Information on dualist heresies and pagan beliefs in John Exarch’s "Hexameron" ("Šestodnev")

Authors

  • Георги Минчев Uniwersytet Łódzki, Wydział Filologiczny, Katedra Filologii Słowiańskiej
  • Малгожата Сковронек Uniwersytet Łódzki, Wydział Filologiczny, Katedra Filologii Słowiańskiej
  • Иван Н. Петров

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/2084-140X.04.07

Keywords:

Medieval dualist heresies, Old Slavonic Literature, Hexaemeron, Bulgarian medieval heretics

Abstract

The article aims to present and analyze those passages of the Hexameron (Šestodnev) in which ‘heretics’, ‘Manichaeans’, ‘pagans’ or ‘pagan Slavs’ are mentioned. The fragments are compared with their Greek counterparts (as long as these exist); the Old Bulgarian texts (especially those that can be considered original additions or loose compilations) are utilized for interpreting certain elements of heterodox doctrines common to Manichaeism, Paulicianism, Massalianism and Bogomilism. The Old Bulgarian translation/compilation by John Exarch supplies important information on the cosmology, theological doctrine and liturgical life of the Neo-Manichaeans within the Byzantine- Slavic world. The original additions and passages that can be seen as loose translations or compilations testify to the relevance of anti-dualist polemics even in the later periods of the Byzantine-Slavic religious community. The old Gnostic and Manichaean concepts, adapted by later dualist heresies (as e.g. Massalianism and Paulicianism), coupled with Trinitarian and Christological deviations from the official dogma, infiltrate the 1st Bulgarian Empire and provide a hospitable environment for the appearance of Bogomilism. In this sense, the Old Bulgarian Hexameron turns out to be an important source of information on the predecessors of the ‘Bulgarian heresy’. The original additions and loose translations/compilations of certain passages uncover some ‘common areas’ characteristic of all medieval Neo-Manichaean doctrines: the dualist creation myth, the belief in Satan as God’s ‘first-born son’ and the related Trinitarian and Christological departures from the prescribed dogma. Especially noteworthy is the passage referring to the Trisagion (Trisvetoe). The rejection of particular elements of the Liturgy of the Faithful attests to the dualists’ more diversified attitude towards the official ritual – not an indiscriminate renunciation, but the exclusion of those elements that were considered to praise the Old Testament God and to be irreconcilable with the Neo-Manichaean beliefs concerning creation and forgiveness. The mentioning of a Slavic pagan sun cult should be analyzed not only in connection with the charges against Manichaeans and Slavs concerning idolatry, but also in a wider context of the refutation of antique astrological beliefs and soothsaying practices. The comparison of particular lexemes, phrases and larger textual units in John Exarch’s Hexameron on the one hand and the Sermon Against the Heretics on the other makes it possible to conjecture that Cosmas the Priest was familiar with his predecessor’s work and made use of it when composing his own anti-heretic text.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Афиногенова O., Греческий вариант апокрифа о борьбе архангела Михаила и Сатанаила, „Scripta & e-Scripta” 3/4, 2006, p. 329–348.
Google Scholar

Aitzetmüller R., Das Hexaemeron des Exarchen Johannes, vol. I–VII, Graz 1958–1975.
Google Scholar

Ангелов Д., Богомилството в България, София 1969.
Google Scholar

Баранкова Г.С., Mильков B.B., Шестоднев Иоанна экзарха Болгарского, Санкт-Петербург 2001.
Google Scholar

Бегунов Ю.К., Козма Пресвитер в славянских литературах, София 1973.
Google Scholar

Бодянский O.M., Шестоднев, составленный Иоанном Ексархом Болгарским. По харатейному списку Московской синодальной библиотеки, Москва 1879.
Google Scholar

Борилов Синодик. Издание и превод, ed. et trans.: Ив. Божилов, А. Тотоманова, Ив. Билярски, София 2010.
Google Scholar

Charanis P., Church and State in the Later Roman Empire. The Religious Policy of Anastasius the First, Thessaloniki 1974.
Google Scholar

Хождение Богородицы по мукам, [in:] Н.С. Тихонравов, Памятники отреченной русской литературы, vol. II, Москва 1863.
Google Scholar

Comes Marcellinus, The Chronicle of Marcellinus: a translation and commentary, ed. B. Croke, Th. Mommsen, Sydney 1995.
Google Scholar

Чолова Ц., Естественонаучните знания в средновековна България, София 1988.
Google Scholar

Давидов A., Речник-индекс на Презвитер Козма, София 1976.
Google Scholar

Давидов A., Някои лексикални успоредици между Йоан Екзарх и Презвитер Козма, [in:] „Преславска книжовна школа” vol. I, 1999.
Google Scholar

Драгоjловић Д., Богомилство на Балкану и у Малоj Азиjи. I. Богомилски родоначалници, Београд 1974.
Google Scholar

Драгоjловић Д., Богомилство на Балкану и у Малоj Азиjи. II. Богомилство на православном истоку, Београд 1982.
Google Scholar

Дуйчев И., Славяно-болгарские древности IX в., „Balkan Studies” 11.1, 1950, p. 6–31.
Google Scholar

