Oxford history of the christian church

Footnotes.

^1	On the eleventh-century developments see the interpretation of Lemerle, “Byzance au tournant du son destin (1025-1118),” Cinq études, 251-312.
^2	On Alexius Studites see DHGE; G. Ficker, “Erlasse des Patriarchen von Konstantinopel Alexios Studites” (Kiel, 1911); and FM, VII. 136-8.
^3	GR842.
^4	“Chronographia,” Constantine IX, ch. 20, ed. E. Renauld (Paris, 1926), I. 127.
^5	GR833 (Nov 1027) and 835 (Jan 1028).
^6	GR838(Oct 1029).
^7	GR839 (May 1030).
^8	GR846 (Sept 1039).
^9	G. Dagron, “Minorités ethniques et religieuses dans l'orient byzantin à la fin du X^c et au XI^c siècle: L'Immigration syrienne,” TM, 6 (1976), 177-216; Vryonis, Decline, passim and “Byzantium: the Social Basis of Decline in the Eleventh Century,” Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, 2 (1959), 159-75.
^10	By reason of the significance which was later attached to the episode of 1054 there is considerable literature on Cerularius. See L. Bréhier, Le Schisme oriental du XIe siècle (Paris, 1899); Jugie, Le Schisme byzantin; E. Amann, “La Rupture du XIc siècle',” in FM, VII; Runciman, Eastern Schism, all in need of some revision; F. Dvornik “Constantinople and Rome',” CMH IV(1); Beck, Geschichte (brief, with more recent bibliography).
^11	DR891.
^12	See Sirarpie Der Nersessian, Armenia and the Byzantine Empire (Cambridge, Mass., 1945), for a brief account of the Armenian point of view.

¹³ PL143, cols. 793-8; Will (better edition), 56-64.

¹⁴ PL143, cols. 773-81; Will, 85-92.

¹⁵ Edictum Synodale, PG 120, cols. 735-48; Will, 155-68. The original bull is in the Latin account of the episode, Brevis et Succincta Commemoratio, PL143, cols. 1001-4; Will, 150-4. There is a translation in Jugie, Le Schisme byzantin.

¹⁶ PL143, cols. 769-73; Will, 168-71.

¹⁷ GR860 and 861.

¹⁸ GR866 and 870; PG120, cols. 816-20 and 781-96 (the probable order of the letters); Will, 184-8, 172-84.

¹⁹ GR869 (Edictum Synodale).

²⁰ PG120, cols. 795-816; Will, 189-204.

²¹ See his letter to Dominic of Grado, PG120, cols. 755-82; Will, 208-28.

²² See the analysis of P. Lemerle, L'Orthodoxie byzantine et l'œcuménisme médiéval: Les Origines du “schisme” des Églises, Bull. de l'Assoc. Budé (1965), 228-46.

²³ Ep. 207, Sathas, V. 511.

²⁴ Scylitzes Cont., p. 105 (CB, II, p. 643).

²⁵ Ed. E. Kurz, Michaelis Pselli Scripta Minora, I. 232-328 (Milan, 1936); see also L. Bréhier, REG, 16 (1903), 375-416 and 17 (1904), 35-76.

²⁶ Scylitzes Cont., p. 106 (CB, II, p. 644).

²⁷ Scylitzes Cont., p. 106 (CB, II, pp. 644-5); see Lemerle, Cinq études, 280-2.

²⁸ GR890 and 891.

²⁹ On Xiphilinus see W. Fisher, Studien zur byzantinischen Geschichte des elften Jahrhunderts

³⁰ GR893.

³¹ GR896 and 897.

³² GR905.

³³ GR900.

³⁴ GR901.

³⁵ GR909.

³⁶ GR910.

³⁷ GR907; see below pp. 142 ff.

(Plauen i. V., 1883), pp. 2-49 (now in need of some revision).

^38	Gouillard, 'Synodikon', provides an indispensable guide to the heresy trials (texts and commentary).

³⁹ See Lemerle, Humanisme byzantin, passim.

⁴⁰ See A. Garzya, “On Michael Psellus's Admission of Faith,” EEBS, 35 (1966-7), 41-6 (text and English summary).

⁴¹ For a revision of long accepted interpretations see Lemerle, “Le Gouvernement des philosophes”: Notes et remarques sur l'enseignement, les écoles, la culture', Cinq études,195-248; he is not in agreement with the suggestions of W. Wolska-Conus, “Les Ecoles de Psellos et de Xiphilin sous Constantin IX Monomaque,” TM, 6 (1976), 223-43.

