怪力小说网

第65章（第1页）

[122]basilica5，p190（edheibach）。

[123]researchtothehistoryofthebyzantecityrelationtotheancientpolisisstillatanearlystaapartfrotheiportantworkofbratianu，privilès，itisonlythelastfewyearsthatanuberofstudiesonthisproblehaveappearedseeespeciallyekirsten，&lso;diebyzantischestadt&rso;，berichtezuⅪternationalenbyzantisten-kongress，unich1958;fdolr，&lso;diefr&uul;hbyzantischeundbyzantischbeefsstestadt&rso;，attidei3°ngresternazionaledistudisull&rso;altodioevo，spoleto1958，1ff；gostrogorsky，&lso;byzantecitiestheearlyiddleas&rso;，dop13（1959），45ffiportantntributionshavebeenadebybyzantescholarstheussrparticularthereisfirstthestiulatgdiscsionbyapkazdan，&lso;vizantijskiegorodav7-Ⅺvekach&rso;（byzantecitiesfrotheseventhtotheeleventhcenturies），vetskajaarcheologija21（1954），164ff，andderevnjaigorod，whichhearguesforanextensivedeclebyzantecitiestheearlyiddleas，whileeelipsic，&lso;kvoprosuogorodevvizantii8-9vv&rso;（ontheestionofthecitybvzantiufrotheeighthtothenthcenturies），556（1953），113ffandocerki，87ff，jsjuzjuov，&lso;rol&rso;godorov-eporievvistoriivizantii&rso;（theroleofarket-townsbyzantehistory），558（1956），26ff，bothaept，yviewrrectly，theunbrokenntuityofbyzantecitiescfaltheprehensiveaountofcityandvillabyzantiubynvpigulevskaja，eelipsic，jsjuzjuovandapkazdan，&lso;gorodiderevnjavvizantiiv4-Ⅻvv&rso;（townanduntrybyzantiufrothefourthtotheelfthcenturies），actesduxiiengrèsterndesetbyz，ochrida，1961，1（belgrade，1963）agastkazdan&rso;sviewthatthenuisaticaterialisevidenceforasharpdeclebyzantecitylifetheseventhcenturyonward，cfydiscsion，opcit48ffand1。5kolova，&lso;kladyvizantijskichokakistoikdljaistoriivizantii8-Ⅺvv&rso;（hoardsofbyzantesasaurceforthehistoryofbyzantiufrotheeighthtotheeleventhcenturies），5515（1959），50ffseealtheiportantobservationsbypgriern，&lso;rcethedarkas：acritieofevidence&rso;，transactionsoftheroyalhistoricalciety，5thseries，vol9（1959），123ff，andglkurbatov，rannevizantijskijgorod（antiochijav4veke）（anearlybyzantecity-antiochthefourthcentury），lengrad，1962onthentuityofurbanlifeearlydievalbyzantiuseealsvryonis，&lso;anattichoardofbyzantegolds（668-741）frothethoaswhitteorellectionandthenuisaticevidencefortheurbanhistoryofbyzantiu&rso;，zrvi8，1（1963），291ff

[124]onthedateofthefarr&rso;slawseeabovep90andnote7

[125]thisisrrectlypotedoutbylipsic，&lso;vizkrest&rso;janstvo&rso;105ff，andocerki，57ff

[126]thisvillaunityhadnothgtodowiththetypeofunityanizationdistgui射dbyoncultivationandperiodicalredistributionoflandwhichwasoncethoughttohaveexistedbyzantiuandwhoseorigwasattributedtothefenceofthe&lso;priitive&rso;slavunitylifetroducedbyslavigrationthistheorywasputforwardbyza插riaanddevelopedbyvasilijevskijandoreparticularlybypenskijitisbasedonfalsehypotheses;itssupportershadnstructedtheirsupposedpriitiveslavunitiesaftertheodelofthersianirsystewhichisnowregnizedasaproductofalaterperiodunityanizationofthiskdaongtheslavsatthetioftheirsettlentthebalkansisonthentraryatleastunknownandunrerdedtosuup-byzantiuhadneverhadaunityanizedonthebasisofoncultivation，and，ifwerelyontheurces，wecanfdnosuchunityaongtheearlyslavseitherbyzantiucertalyhadunitiesofthekddescribedabove，andthesewerefoundlongbeforetheslavsettlent，aswasalthecaseelsewhere

itistothegreatcreditofpancenko，&lso;krest&rso;janskajabstvennost&rso;，thathewasnotledastraybytheauthorityofza插riaorofhisgreatrsianpredecesrs，andasaresultofacarefulanalysisofurcesheshowedthatthepropertyofthebyzantepeasantwashisdividual，unrestrictedandhereditarypossessionunfortunately，hewenttoofartheoppositedirectionlikehispredecesrs，healwaysthoughtofaunitytersofanagriculturalunitywithperiodicalredistributionofland，andsceherightlyfoundnotraceofthisbyzanteurces，hesiplyncdedthatbyzantiuhadnovillaunitiesatallthiswaspletentradictiontotheurceswhichcertalydidregnizeandfreentlyntionedthe

thereisnodoubtthattheslavsplayedanextrelyiportantparttherevivalofthebyzanteepiretheseventhcenturythiswasnotbecaetheyiportedaspecificallyslavtypeofunityanization，ashasbeenarguedbyansofawhole插offalsencsions，butbecaetheybroughtnewenergyandstrengthtotheenfeebledstate;boththefarrldiersandthefreepeasantsthebyzantethesundoubtedlyntaedalarproportionoftheslavswhohadperatedtotheepiretheiportanceoftheslavsthedevelopntofbyzantiuisespeciallyephasizedbybyzantescholarstheussrcfespeciallylipsic，&lso;vizkrest&rso;-janstvo&rso;lerle，&lso;histoireagraire&rso;，219，p63ff，ephasizestheiportanceofthe&lso;deographicrevotion&rso;（bouleversentdéographie）whichbeganbyzantiuwiththeappearanceoftheslavstheseventhcenturythetheoryofaslavunityanizationiportedtobyzantiu，ontheotherhand，iscreasglybeggivenupbyvietbyzantescholarswhoorigallysupporteditcflevcenko，&lso;aterialy&rso;，28ff，37andespeciallyjsjuzjuov，&lso;bor&rso;bazaputirazvitijafeodal&rso;nychotnosenijvvizantii&rso;（thedisputeaboutthedevelopntoffeudalrelationshipsbyzantiu），vizantijskieocerki，osw，1961，41ffbutseealzvudalvaandapkazdan，&lso;nekotoryeneresennyeprobleycial&rso;noenoiceskojistoriivizantii&rso;（unlvedproblesthecialandenoichistoryofbyzantiu），voprosyistorii1958，10，83ff，andtheobjectionsputforwardbyjsjuzjuov，&lso;nekotoryeprobleyistoriivizantii&rso;（problesthehistoryofbyzantiu），ibid1959，3，101ff，which1nsidertobejtified