Dujčev I., L’epistola sui Bogomili del patriarcha Teofilatto, [in:] Idem, Medioevo bizantinoslavo, vol. I, Roma 1965, p. 313–314.
Google Scholar

Eliade M., Historia wierzeń i idei religijnych, vol. III, trans. S. Tokarski, Warszawa 2008.
Google Scholar

L’Eucologio Barberini gr. 336, ed. S. Parenti, E. Velkovska Roma 1995.
Google Scholar

Ficker G., Die Phundagiagiten. Ein Beitrag zur Ketzergeschichte des Mittelalters, Leipzig 1908.
Google Scholar

Гошев И., Старобългарската литургия според български и византийски извори от IX–X в., „Годишник на Софийския университет. Богословски факултет6” fasc. 8, 1932, p. 60–64.
Google Scholar

Hamilton B., The Cathars and Seven Churches in Asia, [in:] Byzantium and the West c. 850 – c. 1200. Proceedings of the XVIII Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies. Oxford, Amsterdam 1988, p. 284–290.
Google Scholar

Иванов Й., Культ Перуна у южных славян, „Сборник Отделения Русского Языка и Словесности Императорской Академии Наук” 8.4, 1904, p. 140–174.
Google Scholar

Иванов Й., Богомилски книги и легенди, фототипно изд., София 1970.
Google Scholar

Иванов B.B., Топоров B.H., Исследования в области славянских древностей. Лексические и фразеологические вопросы реконструкции текста, Москва 1974.
Google Scholar

Йоан Екзарх, Шестоднев, ed. 2, trans., praef., comment. Н.Цв. Кочев, София 2000.
Google Scholar

Jonas H., Religia gnozy, trans. M. Klimowicz, Kraków 1994.
Google Scholar

Кристанов Цв., Дуйчев И., Естетвознанието в средновековна България, София 1954.
Google Scholar

Leszka M.B., Leszka M.J., Zarys dziejów Konstantynopola w latach 337–602, [in:] Konstantynopol – Nowy Rzym. Miasto i ludzie w okresie wczesnobizantyńskim, ed. M.J. Leszka, T. Wolińska, Warszawa 2011.
Google Scholar

Loos M., Le prétendu témoignage d’un traité de Jean Exarque intitulé „Šestodnev” et relatif aux Bogomiles, „Byzantinoslavica” 13, 1952, p. 59–88.
Google Scholar

Loos M., Satan als erstgeborener Gottes (ein Beitrag zur Analyse des bogomilischen Mythus), „Byzantinobulgarica” 3, 1969, s. 23-35.
Google Scholar

Loos M., Dualist Heresy in the Middle Ages, Praha 1974.
Google Scholar

Magdalino P., Occult Science and Imperial Power in Byzantine History and Historiography (9th–12th Centuries), [in:] P. Magdalino, M. Mavroudi, The Occult Sciences in Byzantium, Geneva 2006.
Google Scholar

Милтенова A., Апокрифът за борбата на архангел Михаил със Сатанаил в две редакции, „Старобългарска литература” 9, 1981, p. 98–113.
Google Scholar

Милтенова A., Неизвестна редакция на апокрифа за борбата на архангел Михаил със Сатанаил, [in:] Литературознание и фолклористика. Сборник в чест на акад. Петър Динеков, София 1983, p. 121–128.
Google Scholar

Минчев Г., Един богомилски текст? Слово на св. Йоан Златоуст за това, как Михаил победи Сатанаил, „Palaeobulgarica” 34.4, 2010, p. 18–46.
Google Scholar

Minczew G., John Chrysostom’s Tale on How Michael Vanquished Satanael – a Bogomil text?, „Studia Ceranea” 1, 2011, p. 22–52.
Google Scholar

Minczew G., Remarks on the Letter of the Patriarch Theophylact to Tsar Peter in the Context of Certain Byzantine and Slavic Anti-Heretic Texts, „Studia Ceranea” 3, 2013, p. 113–130.
Google Scholar

Попруженко М.Г., Козма Пресвитер – болгарский писатель X века, София 1936.
Google Scholar

Quispel G., Gnoza, trans. B. Kita, Warszawa 1988.
Google Scholar

Rudolph K., Gnoza. Historia i istota późnoantycznej formacji religijnej, trans. G. Sowiński, Kraków 1995.
Google Scholar

Runciman S., The Medieval Manichee. A Study of the Christian Dualist Heresy, Cambridge 2003.
Google Scholar

Славенска митология. Енциклопедиjски речник, Београд 2001.
Google Scholar

Stoyanov Y., The Other God. Dualist Religions from Antiquity to the Cathar Heresy, New Haven– London 2000.
Google Scholar

Трифонова Ю., Сведения за старобългарския живот от „Шестоднева“ на Йоан Екзарх, „Списание на Българската академия на науките” 35/19, 1926, p. 1–26.
Google Scholar

Vaillant A., Puech H., Le traité contre les Bogomiles du prêtre Cosmas, Paris 1945.
Google Scholar

Published

2014-12-30

How to Cite

Минчев, Г., Сковронек, М., & Петров, И. Н. (2014). Information on dualist heresies and pagan beliefs in John Exarch’s "Hexameron" ("Šestodnev"). Studia Ceranea, 4, 95–123. https://doi.org/10.18778/2084-140X.04.07

Issue

Section

Articles