Francis J.

THOMSON

SS. CYRIL AND METHODIUS

AND A MYTHICAL WESTERN HERESY: TRILINGUISM
A Contribution to the Study of Patristic and Mediaeval Theories
of Sacred Languages•

Sermo rei et non res sermoni subjecta.

Pope Gregory IX, Decr. V, 40, 61

According to the Vita of St. Cyril, opponents of the Cyrillo-

Methodian mission to Moravia claimed that the use of Slavonie in the
liturgy w as illicit as God had elected but three tongues for his praise:
Hebrew, Greek and Latin, but Cyril refuted their arguments and
coined the clearly equivocal term Tf tdR.51:.IYbNHICô, which can be
equally interpreted as trilinguist or tripagan, to describe them, be-
cause Pilate had used these three languages in the superscription on
the Cross2. At Venice, on his way to Rome, Cyril once again refutes
the adherents of the theory, now qualified by the hagiographer as the
tri! inguist heresy 3, by reference to Scripture and precedent4. In the

•This article is a revised version of a paper read at the confercnce "The 11 OO th

Anniversary of the Arrivai of the Disciples of SS. Cyril and Methodius in Bulgaria",
organized by the Bulgarian Orthodox Church in November 1986. The papcrs delivcred
have not been published. List of abbreviations, see p. 107-121.
1 Corpus iuris canonici, ed. E. FRIEDBERG, II, Leipzig, 1881, p. 913. This maxim,
inspired by Gregory's encouragement of missions to Moslems and Mongols, is quoted in
Pope Innocent IV's rescript of 1248 permitting the use of the Slavonie Glagolitic liturgy,
edited in L. JELié, Fontes historici /iturgiae glagolito-romanae a xm usque ad XIX sae-
culum, Veglia, 1906, saec. xrn, p. 9.
2Vita S. Constantini-Cyrilli (hereafter VC), p. 131. That the hagiographer was being
deliberately equivocal is shown by the fact that he says that Cyril's opponcnts wcre
inspired by the thrice-cursed devil, TpbcAA> TblH AÏl>&OAb, ed. ibidem. On the equivocality
see R. JAKOBSON, Sketches for the His tory of the O/dest Slavic Hymnody: Commemo-
ration of Christ's Saint and Great Martyr Demetrius, in m., Se/ected Writings, VI, 1, The
Hague, 1985, p. 297, and P1ccmo, Questione, p. 67. Tt should be notcd that the rcfcrencc
to the superscription on the Cross is made by Cyril, not by his opponcnts. Although
Constantine only took the name of Cyril on his deathbed, the latter namc is uscd hcrc in
keeping with English scholarly usage.
3 vc. p. 134.
4 VC, pp. 134-136. The theory that the account of the debate in the VC is an abridg-
ment of a treatise on the subject written by Cyril and translated into Slavonie by Metho-
dius, thus most recently D. TRIFUNOVICH [= TRIFUNov1é], Darât na Svetiya dukh i sla-
vyanskite ezitsi, in Kirilo-Metodievski studii, 4 (1987), p. 76, is just one more unsubstan-
tiated hypothesis.

Analecta Bollandiana, 110 (1992), p. 67-122

68 F. THOMSON

heat of the debate Cyril calls his adversaries scribes, Pharisees and
hypocritess and his departure from them is depicted in the words
describing Christ's departure from the Pharisees and Sadducees at
Magdala: He left them and departed 6. At Rome he falls ill and on his
deathbed he calls upon God to destroy the trilinguist heresy 1 .
The Vita of St. Methodius places the debate at Rome and this
time the adversaries expressly refer to the superscription on the Cross
in support of their theory; Pope Hadrian II, however, having coined a
new term to describe them: Pilatists8, curses them9. This bas some-
times been taken to mean that he anathematized themt 0 , but, to the
extent that any credence may be placed on the assertion, it can only
mean that he excommunicated them, since it was precisely in the
ninth century that both at Romell and in the Frankish Empire 12 a clear
distinction between anathema, involving eternal damnation, and ex-
communication, involving exclusion from the sacraments, was
drawnn.
Slavonie sources dealing with the Cyrillo-Methodian mission vir-
tually all mention in fairly strong terms the defeat of the trilinguists,

5 He quotes Matthew xxiii,13 and tells them that it applies to them, VC, p. 134.
6 VC, p . .136; cf. Matthew xvi,4.
7 norll&H Tpbi.i.3bl%Nll1<> epecb, VC, p. 141. (The orthography has here and elsewhere
been slightly modified).
8 Vita S. Methodii (hereafter VM), p. 156: nHilàTlNbl.
9 VM, ibidem: npoti1.t. n.
IOE.g. DVORNIK, Légendes, p. 386, and VAILLANT, Textes, Il, p. 38.
11 Cf. the epistle sent by pope John VIII (872-882) to Archbishop Liubert of Mainz

(863-889) in the affair of Count Boso's fugitive wife Engiltrude: ... H engeltrudim uxorem
Bosonis noveris non solum excommunicatione, que a fraterna societate separat, sed et
anathemate, quod ab ipso corpore Christi, quod est aecclesia, recidit, crebro percussam.
(Epistola Liuberto archiep. Mogunt., in MGH, Epist. t. VII, ed. P. KEHR, Berlin, 1928, p.
280).
12 Canon 56 of the synod of Épernay of 846 lays down: Ut nemo episcoporum quem-

libet, sine certa et manifesta peccati causa, communione privet ecclesiastica. Anathema
autem sine consensu archiepiscopi aut coepiscoporum, praelata etiam evangelica admoni-
tione, nu/li imponat, nisi unde canonica docet auctoritas, quia anathema aeternae mortis
est damnatio et non nisi pro mortali debet imponi crimine, et illi qui aliter non potuerit
corrigi. (MGH, Leg. t. 1, ed. G. PERTZ, Hanover, 1835, p. 392.)
13 E. VODOLA, Excommunication in the Middle Ages, Berkeley, 1986, p. 16, is cor-

rect to point out that the distinction was not consistently made everywhere at this time,
but there is no reason to doubt that it was made at Rome itself. The distinction between
excommunication, viz. exclusion from the sacraments, and anathema, viz. total separa-
tion from the church, was clearly drawn by Gratian (t c. 1150) in his Decretum (Pars Il,
causa XI, quaestio Ill, c. 24, in PL 187, coll. 849-851).
 TRILINGUISM 69

some rather briefly, e.g. according to the Proprium S. Cyrilli the saint
stifled the trilinguists14, while according to the Proprium S. M ethodii
the saint's labours suffered from the trilinguist devils 15, but others in
more expressive ways, e.g. in the Laudatio SS. Cyrilli et Methodii the
brothers, having refuted the evil of the trilinguists, destroyed (it),
casting it out like tares from wheatt6, while Clement of Ochrid in his
Laudatio S. Cyrilli declares that Cyril shut the mouths of the wolves,
the trilinguist heretics11 and the second redaction adds that the latter
made themselves the accomplices in evil of Pilate, whose gibberish he
(viz. Cyril) demolishedtB. The expulsion of Methodius' disciples from
Moravia by the trilinguists is also bewailed in several liturgical
hymns: e.g.
1) a canon for St. Demetrius (ed. ANGELOV, Literatura, 1, p. 32)19;
2) a canon for Thursday in the 4th (Orthodox 5th) week in Lent by
Constantine of Preslav (ed. PoPov, Proizvedeniya, p. 594 )20;
3) a revised version of the Slavonie translation of a prosomoion by
Theodore Studites for vespers on Friday in the 4th (Orthodox 5th)
week in Lent21.
Other Slav sources too mention the controversy but add nothing
new22.

14
o~AàKH rpbhl.3bl%NHtbl, ed. P. LAVROV, Materialy po istorii vozniknoveniya drev-
neyshey slavyanskoy pis'mennosti (= Trudy S/avyanskoy komissii Akademii nauk SSSR,
1), Leningrad, 1930, p. 109. The later redaction refers also to their heretical gibberish,
6MAH EPETHYbCWll'> ed. ibid., p. 121.

15w 6"&Cb rpbhl.3bl%NHtb, ed. ibid:, p. 124. For the Proprium SS. Cyrilli et Methodii
see ibid., p. 115.
16Ed. ANGELOV, Kliment, 1, p. 471; cf. Matthew xiii, 24-30. For later redactions see
ed. ibid., pp. 487 and 507. The ascription of the eulogy variously tu Clement of Ochrid or
Constantine of Preslav cannot be examined here.
17 .s.i.TbYE o~cn &AbtOMb rpbhl.3blYNblM6 Epn1-1toM• ed. ibid., 1, p. 426.
18 npWlECTNblllH 3A060!0 n1-1Aà Tl!: T&OPEWE CE H)('it\E
1 6AEAH p.i.sopb11 ed. ibid, 1., p. 438.
19The suggestion that rpbhl.3b1%NHt6 in the canon merely means pagan, thus

VoRONov, Voprosu, p. 227, or altematively is a scribal mistake for rpH3NHt6, thus ibid.,
p. 227, n. l, is unacceptable. Ascriptions of the canon variously to Cyril, Methodius or
Clement of Ochrid are ail purely speculative.
20Qn this see PoPOv, Spomenavane, pp. 86-90
2 1 For juxtapositions of the original translation and the revised version see KARA-
BINOV, Triod', p. 227; MosIN, Heretici, p. 118; SLAVEVA, Eres, p. 165; POPOV, Proizvede-
niya, p. 27. The wording varies in the codices; for an attempted reconstruction see Mo-
SIN, Heretici, p. 123; Popov, Spomenavane, p. 88.
22 To give but two examples: the Bulgarian monk Khrabr deals with
it in his treatise
De litteris, a defence of a Slavonie alphabet (whether Cyrillic or Glagolitic is disputed)
writtcn in the latc 9th or early lOth century, ed. GIAMBELLUCA-KossovA, Chernorizets, pp.
70 F. THOMSON

Latin sources dealing with the history of the Moravian mission

also contain accounts of the controversy over the use of Slavonie in
the liturgy which are in at least one respect more accurate than the
Slavonie ones in that they record initial papal suspicion of the inno-
vation 23. Nowhere, however, do the opponents of the innovation
advance anything resembling the trilinguist theory, indeed in the Le-
genda Moravica (Tempore Michaelis imperatoris) when Cyril quotes
I Corinthians xiv,39 - forbid not to speak with tongues - in support
of the innovation, they quite rightly protest at this misuse of a passage
concerning glossolalia in a debate about liturgical language24 and
retort:
Quamvis apostolus loqui linguis persuaserit, non tamen per hoc in ipsa,
qua statuisti, Zingua divina solempnia voluit canere. (Ed. MMF, II, p. 263.)

The existence of a Western theory of trilinguism is, however,

apparently borne out by Byzantine sources. Four polemieal cata-
logues of Latin errors include trilinguism. in the Cyrillo-Methodian
sense, the earliest being the Opusculum contra Francos, which in
some codices is anonymous, in others is ascribed to Patriarch Photius
of Constantinople (858-867, 877-886)25, a false ascription since not
only is its style not Photian, it also contains anachronisms which
clearly date it to the period after the schism of 105426. It must have

113-143, see pp. 126-131; the Russian Primary Chronicle of the late 1 lth century contains
an account which clearly goes back to the VM, ed. PSRL, I, Leningrad, 1926, col. 27;
ibid .. II, St. Petersburg, 1908, col. 19. For a juxtapostion of the chronicle account and the
VM see A. SHAKHMATOV, "Povest' vremennykh let" i yeye istochniki, ed. M. PRISELKOV,
in Trudy otdela drevnerusskoy literatury, 4 (1940), p. 88.
23
See, for example, 1) Christian's Vita et passio S. Wenceslai et S. Ludmile ave
eius, ed. MMF, II, pp. 189-190; 2) the Legenda Moravica (Tempore Michaelis im-
peratoris), ed. ibid., pp. 261-264; 3) the Legenda Bohemica (Diffundente sole), ed. ibid.,
pp. 278-279; 4) the legend Quemadmodum, ed. ibid., pp. 292-293.
24 The misinterpretation of tangues in I Corinthians xiv,1-40 to mean foreign lan-

guages instead of glossolalia has a long history and is already found in the Comment. in
XII epistolas b. Pauli of the 4th century wrongly ascribed to Ambrose ("Ambrosiaster"),
in PL 27, coll. 269-270.
25 0n the codices see HERGENROTHER, Photius, III, pp. 173-174; ed. m., Monumenta,
pp. 62-71.
26 On these see HERGENROTHER, Photius, III, pp. 172-224. Why so many Slavists

still repeat the ascription to Photius, e.g. ANGELov, Kiril, p. 63; DuYCHEV, Episodio, pp.
115-116; KuEv, Chernorizets, p. 73, Eres, p. 86, Geschichte, p. 54 and lstoriya, p. 29;
ÜGIYENKO Yeres' (33), p. 6; VARTOLOMEEV, Konstantin, p. 249, is inexplicable, especially
since Hergenrother's proof was accepted by contemporary Slavists, e.g. MALYSHEVSKY,
Kiri/l, pp. 202-203.
 TRILINGUISM 71

been compiled before 1112/3, when it was cited by Nicetas Seides of

Iconium (fl. l 1-12th c.) in his Schediasma ad Latinos 21 , but by
whom is uncertain2s. It was translated in c. 1178 into Latin by Hugo
Etherianus29 (t before the end of 1182) and twice into Slavonie, once
in the 13th30 and once in the 14th century31. Trilinguism appears as
the 19th of the 28 errors which the Opusculum lists:
AÉyoucrt µÎj lieîv c'iA.A.mç y;\oocrcrmç i:o 0EÎov yEpaipE0"0m ei µÎj mîç i:ptcrt
mui:mç È~pciicri:i, ÈÂÂT\VtO"'tt, proµmcri:i. (Ed. HERGENRÔTHER, Monumenta, p.
68.)32
The second catalogue was compiled by Metropolitan Cyril of
Cyzicus, better known by his secular name of Constantine Stilbes (t
after 1204 )33 , soon after the fall of Constantinople in 1204. One of
his sources was the Opusculum, from which he took trilinguism,
which features as the 9th of the no less than 104 errors that he lists34.
The third catalogue is found in a codex copied in 1281 by a certain
Leo, but whether it was also compiled by him is uncertain35. It lists
39 errors, of which the last 20, including trilinguism as the 33rd, have

27 Unedited in full; excerpts ed. L. ALLATIUS, De ecclesiae occidentalis atque orien-

ta/is perpetua consensione /ibri tres ... , Cologne, 1648, pp. 209, 211-213, 475-477, 1111-
1112, and A. PAVLOV, Kriticheskiye opyty po istorii drevneyshey greko-russkoy po/emiki
protiv, Latinyan, St.Petersburg, 1878, pp. 186-188. On it see DARROUZÈS, Mémoire, pp.
52-56.
28 In the translations into Latin and Slavonie, on which see below, it is also ano-
nymous. The ascriptions to Leo of Ochrid, thus SNOPEK, Opusculum, pp. 288-289, or to
Michael Cerularius, thus Juorn, Schisme, p. 216, are purely hypothetical, while that to
Cyril, bishop ofTurov (1169-1182), thus BIENER, Col/ectionibus, pp. 68-69, is a curiosum.
29Ed. HERGENRÔTHER, Monumenta, pp. 62-71; also PG 140, coll. 541-544. The
translator has in places abridged the original.
30 Asc. 51 of the Serbian nomocanon, whence it was included in the Russian nomo-
canon as c. 40. It is found in ail printed editions of the Russian nomocanon since 1650,
e.g. the 1650 Moscow editio princeps, ff. 400'-403'. Modern editions includc PoPov,
Obzor, pp. 58-69.
31 Ed. TSONEV, Râkopisi, pp. 72-75.
32The Latin translation ed. ibidem, also PG 140, coll. 542-543; the second Slavonie
translation ed. TsoNEV, Râkopisi, p. 74. For some unknown reason trilinguism was not
included in the first Slavonie translation, which thus lists only 27 errors.
33Qn him see J.DIETIIART, Der Rhetor und Didaskalos Konstantinos Stilbes, Vienna,
1971 (dissertation), passim.
34Ed. DARROUZÈS, Mémoire, pp. 61-91, cf. p. 63; on his sources see ibid., pp. 91-
100, especially p. 92 for trilinguism, and DIETHART, Op. cit., p. 24.
35Ed. J. DAVREUX, Le Codex Bruxellensis (Graecus) Il 4836 (De haeresibus), in
Byzantion, 10 (1935), pp. 103-106, sce p. 105 for trilinguism.
72 F. THOMSON

been taken directly from the Opusculum 36 . The fourth list of Latin
errors is found in an epistle written in Slavonie by, or rather for,
Metropolitan Nicephorus 1 of Kiev (1104-1121), a Greek from Lycia,
and addressed to Yaroslav Svyatopolkovich of Vladimir in Volhynia
(t 1123) to warn him against close contacts with the West37. It lists
19 errors3s, all taken from the Opusculum39, the 15th being a trans-
lation of the latter's text on trilinguism:
MOA&tb. Tb GO TIH 7 tb.ICO N€ AOCTOHTb HN"l>Mb tô.SbllCOMb ,X&AAHH1 DOrA 7
NO TOICMO TP€MH tô.SbllCH, lKHAO&bCICblMô tô.SbllCOMb, €AAHNbCICHMb H
PHMCICHMb 40.

All Byzantine references to Western trilinguism are thus unconnected

with the Cyrillo-Methodian mission and derive from the Opusculum
contra Francos, a scurrilous catalogue of puerile accusations com-
piled between 1054 and 1112/1113 and more an illustration of odium
theologicum than a reliable historical source4 1. The sole Greek source
which linked trilinguism with the Cyrillo-Methodian mission was the
now lost Historia Chilandarica, which was used by Athanasius of
Paros (1721-1813) as the source for many of the interpolations which

3 6 Qn the sources see ibid., p. 106.

37 Yaroslav indeed had very close ties with the "Latins": his first wife was a
daughter of King Ladislaus 1 ofHungary (1077-1095), his second wife a daughter of Duke
Wladyslaw-Herman of Poland (1081/2-1102), where he twice sought refuge (1097 and
1119); his sister Zbyslava married Duke Boleslaw III of Poland (1107 /8-1138); another
sister Predslava married Almos, a son of King Géza 1 of Hungary (1074-1077), in 1104;
see N. DE BAUMGARTEN, Généalogies et mariages occidentaux des Rurikides russes du x•
au xm• siècle(= Orientalia christiana, IX,1), Rome, 1927, pp. 10-11.
38 The original version of the epistle, which also deals with the question of azymes

in some detail. has not been published in full, but the list of errors has been edited by Po.
POV, Obzor, pp. 111-116. There are two later redactions, one with a defective text and
with no indication of the addressee, ed. MAKARY, Istoriya, II (1889 3 ), pp. 336-341, the
other being a conflation of the epistle with passages from Nicephorus' epistle to Vladimir
II Monomachus of Kiev (1113-1125) and addressed to Y aroslav Svyatoslavich of Murom
(t 1129), ed. ibid., II, pp. 341-349.
3 9Nicephorus omits 7 of the Opusculum's 28 errors, viz. 13, 15, 24-28, but combines

6 and 7 and again 8 and 9, thus giving a total of 19 instead of 21. The idea that Ni-
cephorus' source was John of Claudiopolis' Tractatus contra Latinos, thus GoLUBINSKY,
Istoriya, 1,2 (19042), p. 821, is erroneous.
40 Ed. Popov, Obzor, p. 115; cf. the later redactions, ed. MAKARY, Istoriya, II, pp.

