Oxford history of the christian church

Footnotes.

^1	GR422, spring or summer 843
^2	GR433.
^3	GR429 and 434.
^4	GR436, with a discussion of the motives underlying the schism; cf. Dvornik, Photian Schism, 15.
^5	GR445, end of 847 or first quarter of 848 ; Dvornik, Photian Schism, 19 ff. with reason suggests a later date.
^6	See P. Karlin-Hayter, “Gregory of Syracuse, Ignatios and Photios,” in Iconoclasm, 141 ff.
^7	On the various ambiguities of this episode see Dvornik, Photian Schism, 18 ff.
^8	GR449.
^9	GR455 with a discussion of the conflicting evidence on the nature of the resignation.
^10	GR456.
^11	Theognostus, Libellus to Nicholas I, Mansi, XVI. 300, cited Dvornik, Photian Schism, 54.
^12	GR459.
^13	GR460.
^14	GR464.
^15	GR465.
^16	GR464; ὑπεξελθóvτοζ, PG102, Ep., bk. I, no. 1, col. 588 C.
^17	Nicholas's first letter to Michael III, 25 Sept. 860, MGH, Ep., VI, no. 82, pp. 433-9, French trans. in Stiernon, 249-53.
^18	MGH, Ep., VI, no. 83, pp. 439-40; French trans. in Stiernon, 253-4.
^19	GR466.
^20	See Dvornik, Photian Schism, passim and “The Patriarch Photius and Iconoclasm,” DOP, 7 (1953), 69 ff.; and cf. C. Mango, “The liquidation of iconoclasm and the Patriarch Photios,” in Iconoclasm, 133 ff.
^21	GR468.
^22	GR468, 17.
^23	GR469, Aug or Sept. 861; PG102, Ep., bk. I, no. 2, pp. 593-617; French trans. by Stiernon, 254-8.
^24	DR460 (c. Aug. 861; partial reconstruction from Nicholas I's letters).
^25	MGH, Ep., VI, no. 86, pp. 447-51.
^26	MGH, Ep, VI, no. 85, pp. 442-6, French trans. in Stiernon, 258-61.
^27	MGH, Ep., VI, no. 84, pp. 440-2.
^28	On the council see MGH, Ep., VI, no. 91, pp. 517-23 and no. 98, pp. 556-61.
^29	MGH, Ep., VII, nos. 37-40, pp. 294-6.
^30	MGH, Ep., VI, no. 88, p. 459.
^31	Ibid. 454-87 ; French trans. H. Rahner, L'Église et l'État . . . (Paris, 1964), 338-61. Nicholas was ill at the time so this long letter may owe something to his secretary, Anastasius the Librarian.
^32	On the Pope Responsa ad Consulta Bulgarorum see below, ch. IV, section 6.
^33	GR481, spring or summer 867.
^34	GR482 (Aug. or Sept. before 24 Sept. 867).
^35	GR479 (beginning of 867) and GR483 (Sept., before 24 Sept. 867).
^36	MGH, Ep., VI, no. 100, pp. 600-9.
^37	Dvornik, Photian Schism, uses these rather misleading terms very freely, as do other historians.
^38	DR474 (no mention of first letter); French trans. of second letter in Stiernon, 261-3.
^39	GR499.
^40	GR500.
^41	Mansi, XVI. 27-8; French trans. in Stiernon, 270-2.
^42	Mansi, XVI. 75-81 and 97; French trans. in Stiernon, 272-6 and 277-8.
^43	GR502; Mansi, XVI. 397-406; French trans. in Stiernon, 278-99.
^44	DR486.
^45	See also below, p. 99.
^46	MGH, Ep., VII, no. 7, p. 277 (between Dec. 872 and May 873).
^47	GR504; DR488.
^48	Cf. GR505.
^49	GR504; DR488.
^50	A. Vogt-I. Hausherr, “L'Oraison funèbre de Basile Ier,” Orientalia Christiana, 26 (1932), 62-9.
^51	DR496.
^52	GR513 (autumn 878 or winter 878-9); DR497.
^53	MGH, Ep., VII, nos. 207-10, pp. 166-87.
^54	See Dvornik, Photian Schism, 175 ff.
^55	MGH, Ep., VII, no. 259, pp. 228-30.
^56	See below p. 99 .
^57	MGH, Ep., VII, no. 259, pp. 228-30.
^58	MGH, Ep., VII, no. 258, pp. 226-8.
^59	Dvornik, Photian Schism, 216 ff.
^60	See ibid. for details; cf. DS79, cols. 1397 ff. (Stephanou).
^61	GR536.
^62	See below pp. 92 ff.
^63	See Ostrogorsky, History, 240-1 (with bibliography); text in Zepos, II. 236-368, see Tit. III. 2.
^64	GR481 (spring or summer 867).
^65	PG102, 263-392; on its later use see Dvornik, Photian Schism, 400-1.
^66	See below ch. VI, section 5.
^67	For an assessment of his influence see Lemerle, Humanisme byzantin, ch. 7 and Wilson, Scholars, ch. 5.
^68	Ed. with trans. by R. Henry, 8 vols. (Budé, Paris, 1959-77); J. H. Freese, The Library of Photius (London, 1920), gives an English trans. of nos. 1-165 with notes. The work appears originally to have had no specific short title, but in a fourteenth-century manuscript it is called the Myriobiblon, and late in the sixteenth century became known in the West as the Bibliotheca. Cf. W. T. Treadgold, The Nature of the Bibliotheca of Photius (Dumbarton Oaks Studies18, Washington, DC, 1980).
^69	See Lemerle, Humanisme byzantin, 37 ff. and 179 ff.
^70	See for example no. 274, ed. R. Henry, vol. 8, p. 114, rejected by Photius on grounds of style and content, a verdict in which later scholars appear to concur.
