Jump to content

Talk:Novgorod Codex

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Correct category?

[edit]

Please see Category talk:Earliest known manuscripts by language. Enaidmawr (talk) 01:12, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bogomilism References

[edit]

User Mladifilozof added a reference needed tag to a sentence linking the codex to bogomilism. The subject is extensively covered in the references already listed in the article, for instance, in Zaliznyak's "Problemy izucheniya Novgorodskogo kodeksa XI veka, naidennogo v 2000 g". Some quotes:

В религиозном отношении это были в большинстве своем последователи павликианства-дуалистического учения, в дальнейшем послужившего историческим источником идеологии богомильства.

From a religious point of view these were mainly the followers of a dualistic Paulicianism teaching, which later became a historical source for bogomilism.

(p 207)

Наиболее распространенной и активной ересью в Slavia Orthodoxa X века было богомильство. Продолжала существовать и более древняя ересь, историческим ответвлением которой было богомильство, - павликианство. По-видимому, к какой-то из разновидностей этих еретических течений принадлежал и автор рассматриваемых сочинений.

Bogomilism was the most active and widespread heresy in 10th century Slavia Orthodoxa. Another more ancient heresy also persisted which later branched off into bogomilism, namely Paulicianism. Apparently, the author of the codex was a member of one of these heretical movements.

(p 208)

По мнению Е. Е. Голубинского, Андреян был богомил (см. [Иванов 1925:39]). Можно предполагать, что по своей биографии и характеру деятельности Андреян и писец Новгородского кодекса были сходны.

According to EE Golubinskiy, Andreyan was a bogomil (see Ivanov 1925:39). One can assume that Andreyan and the author of the Novgorod codex has a similar background and modus operandi.

(p 209)

And so on. I provided my own rough translation for the sake of clarity. Since these works are already listed in the article, I don't see the need to further reference individual statements to specific pages or paragraphs. Flyboy Will (talk) 09:09, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]