DAIS - Digital Archive of the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts
    • English
    • Српски
    • Српски (Serbia)
  • English 
    • English
    • Serbian (Cyrillic)
    • Serbian (Latin)
  • Login
View Item 
  •   DAIS
  • Балканолошки институт САНУ / Institute for Balkan Studies SASA
  • BI SANU - Opšta kolekcija / General collection
  • View Item
  •   DAIS
  • Балканолошки институт САНУ / Institute for Balkan Studies SASA
  • BI SANU - Opšta kolekcija / General collection
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Најранији помени улцињске и барске епископије : филолошко–археолошка белешка

The earliest mentions of episcopal sees of Ulcinj and Bar: a philological–archaeological note

Thumbnail
2016
bitstream_49817.pdf (574.5Kb)
Authors
Прерадовић, Дубравка
Article (Published version)
Metadata
Show full item record
Abstract
This paper analyzes written and material sources concerning the earliest history of the Episcopal sees of Ulcinj and Bar, because there are still some ambiguities in the interpretation of the date of composition and the content of episcopal notita 3 published by Gustav Parthey in 1866, and the notitia 10 published in the critical edition of Jean Darrouzès in 1981, where they are both mentioned. Two notitae are actually the same list of metropolitans of the Constantinopolitan church, where were listed fifteen suffragan bishops of Durrachium. Although the compilation of that part of the list is dated in the end of the 10th or the beginning of the 11th century, the confusion produced at the beginning of the last century by dating this notitia in the middle of the 8th century still persists in literature. That misinterpretation consequently brought some scholars to the conclusion that the bishoprics in question were founded in the first half of the 8th century. Tracing the origin of that f...alse interpretation proved that there is no firm scientific grounds for the assertion that Bar and Ulcinj had the bishops on that early date. Another problem considered in this paper is the identification of the bishop seat ĝ ÀÁÀÅţ»ÑÅ mentioned before ĝ ÅÌÀ¹ÚɼÑË in notitia 10. o ÀÁÀÅţ»ÑÅ has been recently identified by some scholars as Ohrid and not as Ulcinj. Analysis of the Latin and Greek written sources demonstrates that the confusion comes from the similar orthography of these two cities that can be found in the civil lists of the cities of the Byzantine Empire, and that the episcopal see listed in the notitia 10 is Ulcinj and not Ohrid. In Bar like in Ulcinj were found the remains of churches dating from the 9th century. The remains of the modest church as well as the ciborium with the inscription that mentions the Byzantinɟ emperors Leo and Constantine, identified as Leo V (813-820) and his son co-ruler were found in Ulcinj. In Bar, the small, possible cross-in-square church was dedicated to the holy warrior Theodor, whose cult appears on the Adriatic, in Venice and in the Apulia at the beginning of the 9th century. Remains of those churches prove the presence of ecclesiastical organization in the south-east Adriatic at the time of reconstruction of the Byzantine domination in the Adriatic, but not the existence of the bishopric sees. However, that hypothesis cannot be rejected. Due to the lack of reliable documents, it is not possible to determine precise date of the establishing bishoprics of Bar and Ulcinj. The first mention of the bishopric Ulcinj dates from 925, when this seat was mentioned in the decisions of the First church council of Split, while Bar is to be found for the first time in the written sources in notita 10, dating from the end of the 10th or the beginning of the next century.

Keywords:
Ulcinj / Bar / episcopal see / Jean Darrouzès / Gustav Parthey / notitiae episcopatuum
Source:
Црквене студије, 2016, 13, 23-35
Publisher:
  • Ниш : Центар за црквене студије