338 and 344. Both TUNITSKY, Kliment, p. 244, n. 3, and KUEV, Chernorizets, p. 78,
wrongly state that the error is listed in Nicephorus' epistle to Vladimir II Monomachus,
cf. the latter ed. KALAYDOVICH, .Pamyatniki, pp. 157-163.
41 Beck rightly dismisses it as eine Flugschrift für die Mas sen der wenig gebildeten
Kleriker: H. BECK, Kirche und theologische Literatur im byzantinischen Reich(= Hand-
buch der Altertumswissenschaft, 12. Abt., 2. Teil, 1), Munich, 1959, p. 538.
 TRILINGUISM 73

he included in the second version of his account of St. Clement of

Ochrid42. However, the Historia was obviously a completely legen-
dary post-Byzantine compilation whose author was acquainted with
late legends about Cyril and Methodius43 and its account of trilin-
guism has no value as an independent source44.
From this brief review of the sources dealing with Western
trilinguism one salient fact emerges: not one can name a single per-
son, let alone a leading ecclesiastic or theologian, who adhered to the
theory: its partisans are referred to by terms such as bishops, priests
and monks 45, many other people 46, ail those with the Pope47, etc.
The first modern scholar to draw attention to the Vitae of SS.
Cyril and Methodius, Alexander V. Gorsky (1812-1875), in 1843
pointed out that Carolingian synods, such as those at Frankfurt in 794
and Mainz in 813, had explicitly denied that it was licit to pray in
only three languages and had enjoined the clergy to preach and teach
in the vernacular, from which he concluded that evidently German
clergy later in the ninth century had opposed a similar policy towards
the Slavs4s. In 1854 Ernst Dümmler (1830-1902) claimed that the
theory of trilinguism was already to be found in the works of Isidore

42 Published in his Otipctvoû icpimç ... (the title runs to 131 words), Leipzig, 1805,

pp. 83-133. The idea that this is a second edition of his account of St. Clement which he
published at Venice in 1784 in his book 'AicoÂ.ou0ia ~oû ev ér:yio1ç 1ta-rpoç Î]µrov KÂ.il-
µev~oç UPXlEltl<JlCOltOU BouÂ.yctpiaç wû oµoÂ.OYll~OÛ is Still being repeated, e.g. PODSKAL·
sKY, Theologie, p. 364, n. 1531, even though it has long been shewn to be incorrect, see
TUNITSKY, Kliment, pp. 22-25.
43 In so far as Athanasius has correctly reproduced the Historia, it apparently linked

the Cyrillo-Methodian mission with Bulgaria, not Moravia. The idea that it goes back to
a Greek account of the mission antedating even the VC and VM, thus TUNITSKY, Kliment,
pp. 31-39, is clearly incorrect, see JAGié's review, pp. 579-580, and there is no reason to
suppose that it antedates the 17th century.
44 The passages dealing with Cyril and Methodius are edited by TUNITSKY, Kliment,

pp. 263-270, in parallel with the Slavo-Serbian translation published at Buda in 1823 by
Bishop Dionysius Popovié; for trilinguism see pp. 269-270.
45 vc. p. 134.
46 VM, p. 156.
47 Opusculum, ed. Popov, Obzor, p. 59. This cannot, in the case of the VC and VM,
be explained as the consequence of a hagiographical preference for the abstract as the
two vitae narne rnany historical personages connected with the events in Moravia.
48 A. V. GoRSKY, Zhitiya svyatykh Kirilla i Mefodiya, in Kirillo-Mefodiyevsky sbor-
nik v pamya( o sovershivshemsya tysyashcheletii slavyanskoy pis'mennosti i khristianstva
v Rossii, ed. M. PoGODIN, Moscow, 1865, p. 35, n. 33.
74 F. THOMSON

of Seville (c. 560-636)49 and over the years since then a whole series
of scholars have elaborated a history of Western trilinguist heresy
which allegedly originated with Hilary of Poitiers (c. 310/320-367)
and was fully formulated by Isidore of Seville 50 .
The scholar who traced its development in the greatest detail,
Kuyo Kuev (1909-1991)51, viewed its evolution against the back-
ground of changes in ecclesiastical administration, the varying poli-
tical aims of Rome and Constantinople, and the never-ending struggle
against heresy:
Formulated by such an eminent scholar and ecclesiastic as Isidore was in
his day, the trilinguist dogma rapidly spread and imposed itself upon the
minds of the entire middle ages. Every deviation from it was considered to
be heresy and suffered the corresponding consequences. (KUEV, Chernori-
zets, p. 73; cf. ID., Geschichte, p. 53; Eres, p. 86; lstoriya, p. 29; Bortsi, p.
153.)

It reached its apogee (nadir?) in the ninth century when it was refuted
by Cyril and Methodius and in the late ninth-early tenth century the
Bulgarian monk Khrabr in his treatise De litteris52 again demolished
it:
And thus the early Bulgarian .scholars of the ninth and tenth centuries
dealt a severe blow to the mediaeval prejudice about the sacredness of the
Greek, H ebrew and Latin tangues and collaborated in the development of
democratic ideas in people's culture and religious life. After this blow tri-
linguism rapidly lost ground and in the course of time disappeared. (KUEV,
Eres, p. 94; cf. ID., lstoriya, p. 39; Bortsi, p. 156.)

That trilinguism was prevalent in the West at the time of the

Cyrillo-Methodian mission is taken as axiomatic by virtually ail scho-
lars and statements to the effect that routine thinking in Rome was

49 DüMMLER, Légende, p. 179, n. 4; he too refers to the Carolingian synods, ibid., p.

180.
50 Amongst those to contribute to the growth of the theory were (in chronological
order) RAèKI, Viek, pp. 160-162; BIL'BAsov, Kirill, II, pp. 86-87; VoRoNov, Istochniki, pp.
671-675; MALYSHEYSKY, Kirill (2), pp. 198-200, 384-385; POTKANSKI, Konstantyn, pp. 58-
60; TUNITSKY,K/iment, pp. 131-132; ÜGIYENKO, Yeres' (31-32), pp. 12-16; SLAYEYA, Eres,
p. 166; VARTOLOMEEY, Konstantin, p. 249.
51 Quite apart from devoting considerable attention to it in other of his works, e.g.
Chernorizets, pp. 72-84, KUEv devoted four articles toit, viz. (in chronological order) Ge-
schichte, Eres, Istoriya, Bortsi.
5 2 See above n. 22.
 TRILINGUISM 75

close to that of the trilingual heretics53 and that all opposition to it

was declared heresy, error and superstition 54 are commonplace. In the
face of such unanimity it is scarcely surprising that in 1954 1. Dujcev
could remark about trilinguism:
Il problema essendo stato studiato in modo soddisfacente, non pare
necessario ritornavi ancora una volta. (DUYCHEV, Episodio, p. 115.)
Seldom can that eminent scholar have been so mistaken: the passages
from the works of Hilary, Isidore and others have been quoted out of
context, while the Carolingian synodal decisions have been cited with
no regard for their historical background, so that the resultant picture
is a gross distortion of reality and is erroneous in several major
respects:
a. trilinguism does not go back to Hilary of Poitiers;
b. it was not formulated by Isidore of Seville;
c. it was never advocated by any known theologian of the Western
church;
d. Western opposition to Cyril and Methodius' innovations was not
so much directed against the use of Slavonie as against the in-
vention of an entirely new alphabet.
Moreover, to be historically accurate it is necessary to add that
e. Hebrew was not one of the three languages of the superscription on
the Cross, neither was it a liturgical language of the early Church.

In Christ's day Biblical Hebrew was a dead languagess and while

Mishnaic Hebrew may still have been spoken by some in Judaeas6,
the linguafranca in the Near East had been since Assyrian times Ara-
maic57, the dialect spoken in Palestine being West Aramaicss. When-

53 SEvéENKO, Paradoxes, p. 222, n. 8; cf. DIITRICH, Christianity, p. 136: the opinion

then held by the Western Church.
54 PoNOMAREV, Vopros, p. 158. The assertion that: the concept of "trilinguism" was
affirmed as the ideological basis for the church's claims to the monopolistic contrai of the
spiritual life of society, thus GoRSKY, Znacheniye, p. 408, is just one more example of fa-
tuous modern jargon.
55 Although finds at Qumran and Masada shew that it was still occasionally used in
non-scriptural texts, see ScHORER, History, II, (1979), pp. 23-27; W1Lcox, Semitisms, p.
979; for the texts see LonsE, Texte, pp. 4-278.
5 6 See ScHÜRER, History, II, pp. 27-28; on the general question of Hebrew and Ara-
maic at this time see RABIN, Hebrew, pp. 1033-1037; BARR, Hebrew, pp. 110-114.
57rts widespread use is reflected in the Old Testament, where Ezra iv,8-vi,!8; vii,
12-26; Daniel ii,4-vii,28 and Jeremiah x,11 are in Aramaic. To be strictly accurate, it
was not so much one language as a body of dialects of the N.W. branch of the Semitic
76 F. THOMSON

ever in St. John's Gospel the term 'Ej3pa.ïcni is used59, it does not
mean in Hebrew but in Aramaic. Thus in xx,16 èK:eiv11 À.Éyet a.Ù't<Îl
o
'Ej3pciicr'ti, Pa.j3j3ouv1, À.Éye'tm ~tôacrica.À.e the word can only be Ara-
maic ., J 1.:i1. while in xix, 17 eiç 'tOV À.eyoµevov Kpa.viou 't07tov, o
l.éye'tm 'Ej3pciicni rol.yoea. it can only be interpreted as a distorted
form of Aramaic ~r:b~ 7.;i. in which the second lamed has been omitted60.
Hence the statement in xix,20 that the superscription on the Cross was
in Hebrew, Latin and Greek6t means in Aramaic, Latin and Greek62, a
fact pointed out by Nonnus of Panopolis (fl. 5th century)63.
In Galilee, where Jesus was l:>rought up, the spoken language was
Aramaic64 and the evidence of the Gospels plainly reveals that Christ's
native tongue was Aramaic, e.g. his words to Jairus' daughter 'ta.À.t0a.
icouµ, viz. mp ~!)"7~, 65 and his cry of dereliction from the Cross el.rot,

family; for a brief survey see BEYER, Language, passim, which is a translation of the first
chapter of idem, Texte, see pp. 23-76.
58 See P. KAHLE, Das zur Zeit Jesu in Paliistina gesprochene Aramiiisch, in ID.,
Opera minora von Paul Kahle. Festgabe zum 21. Februar 1956, Leiden, 1956, pp. 90-92.
59 It does not occur in any other Gospel.
6 °Compare Hebrew n';i.:i'?~. The term 'E~paùni is also used in John v,2 and
xix,13. However, in the former case there are so many variant forms of the word to
which it refers, e.g. B119Çao9a, B119oa'i8a, B119Eo8a see METZGER, Commentary, p. 208,
that the original reading remains conjectural, while in the latter case ra~~aea is
definitely of Aramaic origin, but its derivation is much disputed. Of the various
suggestions !J3A high ground, seems to correspond most closely to the Greek equivalent
À19oo'tprotov. On Aramaisms in the New Testament see ROGER, Aramiiisch, pp. 602-610;
WILCOX, Semitisms, pp. 978-1029; SCHWARZ, Jesus, pp. 5-51.
6 .1 This is the sole original reference to the three languages of the superscription
since the mention in Luke xxiii,38 is a later addition based on John xix,20, see METZGER,
Commentary,pp.180-181.
62 The argument that it may have been in Hebrew because it was a kind of
official
document, thus ELLINGWORTH, Hebrew, p. 339, is invalid as administrative documents
were not drawn up in Hebrew by either Romans or Jews at this time.
63 Paraphrasis
S; evangelii secundum Joannem, ed. PG 43, col. 901. Like other
early writers, Nonnus did not distinguish between Aramaic and Syriac, referring to both
by the latter term; see also below n. 68.
64 See KUTSCHER, History, p. 116; BARR, Hebrew, p. 112; RABIN, Hebrew, p. 1036.
On the Galilean dialect at the time of Christ see BEYER, Language, p. 39.
6 5Mark
v,41. The masculine form of the singular imperative is usually explained as
the loss of the unstressed final vowel in West Aramaic, see SCHWARZ, Jesus, p. 40; BARR,
Hebrew, p. 97; WrLcox, Ta.ti9a, pp. 472-473. On the Joss of unstressed final vowels in
Aramaic see DALMAN, Grammatik, p. 95-96,275 and BEYER, Texte, p. 122-125 (for 1wuµ
see pp. 123-124). However, many codices have the correct feminine form 1wuµ1 viz.
'01p, for the variants see METZGER, Commentary, p. 87; WrLcox, TaÂ.i9a, p. 471;
SCHWARZ,1esus, p. 40, Il. 4.
 TRILINGUISM 77

eÂ.COt, kµa c:ml3ax0avt,66 viz. "~tp~tq ~~7 "i'.17~ "i'.1~~. 67 which must be
contrasted with the Hebrew "J(OW i1~? .,~ .,?~ 68 • Although very little is
known of Christian worship69 before the mid-second century, there
can be little doubt but that the new forms of worship were in the
native language of Christ and the first Jewish Christians, viz. Aramaic,
which is clearly implied by St. Paul's use of the Aramaic liturgical
formula µapavaea10. Sorne common prayers may, of course, have
been recited in Hebrew, but, just as in the synagogues, Aramaic
targums were used for the scriptures11.
As the result of the widespread use of Greek as both a cultural
and a commercial medium throughout the Roman Empiren, a process

66Mark xv,34; for the variants see METZGER, Commentary, pp. 119-120.
67 The sole Hebraism is the omega instead of alpha in EÂ.rot, which reflects 'i11'?~.
The form of the cry in Matthew xxvii,46 is secondary since the repeated invocation T\Â-t i~
Hebrew i',~ and hence the cry is partly in Hebrew, partly in Aramaic.
68 Already Epiphanius of Salamis (c. 315-403) pointed out that the cry was in Syriac,
Panarium 2, 2, 66, in PG 42, col. 312. By Syriac he, of course, meant Aramaic, as did
Nonnus, see above n. 63.
There is a vast literature on Christ's native language, see that listed by HosPERS,
Bibliography, 1, pp. 317-318, and WILCOX, Semitisms, pp. 1021-1029. The old idea that he
spoke Mishnaic Hebrew was recently argued by B!RIŒLAND, Language, pp. 24-27, 39-40,
but is untenable, see the remarks of SEVENSTER, Greek, pp. 34-37. lt is, of course, pos-
sible that he knew at least some Hebrew and it has been argued that he may have used it
upon the solemn occasion of the Last Supper, see J. JEREMIAS, La dernière Cène. Les
paroles de Jésus(= Lectio divina, 75), Paris, 1972, pp. 232-240; BLACK, Approach, pp.
268-269, but it was not his native tongue.
69 0n parallels between early Christian worship and synagogue services see E. WER-
NER, The Sacred Bridge. The Interdependence of Liturgy and Music in Synagogue and
Church during the First Mi/lenium, London, 1951, pp. 17-42; L. HOFFMAN, The Jewish
Lectionary, the Great Sabbath and the Lenten Calendar: Liturgical Links between Chris-
tians and Jews in the First Three Centuries, in Time and Community: In Honor of Thomas
Julian Tal/ey, ed. J. ALEXANDER, Washington, 1990, pp. 3-20. The early Christians wor-
shipped mainly in homes, see Acts ii,46; Romans xvi,5; 1 Corinthians xvi,19; Colossians
iv,15, and seem to have visited synagogues mainly for missionary purposes, see Acts
vi,9; xiii,5; xiv ,1.
70 1 Corinthians xvi,22. Whether this is an imperative, viz. ~r;i ~ni? or a perfect,
viz. ~!J~. lJI? is here irrelevant; see BEYER, Texte, p. 124. On Aramaic as the first litur-
gical language see, e.g., KING, Rites, 1, p. 14; KOROLEVSKY, Languages, p. 3; SALA VILLE,
Introduction, p. 31.
71 See M. McNAMARA, The New Testament and the Palestinian Targum to the
Pentateuch (=Analecta Biblica, 27A), Rome, 19782, pp. 38-45, 251-261; E. LEVINE, The
Aramaic Version of the Bible. Contents and Context (= Beiheft zur Zeitschriftfür die alt-
testamentliche Wissenschaft, 174), Berlin, 1988, pp. 8-13, 20-21.
72For a brief survey see L. ZausTA, Die Rolle des Griechischen im Romischen Kai-
serreich, in Die Sprachen im Romischen Reich der Kaiserzeit. Kolloquium vom 8. bis
10. April 1974, ed. G. NEUMANN and J. UNTERMANN (= Beihefte der Bonner Jahrbücher,
40), Cologne, 1980, pp. 121-145, with a good bibliography, ibid., pp. 141-145.
78 F. THOMSON

of Hellenization had affected some elements of Jewish society73 and

the earliest converts to Christianity included Greek-speaking Jews 74 ,
so that Greek as well as Aramaic must have been used in Christian
worship from the earliest times7s. ln this context it is significant that
the overwhelming majority of Old Testament quotations in the New
go back to the Septuagint text76. With the increasing conversion of
gentiles the importance of liturgical Aramaic declined and the disper-
sal of the Jewish population of Palestine after the capture of Jerusalem
by Titus in 70, together with the suppression of Bar Cochba's revolt
of 132-135, marks the end of the Aramaic period of the church 77,
although the use of Aramaic as a liturgical language lingered on
among the Christian Jewish Nazarenes in Syria until the fourth cen-
tury7s. There is no evidence to support the theory that Hebrew as

73 On the process of Hellenization see M. HENGEL, Juden, Griechen und Barbaren.

Aspekte der Hellenisierung des Judentums in vorchristlicher Zeit (= Stuttgarter Bibel·

studien, 16), Stuttgart, 1976, passim and ID., Judentum und Hellenismus. Studien zu ihrer
Begegnung unter besonderer Berücksichtigung Paliistinas bis zur Mitte des 2. Jahrhun-
derts vor Chr. (= Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, 10), Tü-
bingen, 1988 3 , passim. For brief summaries see ID., The lnterpenetration of Judaism and
Hellenism in the Pre-Maccabean Period, in DAvœs, History, II (1989), pp. 167-228, and
ScHüRER, History, II, pp. 29-80. Sorne Jews had been influenced by Greek thought and
were no longer orthodox, see M. S1MoN;St. Stephen and the Hel/enists in the Primitive
Church, London, 1958, pp. 9-19, and ID., Les sectes juives au temps de Jésus(= Mythes
et religions, 40), Paris, 1960, pp. 84-88. It is not impossible that Christ himself knew
some Greek, see SEVENSTER, Greek, pp. 184-190; BARR, Language, pp. 9-10; MUSSIES,
Greek, pp. 1054, 1056; BIRKELAND, Language, pp. 17 and 39; WILCOX, Semitisms, p. 981,
but the blunt assertion: Dass er zweisprachig aufwuchs, steht [est, thus C. SCHNEIDER,
Geistesgeschichte des antiken Christentums, I, Munich, 1954, p. 51, is unproven.
74 See Acts vi,l; ix,29; xi,30. It is significant that in reporting his conversations with

leading Christians at Jerusalem, Paul refers to Simon by both the Aramaic (Cephas) and
Greek (Peter) forms of his agnomen, see Galatians ii,6-1 O.
75 See C. JoNES, The Eucharist. The New Testament, in The Study of Liturgy, ed. C.
JoNES et al., London, 1978, p. 162. To see in this the beginning of a process ofHelleniza-
tion of the Gospel involving an alteration in content, thus ScHNEEMELCHER, Problem, p. 58,
is to overlook the preceding influence of the LXX on the development of religious
terminology in Greek, on which see C. MoHRMANN, Linguistische Probleme bei den Kir-
chenviitern, in EAD., Études, VI (1977), pp. 183-184.
76 For those in the Pauline epistles see O. MICHEL, Paulus und seine Bibel (= Bei-
triige zur Forderung christlicher Theo/agie, Reihe II, 18), Gütersloh, 1929, pp. 55-68.
77 See TORREY, Period, pp. 205-223; SCHWARZ, Je sus, pp. 316-326. The Syriac, viz.

