Slike stranica
[ocr errors]


[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

blending required for its completion four or five centuries, and the rate of progress varied in different parts of the peninsula. The Milinys maintained their separate identity longest, perhaps till the eve of the Ottoman conquest; but even in the thirteenth century Slavonic tribes still lived apart from the Greeks and preserved their old customs in the region of Skorta in the mountainous districts of Elis and Arcadia.1 We may say that by the fifteenth century the Slavs. had ceased to be a distinct nationality ; they had become part of a new mixed Greek-speaking race, destined to be still further regenerated or corrupted under Turkish rule by the absorption of the Albanians who began to pour into the Peloponnesus in the fourteenth century. That the blending of Slavonic with Girock blood lad begun in the ninth century is suggested by the anecdote related of a Peloponnesian inagnate, Nicetas Rentakios, whose daughter had the honour of marrying it of the Emperor Romanus I. He wils fond of boasting of his. noble Hellonic descent, and drew upon himself the sharp tongue of a distinguished yraminarian, who satirized in jainbics his Slavonic cast of features. But the process of hellenization was slow, and in the tenth century the Peloponnesus and northern Greece were still regural, like Macedonin, ns inuinly Slnyonic."

"Sur Finlay, iv. 21, 22. It is rc. γαρασδοειδής όψις ισολαβωμένη -. markable that in the Chronicle of Morvat it is only in connexion with

evidently one verso of an apigrum on Slavonic regions that the word dpórios,

Nicetax. The meaning of gapao docions "delile," is used: • d. Twv Skilapwr

is a well-known puzzle. Finlay's 4605, ο δ. του Μελιγγου 4531, cl». 2993,

μroposal, γαδαροειδής (from γάϊδαρος, ο δ. των Σκορτων 5026. But notwith

in ass), is unlikely, and the explana.

tion of Sathas (see Gregurovius, op. cit. standing, the etymology. is not the Slavonic dragii, •wool," as G. Meyer

150), " with the countenance of a wou!l have it (op. cit. 135); Opbygos

Zoroastrian". (Zapkodas), is extreniely is the word δρούγγος,

far-fetcheol. I suggested that the drungus,., the Byzantine military

Slavonic proper nane Gorazd may term, which is derived from Gernianic

undcrlie gapao do (Corazd, c.9., was the (Eng. Throny). See J. Schimitt's cd, of name of one of the pupils of the Chronicle of Jorrit, f. 003. There are

apostle Methodius); this would suit very few Slavonic : words in Modern

the context(English Historical lcricu, Greek. Miklosich has counted 129

vi., Jan. 1891, p. 152). (“ Die slavischen Elemente im Neue 3 See the tenth-century scholiast on

mitch)" S.l. of Vienna Acal. Ixiii., 1869.

Strabo 7. | 12:1 (ed. Amsterdam,

1707), and, for Elis, 8. f... 1261 (&marta ? Const. Porph. Them. 53 Eiphucov γάρ ταύτα Σκύθαι νέμονται). The conεκείνον τον περιβόητον γραμματικών plicated question of race-blending in αποσκώμαι εις αυτόν τουτοι το θρυλού- Greece requires still a thoroughgoing μενον ιαμβείον

investigation, as Kirunibacher observes

[ocr errors]



[ocr errors]


We can designate one part of the Peloponnesus into which the Slavonic clement did not penetrate, the border-region between Liconia and Argolis. Here the old population seems to have continued unchanged, and the ancient Doric tongue developed into the Tzakonian dialect, which is still spoken in the modern province of Kynurin.'

It is interesting to note that on the promontory of Taenaron in Laconia a small Hellenic community survived, little touched by the political and social changes which had transformed the Hellenistic into the Byzantine world. Surrounded by Slavs, these Hellenes lived in the fortress of Maina, and in the days of Theophilus' and his son still worshipped the old gods of Greece. But the days of this · pagun immunity were numbered; the Olympians were soon to be driven from their last recess. Before tho end of the century the Muinotes were baptized."

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]


2. The Conversion of Bulgaria Christianity had made some progress within the Bulgarian kingilon before the accession of Boris. It is not likely that the Roman natives of Moesia, wlio had become the subjects of the Bulgarian kings, did much to propngate their faith ; but wo ein hurdly sloubt that some of the Slavs hul been converted, and Christinn prisoners of war scum to have improved the season of their unptivity lwy attempting to proselytizo. their masters. The introduction of Christianity by, captives is a phenomenon which meets us in other cases, and we are (B.Z. 10. 368). Meanwhile consult

presents dilliculties. Thumb holds A. Philippson, "Zur Ethnographic that the loss of I was a rule in the des l'eloponnes," i. and ii., in Piter. Tzakonian dialect, and suggests the Menns Mitteilungen Justus

etymology: eis dakwvlar, 's Axwvla(v), l'erthes' geographischer alustalt, vol. Σακωνία, Τσακωνία (comparing σέρxxxvi., 1890.



