Кирил и Методий в българската Моравия
CIRYL AND METHODIUS IN (THE) BULGARIAN MORAVIA
According to "The Extensive Passional of Methodius". Pope Hadrianus consecrated Methodius on the throne of St. Andronicus in Sirmium, situated on the bank of Sava river. The conquered by the Franks territories as a missionary areas were subdued to the Salzburg Episcopate, that is why archbishop Adalvinus protested to the Pope why Methodius was active in the areas of Lower Pannonia and the neighbouring lands to Drava river, and from there as far as Drava pours into the Danube (according to Salzburg Memorandum).
The book searches for an answer to the question how the wrong opinion was shaped, that the Moravia mission of St. St. Ciryl and Methodius was not around Sirmium, in Lower Pannonia, but near to Boy Marka (later Czechia).
According to the "The extensive St. Passional of Ciryl": 'Rostislas, a royal prince of Moravia, has sent his messengers to Emperor Michael with the following words: "We do not have such a teacher." ... When he arrived in Velegrad, Moravia, he was received by Rostislas with great honour'.
In this search we reiterate to the readers that in the historical sources of the IX-th century there is some talk about two Moravias - one in the area and with proximity of Slovakia of today, and the other, the greater one, as well as the older. The Great Moravia, in the boundaries of the then Bulgarian Kingdom, situated to the north-west of it.
The Bavarian geographer in his work "Description of the northern bank of the Danube territories and towns", which was written during 817-843 A. D., announced that in the middle of the IX-th century there were two Moravias: one on the left bank of the Danube in proximity with Boy Marka, and the other at the mouth of Drava river. The two Moravias were separated by the north-western Bulgarian lands. Regino, abbot of Lorraine, also spoke in the plural of his chronicle of 860 A. D. Constantine Porphyrogenctes affirmed the same in his work "The Government of the Empire". The one area he consecutively named "Megaly Moravia", and the other "Moravia" simply. Emperor Constantine noted that before the conquest by Magyars Megaly Moravia was divided between Magyars and Croats, and after the Magyar conquest it became southern border of Magyars to Croats.
From this unequivocally comes after that Megaly Moravia was south to Hungary before its conquest.
Gardizi also placed the Great Moravia to the south, at Lower Danube, over Bulgarian lands. So, the Bavarian geographer, Frank chronicles. Gardizi and
Emperor Constantino Porphyrogenetes unanimously placed the Great Moravia into Sirmium region where there was situated the Episcopate seat of St. Methodius according to his "Extensive Passional".
In the light of these historical sources there is no doubt which ol the two Moravias Moimir I and Rostislas governed and to which Moravia Michael III has sent Ciryl and Methodius. The dominating up till now opinion that the "Extensive Passional" of Ciryl and Methodius (the socalled "Pannonia Legends") is beneath criticism, and "The short Passional of Ciryl and Methodius", on the other hand, as well as the passionals of their closer disciples (Clement Ohridsky and Naum) are contradicting one another. (For instance, according to the first ones The Moravia Mission of Ciryl and Methodius was done in proximity of Sirmium and in Pannonia, but after the second ones this Mission took place in Pannonian Moravia and its vicinities, in Moesia, Pannonia, Dalmatia, Thrace, Illyria, Macedonia and Thessaly.
The followers of the theory for one and only Moravia who think to this very day that these passionals are so contradictory that the information of one group make groundless the strength and reliability of the other group. They do not take into account the cited historical sources of the IX-th century already presented by us. By simply ignoring the validity of these sources, they reject "The Short Passional" ("The Assumption of St. Ciryl"). "The popolyne passional of Ciryl", "Thessalonica Legend", "The Extensive Passional of Clement Ohridsky", The Old-Russian "Povest of the
passed letbygone years" ("Povest vremennyh let"), "The Second Bulgarian Passional" by Naum Ohridsky, "The Passional of Clement Ohridsky" by Demetrius Chomatianus, "The Moravian Legend" and Czech Chronicles.
One of our tasks was to elucidate these fictitious disagreements between the extensive passionals of the Slav earliest teachers and the monuments, which testify in one way or another to the missionary and instructive activity of Constantine-Ciryl Philosopher and Methodius among Bulgarian Slavs.
The contentions of the two groups are identical, the differences are in the traditional treatments about Moravia, only. Or, to cut a long story short,
oreither the assertions of the one group passionals is doubtful, but the universally accepted understanding about Moravia needs a different interpretation.
Since the sources of the IX-th century announce the existence of two Moravias, every contention neglecting this fact and not asking a question which of the two Moravias preached the Word of God and organized the church work of the Slavs, is unscholarly.
[Back to Index]