East Aramaic, liturgy does not derive from the (West) Aramaic one but from the Greek
liturgy, see SALAVILLE, Introduction, pp. 34-35.
78 On them see PRITZ, Christianity, passim, who favours the idea that the gospel
which they used was in Hebrew, but admits that it may have been in Aramaic, ibid., pp.
70, 84-85, 109. On early Jewish Christian movements see TAYLOR, Phenomenon, pp.
313-334.
 TRILINGUISM 79

opposed to Aramaic and Greek was a liturgical language in the early

Church.
Although an association of language and faith is found in the
Old Testament79, none is found in the New, indeed the equality of all
menso implies the equality of all languages and the miracle of Pente-
costst consecrates their use. This equality is expressed in various
ways by the early Fathers: lrenaeus of Lyons (c. 130/140 - c. 202) de-
clares that while languages vary, the message remains the same 8Z; Cle-
ment of Alexandria (c. 150-c. 215) defends the merits of "barbarous"
tongues and quotes the famous dictum attributed to Anacharsis: 'Eµoi
naV'tEÇ "EUTJVEÇ crJCu0iÇouow83; Origen (c. 185-c. 253/4) declares that
God is the lord of every tongue and hears all prayers as if they were
said in one and the same languages4, while the anonymous "Ambro-
siaster" (fl. 4th century) considers that it is only pagans who try to
hide sacra in incomprehensibility and expressly condemns those who
use languages in church not understood by the congregationss. For
Theodoret of Cyrrhus (c. 393-c. 466) all languages are equal because
human nature is one and the sames6 and, as a Syrian whose native
language was Syriac, he attacks the idea of the pretended superiority
of Greek by pointing out that the Hebrew prophets knew no Greek87,
and anyway Latin and Persian conciseness can be superior to Greek

79E.g. the strictures against Jewish men who had married Ashdodite, Ammonite
and Moabite women and half of whose children could not speak Hebrew in Nehemiah
xiii,23-27. Nowhere, however, is Hebrew referred as a sacred language set a part from
other tangues.
8o See Acts xvii,26; Romans x,12; xiv,11; Gala tians iii,28; Colossians iii,11.
81 See Acts ii,1-11: it is God who addresses us in our own languages, not we who
have to learn a special one to know Him.
82 Contra haereses I, 10, 2, in PG 7, coll. 552-553.
83Stromata I, 16, in PG 8, col. 792; cf. Anacharsis' Epistola prima Atheniensibus,
ed. R. HERCHER, Episto/ographi graeci, Paris, 1873, p. 102: 'Avcixap<nç rrap' 'Ae11vaio1ç
croÀou<ÎÇEt, 'A811vai:ot ôÈ itapà l:Ku8mç. See also below note 86.
84 Contra Celsum VIII, 37, in PG 11, col. 1573. The claim,
thus BARTAK, Versuch,
p. 20, n.10, that this refers solely to private prayer is untenable.
85Commentaria in epistolam b. Pauli ad Corinthios primam XIV, in PL 17, col. 255.
That he is not referring simply to sermons is shewn by the use of cantare in sicut adsolent
Latini homines Graece cantare, oblectati sono verborum, nescientes tamen quid dicant.
86Graecarum affectionum curatio V, in PG 83, col. 949; he tao
quotes Anacharsis'
dictum, see above note 85.
81 /bid.,
col. 945.
80 F. THOMSON

verbosityss. Gregory the Great (c. 540-604) points out that there is
nothing more transient than language89.
Already in the fourth century, however, the idea that the three
languages of the superscription on the Cross had special merit had
been growing in the West. That it was Western Latin theologians
who showed most interest in the superscription is hardly surprising,
since Latin, unlike Greek and Hebrew, is not a Biblical language and
the sole reference to it in the Bible is precisely that in the super-
scription9o, which thus for them had special significance. For Hilary
of Poitiers (c. 310/320-367) the three languages were especially im-
portant in the economy of salvation (Heilsgeschichte) since despite the
conversion of many barbarian peoples Christendom was still largely
confined to the Empire, which was predominantly Roman but in-
cluded also Jews and Greeks:
Quia his maxime tribus linguis sacramentum voluntatis Dei et beati regni
expectatio praedicatur: ex quo illud Pilatifuit, ut in his tribus linguis regem
Judaeorum dominum Jesum Christum esse praescriberet. Nam quamvis
multae barbarae gentes Dei cognitionem secundum apostolorum praedica-
tionem et manentium hodie illic ecclesiarum fidem adeptae sint, tamen spe-
cialiter evangelica doctrina in Romano imperio, sub quo H ebraei et Graeci
continentur, consistit. (Instructio psalmorum, in PL 9, coll. 241-242.)91
However, Hilary neither claims that the three languages are sacred92,
nor does he mention their liturgical use93. Jerome (c. 342-420), the
vir trilinguis, by implication allows them a privileged status because
of the Cross:
Nunc vero passionem Christi et resurrectionem eius cunctarum gentium
et voces et litterae sonant. Taceo de Hebraeis, Graecis et Latinis, quas na-
tiones fidei suae in Crucis titulo Do minus dedicavit. (Epistola LX, 4, in PL
22, col. 591.)

88 Ibid., coll. 949-952.

89
XL homiliarum in evangelia lib. I, 1, 4 in PL 76 col. 1080. See on his interest in
language KARL, Papst, pp. 190-196.
90 See above n. 61.
91 This forms the introduction to his Tractatus super psalmos (PL 9, coll. 251-908),

in which the Greek LXX and Vetus Latina texts of the Psalms are for the first time
compared.
92 MoHRMANN, Language, p. 155, and idem, Probleme, p. 178, wrongly asserts that
he does. For a correct assessment see RESNICK, Lingua, p. 64.
9 3 QaIYENKO, Yeres' (31-32), p. 14, incorrectly claimsthathe does.
 TRILINGUISM 81

However, in that capacity they are not sacred tongues, they merely
represent all languages:
Et titulus Domini continens passionem, in quo scriptum est H ebraicis
litteris, Graecis et Latinis: 'Jesus Nazarenus rex Judaeorum' in signum
Crucis et in testimonium universarum gentium, quae nunc Aegyptus appel-
lantur. (Comm. in lsaiam proph. VII, 19, verss. 19-21, in PL 24, col. 257 .)94

This thesis is repeated by later writers, e.g. Anselm of Laon (t 1117)95

and Jacob of Voragine (c. 1230-1298)96. Jerome remarks, moreover,
on the poverty of Greek and Latin with regard to Hebrew97, which is
for him the mother of all tongues98.
Jerome's contemporary Augustine (354-430) not implicitly but
expressly allows a pre-eminent status for the three languages of the
Cross:
Nam cum Dominus crucifigeretur, titulus inscriptus est a Pilato et posi-
tus 'Rex Judaeorum' tribus linguis, Hebraea, Graeca et Latina; quae linguae
toto orbe maxime excellunt. (ln psalmum LVIII enarratio 1, 1, in PL 36, col.
692.)

and goes on to explain why they were chosen:

Hae quippe tres linguae ibi prae ceteris eminebant: Hebraea, propter Ju-
daeos in Dei /ege gloriantes; Graeca, propter gentium sapientes; Latina,
propter Romanos multis ac pene omnibus iam tune gentibus imperantes (ln
Joh. evangelium, tract. CXVII, 4, in PL 35, col. 1946.)

This idea that Hebrew was pre-eminent with regard to the divine law,
Greek with regard to philosophy99 and Latin with regard to adminis-
tration came to dominate mediaeval exegesis and Augustine's words
were often quoted down the centuries, e.g. by Becte (c. 673-735)100,
Alcuin (c. 730-804)101, Smaragdus (t c. 825)102 and the G/ossa ordi-

94By Egypt he means this world.

95 Enarrationes in Apocalypsin IX, in PL 162, col. 1534.
96See below note 156.
97 Comment. in Isaiam proph. XII, 40, vers. 12 seqq., in PL 24, col. 407.
98 Comment. in Sophoniam proph. III, vers. 14 seqq., in PL 25, col. 1384.
99 Augustine elsewhere talks of the superiority of Greek over ail other languages for
the expression of abstract ideas: Quaestionum in Heptateuchum VII, 41, in PL 34, col.
805.
lOOin Lucae evangelium expositio, VI, 23, in PL 92, col. 618. They are also quoted
in two commentaries falsely ascribed to Bede, viz. In Matthaei evangelium expositio IV,
27, ibid., col. 124, and In Joannis evangelium expositio 19, ibid., col. 910.
101 Comment. in S. Joannis evangelium VII, 19, vers. 19-20, in PL 100, col. 981.
82 F.THOMSON

naria103, the standard mediaeval exegetic commentary on the Bible,

which was begun by Anselm of Laon (t 1117)104 and only lost its
importance towards the early 18th century. They also clearly in-
fluenced the great scholastic theologians such as Albertus Magnus (c.
1200-1280)105 and Thomas Aquinas (1225/6-1274). The latter,
having given Augustine's reasons for their pre-eminence, goes on to
elaborate upon their roles in philosophy:
Vel per hebraeam significabatur quod Christus dominari debebat theo-
logicae philosophiae, quae significatur per hebraeam, quia Judaeis est tra-
dita divinarum rerum cognitio; per graecam vero philosophiae naturali et
philosophicae: nam Graeci erga naturalium speculationem insudaverunt:
per latinam vero philosophiae practicae, quia apud Romanos maxime viguit
scientia moralis: ut sic in captivitatem redigantur omnes intellectus in ob-
sequium Christi. (Expositio in evangelium b. Joannis XIX, 8.)106
Thomas was not the only person to elaborate upon this Augus-
tinian concept of the historical pre-eminence of the three languages.
Thus Bede considered that Hebrew was also pre-eminent because it
was the first language created at Babe1101, while Latin was pre-eminent
as the common language of scholars1os. Honorius 'of Autun' (fi.
1100)109 succinctly stated:
... Hebraea mater omnium linguarum, Graeca doctrix omnium linguarum,
Latina imperatrix omnium linguarum ... (Gemma animae III, 94, in PL 172,
col. 667.)
a formulation repeated by the Middle High German writer Hugo von
Trimberg (c. 1235-c. 1313):

l02Collectiones in epistolas et evangelia, in PL 102, col. 190.

103 See the marginal glosses edited in PL 114, col. 421 (on John XIX, 19).
104 The idea that Walafrid Strabo (c. 808-849) began them can no longer be main-
tained, see DE Buc, Œuvre, pp. 5-28.
105 Expositio in evangelium Joannis XIX (ed. P. JAMMY, B. Alberti Magni Ratisbon.

episc .. Ord. Praedicat. Commentarii in Joannem, in Apocalypsim. Operum tomus unde-

cimus, Paris, 1651, p. 309).
106
Edited in S. Thomae Aquinatis doctoris ange/ici In evangelia S. Matthaei et S.
Joannis. commentaria, t. II, Turin, 1925, p. 480. Augustine had a considerable influence
on Thomas' linguistic theories, see MANTHEY, Sprachphilosophie, pp. 173-175.
101 Hexaèmeron I. in PL 91, col. 50.
!08 Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum I, 1, in PL 95, col. 26. A similar idea is
expressed with regard to ail three languages by Paschasius Radbertus (c.790-c.859), see
his Expositio in evangelium Matthaei XII, 27, in PL 120, col. 946.
l09 Augustodunensis probably does not mean of Autun.
 TRILINGUISM 83

Wenne aller sprâche lêrerîn

Jst kriechisch, sô muoz jüdisch sîn
Der sprâche muoter über alliu lant,
Daz ist den wîsen wol bekant:
Aber aller sprâche künigîn
Über aile die werlt îst latîn. (Der Renner; 22327-22332)110

A clear expression of the idea of the historical pre-eminence of the

three languages at the time of Cyril and Methodius is found in Pope
Nicholas I's (858-867) epistle to Emperor Michael III (842-867), who
had called Latin a barbarous tongue:
ln tantum vero furoris abundantiam prorupistis, ut linguae Latinae inju-
riam irrogaretis, hanc in epistola vestra barbaram et Scythicam appellantes
ad injuriam Ejus, qui fecit eam; omnis enim operis derogatio ad opificis
redundat injuriam. 0 furorem! Qui nec linguae novit parcere, quam Deus
fecit, et quae inter caeteras in nomine Domini hortante Apostolo: 'Con-
fitetur, quia Dominus noster Jesus Christus in gloria est Dei patris' (Phi-
lipp. Il, 11). Et quae cum H ebraea arque Graeca in titulo Do mini a reliquis
discreta, insignem principatum tenens omnibus nationibus praedicat Jesum
Nazarenum regem Judaeorum; quem titulum multi Judaeorum corrumpere
voluerunt, sieur vos nunc huius celeberrimae linguae tentatis insigne de-
struere, sed minime potuerunt. (Epistola 86, in PL 119, col. 932.)111
The notion of the historical pre-eminence of the three languages
was by no means foreign to the reformers. For Martin Luther (1483-
1546), Greek and Latin were sacred as they had been chosen by God
for the Bible, while Latin was the principal language in which the
Gospel had been propagated. As he put it in an expressive metaphor:
Die sprachen sind die scheyden, darynn dis messer des geysts stickt,112
and in 1526 he stated that if Hebrew and Greek had been as well
known as Latin, he would have advocated mass being said in Ger-
man, Latin, Greek and Hebrew on altemate Sundaysm.

110 Ed. G. EHRISMANN, Der Renner von Hugo von Trimberg, III (= Bibliothek des li-
terarischen Vereins in Stuttgart, 252), Stuttgart, 1909, p. 223.
111 RESNICK, Lingua, p. 67, considers that Nicholas 1 is here claiming that amongst
the three languages of the Cross it is Latin which has the pride of place. It is true that in-
signem principatum tenens refers to Latin, but the sense is surely that it holds this to-
gether with Hebrew and Greek.
11 2 An die Burgermeyster und Radherrn allerley stedte ynn Deutschen Landen, edited
in D. Martin Luthers Werke. Kritisc;he Gesammtausgabe, XV, Weimar, 1899, pp. 27-53,
see p. 38.
113Deudsche Messe und ordnung Gottis diensts, ed. ibid., XIX, Weimar, 1897, pp.
72-113, see p. 74.
84 F. THOMSON

Clearly Pilate's choice of languages was providential: as Theo-

dore Polikarpov (t 1731 ), the first Rus si an to reveal any acquaintance
with the Augustinian formulation, put it in the preface to his
Slavonico-Graeco-Latin dictionary of 1704:
Tres linguas narrat Sacra pagina fuisse in Cruce Saluatoris nostri
CHRISTI Domini, Hebraeam, Graecam et latinam. Mysterium certe latuit in
hoc trilinguio, nam Hebraea /ingua est Zingua sacra, Graeca Zingua est
Zingua sapientiae, latina Zingua est Zingua imperii. (POLIKARPOV, Dictio-
narium, f. 4r [reprint p. 7].)114

It is nevertheless incorrect to interpret Augustine's theory of the histo-

rical pre-eminence of the three languages as involving the notion of
their perse sacredness11s.
The first to call all three languages explicitly sacred was Isidore
of Seville (c. 560-636):
Tres autem sunt linguae sacrae: Hebraea, Graeca, Latina, quae toto orbe
maxime excellunt. His namque tribus Unguis super crucem Domini a Pilato
fuit causa Ejus scripta. Unde et propter obscuritatem sanctarum Scriptura-
rum harum trium linguarum cognitio necessaria est, ut ad alteram recur-
ratur si quam dubitationem nominis vel interpretationis sermo unius linguae
attulerit. Graeca autem Zingua inter caeteras gentium clarior habetur. Est
enim et Latinis et omnibus Unguis sonantior. (Etymologiae IX, 1, 3-4, in PL
82, col. 326.)

The obvious meaning of this passage is that the three languages are
sacred because they are the languages of the sacred scriptures and a
knowledge of all three is required for the correct interpretation of the
biblical text, an idea which had already been expressed in remarkably
similar terms by Augustine116. To quote only the first two sentences

114 It should be noted that

Latin does not merit a capital letter ! The idea of the
mystical character of the superscription on the Cross was, of course, not new, cf. the
Liber de promissionibus et praedictionibus Dei usually attributed to Bishop Quodvultdeus
of Carthage (t before 454): Primam vero Hebraeam esse linguam, mysticus ille titulus a
Pilato conscriptus ostendit. (1, 16 [cap. IX], in PL 51, col. 741).
115 As does J. SCHWERING, Die Jdee der
drei hei/igen Sprachen im Mittelalter, in
Festschrift August Sauer. Zum 70. Geburtstag des Gelehrten am 12. Oktober 1925, Stutt-
gart, no date[= 1926], p. 5.
116 Cf. De
doctrina christiana Il, 11, in PL 34, col. 42. On the use of Greek and
Hebrew in early and mediaeval Latin biblical exegesis see DE LUBAC, Exégèse, 11,1
(1961), pp. 238-262. Isidore himself was in fact almost entirely ignorant of Greek, see
FONTAINE, Isidore, pp. 849-851, 11,77-1178.
 TRILINGUISM 85

of the passage111, which are clearly influenced by the Augustinian

formulation 11 s, and to read into them an expression of liturgical
trilinguism 119 is a patently erroneous distortion of the meaning since
Isidore neither mentions nor implies their liturgical use120.
Isidore's statement about three sacred languages was frequently
quoted by subsequent writers, e.g. Clement Scotus (fl. 800) 121 , Raba-
nus Maurus (c. 776-856)122 and Rupert of Deutz (c.1070-1129/ 30)123,
and clearly influenced others, e.g. Peter Abelard (1079-1142)124. The
Augustinian idea of their historical pre-eminence and the Isidoran
concept of their exegetic importance are obviously not incompatible
and were often combined, e.g. by Rupert of Deutz125 and Hugh of St.
Victor (c. 1100-1141)126.
Isidore also introduced a second new element with regard to the
three languages. Like all mediaeval exegetes he was fascinated by
number symbolism and in his opusculum on numbers in the Bible he
drew attention to the linguistic triad:

117 As is ail too often done,

e.g. by OmYENKo, Yeres' (31-32), p. 15; KuEv, Cherno-
rizets, p. 72.
11 3 See the passage from Augustine's In psalm. LVIII enarratio quoted above on p.
81. For the possible Augustinian inspiration of the third sentence, see note 116.
11 9First alleged by DOMMLER,
Légende, p. 174, n. 4, and repeated ad nauseam, see,
e.g., VoRONOV, lstochniki, p. 674; Bn:BAsov, Kirill, II, p. 86; ÜGIYENKo, Yeres' (31-32),
p. 15, who suggests that Isidore was opposing the use of Spanish in the liturgy (in the 7th
century !) ; ANGELOV, Kiril, p. 58, n. 1 (with the amusing misprint trite slavyanski ezika!);
SLAVEVA, Eres, p. 166; PODSKALSKY, Verhiiltnis, p. 38.
120 As has often enough been pointed
out, see, e.g., SNOPEK, Slavenapostel, p. 109, n.
64; ID., List, pp. 91-92; GRIVEC, Konstantin, p. 76, n. 40; DITTRICH, Christianity, p. 136;
BosHKOSKI, Kiril, p. 68. On Isidore's theory of three sacred languages see BoRsT, Turm-
bau, 11,1 (1958), p. 454; BERscmN, Letters, p. 19. The idea that Isidore elevated the three
languages to the sacred level to defend them against the rise of barbarian tongues, espe-
cially Gothie, thus RESNICK, Lingua, p. 66, is purely hypothetical.
121 Ars Grammatica XXXVII,
ed. J. ToLKIEHN, Clementis ars grammatica (=Philo-
logus. Supplement-Band XX,3), Leipzig, 1928, p. 22.
122De universo XVI, 1, in PL 111, col. 435.

123Comment. in Apocalypsin Joannis apost. IV, 7, in PL 169, col. 965.

124 Epistola 9 [ad
virgines Paracletenses. De studio litterarum], in PL 178, coll.
333-334.
125See above n. 123; see also his Comment. in Genesim IV, 39, in PL 167, col. 364.
126 De grammatica, ed. J.LECLERCQ, Le "De Grammatica" d'Hugues de Saint-Victor,
in Archives d'histoire doctrinale et littéraire du moyen-âge, 14 (1943-45), pp. 269-270.
86 F. THOMSON

Sacrae legis Zingua triplex est, Hebraea, Graeca et Latina. (Liber nume-
rorum IV, 17, in PL 83, col. 182.)127
This numerical symbolism of the three languages was especially dear
to mediaeval Irish exegetes12s and is also found in various forms in
the thought of man y mediaeval writers, e.g. Rab anus Maurust29.
Although for Isidore all three languages are sacred, there is a hie-
rarchy within the triad: Greek may be clarior and sonantior but, as
for Jeromel30, Hebrew is the mother of all tonguesl31, a statement
which became a commonplacel32. In his work on the divine office
127 On the symbolism of three in general see UsENER, Dreiheit, passim; with spe-
cific reference to mediaeval writers see GROSSMANN, Studien, pp. 30-31, 52; HELLGARDT,
Problem, pp. 169-171; MEYER, Zahlenallegorese, pp. 117-123, and ID., Lexikon, coll. 214-
331; on the symbolism of three in the liturgy see below n. 150; on it in mediaeval
exegesis in particular see DE LUBAC, Exégèse, 11,2 (1964), pp. 7-40. It takes many forms,
e.g. anthropological (body, soul, spirit), cosmological (heaven, earth, hell), temporal (be-
fore the law, under the law, under grace), theological (Trinity), biblical (Magi), iiturgical
(threefold Kyrie, Sanctus, Agnus Dei, Domine non sum dignus, Mea culpa), ecclesiastical
(ecclesia militans, expectans, triumphans), etc. Number symbolism is, of course, not fo-
reign to early Slavonie literature, see PETKANOVA, Chislata, passim; EAD., Znachenieto,
passim; for the 16th century see KIRILLIN, Simvolika, passim. The association of letters
and numbers in Greek and hence in Slavonie led naturally to letter symbolism, on which
see F. DoRNSEIFF, Das Alphabet in Mystik und Magie (= l:TOIXEIA. Studien zur Ge-
schichte des antiken Weltbildes und der griechischen Wissenschaft, 7), Leipzig, 1925 2,
passim; for gematria, viz. Ùle numerical value of words, see ibid., pp. 91-118.
128 E.g. in ùie 8th-century work falsely ascribed to Bede Excerptiones Patrum, col-
/ectanea,flores ex diversis, quaestiones et parabolae, in PL 94, col. 547. Irish exegetes
were obsessed by a mania for etymologies and frequently gave the equivalents of words
in the three languages, e.g. in the 8th-century Irish adaptation of Isidore's work on num-
bers (see above n. 127), the Liber de numeris 20, in PL 83, col. 1302. This Irish mania
attracted Bede's censure, see his Hexaemeron I, in PL 91, col. 17. On the mania see
B1scHOFF, Wendepunkte, pp. 207-208. lt was in fact largely inspired by ùie great respect
in which Isidore's works were held in Ireland, see HILLGARTH, Spain, p. 189; BISCHOFF,
Verbreitung, pp. 327-330. The fantasy of the etymologies reveals that for the Irish the
languages were not only sacrae but in the case of Greek and Hebrew also ignotae, see
the remarks of McNALLY, Linguae, p. 397. In fact their knowledge was largely restricted
to what they could glean from the works of Jerome, Augustine and Isidore, see B1scHOFF,
Element, pp. 29-30.
129 De clericorum institutione ad Herstulphum archiepisc. III, 8, in PL 107, col. 385.
130 See above n. 98.
131 Etymologiae I, 4-5, in PL 82, col. 75.
132For Honorius see the passage from his Gemma animae quoted above on p. 82;
see also Rupert of Deutz, ln Exodum comment. I, 9, in PL 167, col. 576. Other
expressions of its superiority are frequent, e.g. for Rabanus Maurus it is the Zingua
perfecta, see his De clericorum institutione III, 3, in PL 107, col. 380; according to Hugh
of St. Victor Hebraea /oquuntur ange/i, see his Miscellanea III, 34, in PL 177, col. 655.
On the idea of Hebrew as the mother of al! tongues see DE LUBAC, Exégèse, 11,l (1961),
pp. 245-246; RESNICK, Lingua, pp. 54-55. Mediaeval theologians, who thought that Jesus
spoke Hebrew, found it fitting that salvation should be preached to man in the language of
 TRILINGUISM 87

Isidore comments upon the fact that certain Hebrew words such as
Alleluia and Amen are retained in the opus Dei. This is not, however,
because they cannot be translated, but propter sanctiorem auctorita-
tem133, viz. they are sacred not because they are used in the liturgy but
because they are taken from the Bible and he makes no allusion to the
idea of three liturgical languages.
Over the centuries various new elements were introduced into the
discussion of the three languages of the superscription on the Cross.
Thus, for instance, Bonaventura (c. 1217-1274) saw in its trilinguism
the fulfilment of the Mosaic law requiring three witnessesl34, while for
Cesare Baronio (1538-1607) Latin was the most sacred of the three
since, being the last named, it inust have been closest to Christ's
head135, a somewhat unfortunate suggestion since, although in John
xix,20 the Vulgate has the sequence Hebrew, Greek, Latin, the most
probable order in the original in the Greek was Hebrew, Latin,
Greekl3 6 • Only seldom is a voice heard to declare that the super-
scription was trilingual simply so that as many as possible of those
present might understand it. As the Flemish poet Jacob Van Maerlant
(c. 1235-c. 1300) put it:
Ebrreusch, Griecs eii Latijn
Was ghescreven dat brievekijn,
Om dat vele liede te samen,
Die te ghenen Paschen quamen,
Lesen souden eii verstaen.
(Rymbybel 26451-26455, ed. J. DAVID, vol. II, Brussels, 1859, p. 658.)137

Adam, the man by whom death had corne into the world, e.g. Alcuin: Opportuit enim ut
in ea Zingua sa/us mundo primo praedicaretur, per quam primum mors intraverat in mun-
dum. Ostendit quoque titulus in cruce Sa/vatoris scriptus. (Interrogationes et respon-
siones in Genesin 150, in PL 100, col. 533).
133 De ecclesiasticis officiis I, 13, 2, in PL 83, col. 750; ed. LAwsoN, Isidori, p. 15.
This passage is directly inspired by Augustine, cf. De doctrina christiana II, 11, in PL 34,
coll. 42-43.
134 Comment. in evangelium S.
Ioannis XIX, 32 (vers. 20), edited in Doctoris sera-
phici S. Bonaventurae S.R.E. episc. card. Opera omnia, edita studio et cura PP. CoLLEGII
A S. BONAVENTURA, t. VI, Quaracchi, 1893, pp. 496-497; cf. Deuteronomy xix,15.
135 Annales ecclesiastici, annus 34,
115, ed. A. THEINER, I, Bar-le-Duc, 1864, p. 140.
136For the variants s.ee METZGER, Commentary, p. 253. The Vulgate order in Luke
xxiii,38 is Greek, Latin, Hebrew.
13 7 John Chrysostom says exactly the same: In Joannem homilia LXXXV, 1, in PG
59, col. 460.
88 F. THOMSON

The earliest expression of the association of the three languages

of the superscription on the Cross with the languages used in the li-
turgy is found in the Expositio brevis antiquae liturgiae Gallicanae
in duas epistolas digesta138, the title of which ends with the phrase:
Germanus episcopus Parisius scripsit de missa139, which can only
mean Germanus of Paris (c. 496-576), an ascription long main-
tainedI4o but subsequently questioned for various reasonsI4I. It was,
however, only in 1924 that it was pointed out that the Expositio is in
places inspired by Isidore of Seville's De ecclesiasticis officiis and in-
cludes one litera! quotation:
Propter carnales namque in ecclesia non propter spirituales consuetudo
est constituta cantandi, ut qui verbis non conpunguntur, suavitate modula-
minis moveantur. 142
The counter-claim that it was Germanus who influenced lsidore1 43 is
disproved by the fact that the compiler of the Expositio clearly had at
his disposa! a codex of De ecclesiasticis officiis belonging to the
textual family CJ which had a corrupt hypearchetype144: thus in the
above passage est constituta cantandi is secondary for cantandi est
instituta and qui is corrupt for quia145, while namque is the compiler's
own substitution for the original autem. There can thus be no doubt

138 The text which survives in one codex of c. 840, Autun, Bibliothèque Municipale,
MS 184, is very corrupt and the two critical editions each propose various conjectural
corrections, viz. QuASTEN, Expositio, pp. 10-31, and RATCLIFF, Expositio, pp. 3-25. The
text in PL 72, coll. 89-98, is a reproduction of the editio princeps of 1717 in MARTÈNE,
Thesaurus, V, coll. 91-lOO;considerable excerpts are found in GAMBER, Ordo, pp. 17-23.
139 See the facsimile in RATCLIFF, Expositio, facing p. 3.
140 It should be noted, however, that although the first editors accepted a dating to
the mid sixth century, they were reticent about the attribution to Germanus, see MARTÈNE,
Thesaurus, V, coll. 89-90.
141 See the accounts in WILMART, Germain, coll. 1096 and 1101; LECLERCQ, Messe,
coll. 649-651.
142 Ed. QuASTEN, Expositio, p. 24, and RATCLIFF, Expositio, p. 17; cf. De ecclesias-
ticis officiis I, 5, 2, in PL 83, col. 742 and LAWSON, Isidori, p. 6. It wâs pointed out by
WILMART, Germain, coll. 1099-1102, with a juxtapostion of the passages; other juxta-
positions are found in QUASTEN, Expositio, pp. 5-6, and m., Influence, p. 56, n. 14.
l43Thus LECLERCQ, Messe, coll. 650-651, and VAN DER MENSBRUGGE, Expositio, pp.
224-225.
144 0n the family see LAwsoN, Isidori, pp. 58*-64*; C is the siglum for St. Peters-
burg Public Library MS Q.v.I.15, J for Vat. Ottob. lat. 122, on these MSS see ibid., pp.
26*-27*.
145 See LAWSON, lsidori, p. 151 *.
 TRILINGUISM 89

about the dependence of the Expositio on De ecclesiasticis officiis 146 •

Since Isidore's work was compiled between 598 and 615 147 , the
Expositio must be dated to the 7th or early 8th century 148 •
According to the description of the mass in the Expositio, the
Trisagion149 is first sung in Greek then in Latin and ends with the
Hebrew Amen to symbolize the trinitas linguarum of the superscrip-
tion on the Cross, while the Kyries are sung by three choirboys in the
three languages to symbolize the three tempora saeculi, ante legem
scilicet, sub lege et sub gratiaiso. However, the Expositio does not
advocate trilinguism in the Cyrillo-Methodian sense: it emphasizes the
use of the three sacred languages within the one Latin liturgy. This
chanting of Greek prayers and hymns in the Latin mass became more
common in the 8th century and during the 9th to 11 th centuries the
M issa Graeca, as it is known, became fairly widespread 1s1. It was

146See ibidem; also RATCLIFF, Expositio, p. 18.

147 See LAWSON, Isidori, pp. 13*-14*.
148More precise datings, e.g. to the 7th century, thus ATKINSON, Entstehung, p. 114,
cannot be proved. The thesis that the Expositio is a revision of Germanus' lost original,
thus BATIFFOL, Études, pp. 246-251; LECLERCQ, Messe, coll. 648-652; ID., Paris, coll. 1889-
1892; GAMBER, Ordo, p. 12, is pure hypothesis.
149Qn the Trisagion in the Expositio see LECLERCQ, Messe, col. 653; QuASTEN, In-
fluence, pp. 57-61. In the Gallican and Mozarabic liturgies it was sung after the Gloria,
see BRou, Études, pp. 310-314, and not instead of it, as alleged by BERSCHIN, Letters, p.
20. On its singing in the Frankish Church see NICKL, Anteil, pp. 16-20.
1s0 Ed. MARTÈNE, Thesaurus, V, coll. 91-92; PL 72, coll. 89-90. The passage is
very
corrupt, see the various conjectures proposed by QuASTEN, Expositio, pp. 11-12; RATCLIFF,
Expositio, pp. 4-5; BATIFFOL, Études, pp. 258-259; WILMART, Germain, coll. 1061-1062.
The influence of number symbolism is obvious. On number symbolism in the liturgy in
general see SUNTRUP, Zahlenbedeutung, pp. 321-346; on the number three in the liturgy in
particular see MEYER, Lexikon, coll. 315-330.
lS1 See BRou, Chants, passim; CASPARI, Quel/en, III (1875), pp. 466-510. Where
and when Greek hymns were first inserted into the ordinary of the mass is much disputed,
the most commonly held view being Rome in the 7th or 8th century, see ATKINSON,
Amnos, pp. 15-24, and ID., Entstehung, pp. 114-118; for a bibliography see ZAGIBA,
Messe, coll. 159-160. Still today the epistle and gospel are sung in Greek as well as in
Latin at solemn papal masses, see KING, Rites, 1, p. 15; BRINKTRINE, Papstmesse, pp. 14-
16. They were also read in both languages in St. Sophia, Constantinople, on major
festivals, a fact well known in the West in the ninth century, both at Rome, see Nicholas
I's epistle to Michael III (PL 119, col. 932), and in the Frankish Empire, see De
ecclesiasticis officiis II, 1 by Amalarius of Metz (c. 775-c. 850), ed. PL 105, col. 1073.
The practice still obtained in the 1 lth century, see Pope Leo IX's Epistola C, 23 [ad
Michaelem Constantinopolit. patr.], in PL 143, col. 761.
90 F. THOMSON

particularly cultivated at the Abbey of St. Denis at Paris 152 , where

interest in Greek was stimulated by the confusion of St. Denis (Dio-
nysius) of Paris, a martyr at the time of the Decian persecution (250-
251 ), with Dionysius the AreopagiteI53, and at the Abbey of St. Gall
at St. Gallen154 •

152 Greek prayers are found in two 9th-century codices which belonged to the
Abbey, viz. Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, cod. lat. 2290 and Laon, Bibliothèque Munici-
pale, MS 118, see NEBBIAI - DALLA GUARDA Bibliothèque, pp. 33-34, and HUGLO, Chants,
p. 75, and the origins of the Mis sa Graeca have been associated with it, thus ATKINSON,
Entstehung, pp. 144-145. However, other codices of the ninth century e.g. Paris, Biblio-
thèque Nationale, cod. lat. 2291, and Stockholm, Royal Library, MS A 136, are associated
with the monastery of St. Amand-en-Pévèle (Flanders), see BERSCHIN, Letters, pp. 22-23,
whose ordo of between 770 and 800 provided for the readings and canticles of the pascal
vigil in both Greek and Latin, see ordo XXX B, 39 and 41 edited M. ANDRIEU, Les
Ordines romani du haut moyen âge, III(= Spicilegium sacrum Lovaniense, 24), Louvain,
1951, p. 472, so that it may have originated in the latter monastery. Whetherthe me-
lodies are Byzantine or Carolingian in origin is much disputed, see the bibliography in
ATKINSON, Amnos, p. 7, n. 3.
l5 3 The works of Dionysius the Areopagite were translated from Greek into Latin at
the Abbey of St. Denis under the supervision of its abbot Hilduin (t 855/861) from a
codex presented by Emperor Michael II (820-829) to Emperor Louis 1 (814-840) in 827,
on which see BRUNHÔLZL, Geschichte, 1, pp. 410-415; BERSCHIN, Letters, pp. 117-118;
THOMSON, Sensus, p. 678; WEISS, Studio, pp. 427-428; the codex is still preserved, viz.
Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, cod. gr. 437, on which see OMONT, Manuscrit, pp. 230-236;
TfilRY, Études, 1, pp. 63-100; the translation ed. CHEVALLIER, Dionysiaca, 1, pp. 5-669; II,
pp. 727-1578. However, the Abbey only became a centre of Greek studies after William
of Gap (abbot of St. Denis 1172/3-1186) in 1167 presented it with some Greek codices
which he had obtained at Constantinople, and the singing of the epistle and gospel in
Greek at mass on the octave of St. Denis (16 October), as laid down in the Abbey's
ordinary of 1234/36, ed. FoLEY, Ordinary, p. 637, probably originated then, see OMONT,
Messe, pp. 180-181; HuGLO, Chants, p. 74; WBss, Studio, p. 434. On the liturgical com-
memoration of St. Denis at the Abbey in the 1 lth-12th centuries see FoLEY, St.-Denis, pp.
534-538. The entire mass in Greek originated in either the !6th century, thus OMONT,
Messe, p. 183, PRALLE, Gebrauch, pp. 391-392, or the early 17th, thus HuGLO, Chants, pp.
82-83. On Greek studies at St. Denis see WEISS, Studio, passim; NEBBIAI - DALLA
GuARDA, Bibliothèque, pp. 29-35; on William of Gap and the Greek MSS see L. DELISLE,
Review of M. James, The Western Manuscripts in the Library of Trinity College, Cam-
bridge, vol./, Cambridge, 1900, in Journal des Savants (1900), pp. 722-739, esp. pp. 725-
732.
154 No Jess than 44 of the Abbey's MSS contain some Greek and the Missa Graeca
is found in six of the lOth and 1lth centuries, viz. MS 338, 376, 378, 380-382, 484, see on
them G. ScHERRER, Verzeichniss der Handschriften der Stiftsbibliothek von St. Galien,
Halle, 1875, pp. 118, 119, 128, 129-131, 155; KACZYNSKI, Learning, pp. 236-254, 296-298,
and m., Greek, pp. 99-113, 132-135. On the liturgy at St. Gall's in the Middle Ages see
AUF DER MAUR, Gallens, pp. 40-49. For a bibliography of ail codices with the Missa
Graeca see ATKINSON, Entstehung, pp. 120-125; in addition it should be noted that the
lOth-century sacramentary of Fulda prescribes the singing of the creed in Greek and Latin
on Wednesday after the fourth Sunday in Lent, see ed. G. RICHTER - A. ScHôNFELDER,
Sacramentarium Fu/dense saeculi x. Cod. theol. 231 der K. Universitiitsbibliothek zu
 TRILINGUISM 91

The use of the three sacred languages within the one Latin mass
was commented upon by many writers, e.g. Honoriustss and Jacob of
Voraginets6. Perhaps the most succinct account of the use of the three
and the reasons for this is found in the work which for centuries
remained the basic authority on the origins and meaning of eccle-
siastical offices, ceremonies, feasts, etc., viz. the Rationale divinorum
officiorum of William Durandus the Elder (c. 1230/1-1296):
Notandum est etiam quod in missae officio, ubi Christi passio reprae-
sentatur, tribus linguarum generibus utimur, scilicet Graeca, H ebraea et
Latina, ad significandum quod his tribus linguis scriptus est titulus cruc'is
Christi - Ioan.19 - et ad designandum quod omnis Zingua, quae per hanc
triplicem intelligitur, Deum laudare et confiteri debeat, quia Dominus
noster lesus Christus in gloria est Dei patris. Licet enim multa sint genera
linguarum, istae tamen principales sunt: Hebraea propter legem et quia est
aliarum mater; Graeca propter sapientiam; Latina propter nobilitatem et
dominium Romani imperii. Verba Latina sunt epistolae, evangelia, orationes
et cantus; Graeca sunt Kvpu: ik1aov, Xp1aTE ÉÂnaov et T,µaç1s1, Hebraica
sunt alleluija, amen, sabaoth et osanna. (ed. V. D'AVINO, Rationale divi-
norum officiorum a rev.mo domino G. Durando episc. Mimatensi ... concin-
natum .. ., Naples, 1859, p. 145.)158

The anonymous late 14th-century Swabian writer who compiled

an explanation of the mass in Middle High German had a somewhat
confused conception of Hebrew and thus arrived at the idea of four
sacred languages in the liturgy:
So vahet man denne an die heiligen messe. Die singer man mit vier
slachte sprache; die eine heizet latin; die ander heizet kriechs, das is
kyrielyson; die dritte heizet ebreisch, das ist amen; die vierde ist himelschie
sprache, das ist alleluia. (ed. J. ÜBERLIN, Bihtebuoch dabey die bezeiche-

Gottingen. Text und Bilderkreis (=Quel/en und Abhandlungen zur Geschichte der Abtei
und der Diozese Fulda, 9), Fulda, 1912, p. 339.
!SS Gemma animae 1, 92, in PL 172, col. 574.

IS6Legenda aurea, ed. T. GRAESSE, Jacobi a Voragine Legenda Aurea vulgo Historia
Lombardica dicta, Breslau, 1891, p. 848. He also repeats the Hieronymian thesis that the
three represent all languages. The idea that the use of Greek and Hebréw words in the
mass (Kyrie eleison, hosanna, etc.) symbolizes the three sacred languages of the Cross is
not foreign to 19th-century liturgical scholarship, see GmlRANGER, Institutions, III (1883),
p. 147.
is1 Sic!

IS 8 The passage is clearly inspired by John Beleth's (fl. 12th century) Summa de di-
vinis officiis 98, in PL 202, col. 102; cf. also col. 44. There were no fewer than 44 in-
cunabular editions ofDurandus' Rationale, the editio princeps being that at Mainz in 1459,
see Gesamtkata/og der Wiegendrucke, ed. E. YON RATH, VII, Leipzig, 1938, nos. 9101-
9144, coll. 727-751.
92 F. THOMSON

nunge der heiligen messe. Beichtbuch aus dem XIV. Jahrhundert mit
Glossen, Strassburg, 1784, p. 77-78.)159
The concept of the use of the three sacred languages within the
one Latin mass cannot be equated with a theory permitting all of the
liturgy to be celebrated in only three languages. The sole piece of
evidence which might at first sight appear to indicate that this latter
theory, viz. trilinguism in the Cyrillo-Methodian sense, was indeed
held in the West dates from the late eighth century in the form of
canon Lli of the Synod of Frankfurt of 794:
Ut nul/us credat, quod nonnisi in tribus linguis Deus orandus sit, quia in
omni lingua Deus adoratur et homo exauditur, si iusta petierit. (MG H,
Legum sectio III: Concilia, tom. 11,1, ed. A. WERMINGHOFF, Hanover, 1906,
p. 171.)160

This canon must, however, be considered in its historical context, that

of Charlemagne's programme of reforms, the aim of which was to
strengthen the unity of the Frankish Empire within a Christian frame-
work. One aspect of the programme was liturgical: the unity of
Church and Empire was to be enhanced by greater liturgical uni-
formity by replacing the Gallican liturgy with the Roman161, and
between 784 and 791 at Charlemagne's request Pope Hadrian I (772-
795) despatched a copy of the Gregorian sacramentary162. Since the
copy sent had been especially compiled for papal use and was in-

159In the codex the explanation of the mass, ed. ÜBERLIN, op. cit., pp. 75-91, is
preceded by a penitential, see ibid., pp. 1-74.
160 Presided over by Charlemagne himself and attended by some 300 bishops and

other clerics, including Alcuin, it was the most important synod of his reign; on it see
HEFELE, Histoire, III,2, pp. 1045-1060; DE CLERCQ, Législation, pp. 183-191; HARTMANN,
Synoden,pp. 105-115.
161 See the Admonitio generalis of 789, in MGH, Legum sectio II. Capitularia re-

gum Francorum, vol. 1, ed. A. BoRETIUS, Hanover, 1883, pp. 53-62, esp. p. 61. On the Ji-
turgical refonn see LENTNER, Volkssprache, pp. 30-34; VoGEL, Réforme, pp. 218-220, and
ID., Pépin, pp. 214-218.
Another aspect of the reforms was the correction of the text of the Bible, the most
important revision being the Alcuinian; on this see B. FISCHER, Bibeltext und Bibelreform
unter Karl dem Grossen, in BRAUNFELS, Karl, II (1965), pp. 156-216.
162 The request has not survived, the papal reply has: Epistola XCIX [ad domnum

Carolum regem directa], in PL 98, coll. 435-438.

 TRILINGUISM 93

complete163, it was revised in c. 800-810 and a supplement added

which contained a résumé of the Frankish Gelasian sacramentary 164 .
Another aspect of the reform programme was linguistic: in the
historical circumstances it was inevitable that the principal language of
administration and law in the multilingual empire should be Latin 165 .
Merovingian Latin had, however, degenerated into a confused system
in which solecism and incongruity were commonplace and it had
become necessary to restore correct norms for use throughout the
Empire and to instruct the nobility's children in these norms16 6 • It is
surely no exaggeration to state that the restoration of the norma recti-
tudinis ensured the maintenance of Latin as the language of West
European culture until the Renaissance167. The linguistic reform pro-
gramme was not, however, limited to Latin. Charlemagne was also
anxious to raise the level of the moral and religious education of all
his subjects, which could only be done by instruction in the verna-
culars, ut quisque sciat quod petat a Deo168. The synod of Frankfurt

163The best edition of the Sacramentum Hadrianum is that by J. DESHUSSES, Le

sacramentaire grégorien. Ses principales formes d'après les plus anciens manuscrits, 1
(= Spicilegium Friburgense, 16), Freiburg, 1971, pp. 85-348.
164 This supplement ed. ibid., pp. 351-605. Whether it was compiled by Alcuin, thus
VoGEL, Réforme, pp. 227-231, and m., Pépin, pp. 229-234, or Benedict of Aniane, thus J.
DESHUSSEs, Le "Supplément" au sacramentaire grégorien: Alcuin ou saint Benoît d'Ani-
ane?, in Archiv für Liturgiewissenschaft, 9 (1965), pp. 48-71, cannot be examined here.
165 For a survey of the Latinization of the West see BARDY, Question, 1, pp. 52-121.
166 See Charlemagne's mandatum De litteris colendis, in MGH, Legum sectio II.
Capitularia regum Francorum, vol. 1, ed. A. BoRET!US, Hanover, 1883, p. 79. On the res-
toration of the norma rectitudinis see LoT, Époque, pp. 144-152; FLECKENSTEIN, Bildungs-
reform, pp. 75-77; FONTAINE, Pluralité, pp. 778-805; KLOPSCH, Bildungsreform, pp. 65-72.
Alcuin's Grammatica and De orthographia (PL 101, coll. 849-902 and 902-920), and Cle-
ment Scotus' Ars Grammatica (see above n. 121), are products of this reform.
!67See MEYERS, Latin, pp. 409-410. RICHTER, Sprachenpolitik, pp. 422-423, is unjust
in asserting that Charlemagne was solely interested in administration and not culture.
168 Admonitio generalis, in MGH, Legum sectio II. Capitularia regum Francorum,
vol. 1, ed. A. BoRET!US, Hanover, 1883, p. 59. At which period the illiterate Romance po-
pulation ceased to understand spoken Latinisa moot point. LoT, Époque, pp. 135-136,
would date it to the fifth century, whereas G. DE PoERCK, Les plus anciens textes de la
langue française comme témoins de l'époque, in Revue de linguistique romane, 27 (1963),
p. 13, would date the emergence of Romance vemaculars as languages in their own right
to the ninth. At ail events, Charlemagne's insistence on preaching in the vernaculars re-
veals that Latin was no longer understood except by the educated. On the first official
"French" text, viz. the oath of Strassburg in 842, see BALIBAR, Institution, pp. 19-91, with
edition on p. 69. In ltaly, on the other hand, it is possible that the population could still
understand ecclesiastical Latin in the eleventh or even twelfth century, see M. RICHTER,
Latina lingua - sacra seu vulgaris?, in The Bible and Medieval Culture, ed. W. LouR-
DAUX and D. VERHELST (= Mediaevalia Lovaniensia, ser. 1, 7), Louvain, 1979, p. 16-34.
94 F. THOMSON

in 794 decreed that all were be taught the Paternoster, Credo and
Quicumque in the vemaculart69 and the Old High German Weissen-
burg catechism of c. 800 with translations of these prayers must be
viewed in this lightl 10. Two of the five reforming synods held in
813171 devoted their attention to the question: that at Mainz decreed in
canon XL V that children should be taught the faith in the vemacular
if they did not understand Latin and that clergy neglecting their task
of instruction should be disciplined172, while that at Tours in canon
XVII laid down that every bishop should have a collection of ho-
milies translated in rusticam Romanam linguam aut Thiotiscam for
the people to understand173. Several capitula also exhort the clergy in
a similar vein174, the Capitula a sacerdotibus proposita of 802 speci-
fically enjoining that the liturgy is to be explained175. Archbishop
Theodulf of Orleans (808-818) insisted that a plea of ignorance of the
vernacular was no excuse for a priest's failure to instruct his flock176.
Charlemagne himself in his persona! correspondence insisted on the
need to teach prayers in the vemacular177. There can be no doubt but
that this policy stimulated the rapid development of German as a
169Canon XXXIII, in MGH, Legum sectio III: Concilia, tom. II,1, ed. A. WERMING-
HOFF, Hanover, 1906, p. 169. The phrase /ides catholica sanctae trinitatis is vague but
almost certainly means the Quicumque, see HEFELE, Histoire, III/2 (1910), p. 1059, n. 1.
170 Ed. W. BRAUNE, Althochdeutsches Lesebuch, ed. A. EBBINGHAUS, Tübingen,
1962, pp. 34-37. The editio princeps of this catechism by I. EccARDUS (=Johann Georg
voN ECKHART, 1664-1730) at Hanover in 1713 has the title Incerti monachi Weissenbur-
gensis Catechesis theotisca seculo IX conscripta nunc vero primum edita ... (the text ed.
pp. 60-73), which led TUNITSKY, Kliment, p. 132, n. 2, to inventa whole genre of works
entitled Cathechesis (sic) theotisca, an error repeated by KuEv, Chernorizets, p. 75. On
the use of the Germanie vernaculars in missionary work from the 7th to the 9th century
see VAN DEN BooM, Muttersprache, pp. 109-183.
171
They were held at Arles, Rheims, Mainz, Tours and Châlons-sur-Saône; on them
see HEFELE, Histoire, III,2 (191-0), pp. 1135-1148; DE CLERCQ, Législation, pp. 232-247;
HARTMANN, Synoden, pp. 128-140.
172Acta and canons edited in MGH, Legum sectio III: Concilia, tom. II,!, ed. A.
WERMINGHOFF, Hanover, 1906, pp. 258-273, see esp. pp. 271-272.
173 Acta and canons edited ibid., pp. 286-293, see esp. p. 288. On the importance of
this canon for the development of French see HAUPRICH, Einfluss, p. 1v.
174 E.g. the Capitula de examinandis
ecclesiasticis of 802 in cc. IX-X, in MGH,
Legum sectio II. Capitularia regum Francorum, vol. I, ed. A. BoRETIUS, Hanover, 1883,
pp. 109-110, see esp. p. 110; Capitula de presbyteris admonendis of uncertain date in cc. I
and III, ibid., p. 237 and 238.
175 Ibid., pp. 106-107, see cap. V, p. 107. On the laity's participation in the liturgy
via responses and hymns see NICKL, Anteil, pp. 8-32.
116Cap. ad presbyteros parochiae suae 28, in PL 105, col. 200.
111 Ad Ghaerbaldum episcopum Leodiensem epistola, in PL 98, col. 917-918.
 TRILINGUISM 95

literary languaget7s. According to Charlemagne's biographer Einhard

(c. 770-840), the emperor himself began to compile a grammatica
patrii sermonis and to copy down barbara et antiquissima car-
minat79, and by the mid-ninth century a considerable body of both
translated and original works had been createdtso. If a similar corpus
of works was not produced in the rustica Romana Zingua, it was pro-
bably because the latter was still considered to be a degenerate form of
Latinl81.
It is against this background that the above quoted decision of
the synod of Frankfurt in 794 must be viewed:
Nabady shauld believe that Gad may be prayed ta in anly three
languages, because Gad is adared and man heard in every language if he
requests thase things which are right.

