The Period of the Sclavinii and the Bogomil Movement

A section of the earlier population abandoned the interior of the country, seeking refuge in the coastal towns and settlements or penetrating more deeply into mountain areas difficult to access. The well-tried Romaonian policy in the case of smaller groups and nomadic tribes, of pacification through the imposition of an economic system and government, aided by religious and cultural influences, followed by an assimilation of the newcomers, did not work in this case. The main reason for this should undoubtedly be sought in the sclavinii - newly-formed Slav principalities in Macedonia, with their internal religious, cultural and artistic life. To give a better view of the picture which, in our opinion, is of crucial significance for the understanding of the lack of frescoes and easel painting, we would submit certain information given in Professor Ostrogovski’s study.

“It has only recently become clear that the concept of the Sclavinii is central to an understanding of the history of the Balkans at that time. It best characterizes the situation on the Balkan Peninsula from the 7^th-9^th centuries. The Sclavinii were districts that belonged to the Slavs and were in fact out of reach of the Romaoian authorities. These regions did not, however, have a state organization of their own. The Balkan Peninsula was, in fact, lost to the Romaoian state although the function of Romaoian sovereignty was able to be maintained through its formal retention of sovereignty over the effectively lost Balkan, yet it did not reveal the factual conditions. If we want a realistic picture of the Balkans at that time, it is necessary to determine whether not merely formal but actual Romaoian rule existed here, whether the Romaoian government functioned here. It is not difficult to determine this: wherever Romaoian government existed in the Middle Ages there existed an organization in themes. Where there were no themes there was no real Romaoian rule” Ostrogorski goes on to say: ”Obviously, in view of the fact that the Romaoian rule was disorganized by the incursions of the Slav tribes, organization into themes started much later in the Balkans and advanced very slowly." Later on Ostrogorski states: “Only in the last years of the 8^th century was the theme of Macedonia established, and it did not have much in common with Macedonia either in its ancient or contemporary sense. The Romaoian theme of Macedonia covered the western part of Thrace. Its capital was Adrianopolis. The title Macedonia was applied to western Thrace precisely because Macedonia had been lost and was in the hands of the Slavs, consisting of a conglomerate of Sclavinii.”

In his “History of the Wars” Procopius of Caesarea, one of the most famous Romaoian writers and historians, and a contemporary of the Romaoian Emperor Justinian (527-565), mentions the belief of the Slavs. “They believe” says Procopius, “in the existence of a god, the creator of thunder who is single and lord and master of all, and they dedicate oxen to him and other sacrificial animals. Truly, they respect also rivers and nymphs and some other divinities, and to all of them offer sacrifices and do fortune telling upon those sacrifices. They have their own language which is completely barbarian”.

All this proves that the Slavs were closely bound to their Sclavinii, where they had a decidedly isolated life-style of their own which was in many respects the same as that which they had had in their own former land. Their pagan customs, their language and their semi-nomadic way of life enabled the Slavs to remain more of less beyond the reach of direct Romaoian influence, particularly in the fields of crafts and painting.

For completely understandable reasons, the influence over the acceptance of frescoes and easel painting, which were mainly connected with the Christian cult, developed very slowly.

For this reason the territory of Macedonia, on which the organization of the Slav principalities lasted the longest, should not be identified with any other territory in the Balkans, particularly in the period of the 7^th-8^th centuries.

In the 9^th century, after lengthy crisis, the Romaoian Empire started gradually to recover. In the process of the establishment of organized themes in the Balkans, as Professor Ostrogorski states: “The process of Romaoian reoccupation of certain regions in the Balkans is evident.” This was achieved mainly by the organization of government through themes on the territories of Thessaloniki and Dyrrachium, two extremely significant strongholds of the Romaoian Empire on the Agean and Adriatic seas. With this ended the period of the Sclavinii, which typified the history of the Balkans from the 7^th century to the middle of the 9^th century.

The suppression of the Sclavinni, according to the source cited, did not take place without military action by the Romaoian army. Equally, the suppression of the Macedonian Sclavinni by the Bulgarian state during this period did not take place without armed conflicts between the Macedonian Slavs and their conquerors. Later, compared to the other Slav peoples in the Balkans, the Slavs from Macedonia, like the Bulgarians under whose rule they were for a time, gradually came under direct Romaoian cultural influence. Accepting the Christian religion and its rites, they accepted religious painting and acquired the technology for its production as well as the production of other liturgical objects. In doing so, the Macedonian Slavs became a major link between the rich Romaoian culture and other Slav peoples.

