第170章（1 / 2）
[11]Recent editions are-Geoffrey de Villehardouin，La conquête de Constantinople，ed.and trans.E.Faral，Ⅰ-Ⅱ，Paris 1938，1939;Robert de Clari，La conquête de Constantinople，trans.P.Charlot，Paris 1939.
[12]Cf.for instance，the summary in Bréhier，L’Eglise et l’Orient au Moyen Age.Les croisades（1921），p.1 ff.
[13]The text may be found conveniently appended to Anna Comnena Ⅱ，573-6，CB（=Migne，PG 131，564-8，and PL 155，466-70）。
[14]Cf.Chalandon，Alexis Ⅰ，325 ff.；Dolger，Rge.1152;Vasiliev，History 386 ff.Grousset，Histoire des croisades et du royaume franc de Jérusalem Ⅰ（1934），1 f.C.Erdmann，Die Entstehung des Kreuzzugsgedankens（1935），365，note 7，makes out a very good case for considering that the forgery was first made in the years 1105-6 and was used as part of Bohemund of Antioch’s propaganda to stir up a crusade against Byzantium.A similar view is found in E.Joranson，‘The Problem of the Spurious Letter of Emperor Alexius to the Count of Flanders’，Am.Hist.Rev.55（1950），811 ff.who gives an English trans.of the letter and a detailed survey of the older literature on the subject.
[15]ed.F.Sisic，Letopis popa Dukljanina（The chronicle of the Priest of Doclea），Belgrade 1928，with an old Italian and a Croat trans.and a most valuable historical commentary.Cf.also the ed.（based on Sisic）with good commentary and modern Serbo-Croat trans.by Ⅴ.Mosin，Ljetopis popa Dukljanina，Zagreb 1950.
[16]ed.V.Corovic，Spisi sv.Save（The writings of St.Sava）（1928），151 ff.；P.J.Safarik，Pamatky drěvniho písemnictvi Jihosl.（Memorials of ancient South Slav literature）（1873），1 ff.；German translation and commentary by S.Hafner，Stefan Nemanja nach den Viten des hl.Sava und Stefans des Erstgekronten，Graz-Vienna-Cologne 1962.
[17]ed.Danicic，1860 and 1865.
[18]Migne，PG 126;cf.Uspenskij，Obrazovanie 1-58 and Appendix 10-20，25-9;Vasiljevskij，Pecenegi 134-49 and MNP 204（1879），144-217，318-48;Zlatarski，Istorija Ⅱ，262-350;Xanalatos，Beitrage.Bulgarian trans.of the letters by Mitrop.Simeon，‘Prevod na pismata na Teofilakta Ochridski，archiepiskop buulgarski’（Translation of the letters of Theophylact of Ochrida，Archbishop in Bulgaria），Sbornik na Buulg.Akad.na Naukite 27（1931），1-279.Cf.the important preliminary notes on the pressing need for a new critical edition by A.Leroy-Molinghen，‘Prolégomènes à uneédition critique des Lettres de Théophylacte de Bulgarie’，B 13（1938），253 ff.
[19]Migne，PG 133，1003-1424.On the other editions，the manuscript tradition and bibliography on the problem of Prodromus cf.the comprehensive survey by Moravcsik，Byzantinoturcica Ⅰ，（2 nd ed.），522 ff.
[20]W.Regel，Fontes rerum byzantinarum Ⅰ，1（1892），131-82;Ⅰ，2（1917），183-228（fasc.2 is inaccessible to me）。
[21]Edited with a commentary by R.Browning，‘A New Source on Byzantine-Hungarian Relations in the Twelfth Century’，Balkan Studies 2（1961），173 ff.Cf.also P.Wirth，‘Das bislang erste literarische Zeugnis für die Stephanskrone’，BZ 52（1960），79 ff.
[22]ed.V.Vasiljevskij，ⅤⅤⅠ（1892），55-132，with Russian trans.and a valuable introduction.
[23]ed.K.Konrna，‘Das Hodoiporikon des Konstantin Manasses’，BZ 13（1904），313-55.
[24]Tafel，Eustathii opuscula，1832（where several letters of M.Psellus are attributed to him;cf.K.Sathas，，30，67;Ⅴ，75）；idem，De Thessalonica eiusque agro（1839），401-39，reprinted in Migne，PG 135 and 136.Seven political orations of Eustathius，two already edited by Tafel，and five hitherto unknown，are published by Regel，Fontes rerum byz.Ⅰ，1（1892），1-131.
[25]ed.with full discussion by M.Bachmann，Die Rede des Johannes Syropulos an den Kaiser Isaak Ⅱ.Angelos，Diss.Munich 1935.He also considers in detail the orations made in 1193 by Sergius Colybas and George Tornices（ed.Regel，Fontes rerum byz.Ⅰ，2）.Cf.also J.Dujcev，Proucvanija vurchu bulgarskoto srednovekovie（Studies in the Bulgarian middle ages），Sofia 1945，52 ff.
