Stojkov, Stojko (2018) „Склавинија“ кај Теофилакт Симоката. Историја, 53 (1). pp. 15-40. ISSN 0579-0263
Preview |
Text
Stojkov Simokata.pdf Download (627kB) | Preview |
Abstract
In his article “Sklavenia” (“Σκλαυινια”) revisited”, Andreas
Gkoutzioukostas included me in the debate on the question whether “Sclavinia” at Theophylact Simokatta’s History was an adjective or a noun, counting me among historians who support the second thesis. He did this through a free interpretation of my presentation at the Byzantine Congress in Belgrade in 2016: "The term Sclavinia – Byzantine
invention or Western influence?" in which I did not take clear position on whether Theophylact’s “Sclavinia” is a noun or adjective.
This article aims, not just to clarify my position on the raised question, but also to add some additional arguments through examination of terminology Theophylact used for Slavs. The conclusion is that both interpretation of word “Sclavinia” as adjective and noon have their week points. Therefore, alternative possibility is presented: that “Sclavinia” did not exist at all in the original of the History, but rather was a modification occurring in the 10th century in a similar way as in the case of The Miracles of Saint Demetrius. This is considered as only way to be defended interpretation of ‘Sclavinia” in Theophylact’s texts we possessed as a noun, but it also means that there was not “Sclavinia” in the original text at all. The possibility of existing of noon “Sclavinia” in the original of Theophylact’s History is considered as unlikely.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Subjects: | Humanities > History and archaeology |
| Divisions: | Faculty of Educational Science |
| Depositing User: | Stojko Stojkov |
| Date Deposited: | 28 Mar 2019 10:28 |
| Last Modified: | 28 Mar 2019 10:28 |
| URI: | https://eprints.ugd.edu.mk/id/eprint/21846 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |