{"title":"On Theophylact’s in Defense of Eunuchs (I)","authors":"Bojana Krsmanović, Darko Todorović","doi":"10.2298/ZRVI1552091K","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The first part of this paper analyzes a text by Theophylact of Ohrid known as In Defense of Eunuchs. In terms of its genre and topic, this work stands alone in Byzantine literature. Through a dialogue between the two interlocutors - a monk and a eunuch, Theophylact challenges the traditional representation of eunuchs. He particularly focuses on the condemnation of castration in Ecclesiastical Canons and secular legislation (of the late Roman Empire and Byzantium). Theophylact highlights the ambivalence of the views on eunuchs in Byzantine society, demonstrating that castration as such did not necessarily lead to the marginalization of the castrated individual. The most important part of Theophylact’s Defense offers a comparison between “the bearded” and eunuchs in monastic orders. Also, the affirmation of freedom of choice between good and evil and insisting that an individual should be judged according to his own deeds is the guiding idea of Theophylact’s Defense. The second part of the paper contains a Serbian translation of Theophylact’s text with a commentary. Besides the French translation by the editor of the critical edition P. Gautier, this is the second complete translation of the Greek original. It deviates from Gautier’s version in several places, offering alternative readings of ambiguous places. [Projekat Ministarstva nauke Republike Srbije, br. 177032: Tradicija, inovacija i identitet u vizantijskom svetu]","PeriodicalId":53859,"journal":{"name":"Zbornik Radova Vizantoloskog Instituta","volume":"31 1","pages":"91-172"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zbornik Radova Vizantoloskog Instituta","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2298/ZRVI1552091K","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The first part of this paper analyzes a text by Theophylact of Ohrid known as In Defense of Eunuchs. In terms of its genre and topic, this work stands alone in Byzantine literature. Through a dialogue between the two interlocutors - a monk and a eunuch, Theophylact challenges the traditional representation of eunuchs. He particularly focuses on the condemnation of castration in Ecclesiastical Canons and secular legislation (of the late Roman Empire and Byzantium). Theophylact highlights the ambivalence of the views on eunuchs in Byzantine society, demonstrating that castration as such did not necessarily lead to the marginalization of the castrated individual. The most important part of Theophylact’s Defense offers a comparison between “the bearded” and eunuchs in monastic orders. Also, the affirmation of freedom of choice between good and evil and insisting that an individual should be judged according to his own deeds is the guiding idea of Theophylact’s Defense. The second part of the paper contains a Serbian translation of Theophylact’s text with a commentary. Besides the French translation by the editor of the critical edition P. Gautier, this is the second complete translation of the Greek original. It deviates from Gautier’s version in several places, offering alternative readings of ambiguous places. [Projekat Ministarstva nauke Republike Srbije, br. 177032: Tradicija, inovacija i identitet u vizantijskom svetu]
本文的第一部分分析了奥赫里德的《太监保卫战》一文。就其体裁和主题而言,这部作品在拜占庭文学中独树一帜。通过两个对话者——一个和尚和一个太监之间的对话,Theophylact挑战了传统的太监形象。他特别关注教会正典和世俗立法(罗马帝国晚期和拜占庭)中对阉割的谴责。Theophylact突出了拜占庭社会对太监的矛盾看法,表明阉割本身并不一定会导致被阉割的个体被边缘化。Theophylact的《辩护》中最重要的部分是将“大胡子”与修道院中的太监进行比较。同时,Theophylact辩护书的指导思想是肯定善恶选择的自由,坚持个人应该根据自己的行为来判断。论文的第二部分包含塞尔维亚语翻译的Theophylact的文本和评论。除了批评版的编辑P.戈蒂埃的法语翻译,这是希腊原文的第二个完整的翻译。它在几个地方偏离了戈蒂埃的版本,对模棱两可的地方提供了另一种解读。[南斯拉夫]塞族共和国部长项目;[177032: Tradicija, invacija i identitet u vizantijskom [j]