Clearly the three unspecified languages are Hebrew, Greek and Latin,
but since the liturgy was not celebrated in Hebrew or Greekl82 in the
Frankish Empire, it is obviously their use within the Latin mass
which the synod had in mind. Since there is not the slightest evi-
dence for either a demand for or an advocacy of a vernacular liturgy
in German or Romance at this timets3, it is clearly erroneous to claim
either that the canon permits the use of German in the liturgyts4 or that

l?S See RICHTER, Sprachenpolitik, pp. 431-432; BETZ, Karl, p. 306; HENZEN, Schrift-
sprache, p. 50. lt is, however, an exaggeration to claim that Charlemagne's reforms in-
cluded the aim of creating a German cultural and ecclesiastical language, as done by DE
BooR, Literatur, p. 8, since the works are in many dialects and there is no evidence for
any efforts to produce a standard form of Old High German, see GEUENICH, Überlie-
ferung, p. 121; MASSER, Aufgaben, p. 97.
179Vita Caroli imperatoris 29, in PL 97, col. 52. Doubts about whether the carmina

were in fact in German expressed by some, e.g. GEUENICH, Über/ieferung, pp. 114-116,
cannot be examined here, but the unwritten laws which Charlemagne ordered to be com-
mitted to writing, see Einhard, op. cit., ibidem, were probably written in Latin, see
PONERT, Deutsch, p. 44.
18°For a bibliography of these works see ALBRECHT, Bibliographie, I, pp. 391-451.
As in the case of Old Slavonie literature, the majority of the translations were made for
missionary purposes.
181 See VAN DEN BOOM, Muttersprache, p. 117; PONERT, Deutsch, p. 12. As opposed
to the rustica Romana lingua, the lingua Thiotisca was nota lingua vulgahs but a Zingua
gentilis, viz. of the gens (theot), see LOWE, Deutschland, p. 189.
1820n the use of Greek within the Latin mass see above.
183 As bas often been pointed out, e.g. BARTAK, Versuch, p. 13; BORST, Turmbau,
II,2 (1958), p. 499;LENTNER, Volkssprache, p. 30.
l84 As claimed by PoNERT, Deutsch, p. 12. This is also presumably what RosEN-
STOCK-HUESSY, Frankreich, p. 98, meant when stating that by this canon German was
being recognized as a messianic language on a par with the three sacred ones.
96 F. THOMSON

it is evidence of growing resentment against a refusal to permit the use

of the vemacular in the liturgyiss. It is quite obvious that the canon
must be referring to the prayers and hymns taught in the vernacular to
the illiteratel 86 and hence reveals that a misguided belief existed
among some of the latter that only the three languages used in the
liturgy could be used for prayer even in an extraliturgical context. It
cannot thus be cited, as is often wrongly done1s1, as evidence for the
existence of trilinguism in the Cyrillo-Methodian sense. It is, how-
ever, self-evident that if such a superstition existed, the delusion must
have existed among the ignorant that in the liturgy only the three
sacred languages could be used, but there is not the slightest evidence
that any leading ecclesiastic or theologian ever entertained such an
idea and the notion that the Western Church ever propagated tri-
linguism in the Cyrillo-Methodian sense belongs to the realm of
myth, not history1ss.
Not one of the sources which deal with the question of the three
sacred languages ever claims that they are sacred because they are
used in the liturgy: their sacredness is derived from their scriptural,
not liturgical, use, which reflects the fact that the use of any particular
language in the liturgy is a pastoral, not a dogmatic question1s9 and
permission for its use may be granted or rescinded by the competent

185 As alleged by KUEv, Geschichte, p. 57, and ID., Chernorizets, p. 75.

186 As has occasionally been pointed out, e.g. by NAEGLE, Kirchengeschichte, 1,1, p.
89, n. 371; KRETSCHMAR, Drei-Sprachen-Hiiresie, p. 175. The latter is, however, in-
correct to view it specifically against the background of the conversion of the Saxons and
Avars instead of in the light of the Carolingian reforrns.
1 87 E.g., by VoRONOV, Istochniki, p. 675; TUNITSKY, Kliment, p. 132; ÜGIYENKO,
Yeres' (33), pp. 6-7.
188
Popular literature abounds with oddities about the sacred languages, to give but
two examples: a Spanish list of peoples of c. 1000 ends with the remark: Et sunt LXXII
generationes, ex quibus elegit Dominus tres, id est Ebrea, Grega et Latina. Ceteras vero
ve/ut canes latrantes (ed. BoRsT, Turmbau, 11,2 [1959], p. 938), while the 9th-century ero-
tapocritic Joca monachorum contain the question: Quantas linguas benedixit Deus? R.
Tres - graeca, aebraica et Latina (ed. WôLFFLIN-TROLL, Joca, p. 112). However, popular
literature also provides no evidence for the existence of trilinguism in the Cyrillo-Me-
thodian sense.
189 As has often been pointed out, e.g. by SNOPEK, Konstantinus, p. 139; GRIVEC,
Konstantin, p. 111. Despite this, trilinguism has often been referred to as a dogma, e.g.
by ANGELOV, Kiri/, p. 63; BOZILOV, ldéo/ogie, p. 76, and frequently by KUEV, e.g. Cherno-
rizets, p. 78; Bortsi, p. 153, and ·ceschichte, p. 29, where the statement is found: the
dogma of trilinguism is nota dogmatic question ( !).
 TRILINGUISM 97

authorityl90, The exclusive use of certain languages in the liturgy for

reasons of ecclesiastical expediency has frequently been advocated 191 .
Indeed there have even been advocates of the exclusive use of one
language, viz. Latin, such as the compiler of the plan proposed to
King Philip VI of France (1328-1350) in 1332/3 for a crusade tore-
cover the Roly Landt92. Even in the nineteenth century Prosper Gué-
ranger (1805-1875), who restored the Benedictine order in France,
considered that since Peter, the prince of the apostles, had moved to
Rome, Latin was destined to serve as the language uniting the whole
church19 3 and that its adoption by the Greek Church would have pre-
vented the schism of 1054 on the grounds that legem credendi statuat
!ex supplicandi194. Small wonder that he called the permission
granted for the use of Slavonie by Pope John VIII (872-882) in 880 a
désastreuse indulgencet95. Although the advocacy of such ideas
confuses unity with uniformity, it does not constitute heresy, which
by definition involves either the wilful, persistent denial or doubt of a
defined dogma of the faith, or the confession and propagation of a
doctrine which has been condemned as contravening revealed truth196,

19°For the Latin rite this is the Apostolic See, see canon 838, 2 of the 1983 Codex
iuris canonici, ed. PAss1cos, Code, p. 153.
191 The exclusive use of Latin in the West until the decision of the Second Vatican
Council on 4 December 1963 to permit the use of vemaculars was not so much based
upon the idea of Latin as a sacred language as upon the considerations that a) it expressed
the unity of the Church in past and present; b) it is stable and hence a suitable vehicle for
the expression of objective universal truths; c) a disciplina arcani increases reverence for
the ho! y mysteries; d) vernaculars are in a permanent state of flux and hence new trans-
lations are constantly required; e) metalinguistic features of vernaculars su ch as tone and
stress can reduce the objective to the subjective. Such considerations are not the object
of study here.
192 Directorium ad passagiumfaciendum VIII, 1, 1-3, in Recueil des historiens
des
croisades ... Documents arméniens, II, Paris, 1906, pp. 469-471. Whether the pseudonym
of its author, Brocardus, hides Archbishop William Adam of Antibari (1324 - c.1339)
cannot be examined here.
193GlffiRANGER, Institutions, III, (1883), pp. 57-58.
194 Ibid, p. 74.

195 Ibid. p. 110; cf. his remark: «toute liturgie qui n'est pas romaine devient in-
failliblement nationale», ibid., II (1880), p. 671.
196 For the most recent Catholic definition see canon 751 of the 1983 Codex iuris ca-
nonici, ed. PAss1cos, Code, p. 138. Although there is no formai definition, the Orthodox
concept is the same, see BoBCHEV, Pravo, p. 180. There is no accepted Protestant defi-
nition but the Report to the Churches adopted by the Third World Conference on Faith and
Order in 1952 defined it as an error of doctrine persistent/y proclaimed against a norm of
the Church affecting vital matters of teaching, ed. TOMKINS, Conference, p. 30. As are-
sult of the investiture struggle, simony came to be regarded as heretical, see GRUND-
98 F. THOMSON

In the heat of the controversy over the use of Slavonie, the

opponents of Cyril and Methodius were dubbed heretics. For this to
be the correct term, the trilinguists would have had to proclaim their
theory to be a dogma, viz. a revealed truth formally defined by the
Church. In fact, however, the main sources for the existence of tri-
linguism as a heresy, the Vitae of Cyril and Methodius, both betray
the fact that the principal bone of contention was the invention of a
new alphabet beside the Hebrew, Greek and Latin scripts. Thus,
according to the Vita of Cyril, the latter, when instructed to undertake
the mission to Moravia, agreed on condition that the Slavs had their
own alphabet, and when he was informed that he would have to in-
vent one, expressed the fear that he would earn for himself a heretical
reputationt97. After his arrivai with the new script and the intro-
duction of the liturgy using it, his opponents in Moravia state:
Ne CA<l.&HTCG E>ori w cet.Ab. Awe 60 6H itMo~ CHUE roA't EblM TONG Ebl AH
7
MOrAb C"};T&OfHTH,A<l. 6blWG H CÏH Hcnpb&<l. OHCMGNbl nHwl':we 6GC'tAbl C&Olt CM&HTH
(Ed. GRIVEC, Constantinus, p. 131.)
E>or.i.?
God is not praised by this. For if such a thing had been pleasing to him,
would he not have been able to see to it that they too from the beginning had
praised Godin writing their texts198 with (their) letters?
In V enice his opponents ask:
'r' M&'llYG7 Ck'.<l.lKH N<l.Mb 7 k'.<l.k'.O CH Tbl cinopHAb NblNr-.i. CMs'tNGMb k'.NHrbl 11
O~YHWH? Vl,x'lKG N'llCTb NHk'.TOlKG HNb npn'llit W6f'tAb,NH .i.nocTOAb,NH fHM'Ck'.blH
n.i.n.i., NH E>orocMSb r p11ropYe, NH 1-tpoNHMb, NH A&rO~CTHNb. Mbl lKG TfiH Tbk'.MO
G.3blk'.H S'llM', HMHlKG AWCTOHTb si k'.Wir<l.,Xb CMSHTH E>or.i.: Gspe11, GAHNbl, /\.i. THNbl.
(Ed. ÜRIVEC, Constantinus, p. 134.)199

MANN, Ketzergeschichte, pp. 13-15, but the concept of ethical heresy, i.e. moral behaviour
irreconcilable with Christian faith, is not relevant here.
1 97 Ed. GRNEC, Constantinus, p. 129
198
The word 6&c'&Abl has been variously interpreted, see the translations, for
instance, by DvoRNfK, Légendes, p. 374: paroles; ScHOrz, Lehrer, p. 69: Unterwei-
sungen; SVANE, Konstantinos, p. 63: taler. The correct meaning is shown by the passage
just prior to this in which the Vita describes Cyril's invention of the script and continues: 11
Nt.Ynb 6EC'&Al> n11ct.r11E'{t.rre1\'ctl>:1-1cnpbgt. 6'& cAOgo1 ed. GRNEC, Constantinus, p. 129.
199There are 53 known MSS of the VC, of which 48 were used for the edition of the
VC in ANGELOV, Kliment, III, pp. 89-109; six have the variant for the last three words:
egpe11ctb111, EMHH'cn111, l\t.T11w'ctbl111 see ibid., pp. 106 and 118, n. 4. These include three
early codices, viz. Moscow Theological Academy, MS 19 of the 15th century; Jugoslav
Academy, Agram, MS Ill.a.47 of 1469 and Rila Monastery, MS 418 (61) of 1479. (The
last two were both copied by Vladislav Grammaticus). Ali the rest, the earliest being of
the late 15th century, e.g. Sophia Cathedra!, Novgorod, MS 1385; Solovki Monastery, MS
6191503; Volokolamsk Monastery, MS 1931591, have the reading followed here, which is
certainly the original one. The alternative reading is probably an attempt to make some
 TRILINGUISM 99

Tell us, man, why have you now made an alphabet200 for the Slavs and
teach (it)? Nobody else invented it previously, neither an apostle, nor a
pope of Rome, nor Gregory the Divine, nor Jerome, nor Augustine. We
know of only three peoples for whom it is fitting to praise God in alphabets:
the Jews, Greeks (and) Latins.

According to the Vita of Methodius, the opponents in Rome alleged:

Ne AOCTOl1Tb N11toTOpoM0~111e t"b.3blK:O~ 11M'tTH i;;o~K:O&'b c&o11,xi pt1.3&'t E&pe1111
rpbt'b 11 Àô.Tl1N'b no n11MTO&O~ n11Ct\.Nl1K>1 1(;1t1€ Nô. tpbCT't rocnOAbNl1 Ntl.nl1Ct\..
(Ed. GRIVEC, Constantinus, p. 156.)
lt is not fitting for any people to have its letters except for the J ews and
Greeks and Latins in accordance with Pilate's inscription, which he wrote
on the Lord's cross.

Hostility to the unsanctioned introduction of Slavonie as a liturgical

language was clearly fuelled by the use of a newly invented alphabet
as its vehicle. If, as the Vitae allege, this led some opponents to assert
that only three languages were suitable for liturgical worship, their
claim can undoubtedly be rejected as an error201, but it cannot be
termed a heresy202 and the use of the latter term is just one more sad
example of odium theologicum.
An aversion to the use of the vernacular in the liturgy is not
peculiar to the Latin Church. lt has even been claimed that certain
elements within the Byzantine Church adhered to trilinguism as early
as in the late 4th century since John Chrysostom (344/354-407)

sense out of the confusion which arase from the early corruption of 11M~1u to 11M11111e. For
a bibliography of the MSS of the VC see ANGELOV, Kliment, III, pp. 34-46. In the 1625/6
Serbian codex Hilandar, MS 444, edited by GRIVEC, the orthographie antistoichon of
e:rnn for people. nation (11 occurrences) and iE:rnn for language, longue (17 occur-
rences) is largely adhered to, including in these two passages, but there are two instances
of IE3Mtb for people, see GRIVEC, Constantinus, pp. 117, 126; and four of E3bltb for
language, see ibid., pp. 134, 135 (x3); on the antistoichon see MATHIESON, Question, p. 59.
200The word tN11rM (plurale tantum) can mean books and has been so rendered, see,
for instance, the translations by DvoRN1K, Légendes p. 375: des livres, so too VAILLANT,
Textes, Il, p. 21, but this is to do violence to the text. Cyril had not invented books, but an
alphabet, cf. the translations by SvANE, Konstantinos, p. 65: en skrift; ScHOTZ, Lehrer, p.
71: eine Schrift. For t~N11rn in the sense letters of an alphabet see Lexicon linguae
palaeoslovenicae, II, ed. J. KURZ, Prague, 1973, p. 92.
201 Viz. the propagation of a doctrine which has not been formally condemned;
canon LII of the Synod of Frankfort in 794 refers to prayers in the vemacular, not to
written languages, see above, and hence cannot be considered to be a formai condem-
nation of trilinguism in the Cyrillo-Methodian sense. It is not necessary here to distinguish
between error, propositio fa/sa, sententia improbabilis, etc.
202 It is rightly not included in any bibliography devoted to mediaeval heresies; see
those by KuLcsA.R, Eretnekmozgalmak; GRUNDMANN, Bibliographie; BERKHOUT, Heresies.
100 F. THOMSON

attacked it in a sermon which he preached just before Easter in 399 in

St. Paul's church, which had been allocated to the Goths living in
Constantinople2o3. From the title of the homily it is clear that the
Scriptures had been read in Gothie and a sermon delivered in that
tongue204 and in the homily John expresses his joy that the congre-
gation has heard the Scriptures in a barbarian tangue and, like Scy-
thians, Sauromatians, Maurs, Indians and all other peoples, can me-
ditate on what they have hearct2os. The homily, however, provides no
evidence for a Gothie liturgy206 and contains nothing relevant to litur-
gical language, let alone trilinguism.
Another expression of Byzantine trilinguism has been seen in an
episode which took place when St. Hilarion the Iberian arrived on
Mount Olympus. This requires more detailed analysis since, if cor-
rect, Cyril and Methodius would personally have been acquainted
with trilinguism even before they left for Moravia. According to the
Vita of Hilarion201, the saint <lied in 875 aged 532os, viz. he was bom

203Thus VARTOLOMEEV, Konstantin, p. 249.

204 Toû au~oû oµtÎl.t<X Îl.EX0Êtcm Êv ~TI ÊicicÎl.rtcri~ ~TI Ê1tt IlauÎl.ou, rci~0cov avayicciv.cov,

icai 1tprn~u~Épou rci~eou 1tpooµtÎl.Îjcravwç (Ioh. Chrys., Homilia VIII, in PG 63, col. 499).
On St. Paul's church see JA.NIN, Siège, pp. 394-395.
2os Homilia VIII, in PG 63, col. 501. The statement that Indians, Scythians, Sauro-
matians and all peoples can hear the Scriptures in their own tangues is a patristic locus
communis ;cf. Theodoret, Graecarum affectionum curatio V, in PG 83, col. 948.
206 It is still being quoted as evidence for the existence of a Gothie liturgy, e.g. by
0BOLENSKY, Commonwealth, p. 151, despite the fact that it was pointed out already in
1899 that this was not the case, see BATIFFOL, Homélies, pp. 568-569. On the homily see
BAUR, Johannes, II, pp. 69-70; ALBERT, Goten, pp. 174-175. The idea that Cyril may have
had it in mind during the debate at Venice, thus OeoLENSKY, Commonwealth, p. 151, is
fanciful.
2o7 It was compiled on the basis of the recollections of Hilarion's disciples by Basil,
protoasecretis and philosopher, ed. ABULADZE, Dzeglebi, II (1967), p. 37. A later re-
daction claims that it had been compiled in Greek and then translated into Georgian, sce
PEETERS, Orient, p. 216, n. 3. This is accepted by some, e.g. TARCHNISVILI, Geschichte, p.
149, who considers that the Georgian version was probably compiled by Euthymius the
Athonite (c. 963-1028), whereas others, e.g. PEETERS, Hilarion, pp. 238-239, and m.,
Orient, pp. 159 and 216, consider that the Vita was written in Georgian by Basil, who was
employed in the imperial chancellery as a translater and interpreter. In either case, the
stress which it places on his stay in Rome, see below n. 212, means that it cannôt be later
than the late lOth century, see PEETERs, Hilarion, pp. 239-240.
208
The Vita states that he died on Saturday, 19 November, in the reign of Basil I
(867-886), ed. ABULADZE, Dzeglebi, II, p. 29, and makes it clear that this was during the
incumbency of Patriarch Ignatius of Constantinople (847-858, 867-877), ed. ibid., p. 31.
Between 867 and 877 November 19 fell on a Saturday only in 875, see the perpetual ca-
Jendar in V. GRUMEL, La chronologie(= Bibliothèque byzantine. Série Traité d'études by-
zantines, 1), Paris, 1958, p. 316.
 TRILINGUISM 101

in c. 822. He became a monk at fifteen209, viz. c. 837, and was later

ordained210, which cannot have been prior toc. 847, when he became
twenty-five. Soon after he left for the Roly Land, where he remained
seven years, viz. c. 848-c. 855. He then returned to Georgia and at
some unspecified time during the reign of Emperor Michael III (842-
867) he left for Mount Olympus, where he remained for five years211.
He then went to Rome for two years212, after which he settled in Thes-
salonica. On his arrival he healed Procopius, then a child 213 , and just
after Hilarion's death Procopius, by then a young man, was again
healed, this time by a posthumous miracle214. Hilarion must thus
have been in Thessalonica for at least ten years, viz. he arrived in c.
865, was in Rome in c. 863-865 and on Olympus in c. 858-c. 863215.
According to the Vita of Cyril, when Cyril was 24 he was sent
on an embassy to the Saracens216. Since he <lied on 14 February 869
aged 42211, this would mean in c. 851, although the only recorded
Byzantine embassy to Caliph Mutawakkil (847-861) at this time went
in AH 241, viz. 855/6218. Upon his return Cyril retired to Mount
Olympus where his brother Methodius had already become a
monk2I9, and there the brothers remained until late 860 when Cyril,
accompanied by Methodius, was sent on an embassy to the Kha-
zars220. Upon their return neither went back to Mount Olympus;

209Ed. ABULADZE, Dzeglebi, Il, p. 11.