↑返回顶部↑
[12]Cf.for instance，the summary in Bréhier，L’Eglise et l’Orient au Moyen Age.Les croisades（1921），p.1 ff.
[13]The text may be found conveniently appended to Anna Comnena Ⅱ，573-6，CB（=Migne，PG 131，564-8，and PL 155，466-70）。
[14]Cf.Chalandon，Alexis Ⅰ，325 ff.；Dolger，Rge.1152;Vasiliev，History 386 ff.Grousset，Histoire des croisades et du royaume franc de Jérusalem Ⅰ（1934），1 f.C.Erdmann，Die Entstehung des Kreuzzugsgedankens（1935），365，note 7，makes out a very good case for considering that the forgery was first made in the years 1105-6 and was used as part of Bohemund of Antioch’s propaganda to stir up a crusade against Byzantium.A similar view is found in E.Joranson，‘The Problem of the Spurious Letter of Emperor Alexius to the Count of Flanders’，Am.Hist.Rev.55（1950），811 ff.who gives an English trans.of the letter and a detailed survey of the older literature on the subject.
[15]ed.F.Sisic，Letopis popa Dukljanina（The chronicle of the Priest of Doclea），Belgrade 1928，with an old Italian and a Croat trans.and a most valuable historical commentary.Cf.also the ed.（based on Sisic）with good commentary and modern Serbo-Croat trans.by Ⅴ.Mosin，Ljetopis popa Dukljanina，Zagreb 1950.
[16]ed.V.Corovic，Spisi sv.Save（The writings of St.Sava）（1928），151 ff.；P.J.Safarik，Pamatky drěvniho písemnictvi Jihosl.（Memorials of ancient South Slav literature）（1873），1 ff.；German translation and commentary by S.Hafner，Stefan Nemanja nach den Viten des hl.Sava und Stefans des Erstgekronten，Graz-Vienna-Cologne 1962.
[17]ed.Danicic，1860 and 1865.
[18]Migne，PG 126;cf.Uspenskij，Obrazovanie 1-58 and Appendix 10-20，25-9;Vasiljevskij，Pecenegi 134-49 and MNP 204（1879），144-217，318-48;Zlatarski，Istorija Ⅱ，262-350;Xanalatos，Beitrage.Bulgarian trans.of the letters by Mitrop.Simeon，‘Prevod na pismata na Teofilakta Ochridski，archiepiskop buulgarski’（Translation of the letters of Theophylact of Ochrida，Archbishop in Bulgaria），Sbornik na Buulg.Akad.na Naukite 27（1931），1-279.Cf.the important preliminary notes on the pressing need for a new critical edition by A.Leroy-Molinghen，‘Prolégomènes à uneédition critique des Lettres de Théophylacte de Bulgarie’，B 13（1938），253 ff.
[19]Migne，PG 133，1003-1424.On the other editions，the manuscript tradition and bibliography on the problem of Prodromus cf.the comprehensive survey by Moravcsik，Byzantinoturcica Ⅰ，（2 nd ed.），522 ff.
[20]W.Regel，Fontes rerum byzantinarum Ⅰ，1（1892），131-82;Ⅰ，2（1917），183-228（fasc.2 is inaccessible to me）。
[21]Edited with a commentary by R.Browning，‘A New Source on Byzantine-Hungarian Relations in the Twelfth Century’，Balkan Studies 2（1961），173 ff.Cf.also P.Wirth，‘Das bislang erste literarische Zeugnis für die Stephanskrone’，BZ 52（1960），79 ff.
[22]ed.V.Vasiljevskij，ⅤⅤⅠ（1892），55-132，with Russian trans.and a valuable introduction.
[23]ed.K.Konrna，‘Das Hodoiporikon des Konstantin Manasses’，BZ 13（1904），313-55.
[24]Tafel，Eustathii opuscula，1832（where several letters of M.Psellus are attributed to him;cf.K.Sathas，，30，67;Ⅴ，75）；idem，De Thessalonica eiusque agro（1839），401-39，reprinted in Migne，PG 135 and 136.Seven political orations of Eustathius，two already edited by Tafel，and five hitherto unknown，are published by Regel，Fontes rerum byz.Ⅰ，1（1892），1-131.
[25]ed.with full discussion by M.Bachmann，Die Rede des Johannes Syropulos an den Kaiser Isaak Ⅱ.Angelos，Diss.Munich 1935.He also considers in detail the orations made in 1193 by Sergius Colybas and George Tornices（ed.Regel，Fontes rerum byz.Ⅰ，2）.Cf.also J.Dujcev，Proucvanija vurchu bulgarskoto srednovekovie（Studies in the Bulgarian middle ages），Sofia 1945，52 ff.
↑返回顶部↑