[40]Duchesne，Liber Pontif.391.Cf.Kulakovskij，Istorija Ⅲ，309，note 2，contrary to Bury，BZ 5（1896），570 f.
[41]Cf.Grabar，Iconoclsme，42 ff.
[42]Agathon Diac，Mansi 12，193 E-196 A.
[43]Theophanes 385 f.Cf.Kulakovskij，Istorija Ⅲ，414 ff.
[44]He originated in Germaniceia in North Syria.K.Schenk，BZ 5（1896），296 ff.，shows that the wordsin the chronicle of Theophanes（p.391）are a later addition.I agree with this view，though some scholars support the Isaurian ancestry，e.g.Kulakovskij，Istorija Ⅲ，319，note 2，who relies on the tradition that at baptism Leo received the‘typically Isaurian’name of Conon.Pope Conon（686-7）was，however，certainly no Isaurian，but according to the Liber Pontificalis‘natione grecus，oriundus parte Tracesio，edocatus apud Siciliam’。
[45]A detailed description of the siege，drawing on all the sources and relevant literature，is given by R.Guilland，‘Lexpédition de Maslama contre Constantinople（717-18）’，Etudes byzantines，Paris 1959，109 ff.
[46]For the friendly relations between Byzantium and the Khazars in the eighth century see Vasiliev，The Goths in the Crimea（1936），87.
[47]See above，pp.95 ff.and p.100，note 3.A strategus of the Thracesion theme occurs for the first time in 741（Theophanes 414）.Cf.Diehl，‘Régime des thémes’282，and Gelzer，‘Themenverfassung’77 f.
[48]A strategus of the Bucellarion theme occurs for the first time in 767（Theophanes 440）.Cf.Gelzer，‘Themenverfassung’79.
[49]By 710 there is mention of a patricius et stratigos caravisionorum（Liber Pont.390）；in 732 the strategus of the Cibyraeots appears（Theophanes 410）.Cf.Diehl，‘Régime des thèmes’280 ff.；Gelzer，‘Themenverfassung’34;R.Guilland，‘Etudes de titulature et de prosopographie byzantines.Les chefs de la marine byzantine’，BZ 44（1951）（Dolger-Festschrift）212.
[50]A strategus of Crete is mentioned in the Vita of Stephen the Young（♀767），Migne，PG 100，col.1164.The credit for drawing attention to this passage belongs to G.Spyridakis，，EEBS 21（1951），59 ff.，who would like to assume that Crete received the rank of theme under Leo Ⅲ.Cf.also H.Glykatzi-Ahrweiler，‘Ladministration militaire de la Crète byzantine，’B 31（1961），217 ff.，who is probably right in supposing that Crete was previously subject to an archon and formed an archontate.
[51]For a long time it was generally held by Byzantinists that Leo Ⅲ was responsible for a fundamental reorganization of the themes as well as of other aspects of Byzantine administration，but this does not receive the slightest support from the sources.Cf.my arguments in‘Uber die vermeintliche Reformtatigkeit der Isaurier’，BZ 30（1929-30），394 ff.Ch.Diehl.Le monde oriental de 395 à 1081（1936），255 f.，attempts to revive the old theory，but in describing Leo Ⅲ’s‘work of reorganization’he relies on thewhile admitting（p.256）that they cannot be attributed to Leo with any certainty（on these laws cf.above，p.90 f.）。
[52]For the dates see above under Sources，p.152，note 5，where bibliography is also given.
[53]R.S.Lopez，‘Byzantine Law in the Seventh Century and its Reception by the Germans and the Arabs’，B 16（1942-3），445 ff.，thinks that it is possible to assume that this customary law had been written down as early as Heraclius’day and that it would have influenced both Arab and Germanic law.
[54]Zepos，Jus Ⅱ，16.
[55]Cf.especially the important contribution by E.Kitzinger，‘The Cult of Images in the Age before Iconoclasm’，DOP 8（1954），83-150.
[56]Cf.the interesting comments on the whole problem by H.v.Campenhausen，‘Die Bilderfrage als theologisches Problem der alten Kirche’，Zeitschr.f.Theol.u.Kirche 49（1952），33 ff.，with full bibliography，and G.Ladner，‘The Concept of the Image in the Greek Fathers and the Byzantian Iconoclastic Controversy’，DOP 7（1953），1 ff.，and also S.Der Nersessian，‘Une apologie des images du septième siècle’，B 17（1944/5），58 ff.；G.Florovsky，‘Origen，Eusebius and the Iconoclastic Controversy’，Church History 19（1950），77 ff..Cf.also N.H.Baynes，‘The Icons before Iconoclasm’，Harv.Theol.Rev.44（1951），93 ff.（reprinted in Baynes，Byzantine Studies）。
[57]Theophanes 401.Details on this in J.Starr，The Jews in the Byzantine Empire 641-1204，Athens 1939.
[58]Byzantine sources record that the Caliph Jezid Ⅱ ordered the destruction of Christian icons of the saints in his kingdom in the year 723-4.In fact he ordered the destruction not only of Christian icons，but of all representations of living beings intended for religious purposes，and similar measures had already been taken by Jezid’s predecessor，the Caliph Omar Ⅱ（717-20）.On all these problems see Grabar，Iconoclasme，103 ff.
[59]Theophanes 404，3..
[60]On this and the following passage cf.Ostrogorsky，‘Querelle des Images’，235 ff.
[61]Vita Stephani，Migne PG 100，1084 B;Nicephorus 57.
[62]Mansi 12，975（=Caspar，Zeitschr.f.Kirchengesch.52，85，1.382），。
[63]Leo Ⅲ did not promulgate a‘first’edict against veneration of icons in 726，as has been argued from a misinterpretation of the passage from Theophanes 404 cited above（p.162，note 2），but in this year he began to speak openly against icons（），and his only（not his‘second’）decree against them was first promulgated in 730.This view is based on the irrefutable evidence of the sources as I have shown，Ostrogorsky，‘Querelle des Images’，238 ff.E.Caspar’s objection（Zeitschr.f.Kirchengesch.52（1933），54 f.）is based on the erroneous assumption that the Vita Gregori Ⅱ recognizes two edicts（Liber Pontif.pp.404 and 409）.In actual fact the passage which speaks of the‘iussiones’of the Emperor is not referring to an edict，but to the famous（first）letter of Leo Ⅲ to the Pope.It is known that in Rome this expression was often used when referring to imperial letters.Most scholars have accepted my interpretation：cf.F.Dolger，BZ 31（1931），458 ff.；H.Menges，Die Bilderlehre des hl.Johannes von Damaskus（1938），33;L.Bréhier，EO 37（1938），21 f.，and Vie et mort 79;Bréhier-Aigrain 448 ff.；J.Haller，Das Papsttum Ⅰ（1936），328 and 520;Alexander，Patr.Nicephorus 9;Beck，Kirche 299.
哦豁，小伙伴们如果觉得52书库不错，记得收藏网址 https://www.52shuku.net/ 或推荐给朋友哦~拜托啦 (>.<)
传送门：排行榜单 | 找书指南 |