2l0Ed. ibid., p. 12.
211 Ed. ibid., p. 22.
212 Ed. ibid., p. 23.
213 Ed. ibid., p. 24.
2 14 Ed.ibid., p. 29.
15
2 See PEETERS, Hilarion, p. 241, who would date his stay on Olympus toc. 859-c.
864. His arguments are not, however, entirely clear as he gives Michael III's date of
death as 859 (a misprint?).
216 VC, p. 103.

217 VC,p.141.

218 It is recorded by Tabari (838/9-922/3) in his Annales, ed. M. DE GoEJE, Annales

quos scripsit Abu Djafar Mohammed Ibn Djarir at-Tabari, III,3, Leiden, 1884, pp.1426-
1427. Whether the VC date is incorrect or whether there were two embassies is in this
context irrelevant.
219VC, p. 108; VM, p. 154. Speculation as to precisely when Methodius had retired
there is pointless.
220This embassy is recorded in the VC, pp. 109-127, and in the VM, p. 154, as well
as in the Translatio corporis S. Clementis martyris et pontificis (better known as the
Legenda italica) composed by Bishop Leo of Ostia (1102n-l 115) on the basis of an
account, now lost, of the events written by Bishop Gauderich of Velletri Ct 898), ed. ibid.,
102 F.THOMSON

Cyril stayed in Constantinop1e221, while Methodius was appointed

abbot of Polichnion, a monastery established in the late eighth cen-
tury by Theophanes the Confessor (t 817) on the slopes of Mount Si-
griane beside the Sea of Marmara222. Methodius was thus on Mount
Olympus from before c. 856 to 860, and Cyril from at least c. 856 to
860, and thus both were there when Hilarion arrived.
The Vita of Hilarion relates that when he and a companion
arrived on Olympus, they found a small chapel and settled there. A
monk from the monastery to which it belonged brought them bread
and wine to enable them to celebrate the liturgy and by so doing
incurred the wrath of his abbot, who ordered their expulsion on the
grounds that since no one understood their language, it was uncertain
whether they were orthodox. However, that night in a dream the
abbot sees the Virgin, who assures him of their orthodoxy and re-
proaches him for his inhospitality, whereupon the abbot relents and
permits them to stay223. To see in this episode an example of Byzan-
tine trilinguism22 4 is to do violence to the text. It is not the use of the
language per se which was at issue, but the fact that it was unclear
whether they were orthodox22s. There is in fact no evidence that the
Byzantine Church ever entertained any form of trilinguism and this

pp. 59-61. Although the sources do not record the reason for the embassy, it was clearly
in connection with the Russian attack on Constantinople in June 860. For a bibliography
of the articles especially devoted toit see lL'INSKY, Opyt, p. 65; PoPRUZHENKo, Biblio-
grafiya, p. 57; DUYCHEV, Bibliografiya, pp. 72-73. The idea that Cyril left Olympus to
live in Constantinople before the embassy, thus, e.g. DvoRNIK, Légendes, p. 147, is un-
supported by any historical evidence.
221 vc. p. 128.
222vM, p. 154, which calls the monastery nOAH,Xpom. The correct name is Ilo:l.i-
xvwv, see the Vila of Theophanes by Patriarch Methodius of Constantinople (843-847),
ed. LATYSHEV, Mefodiya, p. 15, and an anonymous Vita, ed. m., Menologii, I, p. 223. The
mistake is found in Greek sources; thus, while some codices of the Vita of Theophanes by
Nicephorus of Blachemae (fi. 9th century) have correctly (Év '<é!) icmà 'tÎ]v I:1ypuxvÎ]v)
Ilo:l.1xviq>, ed. C. DE BooR, Theophanis chronographia, Il, Leipzig, 1885, p.18, others have
Ilo:l.uJCPoviq>, cf. PG 108, col. 28. On the monastery see JANIN, Églises, pp. 207-209;
MANGO, Churches, pp. 259-270; B. MENTHON, Une terre de légendes. L'Oiympe de Bi-
thynie. Ses saints, ses couvents, ses sites, Paris, 1935, pp. 198 and 204, n. 1.
223Ed. ABULADZE, Dzeglebi, II, pp. 19-20.
22 4 As do, e.g., DUYCHEV,
Note, pp. 82-86; S!RADZE, Svyazyakh, p. 68; KUEv, lsto-
riya, p. 29, Gesèhichte, p. 56, and Chernorizets, p. 74.
225DvoRNIK, Légendes, p. 135, n. 1, suspects the historicity of the passage. While
the episode may have been described with hagiographie embroidery, there is no reason to
doubt the initial hostility of the abbot towards Hilarion. For a very similar case of B y-
zantine hostility to the liturgical use of Georgian as described in the Vita of George the
Athonite of the eleventh century see F'LusIN, Arabe, pp. 59-61.
 TRILINGUISM 103

episode is but one of many lllustrating the Byzantine feeling of supe-

riority towards "barbarians"226.
In accordance with Byzantine ideology it was the divine will that
the Christian world should be ruled by the one Emperor and, in
theory at least, the boundaries of Empire and Christendom were co-
terminous221, so that the conversion of peoples outside the Empire
was an important aim of imperial diplomatie policy with methods
ranging from persuasion, via bribery, to force22s. However, for the
Byzantines Orthodox faith and Greek culture formed an organic
whole 229 and thus whenever feasible conversion to Christianity was
the first step towards Hellenization, as Leo VI (886-912) makes clear
in his Tactica with regard to the Slavs:
Ta.Û'm (se. 'tà. !:Â.a.~tKà. Ë8v11) liÈ ô i)µé·rnpoç èv SEÎ~ 'tTI Â.Î]Çn yEvoµEvoç
7ta.'t'ilp Ka.i. 'Proµa.irov a.Ù'tOKpci'trop Ba.crtÂ.Etoç 'trov à.pxa.irov èe&v Ë7tEtcrE µE'ta.-
cr'tl1vm, Ka.i. I'pa.tKoocra.ç, Ka.i. éipxoucrt KŒ'tà. 'tOV 'Proµa.ÏKOV 'tUltOV 1mo'tcil;a.ç,
Ka.i. ~a.7t'ttcrµa.n nµÎ]cra.ç, 'tl1ç liÈ liouÂ.Eia.ç ÎlÂEuSéprocrE 'trov Éa.u1&v à.pxov1rov.
(Tactica, XVill, 101, in PG 107, col. 969.) 230

The Byzantine policy towards converts was characterized not by

respect for barbarous languages but by linguistic intolerance231 and it
has aptly been remarked that Byzantine benevolence towards the use
of liturgical languages other than Greek increased in proportion to the
distance from the Empire of the peoples using them232. In this context

226 See the remarks by PoosKALSKY, Verhiiltnis, p. 39; VAvRINEK, Introduction, p.

264; 0BOLENSKY, Cyrille, pp. 599-600. The classical work on the Byzantine attitude to-
wards "barbarians" remains LECHNER, Hel/enen, passim; see also PoDSKALSKY, Sicht,
passim.
221 See BECK, Mission, p. 654. On the theory of the Emperor as the head of a hie-
rarchy of rulers see F. DôLGER, Die "Familie der Kônige" im Mittelalter, in Historisches
Jahrbuch, 60 (1940), pp. 397-420 passim; OsrROGORSKY, Staatenhierarchie, passim, and
m., Emperor, passim.
228 See ENGELHARDT, Mission, pp. 42-43 and 184; WEITHMANN, Bevolkerung, p. 256.
229See VAvRINEK, Introduction, p. 270.
2300n the term -ypaucrocraç see r. Tl:APAI:, To VOl)µa 'tOV 'rpaucrfiaaç' a-rà Ta1<:wcà
Aiovwç J:-r' -roiJ IocpoiJ, in Byzantina, 1 (1969), pp. 135-157 passim. On conversion as a
step towards Hellenization see BoN, Péloponn~se, p. 66; 0BOLENSKY, Background, p. 16;
WALDMÜLLER, Begegnungen, pp. 598-599.
231 SEvè'.:ENKO, Paradoxes, p. 229.
232See OBOLENSKY, Cyrille, p. 601; on the Byzantine reluctance to permit the use of
vemaculars see also VLASTO, Entry, p. 45; VAvftfNEK, Introduction, pp. 264-265; DuMMER,
Begegnung, p. 226; HussEY, Church,-pp. 96-97; OBOLENSKY, Commonwealth, pp. 152-153.
The idea that permission was granted for the use of Slavonie in Moravia because the
Empire was strong and, had it been weak, it would have been refused, thus GEANA-
104 F. THOMSON

it has often been pointed out that the treatise De litteris, written in the
late ninth-early tenth century in defence of a Slavonie alphabet by the
Bulgarian monk Khrabr233, implies Byzantine and not Latin oppo-
sition toits use234. Doubtlessly Byzantine hostility to the use of lan-
guages other than Greek was to a certain extent fuelled by the fact that
the Nestorian and Monophysite churches did not use Greek235. At all
events the Byzantine attitude towards the use of languages other than
Greek in the liturgy is summed up in the response of the celebrated
canonist Theodore Balsamon (c. 1140 - after 1195) to the question -
in itself indicative of the Byzantine mentality - put to him by Pa-
triarch Mark III of Alexandria (fl. 1195) whether Syriac and Arme-
nian Monophysite clergy who became Orthodox should be obliged to
celebrate in Greek:
x:êiv roat tîlc; 'EA.J..rivil>oc; cprovîlc; 7tciµ1mv àµétexot, µrnx tîlc; illiac; lltcx-
Af'.x:tou iepouprftcroucrtv. (Responsa ad interrogationes Marci 5, in PG 138,
col. 957.)

It is just as inaccurate to view this permission for those totally igno-

rant of the Greek language to celebrate in their own as a reflection of
trilinguism236, as it is exaggerated to view it as la concezione fonda-
mentale dei Bizantini in favore delle lingue nazionali e contro la teo-
ria delle tre lingue sacre23 7 • Although lip service was paid to the

KOPLOS, Interaction, p. 44, is the opposite of the truth - permission was granted simply
because Moravia was beyond imperial intervention.
233See above n. 22.
234 E.g. MALYSHEVSKY, Kirill, p. 385, n. 1; GoLUBINSKY, Istoriya, I,2, p. 329, n. 1;
SNOPEK, Konstantinus, p. 137; TuNITSKY, Kliment, p. 240; ÜGIYENKO, Yeres' (31-32), p.
18; PoDSKALSKY, Verhiiltnis, p. 38; VARTOLOMEEV, Konstantin, p. 249; KUEv, Geschichte,
p. 59, and Chernorizets, p. 78; ÜBOLENSKY, Commonwealth, p. 153; GoLDBLATT, Question,
pp. 79-80; Prccmo, Questione, p. 103, and ID., Guidelines, p. 6. This was denied by
DvoRNfK, Missions, p. 251, n. 58, who sees in De /itteris a mere allusion to the past
dispute in Moravia. However, this ignores the fact that Khrabr introduces new argu-
ments, e.g. that Syriac, not Hebrew, was the language of paradise and that whereas the
Greek alphabet had been developed by pagans, the Slavonie one had been created by a
saint, see ed. GIAMBELLUCA-KOSSOVA, Chernorizets, pp. 128-142.
The idea that Syriac was the language of paradise is first found in Theodoret of
Cyrrhus' (c. 393-c. 466) Quaestiones in Genesin IX, 10, 60, in PG 80, col. 165; for later
witnesses see BoRsT, Turmbau, I (1957), pp. 263-271and287-290.
23ssee ÜGIYENKO, Yeres' (31-32), pp. 16-17. BARTAK, Versuch, pp. 14-18, is, how-
ever, wrong to claim that it was the Monophysites who first broke with the use of the
three sacred languages.
236 As do, e.g. MALYSHEVSKY, Kirill, pp. 382-383; ÜGIYENKO, Yeres' (31-32), p. 19;
KuEv, Geschichte, pp. 54-55, and Chernorizets, pp. 73-74.
237Thus DUYCHEV, Prob/ema, p. 67.
 TRILINGUISM 105

truism that God's word is equally valid in any language, e.g. by Arch-
bishop Eustathius of Thessalonica (c. 1178-1195/6) 238 , the notion that
the Byzantine Church as opposed to the Western actually encouraged
the use of liturgical languages other than Greek 239 is a delusion and
Cyril's apprehension that he would be considered a heretic by his
fellow-Byzantines for creating a new alphabet for the Slavs2 4o is fully
comprehensible.
From the point of view of H eilsgeschichte the Augustinian tradi-
tion of the pre-eminence of Hebrew, Greek and Latin can scarcely be
denied, but it in no way derogates from the intrinsic value of other
languages. This very point is clearly made in Pope John VIII's (872-
882) epistle Industriae tuae to Prince Svatopluk of Moravia (870-
894) of 880:
Nec sanae fidei vel doctrine aliquid obstat sive missas in eadem Sclavi-
nica Zingua canere sive sacrum evangelium vel lectiones divinas novi et
veteris testamenti bene translatas et interpretatas legere aut alia horarum
officia omnia psallere, quoniam qui fecit tres Zinguas principales, H ebraeam
scilicet Graecam et Latinam, ipse creavit et alias omnes ad laudem et
gloriam suam. (MGH, Epist. t. VII, ed. P. KEHR, Berlin, 1928, p. 224.)

On the other hand the term sacred cannot be reserved solely for the
three. Just as bread and wine are not perse sacred but become sancti-
fied by their use in the eucharist, so language, which is a constituent
part of the liturgy together with the material elements, is hallowed by
its religious use and hence every liturgical language merits the epithet
sacred24I.

2 38 /n sanctam quadragesimam oratio praeparatoria 34, ed. T. TAFEL, Eustathii me-

trop. Thessalonic. opuscula .. ., Frankfurt, 1832, p. 133. It is perhaps a little unfair, how-
ever, to dismiss this as just scoring a preacher's point, as does SEVéENKO, Paradoxes, p.
227,n. 25.
239 As is often claimed, e.g. by P. KHRISTU [= CHREsrou], Mneniya na vizantiytsite
za natsionalniya i tsârkovniya ezik, in Izvestiya. Tsârkovnoistoricheski i arkhiven institut.
Tsentralen tsârkoven istorikoarkheologicheski muzey, 2 (1984), p. 23; E. VouLGARAKIS, A
Lesson in Evangelism. The Lives of Cyril and Methodius, in International Review of Mis-
sions, 74 (1985), p. 233; E. TIMIADES, Unity of Faith and Plura/ism in Culture. A Lesson
from the Byzantine Missionaries, in International Review of Missions, 74 (1985), p. 237.
240 See above n. 197.

241 See H. SCHMIDT, Liturgie et langue vulgaire. Le problème de la langue liturgique

chez les premiers Réformateurs et au Concile de Trente (=Analecta Gregoriana, 53),
Rome, 1950, pp. 185-186, and m., Liturgie en volkstaal in het Concilie van Trente, in
Tijdschrift voor liturgie, 34 (1950), p. 26; cf. the very titles of modern books on the
subject such as AUVRAY, Les langues sacrées and RAMSHAW-SCHMIDT, Christ in Sacred
Speech; on liturgical language as sacred see this latter book pp. 11-18. The sole comple-
tely negative attitude towards language seems to be that adopted by George Fox (1624-
106 F. THOMSON

Much of the scholarship devoted to the question of trilinguism as

found in the sources dealing with the Cyrillo-Methodian mission has
been vitiated by the quotation of passages out of context and a failure
to evaluate the sources against their historical background, not to
mention a frequent failure even to distinguish between liturgical and
missionary language242. It is time to bury the myth that trilinguism in
the Cyrillo-Methodian sense was ever propagated by the Western
Church or even advocated by any known theologian, let alone a
Father.

University of Antwerp Francis J. THOMSON

1691), the founder of the Quakers, who rejected ail sacraments and set forms of worship
and pointed out that the superscription on the Cross was the invention of Christ's perse-
cutor Pilate and that according to Revelations xiii,7 and xvii,15 power over ail tongues is
to be given to the beast and the whore, see his journal, ed. N. PENNEY, Journal. George
Fox(= Everyman's Library, 754), London, 1924, pp. 164-165.
242To cite but two examples: DuYCHEV, Vâprosât, p. 256, defined trilinguism as: the
law that on/y the three /anguages (Greek, Latin and H ebrew) be used in the /iturgy and
the preaching of thefaith, while BERNSTEIN, Konstantin, p. 96, claimed: the popes of Rome
were in one way or another forced to al/ow the introduction of the native /anguage of the
flock into preaching and even into church services. If the Western Church had insisted
on the preaching of the Gospel in Latin, how would it have converted pagans? On Sla-
vonie as a missionary language see ZAGIBA, Missionssprache, passim, and ID., S/avische,
passim. He calls it Zingua quarta, whereas P1ccmo, Myastoto, p. 117, prefers the term
dialectus apostolica.
 TRILINGUIS M 107

ABBREVIA TIONS

MGH: Monumenta Germaniae historica.

MMF: Magnae Moraviae fontes historici, 5 vols, ed. D. BARTONKOVA et al.
(=Opera Universitatis Purkynianae Brunensis. Facultas Philosophica,
104, 118, 134, 156,206),Brün n, 1966-1977.
PG: Patrologiae cursus completus... Series graeca et orientalis ... , ed. J.
MIGNE.
PL: Patrologiae cursus completus ... Series prima ... , ed. J. MIGNE.
PSRL: Polnoye sobraniye russkikh letopisey.
VC: Vita S. Constantini-Cyrilli Slavorum apostoli, ed. GRIVEC, Constantinus,
pp. 95-142.
VM: Vita S. Methodii Slavorum apostoli, ed. ÜRIVEC, Constantinus, pp. 147-166.

ABULADZE, Dzeglebi: I. ABULADZE, Dzveli k'art'uli agiograp'iuli literaturis

dzeglebi, 5 vols., Tiflis, 1963-1989.
ALBERT, Goten: G. ALBERT, Goten in Konstantinopel. Untersuchungen zur ost-
romischen Geschichte um das Jahr 400 n. Chr. (= Studien zur Geschichte
und Kultur des Altertums. Neue Folge. 1. Reihe, 2), Paderborn, 1984.
ALBRECHT, Bibliographie: G. ALBRECHT and G. DAHLKE, Internationale Biblio-
graphie zur Geschichte der deutschen Literatur von den Anfi:ingen bis zur
Gegenwart, 2 vols. in 3 +index vol., Berlin, 1969-1977.
ANGELOV, Kiril: D. ANGELOV, Kiril i Metody i vizantiyskata kultura i politika,
in Khilyada i sto godini slavyanska pismenost 863-1963. Sbornik v chest na
Kiril i Metody, ed. D. ANGELOV et al., Sofia, 1963, pp. 51-69.
ANGELOV, Kliment: Kliment Okhridski. Sâbrani sâchineniya, 3 vols., ed. B.
ANGELOV et al., Sofia, 1970-1973.
ANGELOV, Literatura: B. ANGELov, Jz starata bâlgarska, ruska i srâbska lite-
ratura, 3 vols., Sofia, 1958-1978.
ATKINSON, Amnos: C. ATKINSON, 'O amnos tu theu': The Greek Agnus Dei in
the Roman Liturgy from the Eighth to the Eleventh Century, in Kirchen-
musikalisches Jahrbuch, 65 (1981), pp. 7-30.
ATKINSON, Entstehung: C. ATKINSON, Zur Entstehung und Überlieferung der
'Missa Graeca', in Archiv für Musikwissenschaft, 39 (1982), pp. 113-145.
AuF DER MAUR, Beitrag: I. AUF DER MAUR, Sankt Gallens Beitrag zur Liturgie,
in Die Kultur der Abtei Sankt Galien, ed. W. VoGLER, Zürich, 1990, pp. 39-
56.
AUVRAY, Langues: P. AUVRAY, P. POULAIN and A. BLAISE, Les langues sacrées
(=Je sais,je crois, 115), Paris, 1957.

