Suchergebnisse

"The Life of Stephen the Younger is one of the rare sources for Byzantium in the 'Dark Ages' and one of the key witnesses to the history of Iconoclasm. This book presents a new edition of the text, together with a French translation and commentary, and an important introduction. Stephen was a hermit, killed in 765 at the order of the emperor Constantine V; his Life was written in 809, some forty years after the 7th Ecumenical Council, Nicaea II, at which Orthodoxy was affirmed. Professor Auzepy shows how the Life reflects the politics of the era, both those of the patriarchate on which the author depended, and of the female monastery near which Stephen had lived, and transforms the probable victim of a failed political plot into a Christ-like figure martyred by a diabolic emperor. La Vie d'Etienne le Jeune est une des rares sources sur l'histoire de Byzance durant le Haut Moyen-Age et un temoignage majeur de la querelle iconoclaste. Cet ouvrage, comprenant une importante introduction, presente une nouvelle edition du texte, accompagnee d'une traduction francaise annotee. Etienne est un ermite qui fut assassine en 765 sur l'ordre de l'empereur Constantin V. Sa Vie fut ecrite en 809, une quarantaine d'annees apres le septieme concile Ecumenique de Nicee II, au cours duquel fut affirme l'Orthodoxie. Le professeur Auzepy demontre comment la Vie reflete les enjeux politiques de cette epoque, ceux du patriarcat dont l'auteur dependait comme ceux du monastere de femmes aupres duquel Etienne a vecu, et comment la Vie transforme son heros, probablement mis A mort dans le cadre d'un complot, en une figure de saint moine martyrise par un empereur diabolique. Winner of the "Prix Charles Diehl de l'Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 1999"."--Provided by publisher.

In the conservative imaginary, at least in the cases of Constantin N. Brăiloiu and Alexandru N. Lahovary, France was not deemed a functioning political model (i.e., a political or constitutional regime) that Romania should have followed. Compared with the English political model (or rather with the Anglo-Saxon one, since the reference sometimes included the United States of America) and with the Belgian regime, France was certainly a less favoured option. However, without exception and despite all discursive artifice, in the perspective of these two politicians, who were evidently Francophile, both by education and by cultural affinities, France undeniably remained a landmark of civilization or administrative and economic efficiency, and sometimes a beacon of legal inspiration. It must be said that the latter perception was in no way related to Constantin N. Brăiloiu and Alexandru N. Lahovary's conservative convictions. It was commonplace in the local cultural imaginary, which, regardless of one's political, social or cultural affiliation, repeated the encomiastic mantra dedicated to imperial France, to whom the Romanians were convinced that they owed the existence of their nation. In fact, one should not overlook another typical belief of this political imaginary, which is illustrated in our case by Alexandru N. Lahovary: the Romanian politicians were persuaded that the ideals included in the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen were exclusively due to the France of 1789.