⁴² See U. Criscuolo, Epistola a Giovanni Xifilino, critical text, introduction, translation, and commentary (Naples, 1973); Greek text also in Sathas, V.

⁴³ Some of Italus's writings have been edited. See G. Cereteli (ed.), Opuscula Selecta, 2 vols. (Tiflis, 1924-6, lithograph), re-edited by N. Ketschakmadze, Ioannis Itali Opera (Tiflis, 1966), with brief introduction in Russian and Georgian and notes in Latin; P. Joannou (ed.), Ioannes Italos, Quaestiones Quodlibetales (ποఎ00EDαι Καí λὺσΙç'A) (Ettal, 1956); J. Gouillard, TM, 9 (1985), 133-74.

⁴⁴ There is some confusion over the details of the condemnations of the 1076-7 and 1082 trials and the traditions of the Synodicon vary; see Gouillard, ' Synodikon', 188-202; see also GR907; P. E. Stephanou, Jean Italos, philosophe et humaniste (= OCA134, Rome, 1949); Hussey, Church and Learning, 89-94; P. Joannou, Christliche Metaphysik in Byzanz, I (Ettal, 1956).

⁴⁵ DR1078-9.

⁴⁶ DR1236; Darrouzès, Offikia, 72-5.

⁴⁷ DR1236; Darrouzès, Offikia, 67-8.

⁴⁸ Ibid., 75-9 , who points out that many relevant texts are still unpublished and therefore only provisional comment can be made; R. Browning, “The Patriarchal School at Constantinople in the Twelfth Century,” B, 32 (1962), 167-202 and 33 (1963), 11-40, mainly on the location of 'schools' and identification of teachers.

⁴⁹ See A. P. Kazhdan, Social'nyj sostav gospodstvujus+̆c+̆ego klassa Vizantii XI-XII vv. (The social structure of the ruling class in Byzantium during the XIth and XIIth centuries) (Moscow, 1974), summarized by I. Sorlin, “Bulletin Byzantino-Slave,” TM, 6 (1976), 367-80.

⁵⁰ See P. Gautier, “Diatribes de Jean l'Oxite contre Alexis I^er Comnéne,” REB, 28 (1970), 5-55 (text, trans. and commentary).

⁵¹ GR940 (Jan 1086) and DR1130.

⁵² GR941 (Feb. or Mar 1086).

⁵³ GR955 (c.1089, but see P. Stephanou, “Le Procés de Léon de Chalcédoine,” OCP, 9 (1943), 27, who puts it in late 1087 or early 1088.

⁵⁴ DR1085 and discussion on date.

⁵⁵ GR967 and 968; opinion differs as to the year; see Stephanou, op. cit. 57-64.

⁵⁶ Anna Comnena, VII. 4.

⁵⁷ Anna Comnena, X. I; GR945; Gouillard, “Synodikon”202-6.

⁵⁸ Anna Comnena, XIV. 8.

⁵⁹ Text, trans, and commentary in Darrouzès, Documents inèdits.

⁶⁰ GR1003; DR1273; DHGE, 15 (Darrouzès); Gouillard, “Synodikon,” 68-71, 206-10; P. Ioannou, “Eustrate de Nicée. Trois pièces inédites de son procès (1117),” REB, 10 (1952) 24-34; S. Salaville, “Philosophie et théologie, ou épisodes scholastiques á Byzance de 1059 á 1117,” EO, 29 (1930), 146-56.

⁶¹ GR1038; Gouillard, “Synodikon,” 210-15.

⁶² PG140, cols. 140-8.

⁶³ GR1041-3; DR 1412.

⁶⁴ Ed. A. Demetracopoulus, Bibliotheca Ecclesiastica (Leipzig, 1866), 321-59, see Beck, Kirche, 623-4.

⁶⁵ Nicetas Choniates, De Man. Com., VII. 5 (CB, p. 276) and Treasury of Orthodoxy, PG140, cols. 201-81; John Cinnamus, Epitome, VI. 2 (CB, pp. 251-7); P. Classen, “Das Konzil von Konstantinopel 1166 und die Lateiner,” BZ, 48 (1955), 339-68.

