第63章（2 / 2）
[92]Theophanes A.M.6171=679/80（not 678/9;corresponding to Ostrogorsky，‘Chronologie’1 ff）。
[93]Theophanes 359，7 ff.；Nicephorus 35，15 ff.
[94]Theophanes 359，7 ff.，describes the seven Slav tribes，and it is quite clear，especially from Theoph.359，20（where the Byzantine Emperor is compelledto the Bulgars）thatis not‘treaty’，as Zlatarski，Istorija I，1（1918），142 ff.，tries to show，but‘tribute’，as rightly maintained by J.Dujcev，‘Protobulgares et Slaves’，Sem.Kond.10（1938），145 ff.，who also correctly adds that according to Theophanes the obligation to pay tribute did not exend to the Severi.Nevertheless，the latest history of Bulgaria，published by the Bulgarianulgarija，Sofia，1954，p.65），speaks of an alliance which the Protobulgars are said to have made with the Slavs，and even with the Slav state.Cf.also D.Angelov and M.Andreev，Istorija na Buulgarskata duurzava i pravo（History of the Bulgarian state and law），Sofia，1955，59.
[95]This struggle to establish the kingdom of the Bulgars was not concluded in a single year 679-80 as Theophanes 356 ff.says，but probably lasted on into the summer of 681（as noted by Kulakovskij，Istorija Ⅲ，249，from Mansi Ⅺ，617）.This passage is also commented on by J.Trifonov，Izvestija na Istoric.Druzestvo 11-12（1931-2），119 ff.，who uses it，however，as the basis of a number of untenable hypotheses.
[96]Theophanes 358，19;Nicephorus 35，24;Dolger，Reg.243.
[97]Mansi Ⅺ，656.
[98]By 670 Constantine Ⅳ had decreed that his two brothers were to share the imperial prerogatives equally with him and that the portraits of all three Emperors were to appear on the coins.Cf.Dolger，Reg.236.
[99]Theophanes 352，15.
[100]In the official dating of the acta of the sixth oecumenical Council Heraclius and Tiberius are not described as the co-Emperors of Constantine Ⅳ，but as his divinely protected brothers.Cf.Mansi Ⅺ，208 E，217 A，221 CD，229 AB，316 DE，etc.
[101]Cf.Brooks，‘The Brothers of the Emperor Constantine Ⅳ’，EHR 30（1915），42 ff.
[102]In spite of Dolger，BZ 33（1933），137 ff.，I believe，as I have already indicated in Kornemann，Doppelprinzipat 166，that when he deposed his brothers Constantine Ⅳ’s main concern was not to secure the succession for his son Justinian（Ⅱ）but to safeguard the principle of undivided sovereignty.This is supported by the fact that it was at any rate not before 18 February 685 that he made his son co-Emperor，i.e.more than three years after the coup d’état，for Justinian Ⅱ’s letter of 17 February 687 to the Pope（as well as the inscription on the tomb of the father of Pope John Ⅶ）is dated the second year of the reign and the second year of the consulate of Justinian.
[103]Dolger，Reg.257.
[104]Cf.the important comments of R.J.H.Jenkins，‘Cyprus between Byzantium and Islam，A.D.688-965’，Studies presented to D.M.Robinson Ⅱ（1953），1006 ff. ↑返回顶部↑
[93]Theophanes 359，7 ff.；Nicephorus 35，15 ff.
[94]Theophanes 359，7 ff.，describes the seven Slav tribes，and it is quite clear，especially from Theoph.359，20（where the Byzantine Emperor is compelledto the Bulgars）thatis not‘treaty’，as Zlatarski，Istorija I，1（1918），142 ff.，tries to show，but‘tribute’，as rightly maintained by J.Dujcev，‘Protobulgares et Slaves’，Sem.Kond.10（1938），145 ff.，who also correctly adds that according to Theophanes the obligation to pay tribute did not exend to the Severi.Nevertheless，the latest history of Bulgaria，published by the Bulgarianulgarija，Sofia，1954，p.65），speaks of an alliance which the Protobulgars are said to have made with the Slavs，and even with the Slav state.Cf.also D.Angelov and M.Andreev，Istorija na Buulgarskata duurzava i pravo（History of the Bulgarian state and law），Sofia，1955，59.
[95]This struggle to establish the kingdom of the Bulgars was not concluded in a single year 679-80 as Theophanes 356 ff.says，but probably lasted on into the summer of 681（as noted by Kulakovskij，Istorija Ⅲ，249，from Mansi Ⅺ，617）.This passage is also commented on by J.Trifonov，Izvestija na Istoric.Druzestvo 11-12（1931-2），119 ff.，who uses it，however，as the basis of a number of untenable hypotheses.
[96]Theophanes 358，19;Nicephorus 35，24;Dolger，Reg.243.
[97]Mansi Ⅺ，656.
[98]By 670 Constantine Ⅳ had decreed that his two brothers were to share the imperial prerogatives equally with him and that the portraits of all three Emperors were to appear on the coins.Cf.Dolger，Reg.236.
[99]Theophanes 352，15.
[100]In the official dating of the acta of the sixth oecumenical Council Heraclius and Tiberius are not described as the co-Emperors of Constantine Ⅳ，but as his divinely protected brothers.Cf.Mansi Ⅺ，208 E，217 A，221 CD，229 AB，316 DE，etc.
[101]Cf.Brooks，‘The Brothers of the Emperor Constantine Ⅳ’，EHR 30（1915），42 ff.
[102]In spite of Dolger，BZ 33（1933），137 ff.，I believe，as I have already indicated in Kornemann，Doppelprinzipat 166，that when he deposed his brothers Constantine Ⅳ’s main concern was not to secure the succession for his son Justinian（Ⅱ）but to safeguard the principle of undivided sovereignty.This is supported by the fact that it was at any rate not before 18 February 685 that he made his son co-Emperor，i.e.more than three years after the coup d’état，for Justinian Ⅱ’s letter of 17 February 687 to the Pope（as well as the inscription on the tomb of the father of Pope John Ⅶ）is dated the second year of the reign and the second year of the consulate of Justinian.
[103]Dolger，Reg.257.
[104]Cf.the important comments of R.J.H.Jenkins，‘Cyprus between Byzantium and Islam，A.D.688-965’，Studies presented to D.M.Robinson Ⅱ（1953），1006 ff. ↑返回顶部↑