^71	Full justice to Photius as a humanist has at last been done by Lemerle in his study Humanisme byzantin; for the range of Photius's writings see Beck, Kirche, 520 ff.
^72	PG102, Col. 597 A-D, trans. and discussed in Lemerle, Humanisme byzantin, 197-8.
^73	See H-G. Beck, “Christliche Mission und politische Propaganda im byzantinischen Reich,” Settimane di studio del Centro italiano di studi sull'alto medioevo, XIV (Spoleto, 1967), and in Ideen und Realitäten in Byzanz (Variorum, London, 1972). On Byzantine missions in general see C. Hannick in Kirchengeschichte als Missionsgeschichte, gen. ed. H. Frohneset al., vol. II, ed. K. Schaeferdiek (Munich, 1978).
^74	On pre- seventh-century mission work see vol. I in the series Missionsgeschichte. This volume also contains several general essays including one by Karl Holl in which he contrasts Byzantine missionary work with that of the medieval West.
^75	See G. Moravcsik, “Byzantinische Mission im Kreise der Türkvölker an der Nordküste des Schwarzen Meeres,” Proceedings of the XIIIth International Congress of Byzantine Studies, Oxford 1966 (Oxford, 1967), 15-28, and “Byzantine Christianity and the Magyars in the period of their migration,” American Slavic and East European Review, 5 (1946), 29-45, reprinted in Studia Byzantina (Amsterdam and Budapest, 1967), 245-59.
^76	There is a considerable literature on Constantine (Cyril) and Methodius. See F. Grivec and F. TomsU0306ic+̆, Constantinus et Methodius Thessalonicenses. Fontes (with Latin trans.) (Zagreb, 1960); F. Grivec, Konstantin und Method, Lehrer der Slaven (Wiesbaden, 1960); F. Dvornik, Les Slaves, Byzance et Rome au IX^e siècle (Prague, 1933; 2nd edn., 1969); id., Légendes; id., Byzantine Missions; Vlasto, Entry; see also the bibliography cited in Beck, Geschichte, 103-6; and the general account in Obolensky, Commonwealth, and in CMH IV (1).
^77	I. S+̆evcȈenko, “The Definition of Philosophy in the Life of Saint Constantine,” For Roman Jakobson . . . (The Hague, 1956), 449-57, admirably analyses the nature of Constantine's 'philosophla' and its relation to Christian teaching.
^78	Darrouzès, Offikia,431-2, considers it unlikely that a young deacon of 23 years would hold so important a post as chartophylax as Dvornik supposed; cf. Dvornik, Byzantine Missions, 57.
^79	This is controversial; see Vlasto, Entry, 329, note 91 and Dvornik, Byzantine Missions, Appendix I.
^80	On the possible identification of the 'barbarians' with the Rus see H. Ahrweiler, “Les Relations entre les Byzantins et les Russes au IX^c siècle,” Ass. Internat. des Études Byzantines, Bulletin d'Information et de Co-ordination, 5 (Athens and Paris, 1971), 57-61.
^81	See M. V. Anastos, “Political theory in the Lives of the Slavic saints Constantine and Methodius,” Harvard Slavic Studies, 2 (1954), 11-38 (reprinted Variorum, London, 1979).
^82	Vita Constantini, ch. 8, Dvornik, Légendes, 358.
^83	Ibid. , ch. 9-11, Dvornik, ibid. 361 ff.
^84	see G. Ostrogorsky, “The Byzantine Background of the Moravian Mission,” DOP, 19 (1965), 1-18.
^85	See Vavrínck-ZisteȈrovfá, “Byzantium's Role,” on archaeological findings.
^86	Vita Constantini, ch. 14, Dvornik, Légendes, 372.
^87	Ibid.
^88	After Methodius returned from Khazaria he was made head of the monastery of Polychron; but it is not clear where this was; see Janin, Églises et monastères, II. 208-9.
^89	See A. Dostál, “The Origins of the Slavonic Liturgy,” DOP, 19 (1965), 67-87.
^90	Vita Constantini, ch. 16, Dvornik, Légendes, 375-8.
^91	RP IV. 452-3; (Resp. 6 to Mark of Alexandria); PG 138, col. 957 B. He is speaking here of 'orthodox Syrians and Armenians and other regions and it is not clear how far 'other regions' was meant to imply an open invitation.
^92	See G. Moravcsik, “The Role of the Byzantine Church in Medieval Hungary,” American Slavic and East European Review, 6 (1947), 134-51 (reprinted) in his Studia Byzantina, Amsterdam and Budapest, 1967).
^93	The paradoxical nature of the Byzantine contribution is discussed by Vav→ínek-ZásteȈrová, “Byzantium's Role,” 176-88.
^94	I. S+̆evcȈenko, “Three Paradoxes of the Cyrillo-Methodian Mission,” Slavic Review, 23 (1964), 220-36.
^95	G. C. Soulis, “The Legacy of Cyril and Methodius to the Southern Slavs,” DOP, 19 (1965), 19-43 (with bibliography).
^96	See Soulis, op. cit. 38-43.
^97	See below pp. 117 ff.
^98	GR481; PG102, Ep., bk. I, no. 13, cols. 736-7.
^99	DR493 (dated c. 874?).
^100	See Ostrogorsky, History, 283, note 1. See below, p. 117.
^101	See D. Obolensky, “The Heritage of Cyril and Methodius in Russia” DOP, 19 (1965), 45-65; L. Müller, “Byzantinische Mission nördlich des Schwarzen Meeres vor dem elften Jahrhundert,” Proceedings of the XIIIth International Congress of Byzantine Studies, Oxford 1966 (Oxford, 1967), 29-38.