^66	Text in Gouillard, “Synodikon,” 75-7; see also ibid. 217-26 for detail on the discussion of theological issues; GR1059-67, 1075-7, and 1109-17.
^67	Gouillard, “Synodikon,” 77-81 (text).
^67a	See J. Darrouzés, REB, 30 (1972), 187-97.
^71	For the Greek text and commentary see R. Browning, “A New Source on Byzantine-Hungarian Relations,” Balkan Studies, 2 (1961), 173-214.
^72	See G. Podskalsky, “Nikolaos von Methone und die Proklosrenaissance in Byzanz (11./12. Jh.),” OCP, 42 (1976), 509-23; Nicholas of Methone, Refutation of Proclus' Elements of Theology, ed. A. D. Angelou (Athens and Leiden, 1984).
^68	Nicetas Choniates, De Man. Com. VII. 5 (CB, p. 275).
^69	H. Hunger, “Die byzantinische Literatur der Komnenenzeit: Versuch einer Neubewertung,” Österreichische Ak. der Wiss., Phil. Hist. Kl., 1968, No. 3, pp. 59-76.
^70	Eleventh-century developments are reviewed in TM, 6 (1976).
^73	See below pt. II, section 10.
^74	On heresies in general including the variant dualisms see J. Gouillard, “L'Hérésie,” 299-324, and M. Loos, Dualist Heresy in the Middle Ages (Prague, 1974). This section on the dualists, though carried through to the end of the middle ages, is placed here for convenience.
^75	For an indispensable guide in attempting to disentangle divergent evidence (and modern views) on the nature of the Paulician heresy see P. Lemerle, “L'Histoire des Pauliciens d'Asie Mineure d'aprés les sources grecques,” TM, 5 (1973), 1-144 (with 2 plates of the fortress Tephrice). See also N. G. Garsoïan The Paulician Heresy . . . in Armenia and the Eastern Provinces of the Byzantine Empire (The Hague and Paris, 1967) and Lemerle critique of this work, “Histoire des Pauliciens,” op. cit. 12-15.
^76	See C. Astrucet al., “Les Sources grecques pour l'histoire des Pauliciens d'Asie Mineure; Texte critique et traduction,” TM, 4 (1970), 1-227.
^77	John of Damascus, De Haeresibus, PG 94, cols. 776-7.
^78	See C. Astrucet al., “Les Sources grecques,” TM, 4 (1970), 185-207.
^79	For a general account see Obolensky, Bogomils; see also the more recent discussion in Obolensky, Commonwealth, 119-27.
^80	GR788 and 789 (both undated, with summary of the heretical doctrines and the penalties to be imposed). The Patriarch's letter has been re-edited by I. Dujc+̆ev, “L'epistola sui Bogomili del patriarca costantinopolitano Teofilatto,” Mélanges E. Tisserant, II(ST232, Vatican, 1964), 63-91.
^81	See H.-C. Puech and A. Vaillant, Le Traité contre les Bogomiles de Cosmas le prêtre (Paris, 1945), trans. and commentary, and ed. Ju. Begunov (Sofia, 1973), p. 297.
^82	PG 130, cols. 20-1360; tit. 27; cols. 1289-332 deals with the Bogomils.
^83	See his Advice to the Orthodox, Puech and Vaillant, op. cit. 112-27.
^84	On Byzantine Bogomilism see Obolensky, Bogomils, 168-229.
^85	Text in G. Ficker, Die Phundagiagiten: Ein Beitrag zur Ketzergeschichte des byzantinischen Mittelalters (Leipzig, 1908); the letter is summarized in Obolensky, Bogomils, 176-83. “Neo-Massalianism,” 'comme il est prudent de l'appeler', is Gouillard's name for the revival of the tenth to twelfth centuries, ' L'Hérésie', 319.
^86	PG 122, cols. 820-82 and ed. P. Gautier, REB, 38 (1980), 105-94 who argues against Psellus's authorship.
^87	Anna Comnena, XIV. 8-9.
^88	S. Runciman, “The End of Anna Dalassena,” Annuaire de l'Institut de Philologie et d'Histoire orientales et slaves, 9 (1949 = Mélanges H. Grégoire I), 517-24; see also the criticism of J. Gouillard, TM, 1 (1965), 314, note 122.
^89	see Janin, Églises et monastéres, III. 513.
^90	GR946; Anna Comnena, X. 1.
^91	GR988; Anna Comnena, XV. 9-10.
^92	GR989.
^93	See R. Browning, “Unpublished Correspondence between Michael Italicus, Archbishop of Philippopolis, and Theodore Prodromos,” Byzantino-Bulgarica, I (1962), 279-97 (text and commentary).
^94	GR 1007 (May 1140); see Gouillard, 'L'Hérésie', 319-21, on certain apparent affinities between neo-Messalianism and some aspects of Orthodox spirituality.
^95	GR 1011, 1012, and 1014.
^96	GR 1013 and 1015; Cinnamus, History, bk. 2, ch. 10 (CB, pp. 63-6).
^97	See the Slavonic life, cited by Obolensky, Bogomils, 223-6, and E. KaluZ+̆niacki, Werke des Patriarchen von Bulgarien, Euthymius (Vienna, 1901), 27-58.