ISSN: 1820-2446

[ Google Scholar ]
Handle
https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_dais_12508
URI
https://dais.sanu.ac.rs/123456789/12508
Collections
  • BI SANU - Opšta kolekcija / General collection
Institution/Community
Балканолошки институт САНУ / Institute for Balkan Studies SASA
TY  - JOUR
AU  - Прерадовић, Дубравка
PY  - 2016
UR  - https://dais.sanu.ac.rs/123456789/12508
AB  - This paper analyzes written and material sources concerning the earliest history of the Episcopal sees of Ulcinj and Bar, because there are still some ambiguities in the interpretation of the date of composition and the content of episcopal notita 3 published by Gustav Parthey in 1866, and the notitia 10 published in the critical edition of Jean Darrouzès in 1981, where they are both mentioned. Two notitae are actually the same list of metropolitans of the Constantinopolitan church, where were listed fifteen suffragan bishops of Durrachium. Although the compilation of that part of the list is dated in the end of the 10th or the beginning of the 11th century, the confusion produced at the beginning of the last century by dating this notitia in the middle of the 8th century still persists in literature. That misinterpretation consequently brought some scholars to the conclusion that the bishoprics in question were founded in the first half of the 8th century. Tracing the origin of that false interpretation proved that there is no firm scientific grounds for the assertion that Bar and Ulcinj had the bishops on that early date.  Another problem considered in this paper is the identification of the bishop seat ĝ  ÀÁÀÅţ»ÑÅ mentioned before ĝ  ÅÌÀ¹ÚɼÑË in notitia 10. o  ÀÁÀÅţ»ÑÅ has been recently identified by some scholars as Ohrid and not as Ulcinj. Analysis of the Latin and Greek written sources demonstrates that the confusion comes from the similar orthography of these two cities that can be found in the civil lists of the cities of the Byzantine Empire, and that the episcopal see listed in the notitia 10 is Ulcinj and not Ohrid.  In Bar like in Ulcinj were found the remains of churches dating from the 9th century. The remains of the modest church as well as the ciborium with the inscription that mentions the Byzantinɟ emperors Leo and Constantine, identified as Leo V (813-820) and his son co-ruler were found in Ulcinj. In Bar, the small, possible cross-in-square church was dedicated to the holy warrior Theodor, whose cult appears on the Adriatic, in Venice and in the Apulia at the beginning of the 9th century. Remains of those churches prove the presence of ecclesiastical organization in the south-east Adriatic at the time of reconstruction of the Byzantine domination in the Adriatic, but not the existence of the bishopric sees. However, that hypothesis cannot be rejected.  Due to the lack of reliable documents, it is not possible to determine precise date of the establishing bishoprics of Bar and Ulcinj. The first mention of the bishopric Ulcinj dates from 925, when this seat was mentioned in the decisions of the First church council of Split, while Bar is to be found for the first time in the written sources in notita 10, dating from the end of the 10th or the beginning of the next century.
PB  - Ниш : Центар за црквене студије
T2  - Црквене студије
T1  - Најранији помени улцињске и барске епископије : филолошко–археолошка белешка
T1  - The earliest mentions of episcopal sees of Ulcinj and Bar: a philological–archaeological note
SP  - 23
EP  - 35
VL  - 13
UR  - https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_dais_12508
ER  - 
@article{
author = "Прерадовић, Дубравка",
year = "2016",
abstract = "This paper analyzes written and material sources concerning the earliest history of the Episcopal sees of Ulcinj and Bar, because there are still some ambiguities in the interpretation of the date of composition and the content of episcopal notita 3 published by Gustav Parthey in 1866, and the notitia 10 published in the critical edition of Jean Darrouzès in 1981, where they are both mentioned. Two notitae are actually the same list of metropolitans of the Constantinopolitan church, where were listed fifteen suffragan bishops of Durrachium. Although the compilation of that part of the list is dated in the end of the 10th or the beginning of the 11th century, the confusion produced at the beginning of the last century by dating this notitia in the middle of the 8th century still persists in literature. That misinterpretation consequently brought some scholars to the conclusion that the bishoprics in question were founded in the first half of the 8th century. Tracing the origin of that false interpretation proved that there is no firm scientific grounds for the assertion that Bar and Ulcinj had the bishops on that early date.  Another problem considered in this paper is the identification of the bishop seat ĝ  ÀÁÀÅţ»ÑÅ mentioned before ĝ  ÅÌÀ¹ÚɼÑË in notitia 10. o  ÀÁÀÅţ»ÑÅ has been recently identified by some scholars as Ohrid and not as Ulcinj. Analysis of the Latin and Greek written sources demonstrates that the confusion comes from the similar orthography of these two cities that can be found in the civil lists of the cities of the Byzantine Empire, and that the episcopal see listed in the notitia 10 is Ulcinj and not Ohrid.  In Bar like in Ulcinj were found the remains of churches dating from the 9th century. The remains of the modest church as well as the ciborium with the inscription that mentions the Byzantinɟ emperors Leo and Constantine, identified as Leo V (813-820) and his son co-ruler were found in Ulcinj. In Bar, the small, possible cross-in-square church was dedicated to the holy warrior Theodor, whose cult appears on the Adriatic, in Venice and in the Apulia at the beginning of the 9th century. Remains of those churches prove the presence of ecclesiastical organization in the south-east Adriatic at the time of reconstruction of the Byzantine domination in the Adriatic, but not the existence of the bishopric sees. However, that hypothesis cannot be rejected.  Due to the lack of reliable documents, it is not possible to determine precise date of the establishing bishoprics of Bar and Ulcinj. The first mention of the bishopric Ulcinj dates from 925, when this seat was mentioned in the decisions of the First church council of Split, while Bar is to be found for the first time in the written sources in notita 10, dating from the end of the 10th or the beginning of the next century.",
publisher = "Ниш : Центар за црквене студије",
journal = "Црквене студије",
title = "Најранији помени улцињске и барске епископије : филолошко–археолошка белешка, The earliest mentions of episcopal sees of Ulcinj and Bar: a philological–archaeological note",
pages = "23-35",
volume = "13",
url = "https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_dais_12508"
}
Прерадовић, Д.. (2016). Најранији помени улцињске и барске епископије : филолошко–археолошка белешка. in Црквене студије
Ниш : Центар за црквене студије., 13, 23-35.
https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_dais_12508
Прерадовић Д. Најранији помени улцињске и барске епископије : филолошко–археолошка белешка. in Црквене студије. 2016;13:23-35.
https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_dais_12508 .
Прерадовић, Дубравка, "Најранији помени улцињске и барске епископије : филолошко–археолошка белешка" in Црквене студије, 13 (2016):23-35,
https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_dais_12508 .

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
About DAIS - Digital Archive of the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts | Send Feedback

CoreTrustSealre3dataOpenAIRERCUB
 

 

All of DSpaceInstitutions/communitiesAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis institutionAuthorsTitlesSubjects

Statistics

View Usage Statistics

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
About DAIS - Digital Archive of the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts | Send Feedback

CoreTrustSealre3dataOpenAIRERCUB