Boulov: tolppovae). The chief town | The Tzakonian dialect perplexed in tlic Tzakonian district is Lconilli. philologists and was variously taken It's extent is exhibited in the ethnofor Slavonic (kopitar, Hopf, Philippa graphical map in Philippson, op. cit. son) and Albanian (Sathas). But the The Tšékwves are mentioned in Con. studies of Dellner (cfr. his Zakonische stantine, Cor. 696. Grammatik, 1881) and Thumb (“Die Ithnographische Stellung der Za. . In the reign of Basil I. See Con. konen," in Inuloyermanische Forschunb.

stiintine, De adm. imp. 221 ; llopf,

129. gen, iv. 195 899., 1894) have demon.. strated that the Tzakones and their 3 E.y. the Goths (Wullilas) and tho linguage are Greek. Thie



not surprised to learn that some of the numerous prisoners who were carried away by Krum made efforts to spread their religion among the Bulgarians, not without success. Omurtay was deeply displeised and alarmed when he was informed of these proceedings, and when threats failed to recull the perverts to their ancestral cult, he persecuted both those who had fallen away and those wlio had corrupted them.' Amongst the martyrs was Manuel, the archbishop of Hadrianople.” The most illustrious proselyte is said to have

* been the eldest son of Omurtay himself, who on account of his perversion was put to death by his brother Malumir.

The adoption of Christianity loy pagan rulers hus generally been prompted by political considerations, and has invariably a political aspect. This was eminently the case in the conversion of Bulgaria. She was entangled in the complexities of a political situation, in which the interests of both the Western and the Eastern Empire were involvedl. The disturbing fact was the policy of the Franks, which aimed at the extension of their power over the Slavonic states on their south-eastern frontier. Their collision with Bulgaria .on the Middle Danube in the reign of Omurtag had been followed by yours of peace, and a treaty of alliance was concluded in A.1). 845. The efforts of King Lewis the German were at


1 Theodore Stud. (lurru Cut. lxiii. P'p. 220 841.) relates that the Bulgarian ruler, whose name, unfortunately, he does not mention (and the late of this catechesis is unknown), issued a decree that all Christianis should wat meat in Lent on pain of death. Four. teen resisted the orier. One was pruit .lo death, and his wife and children given its slaves to Bulgarian niasters, as an example; l'ut the others lieki out, and were also executed. The klan has been sufijoseal to be Krum; cf. Auvray's note, 1. 617. Theopiliy. lautus (list. mirl. 192) relates that one of Krum's capitives, kinanın, was assigned to Omurtig who becamo pratly attached to him, and tried to induce him to apost.itize. As he wils obstinate, he was thrown into a foul purisoll, whicro he remained till allor Omurtig's death.

Coul. 7%. 217. According to tho llelogion liesilii, l'irs jis, jun. 22 Migre', 117, 276, hirum pont

Manue: to death, cutting off his arms from his shoulders, then cleaving him in twain with a sword, and throwing the remains to wild beasts: It is mulded that Krum's act caused such disgust among the Bulgarians that they strangled him with ropes. All this is evidently a sensational and impudent invention. For the persecu. lion of Tsok, sıc above, p. 359. Thcopilyl. 02 cil. .193

Sult Malamir rolcaścid the capitive kinamon from prison at the request of his brother Enrarôties. Kinamon con verted Eura rôtis, who wils put to death by Malamir its an apiostato. Malamir, according to this narrativa (197). clical three years later; this would give for the death of Enravótils. We have an carlier instance of ripostasy on the part of a royal Bulgarian in Telorig, iho refugee who accepted lap lism nt the court of IV. (Theophi

. -151).

[ocr errors]


this time directed to destroying the independence of the Slavonic kingdom of Great Moraviii, north of the Citrpathians. Prince Rostislav was inaking a successful stand against the encroachments of his Teutonic neighbours, but he wanted allies sorely and he turned to Bulgaria. He succeeded in engnging the co-operation of Boris, who, though he sent an embassy to Lewis just after his accession, formed an offensive alliance with Rostislav in the following year (A.D. 853). The allies conducted a joint campaign and were defeated. The corisiderations which impelled Boris to this change of policy are unknown; but it was only temporary. Nine years Inter he changed front. When Karlmann, who had become governor of the East Mark, revolted ngainst his father Lewis, he was supported by Rostislav, but Boris sided with Lewis, and a new treaty of alliance was negotiated between the German and Bulgarian kings (A.D. 862).”