^98	Life, ed. V. I. Zlatarski, Sbornik za narodni umotvorenia, nauka i knizhina, 20 (Sofia 1904), p. 16, 11 and p. 33, 20 and see M. Heppell, “The Spiritual Testament of St Teodosi of Turnovo,” Sobornost, 4 (1982), 202. On Bogomilism in the Second Bulgarian Empire see Obolensky, Bogomils, 230 ff.
^99	GR 1291 (undated); text in Ficker, Phundagiagiten, 115-125.
^100	In Restitutionem Imaginum (Germanus works in a good deal on Bogomil errors), PG140, cols. 660-76 and In Exaltationem Venerandae Crucis et contra Bogomilos, PG140, cols. 621-44.
^101	See below, ch. VIII, section 7.
^102	GR 2210, 2211, 2213.
^103	GR 2317.
^104	GR 2084 (c. May, 1318).
^105	Gouillard, “Synodikon,” 63-9 (text); see his comments on the dualist sects, pp. 228-37.
^106	Contemporary western dualist movements and possible links with the East are not discussed here.
^107	In Phot. Patr. Cp. Nomocan., tit. X, cap. 8, RP I. 242-6.
^108	GR1020 (undated); In Phot. Patr. Cp. Nomocan., tit. IX, cap. 15, RP I. 191.
^109	Symeon the New Theologian, Catecheses, I. 169.
^110	GR1007, “L'expérience sensible de l'Esprit opérant en lui,” so Grumel translates it; RP V. 76 ff.
^111	GR954 (Sept. 1089 or soon after); see W. Holtzmann, “Die Unionsverhandlungen zwischen Kaiser Alexios I. und Papst Urban II. im Jahre 1089,” BZ, 28 (1928), 38-67 (with Greek texts).
^112	See F. Dvornik, Photian Schism, 326-8.
^113	This concept (which conflicted with Byzantine views) is developed by C. Erdmann, Die Entstehung des Kreuzzugsgedankens (Stuttgart, 1935).
^114	There is a vast literature on the crusades including several general surveys. See Setton, Crusades and Runciman, Crusades. P. Lemerle, “Byzance et la croisade,” X Congresso Internazionale di Scienze Storiche, Relazioni 3 (Florence, 1955), 595-620, discusses the impact of the first four crusades on Byzantium and evaluates the Greek sources. For the effect of the crusades on the Orthodox patriarchates of Antioch and Jerusalem and on the separated eastern churches see Hamilton, Latin Church in the Crusader States.
^115	See below pp. 174-6 and Hamilton, Latin Church in the Crusader States for the widely differing and fluctuating relations between Franks and the Orthodox in the patriarchates of Antioch and Jerusalem.
^116	Ep. CDXXXVII, PL163, cols. 388-9.
^117	DR1261 and 1262.
^118	DR1302 and 1303. Dölger puts the letters in 1124 and 1126, but for the acceptance of the later dates see Lamma, I. 28-30, with discussion of the contents; see also Ostrogorsky, History, 385, note 1.
^119	Lamma, I. 30-1, citing PL189, bk. II, Epp. 39 and 40, cols. 260-2; Letters, ed. G. Constable (Cambridge, Mass., 1967), vol. I, Ep. 75 (to John II), pp. 208-9 and vol. II, pp. 148-9, and vol. I, Ep. 76 (to the Patriarch), pp. 209-10 and vol. II, p. 149, with the suggestion that they cannot be dated more closely than some time within Peter's abbacy and before John II's death, i.e. 1122-43.
^120	Liber Pont., II. 415, 419-20 (Vita Alex. III); cf. Cinnamus, History, bk. VI, ch. 4 (CB, p. 262).
^121	e.g. Runciman, Eastern Schism, 121-2; Every, Byzantine Patriarchate, 169.
^122	Dialogue, ed. V. Loparov, VV, 14 (1907), 344-54; and L. Allatius, De . . . Ecclesiae . . . Consensione (Cologne, 1648), bk. 2, ch. 5, pp. 555 ff. and ch. 12, 661 ff.
^123	Norden, Papsttum, 96; cf. GR1121 and 1122.
^124	George Tornices, Lettres et Discours, ed. J. Darrouzès (Paris, 1970), Ep. 30, pp. 324-35.
^125	J. Darrouzès, “Les Documents byzantins du XII^c siécle sur la primauté romaine,” REB, 23 (1965), 69-82 and G. Hofmann, “Papst und Patriarch unter Kaiser Manuel I. Komnenos,” EEBS, 23 (1953), 74-82 (text of papal and patriarchal letters of 1173). Darrouzès evidence in REB was to some extent drawn from unpublished material thus emphasizing that the situation in the twelfth century may have to be revised still further as more unexplored material becomes available. A. Kazhdan, People and Power (Washington, DC, 1982), 157, supports the attribution to Michael Anchialus but he does not appear to have taken into account all Darrouzès's arguments, e.g. on the content of the Dialogue and of the patriarchal letter edited by Hofman, op. cit.
^126	Burchard of Mount Sion AD 1280, trans. A. Stewart (London, 1897), p. 107, cited by Hamilton, Latin Church in the Crusader States, 359.

