiography, with its emphasis on historical narrative, rather than miracles. On the other hand, that some of Clement's sermons were later mistaken for those of John Chrysostom is a good indication of the degree to which they had incorporated the patristic tradition (p.157). Clement died in 916 and the extraordinary influence of the Ochrid school may explain the subsequent developments of the Cyrillic-Methodian tradition in Bulgaria. According to the Vita Clementis or, rather, to the author of its Greek version, Theophylact of Ochrid, Constantine had preached in Greek among the Bulgars long before going to Moravia.
Whatever one thinks about this tradition, it is possible, alternatively, that it may be a reflection of a Byzantine, rather than Bulgarian, agenda. By contrast, the mid-eleventh-century sermon of the Kievan metropolite Ilarion known as Slovo o zakone a blagodati is a clear attempt to minimize the Byzantine influence in Rus': Constantinople is referred to as the "New Jerusalem," but only the St. Sophia in Kiev (and not the one in Constantinople) is compared to the Temple, while Vladimir and Yaroslav appear as Solomon and David. The insertion of the Apostle Paul legend into the Russian Primary Chronicle may serve a similar purpose, as "Paul is the teacher of the Slavic race, from which we Russians too are sprung, even so the Apostle Paul is the teacher of us Russians, for he preached to the Slavic nation... But the Slavs and the Russes are one people..."4 As Nestor, the author of this chronicle, is the first known author to claim the (early) Slavs as ancestors of any ethnic group, Avenarius's conclusion is of considerable interest: Nestor's all-Slavic approach is a narrative strategy designed to diminish the importance of the Byzantine connection to Rus' Christianity (p.198). Indeed, according to Nestor, it was the Apostle Paul, not Emperor Basil II, who was responsible for the conversion of the Slavs (Rus'). But Avenarius takes his conclusion a step further. Nestor's use of such Byzantine chroniclers as John Malalas and George Hamartolos indicates his awareness that, unlike other works of Byzantine historiography, chronicles had an "universal," as opposed to Byzantine, focus. Since chronicles chronicled the history of humankind, not of the Empire, they were acceptable and could be incorporated into a native Rus' narrative (p.199).
On balance, this is a useful and decidedly worthwhile study, focused, but also wide ranging, meticulous and detailed. Avenarius's book has much to offer to a wide audience of historians and scholars with an interest in Slavic studies and religion. He provides tantalizing hints about areas where further investigation might be useful and asks us all to rethink our understanding of medieval Eastern Europe.
Notes:
1. Oleg M. Prikhodniuk et al. "Martynovskii klad," Materialy po arkheologii, istorii i etnografii Tavrii 2 (1991), 72-92; Ljudmila V. Pekarskaja and Dafydd Kidd, Der Silberschatz von Martynovka (Ukraine) aus dem 6. und 7. Jahrhundert (Innsbruck, 1994). See also Dafydd Kidd and Ludmila Pekarskaya, "New insight into the hoard of 6th-7th century silver from Martynovka," in La noblesse romaine et les chefs barbares du IIIe au VIIe siиcle, ed. by Franc,oise Vallet and Michel Kazanski (Saint-Germain-en-Laye, 1995), pp. 351-60.
2. Csanбd Bбlint, "Ьber einige цstliche Beziehungen der Frьhawarenzeit (568-circa 670/680)," Mitteilungen des archдologischen Instituts der ungarischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 10-11 (1980-1981), 131-46; Csanбd Bбlint, Die Archдologie der Steppe. Steppenvцlker zwischen Volga und Donau vom 6. bis zum 10. Jahrhundert (Vienna/Cologne, 1989). See also Csanбd Bбlint, "Zwischen Orient und Europa. Die 'Steppenfixierung' in der Frьhmittelalterarchдologie," in Zwischen Byzanz und Abendland. Pliska, der цstliche Balkanraum und Europa im Spiegel der Frьhmittelalterarchдologie, ed. by Joachim Henning (Frankfurt am Main, 1999), pp. 13-6.
3. For a quick reference, see http://www.nhm-wien.ac.at/NHM/prehist/Stadler/Halbturn96/AwarischeBeitraege/AwarischeBeitraege.html#Der_Schatzfund_von_Vrap.