From this early period we have various important remains of the material culture on the terrain of Macedonia. Only icons painted on wood have not yet been discovered. In our opinion, and based on what has been said above, their discovery should not be expected. It becomes clear that with the advent of the Slavs, widespread icon production ceased or dwindled to a small number commissioned by the drastically reduced early Christian population, which hardly managed to maintain any of the previously built churches.

No icon has yet been discovered in Macedonia which on the basis of its inscription or by means of stylistic analysis can be linked to the activities of Clement of Ohrid and St. Naum, the disciples of Cyril and Methodius, so, in the 9^th and the first half of the 10^th century, it can be reckoned with considerable certainty that after the year 843 and the establishment of the cult of icons their number increased rapidly. There must have been icons in Ohrid, which at the end of the 9^th century became one of the most important centres of Slavonic culture in this part of the Balkan Peninsula. The three decades long cultural, educational, religious and other activities of St. Clement in this town have left deep traces. His monastery dedicated to St. Panteleimon, protector of health, was the centre of this multi-faceted activity. It can be said with certainty that during the construction of their monastery churches, besides painting the walls with frescoes, Clement and Naum could not have failed to adorn them with icons. They were certainly in a position to engage skilled painters who were already well known. Bearing in mind the well known cultural and educational endeavours of Clement of Ohrid and St. Naum, to educate their Slav pupils, to whom Slavonic literacy and the Slavonic language in which the church services were conducted would not be alien, and the fact that the sacred books were translated and texts written which interpreted in the paintings in churches and the icons, it can be assumed that local fresco-and icon- painters were supported and were in great demand. They came from the Slav community and may have been educated as painters in the painting schools in Thessaloniki, Ohrid or Kastoria, or in some others smaller centre on the territory of the Macedonia of the time. The great advantages the city of Thessaloniki had should be emphasized: after Constantinopole it came second in size and importance as a spiritual, cultural and artistic centre and it was the birthplace of the Slav educators Cyril and Methodius.

But what happened to those icons? Where are they and when did they disappear?

Could their disappearance be interpreted in connection with changes relating to the appearance of the Bogomils? The words of Presbyter Cosmas in his “Sermon Against the Bogomils”, written in the mid 10^th century, seem to provide certain indications and support the suspicion that it is precisely the Bogomils who were the cause of the disappearance of the icons. For Presbyter Cosmas says: “The demons are afraid of the face of the Lord painted on tablets, while the heretics have no respect for icons, calling them idols.”

The struggle of the Bogomils against icons may be considered as last serious attack upon icons, after which came a completely different period in which icon-painting was to assume a more significant place in the newly-built churches and monasteries in Macedonia. It should be stressed that this was the time of the creation of Samuil’s Macedonian Empire and establishment of the Patriarchate of Ohrid and Prespa, and when the great three-naved Balisa of St. Achilleus of Larissa was built on the island of St. Achilleus in Lesser Prespa Lake. A correct interpretation of the sources, especially the emendations and additions made to the chronicle of the Romaoian Scilica (second half of the 11^th century) by Mihailo, Bishop of Devol (early 12^th century) testify to the fact that even in the hard and ill-fated times of Samuil’s Empire there were very important undertakings in the form of religious buildings and related to them, fresco – and easel painting.

The defeat of Samuil’s army and the fall of his empire (1014-1018) were to lead to the demotion of the Patriarchate of Ohrid and Prespa to a lower level – that of an archbishopric, and to the appointment of Jovan (1018–1037) to the archiepiscopal throne of Ohrid. Jovan had been prior of Slav monastery in valley of the River Radika. In our opinion, it may have been on site where the foundations of a monastery church dedicated to the Mother of God have been found near the village of Rostuse.

After Jovan, who was a Slav by origin and “a most noble monk”, as the Romaoian Emperor Basil II styles him in his chrysobull, Greeks were appointed to the throne of the Ohrid Archbishopric. The first of them was Leo (1037-1056), one of the most eminent philosophers of his time, a theologian and polemicist, and instrumental in bringing about the ecclesiastical schism between Constantinopole and Rome (1054). In studies related to the date of the building of cathedral church of St. Sophia in Ohrid, Leo was for a long time credited with its construction. More recently, however, other opinions have been put forward who link Leo’s name only with the painting of the church. It is indisputable that it was during his time that the great stone iconostasis that shut off the whole of the altar space was built. Whether Archbishop Leo commissioned any icons on wood or any other material to be made for the iconostasis is not known. There may have been curtains with saints painted on them in the intercolumnar spaces; but even if they were closed with curtains which might or might not have been fixed to the architrave above the iconostasis, where icons were beginning to be placed at this time.

<<  >>

Icons of Macedonia

Webmaster