[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.By his wife Rhipsimé he had four sons, whomhe named David, Moses, Aaron, and Samuel; to the world they were collectivelyknown as the Comitopuli, the Count s children.[1] Of what province Nicholas wasgovernor we do not know, nor when he died.By the time of the abdication of TsarBoris, his sons had succeeded to his influence; and to them the Western Bulgarianslooked to preserve their independence.Of the history of this revolution we know nothing.The Emperor John Tzimisces wasapparently unconcerned by troubles in Bulgaria after his victory at Dristra.Hisattention was mainly turned to his eastern frontier.We only hear that, following theold Imperial policy, he established large numbers of Armenians, Paulician heretics,round Philippopolis and on the borders of Thrace.[2] This would dilute and weakenthe Slavs; but it weakened them chiefly in the one way which as a pious Emperor hemight regret it increased the vigour of the Dualist heresy.To the provinces furtherto the west he paid no attention.It1.In Drinov (op.cit., p.88) and Jirecek (Geschichte, pp.173, 186, 189), and other works, we hear of acertain Shishman who was the father of the Comitopuli.His existence is deduced solely from a list ofthe Tsars of Bulgaria interpolated probably as late as the eighteenth century, in the Register ofZographus (see Zlatarski, op.cit., pp.638-9).The Charter of Pincius (see Farlati s Illyricum Sacrum, iii.,pp.111-12), calling the Tsar Stephen in 974, is equally suspicious (Zlatarski, loc.cit.).The namesNicholas and Rhipsimé are given in a deed of Samuel s (op.cit., p.637), and in Bishop Michael ofDevol s MS.of Scylitzes (Prokic, Die Zusätze in der Handschrift des Johan.Scylitzes, p.28.)2.Cedrenus, ii., p.382.217218 S.Runciman - A history of the First Bulgarian empire - 3.3 Page 2 of 29was only after his death, in January 976, that statesmen at Constantinople fullyrealized the fact that, not only were there large numbers of Bulgarians quiteunconquered, but they were restively and aggressively airing their independence.[1]Already they had looked around for foreign support.At Easter time in 973 the oldWestern Emperor, Otto I, was at Quedlinburg, receiving embassies from manyvaried nations; and among them were envoys from the Bulgarians.But Otto wasdying, and his son had other cares.Nothing came of this mission.[2]Meanwhile, at home, Samuel, the youngest of the Comitopuli, was establishinghimself in sole supremacy.How the brothers organized the independent kingdom isuncertain; possibly they each took over a quarter of the country and ruled it as someform of a confederacy, with David, the eldest, as their head.[3] Fortune, however,favoured Samuel.David was soon killed by Vlach brigands at a spot called the FairOak Wood, between Castoria and Prespa, in the extreme south of the kingdom.Moses set out to besiege the Imperial town of Serrae (Seres), probably in 976, on thenews of the death of the terrible Emperor John; there a stray stone cast by thedefenders ended his life.[4] Aaron had a gentler temperament1.Cedrenus, ii., p.434, says that the Comitopuli revolted on John Tzimisces s death; but we knowthat they were independent in 973 (see below).Probably the West Bulgarian question lay dormant,till on John s death the Bulgarians became actively aggressive.Drinov s theory (loc.cit.) of anindependent Western Bulgaria that seceded in 963 depends on the existence of the mythicalShishman and on a paragraph in Cedrenus, ii., p.347, which has clearly been interpolated out ofplace.Drinov has, however, been copied by Jirecek and Schlumberger and the Cambridge MediaevalHistory.2.Annales Hildesheimenses, p.62.An embassy from Constantinople arrived at the same time.3.Zlatarski (op.cit., p.640) definitely divides up the country between them.I think that rather tooconfident.4.Cedrenus, ii., p.435.He mentions Aaron s death at the same time as David s and Moses s, thoughactually it occurred later.The legend of David s retirement, as the sainted Tsar David, into amonastery, given in Païssius (Istoriya Slaveno-bolgarskaya , pp.33, 63, 66, 70), and in Zhepharovitch sStemmatigraphion (eighteenth-century works, though compiled from older sources), is obviously of nohistorical value.See Zlatarski (op.cit., pp.646-7).219than his brothers, it seems, for it was his pacifism that was to prove his ruin in theend.At the moment he was content to play second fiddle to Samuel, who probably S.Runciman - A history of the First Bulgarian empire - 3.3 Page 3 of 29by the year 980, if not before, was enjoying the title of Tsar.[1]From the Peace of Dristra till his death in 976 the Emperor John had ignored thewest, though probably he intended to deal with it later, when an occasion shouldarise.On his death the young Basil II, already for thirteen years a nominal Emperor,succeeded to the full authority.But for four years Basil s hands were tied by thegreat rebellion of Bardas Sclerus in Asia.Even till 985 his position was insecure; hehimself was gay and careless, while all his ministers and generals plotted againsthim.These years gave Samuel his opportunity
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]