Moravia had need of help against the combination of Bulgaria with her German foe, and Rostislav sent an embassy to the court of Byzantium. It must have been the purpose of the ambassadors to convince the Emperor of the dangers with which the whole Illyrian peninsula was menaced by the Bulgaro-Cierman alliance, and to induce him to attack Bulgaria."

The Byzantine government must have known much more than we of the nature of the negotiations between Boris and Lewis. In particular, we have no information as to the price which the German offered the Bulgarian for his active assistance in suppressing the rebellion. But we have clear evidence that the question of the conversion of Bulgaria to Christianity wils touched upon in tlic negotiations. As a means of increasing his political influence at the Bulgarian court, this matter was of great importance to Lewis, and Boris did not decline to entertain the proposition. The interests of the Eastern Empire were directly involved. Bulgaria was a standing danger ; but that danger would be seriously enhanced if she pissed under the ccclesiastical supremacy of Rome and threw in her lot with Latin Christinnity. It was a matter of supreme urgency to detach Boris from his connexion with Lewis, and the representatives Tionib. Bort., 8.11.

Cp. Zlatnrski, an. : %uturshi, 01.

Op dun. Berb., 8.0, 804 ; Zlatarski, Co.

[ocr errors]


of Rostislav may have helped Michael and his advisers to realize the full gravity of the situation. It was decided to coerce the Bulgarians, and in the summer of A.D. 863 Michael marched into their territory at the head of his army, while his fleet appeared off their coast on the Black Sea.' The moment was favourable. Bulgarian forces were absent, taking part in the campaign against Karlmann, and the country was suffering from a cruel famine. In these circumstances, the Emperor accomplished his purpose without striking a blow; the demonstration of his power sufficed to induce Boris to submit to his conditions. It was arranged that Bulgaria should receive Christianity from the Greeks and become ecclesiastically dependent on Constantinople;' that

. Boris should withdraw from the offensive alliance with Lewis and only conclude a treaty of peace.' In return for this alteration of his policy, the Emperor ayreed to some territorial concessions. He surrendered to Bulgaria a district which was uninhabited and forined a march between the two realıns, extending from the Iron Gate, a pass in the StranjaDagh, northward to Develtos. It has been supposed that at the same time the frontier in the far west was also regulated, and that the results of the Bulgarian advance towards the Hadriatic were formally recognized."

The brilliant victory which was gained over the Saracens

The meaning of this expedition the southern point of the region in has been first satisfactorily explained question, and itlentities, it with a pass by Zlatarski, 62 sqq. The source is called Demir Kapili, • Iron Gate'," in Simeou (Cont. Gicory. 821).

the north-western hills of the StranjaThe consent to accept Christianity Planina, north of Losen-grail, which is was perhaps unexpected. Photius, near Kuvchat. He places the western Ep. 4. p. 168 εις την των χριστιανών point of the surrendered district παραδόξως μετενεκεντρίσθησαν πίστιν. at the Sakar Planina. The other

* This treaty was maintained for region, between the Eastern Balkans niany years to come.

and the Erkesiia, was also called • Cont. Theoph. 163 débwrev dprugu Zagora (="behind the mountains "); ουσαν τηνικαύτα την από Σιδηράς, ταύτης Zlatarski, 70 sqq. Ochrida and δε τότε δριον τυγχανούσης Ρωμαίων τε Glavinitsa were Bulgarian in the reign και αυτών άχρι της Δεβέλτου, ήτις ούτω of Boris (Vilu Clementis, c. 17. p. 24, cd. καλείται Ζάγορα, παρ' αυτούς (ερήμη is Miklosich : Kephalenia = Glavinitsa). the antecedent of Hris). The credit Zlaiarski carefully discuissey the of having explained this passage whereabouts of this place and con. boclongs to Zlatrnki, op. cit. 65 879. clucles that (distinct from the region Hillorto Lionpå load been explained of of Coque (ilosnil, on the bay of Avlonia, the so named Boulkas pilns (Voronova, which will onlled (ilisvinitat) therio Meu novo, 13:39, 11. 2), lout thio wels all inlawl fortrin Gilavinituil, district stretching from the Billkins lietween the rivers Voiusa (ancient to Develtos was already Bullgieriani. Aoux) and Ozum (ancient Aposus), Zlatarski has seen that Lionpâ marks near Mount Tomor : and he would

« PrethodnaNastavi »