4. Samuel Hazzard Cross and Olgerd P. Sherbowitz-Wetzor (transl.), The Russian Primary Chronicle: Laurentian Text (Cambridge, Mass., 1953), p. 63.
Whatever one thinks about this tradition, it is possible, alternatively, that it may be a reflection of a Byzantine, rather than Bulgarian, agenda. By contrast, the mid-eleventh-century sermon of the Kievan metropolite Ilarion known as Slovo o zakone a blagodati is a clear attempt to minimize the Byzantine influence in Rus': Constantinople is referred to as the "New Jerusalem," but only the St. Sophia in Kiev (and not the one in Constantinople) is compared to the Temple, while Vladimir and Yaroslav appear as Solomon and David. The insertion of the Apostle Paul legend into the Russian Primary Chronicle may serve a similar purpose, as "Paul is the teacher of the Slavic race, from which we Russians too are sprung, even so the Apostle Paul is the teacher of us Russians, for he preached to the Slavic nation... But the Slavs and the Russes are one people..."4 As Nestor, the author of this chronicle, is the first known author to claim the (early) Slavs as ancestors of any ethnic group, Avenarius's conclusion is of considerable interest: Nestor's all-Slavic approach is a narrative strategy designed to diminish the importance of the Byzantine connection to Rus' Christianity (p.198). Indeed, according to Nestor, it was the Apostle Paul, not Emperor Basil II, who was responsible for the conversion of the Slavs (Rus'). But Avenarius takes his conclusion a step further. Nestor's use of such Byzantine chroniclers as John Malalas and George Hamartolos indicates his awareness that, unlike other works of Byzantine historiography, chronicles had an "universal," as opposed to Byzantine, focus. Since chronicles chronicled the history of humankind, not of the Empire, they were acceptable and could be incorporated into a native Rus' narrative (p.199).
On balance, this is a useful and decidedly worthwhile study, focused, but also wide ranging, meticulous and detailed. Avenarius's book has much to offer to a wide audience of historians and scholars with an interest in Slavic studies and religion. He provides tantalizing hints about areas where further investigation might be useful and asks us all to rethink our understanding of medieval Eastern Europe.
Notes:
1. Oleg M. Prikhodniuk et al. "Martynovskii klad," Materialy po arkheologii, istorii i etnografii Tavrii 2 (1991), 72-92; Ljudmila V. Pekarskaja and Dafydd Kidd, Der Silberschatz von Martynovka (Ukraine) aus dem 6. und 7. Jahrhundert (Innsbruck, 1994). See also Dafydd Kidd and Ludmila Pekarskaya, "New insight into the hoard of 6th-7th century silver from Martynovka," in La noblesse romaine et les chefs barbares du IIIe au VIIe siиcle, ed. by Franc,oise Vallet and Michel Kazanski (Saint-Germain-en-Laye, 1995), pp. 351-60.
2. Csanбd Bбlint, "Ьber einige цstliche Beziehungen der Frьhawarenzeit (568-circa 670/680)," Mitteilungen des archдologischen Instituts der ungarischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 10-11 (1980-1981), 131-46; Csanбd Bбlint, Die Archдologie der Steppe. Steppenvцlker zwischen Volga und Donau vom 6. bis zum 10. Jahrhundert (Vienna/Cologne, 1989). See also Csanбd Bбlint, "Zwischen Orient und Europa. Die 'Steppenfixierung' in der Frьhmittelalterarchдologie," in Zwischen Byzanz und Abendland. Pliska, der цstliche Balkanraum und Europa im Spiegel der Frьhmittelalterarchдologie, ed. by Joachim Henning (Frankfurt am Main, 1999), pp. 13-6.
3. For a quick reference, see http://www.nhm-wien.ac.at/NHM/prehist/Stadler/Halbturn96/AwarischeBeitraege/AwarischeBeitraege.html#Der_Schatzfund_von_Vrap.
4. Samuel Hazzard Cross and Olgerd P. Sherbowitz-Wetzor (transl.), The Russian Primary Chronicle: Laurentian Text (Cambridge, Mass., 1953), p. 63.
ај сеа продужи даље што би се рекло за темава...ебаве..