¹²⁷ H. Stern, “Les Représentations des Conciles dans l'Eglise de la Nativité à Bethléem,” B, 13 (1938), 421; cf. C. Walter, L'Iconographie des conciles dans la tradition byzantine (Paris, 1970), 160-1 and passim.

¹²⁸ See B. Hamilton, Monastic Reform, Catharism and the Crusades (900 -1300) (Variorum, London, 1979), I-IV.

¹²⁹ See A. Pertusi, “Rapporti tra il monachesimo italo-greco ed il monachesimo bizantino nell'alto medio evo,” La chiesa greca in Italia dell'VIII al XVI secolo (Atti del consegno storico interecclesiale. Bari, 1969; Padua, 1972), II. 473-500.

¹³⁰ See G. Bardy, La Question des langues dans l'église ancienne (Paris, 1948).

¹³¹ See M. Anastos, “Some Aspects of Byzantine influence on Latin Thought in the Twelfth Century,” Twelfth Century Europe and the Foundations of Modern Society, ed. M. Clagett, G. Post, and R. Reynolds, 2nd edn. (Madison, Wisc., 1966), 132-4 (reprinted Variorum, London, 1979).

¹³² A. Strittmatter, “Notes on Leo Tuscus Translation of the liturgy of St John Chrysostom,” Didascaliae: Studies in honor of A. M. Albareda, ed. Sesto Prete (New York, 1961), 409-24; A. Jacob, “La Traduction de la Liturgie de S. Jean Chrysostome par Léon Toscan,” OCP, 32 (1966), 111-62.

¹³³ Cf. Darrouzès, “Documents byzantins,” 42-88.

¹³⁴ PL188, cols. 1141-60, text and trans. G. Salet (SC118, Paris, 1966).

¹³⁵ PL188, cols. 1163-248; Dialogue II, trans. P. Harang, “Dialogue entre Anselme de Havelberg et Néchitès de Nicomédie sur la procession du Saint Esprit,” Istina, 17 (1972), 375-425. Both Dialogues II and III are discussed by N. Russell, “Anselm of Havelberg and the Union of the Churches,” Sorbornost, 1 (2), 19-41 and 2 (1), 29-41. See also bibliography and comment in Darrouzès, “Documents byzantins,” 59-65.

¹³⁶ PL188, ch. 24, cols. 1202-5; Istina, op. cit. 417-19.

¹³⁷ PL188, ch. 26 and 27, cols. 1208-10; Istina, op. cit. 422-4.

¹³⁸ See PL188, Dialogue II, especially chs. 7, 8, and 9.

¹³⁹ Peter of Monte Cassino, Chron., bk. 4, ch. 115, MGH SS VII. 833, cited Norden, Papsttum, 99-100.

¹⁴⁰ J. Schmidt (ed.), Des Basilius aus Achrida Erzbischofs von Thessalonich bisher unedierte Dialoge (Munich, 1901); Darrouzès, “Documents byzantins,” 65-8.

¹⁴¹ See P. Lemerle, “Byzance et la croisade,” Relazioni del X Congresso Internazionale di Scienze Storiche, vol. 3, Storia del medioevo (Florence, 1955).

VII ¹ . The Effects of the Fourth Crusade 1204-1261.