BALIBAR, Institution: R. BALIBAR, L'institution du français. Essai sur le collin-

guisme des Carolingiens à la République, Paris, 1985.
BARDY, Question: G. BARDY, La question des langues dans l'Église ancienne, I
(ail published) (=Études de théologie historique), Paris", 1948.
108 F. THOMSON

BARR, Hebrew: J. BARR, Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek in the Hellenic Age, in
DAVIES, History, II (1989), pp.79-114.
BARR, Language: J. BARR, Which Language Did Jesus Speak? Sorne Remarks
of a Semitist, in Bulletin of the John Rylands Library, 53 (1970), pp. 9-29.
BARTAK, Versuch: J. BARTAK, Versuch, die liturgische Sprache der Kirche
vom dogmatischen, historischen und pastorellen Standpunkte zu beleuchten,
Kôniggrlitz, 1875.
BATIFFOL, Études: P. BATIFFOL, Études de liturgie et d'archéologie chrétienne,
Paris, 1919.
BATIFFOL, Homélies: P. BATIFFOL, De quelques homélies de S. Jean Chryso-
stome et de la version gothique des écritures, in Revue biblique, 8 (1899),
pp. 566-572.
BAUR, Johannes: C. BAUR, Der heiligelohannes Chrysostomus und seine Zeit,
2 vols., Munich, 1929-1930.
BECK, Mission: H. BECK, Christliche Mission und politische Propaganda im
byzantinischen Reich, in Settimane di studio del Centro italiano di studi
sull'alto medioevo, 14 (1967), pp. 649-674.
BERKHOUT, Heresies: c. BERKHOUT and J. RUSSELL, Medieval Heresies. A Bi-
bliography 1960-1979 (=Subsidia mediaevalia, 11), Toronto, 1981.
BERNSTEIN, Konstantin: S. BERNSTEIN (BERNSHTEYN), Konstantin-Filosof i Me-
fody. Nachal'nyye glavy iz istorii slavyanskoy pis'mennosti, Moscow, 1984.
BERSCHIN, Letters: W. BERSCHIN, Greek Letters and the Latin Middle Ages.
From Jerome to Nicholas of Cusa, Washington, 1988.
BETZ, Karl: W. BETZ, Karl der Grosse und die Lingua Theodisca, in BRAUN-
FELS, Karl, II (1965), pp. 300-306.
BEYER, Language: K. BEYER, The Aramaic Language. Its Distribution and
Subdivision, Gôttingen, 1986.
BEYER, Texte: K. BEYER, Die aramiiischen Texte vom Toten Meer samt den
Inschriften aus Paliistina, dem Testament Levis aus der Kairoer Genisa,
der Fastenrolle und den alten talmudischen Zitaten, Gôttingen, 1984.
BIENER, Collectionibus: F. BIENER, De collectionibus canonum ecclesiae grae-
cae schediasma litterarium, Berlin, 1827.
BIL'BASOV, Kirill: V. BIL'BASOV, Kirill i Mefody, 2 vols., St. Petersburg, 1868-
1871 (reprint Amsterdam, 1970).
BIRKELAND, Language: H. BIRKELAND, The Language of Jesus (= Avhandlinger
utgitt av det Norske Videnskaps-Akademi i Oslo. Historisk-filosofisk
Klasse, 1954, pt. I), Oslo, 1954.
BISCHOFF, Element: B. BISCHOFF, Das griechische Element in der abendliin-
dischen Bildung des Mittelalters, in Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 44 (1951),
pp. 27-55.
BISCHOFF, Verbreitung: B. BISCHOFF, Die europiiische Verbreitung der Werke
Isidors von Sevilla, in Isidoriana. Colecci6n de estudios sobre Isidoro de
Sevilla publicados con occasion del XIV centenario de su nacimiento, ed.
M. DfAz Y DfAz, Le6n, 1961,,pp. 317-344.
 TRILINGUIS M 109

BISCHOFF, Wendepunkte: B. BISCHOFF, Wendepunkte in der Geschichte der la-

teinischen Exegese im Frühmittelalter, in Sacris erudiri, 6 (1954), pp. 189-
281.
BLACK, Approach: M. BLACK, An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and Acts,
Oxford, 19542.
BOBCHEV, Pravo: S. BoBCHEV, Cherkovno pravo. Sâkraten kurs iz lektsiite po
cherkovno pravo cheteni na Yuridicheskiya fakultet (= Universitetsk a
biblioteka, 70), Sofia, 1927.
BoN, Péloponnèse: A. BoN, Le Péloponnèse byzantin jusqu'en 1204 (= Biblio-
thèque byzantine. Série Études, 1), Paris, 1951.
BoRST, Turmbau: A. BORST, Der Turmbau von Babel. Geschichte der Mei-
nungen über Ursprung und Vielfalt der Sprachen und Volker, 4 vols. in 6,
Stuttgart, 1957-1963.
BosHKOSKI, Kiril: B. BosHKOSKI, Sveti Kiril - misioner i zashtitnik na sloven-
skata pismenost, in Simpozium 1100-godishnina od smrtta na Kiril Solunski,
I, ed. Kh. POLENAKOVIK, Skopje, 1970,pp. 65-73.
BozILov, Idéologie: 1. BoZILOV, L'idéologie politique du tsar Syméon: Pax Sy-
meonica, in Byzantinobulgarica, 8 (1986), pp. 73-88.
BRAUNFELS, Karl: Karl der Grosse. Lebenswerk und Nachwirkung, 4 vols., ed.
W. BRAUNFELS, Düsseldorf, 1965-1967.
BRINKTRINE, Papstmesse: J. BRINKTRINE, Die feierliche Papstmesse und die
Zeremonien bei Selig- und H eiligsprechungen, Freiburg im Br., 1925.
BROU, Chants: L. BROU, Les chants en langue grecque dans les liturgies la-
tines, in Sacris erudiri, 1 (1948), pp. 165-180; 4 (1952), pp. 226-238.
BROU, Études: L. BROU, Études sur la liturgie mozarabe. Le Trisagion de la
messe d'après les sources manuscrites, in Ephemerides liturgicae, 61
(1947), pp. 309-334.
BRUNHôLZL, Geschichte: F. BRUNHÔLZL, Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur
des Mittelalters, 2 vols., Munich, 1975-1990.

CASPARI, Quel/en: C. CASPARI, Ungedruckte, unbeachtete und wenig beachtete

Quel/en zur Geschichte des Taufsymbols und der Glaubensregel, 3 vols.,
Christiana, 1866-1875.
CHEVALLIER, Dionysiaca: P. CHEVALLIER, Dionysiaca. Recueil donnant /'en-
semble des traductions latines des ouvrages attribués au Denys de /'Aréo-
page ... , 2 vols., Bruges, 1937-1950.

DALMAN, Grammatik: G. DALMAN, Grammatik des jüdisch-paliistinischen Ara-

miiisch nach den Idiomen des paliistinischen Talmud, des Onkeltargum und
Prophetentargum und der jerusalemischen Targume, Leipzig, 1905 2.
DARROUZÈS, Mémoire: J. DARROUZÈS, Le mémoire de Constantin Stilbès contre
les Latins, in Revue des études byzantines, 21 (1963), pp. 50-1 OO.
DA VIES, History: The Cambridge History of Judaism, ed. W. DA VIES and L.
FINKELSTEIN, 2 vols., Cambridge, 1984-1989.
110 F. THOMSON

DE Buc, Œuvre: J. DE Buc, L'œuvre exégétique de Walafrid Strabon et la

Glossa ordinaria, in Recherches de théologie ancienne et médiévale, 16
(1949), pp. 5-28.
DE BooR, Literatur: H. DE BooR, Die deutsche Literatur von Karl dem Gross en
bis zum Beginn der hofischen Dichtung, 770-1170, ed. H. KoLB (=Ge-
schichte der deutschen Literatur von den Anfiingen bis zur Gegenwart, 1),
Munich, 19799.
DE CLERCQ, Législation: C. DE CLERCQ, La législation religieuse franque de
Clovis à Charlemagne. Étude sur les Actes de conciles et les capitulaires,
les statuts diocésains et les règles monastiques (507-814)(= Recueil de tra-
vaux publiés par les membres des conférences d'histoire et de philologie,
Série II, 38), Louvain, 1936.
DE LUBAC, Exégèse: H. DE LUBAC, Exégèse médiévale. Les quatre sens de
/'Écriture, 2 vols. in 4 (=Théologie. Études publiées sous la dir. de la Fac.
de théologie s.j. de Lyon-Fourvière, 41/1-2, 42, 59), Paris, 1959-1964.
DITTRICH, Christianity: Z.DITTRICH, Christianity in Great-Moravia(= Bij-
dragen van het Instituut voor Middeleeuwse Geschiedenis der Rijksuniver-
siteit te Utrecht, 33), Groningen, 1962.
DUMMER, B egegnung: J. DUMMER, Die Begegnung mit den Nachbarvolkern als
Sprachenproblem in byzantinischer Sicht, in Byzanz in der europaïschen
Staatenwelt, ed. J. DUMMER and J. lRMSCHER, Berlin, 1983, pp. 224-229.
DüMMLER, Legende: E. DOMMLER, Die pannonische Legende vom heiligen Me-
thodius, in Archiv für Kunde osterreichischer Geschichts-Quellen, 13
(1854), pp. 147-199.
DUYCHEV, Bibliografiya: 1. DUYCHEV, A. KIRMAGOVA and A. PAUNOVA, Kirilo-
metodievska bibliografiya, 1940-1980, Sofia, 1983.
DUYCHEV, Episodio: 1. DUJCEV [= DUYCHEV], Un episodio dell'attività di Cos-
tantino Filosofo in Moravia, in Ricerche slavistiche, 2 (19541), pp. 90-96
[In., Medioevo, 2 (19682), pp.113-121].
DUYCHEV, Medioevo: 1. DUJCEV [= DUYCHEV], Medioevo bizantino-slavo, 3
vols.(= Storia e letteratura, 102, 113, 119), Rome, 1965-1971.
DUYCHEV, Note: 1. DUJCEV [= DUYCHEV], Note sulla Vita Constantini-Cyrilli,
in Slavistische Forschungen, 6 (1964 1), pp.72-84 [In., Medioevo, II (19682),
pp. 77-90].
DUYCHEV, Problema: 1. DUJCEV [= DUYCHEV], Il problema delle lingue nazio-
nale nel Medio Evo e gli Slavi, in Ricerche slavistiche, 8 (19601), pp. 39-60
[In., Medioevo, 2 (19682), pp. 43-68].
DUYCHEV, Vâprosât: I. DUYCHEV, Vâprosât za vizantiysko-slavyanskite otno-
sheniya i vizantiyskite opiti za sâzdavane na slavyanska azbuka prez
pârvata polovina na IX vek, in Izvestiya na Instituta za bâlgarska istoriya, 7
(1957), pp. 241-265.
DVORNIK, Légendes: F. DvoRNIK, Les Légendes de Constantin et de Méthode
vues de Byzance(= Byzantinoslavica. Supplementa, I), Prague, 1933.
DvoRNIK, Missions: F. DVORNIK, Byzantine Missions among the Slavs. SS.
Constantine-Cyril and Methodius, New Brunswick, 1970.
 TRILINGU ISM 111

ELLINGWORTH, Hebrew: P. ELLINGWORTH, Hebrew or Aramaic, in The Bible

Translator, 37 (1986), pp. 338-341.
ENGELHARDT, Mission: 1. ENGELHARDT, Mission und Politik in Byzanz. Ein
Beitrag zur Strukturanalyse byzantinischer Mission zur Zeit Justins und
Justinians (= Miscellanea Byzantina Monacensia, 19), Munich, 1974.

FLECKENSTEIN, Bildungsre form: J. FLECKENSTEIN, Die Bildungsref orm Karts

des Grossen als Verwirklichung der Norma rectitudinis, Bigge, 1953.
FLUSIN, Arabe: B. FLUSIN, De l'arabe au grec, puis au géorgien: une Vie de
saint Jean Damascène, in Traduction et traducteurs au Moyen Âge. Actes
du colloque internationa l du CNRS organisé à Paris, Institut de Recherche
et d'Histoire des Textes, les 26-28 mai 1986. Ed. G. CONTAMINE(= Docu-
ments, études, répertoires publiés par l'Institut de Recherche et d'Histoire
des Textes), Paris, 1989, pp. 51-61.
FOLEY, St.-Denis: E. FoLEY, St.-Denis Revisited: the Liturgical Evidence, in
Revue bénédictine, 100 (1990), pp. 532-549.
FOLEY, Ordinary: E. FoLEY, The First Ordinary of the Royal Abbey of St.-
Denis in France (Paris, Bibliothèque Mazarine 526) (= Spicilegium Fribur-
gense, 32), Fribourg, 1990.
FONTAINE, Isidore: J. FONTAINE, Isidore de Séville et la culture classique dans
l'Espagne wisigothique, 1vol.in3 pts., Paris, 1983 2.
FONTAINE, Pluralité: J. FONTAINE, De la pluralité à l'unité dans le "latin caro-
lingien"?, in Settimane di studio del Centro italiano di studi su/l'alto me-
dioevo, 37 (1981), pp. 765-805.

GAMBER, Ordo: K. GAMBER, Ordo antiquus Gallicanus. Der gallikanische

Messritus des 6. Jahrhunderts (= Textus patristici et liturgici, 3), Regens-
burg, 1965.
GEANAKOPLOS, Interaction : D. GEANAKOPLOS, Interaction of the "Sibling"
Byzantine and Western Cultures in the Middle Ages and Italian Renais-
sance (330-I600), New Haven, 1976.
GEUENICH, Überlieferu ng: D. GEUENICH, Die volkssprachige Überlieferung
der Karolinger zeit aus der Sicht des Historikers, in Deutsches Archiv für
Erforschung des Mittelalters, 39 (1983), pp. 104-130.
GIAMBELLUCA-KOSSOYA, Chernorizets: A. DZHAMBELUKA-KOSSOYA [= GIAM-
BELLUCA-KOSSOYA], Chernorizets Khrabâr. 0 pismenekh', Sofia, 1980.
GOLDBLATT, Question: H. GOLDBLATT, The Church Slavonie Language
Question in the 14th and 15th Centuries: Constantine Kosteneeki's Ska-
zanie iz'ijavljénno 6 pismenex, in P1ccmo, Aspects, 1, pp. 67-98. ,
GoLUBINSKY, Istoriya: Ye. GOLUBINSKY, Istoriya russkoy tserkvi, 2 vols. in 4
pts. (= Chteniya v lmperatorskom Obshchestve istorii i drevnostey rossiy-
skikh, 198 [= I,l), 209-210[=1 ,2], 192[=11,l], 249 [= II,2]), Moscow, 1901-
19162-1.
112 F. THOMSON

GORSKY, Znacheniye: V. S. GORSKY, Mirovozzrenches koye znacheniye de la

Kirilla i Mefodiya v kul'ture Kiyevskoy Rusi, in Kirilo-Metodievski studii,
4 (1987), pp. 404-411.
GRIVEC, Constantinus: F. GRIVEC and F. ToMsrc, Constantinus et Methodius
Thessalonicenses. Fontes(= Radovi Staroslavenskog instituta, 4), Agram,
1960.
GRIVEC, Konstantin: F. GRIVEC, Konstantin und Method, Lehrer der Slaven,
Wiesbaden, 1960.
GROSSMANN, Studien: U. GROSSMANN, Studien zur Zahlensymbolik des Früh-
Mittelalters, in Zeitschriftfür katholische Theologie, 76 (1954), pp. 19-54.
GRUNDMANN, Bibliographie: H. GRUNDMANN, Bibliographie zur Ketzerge-
schichte des Mittelalters (1900-1966) (= Sussidi eruditi, 20), Rome, 1967.
GRUNDMANN, Ketzergeschichte: H. GRUNDMANN, Ketzergeschichte des Mittel-
alters (=Die Kirche in ihrer Geschichte. Ein Handbuch, ed. K. SCHMIDT
and E. WOLF, vol. Il, fasc. G), Gôttingen, 1963.
GUÉRANGER, Institutions: P. GUÉRANGER, Institutions liturgiques, 4 vols., Paris,
1878-18853.

HARTMANN, Synoden: W. HARTMANN, Die Synoden der Karolingerzeit im Fran-

kenreich und in Italien(= Konzilien-geschichte, Reihe A. Darstellungen),
Paderborn, 1989.
HAUPRICH, Einfluss: W. HAUPRICH, Der Einfluss des Christentumes auf den
franzosischen Wortschatz (nachgewiesen an den Wortern der Kirche),
Neuried, 1930.
HEFELE, Histoire: C. VON HEFELE, Histoire des conciles d'après les documents
originaux, ed. H. LECLERCQ, 11vols.in21 pts., Paris, 1907-1952.
HELLGARDT, Problem: E. HELLGARDT, Zum Problem symbolbestimmte r und
formaliisthetischer Zahlenkomposition in mittelalterlicher Literatur. Mit
Studien zum Quadrivium und zur Vorgeschichte des mittelalterlichen
Zahlendenkens (= Münchener Texte und Untersuchungen zur deutschen
Literatur des Mittelalters, 45), Munich, 1973.
HENZEN, Schriftsprache: W. HENZEN, Schriftsprache und Mundarten. Ein
Überblick über ihr Verhiiltnis und ihre Zwischenstufen im Deutschen (=Bi-
bliotheca Germanica, 5), Bern, 19542.
HERGENRÔTHER, Monumenta: J. HERGENROETHER (sic), Monumenta graeca ad
Photium ejusque historiam pertinentia, Regensburg, 1869.
HERGENRÔTHER, Photius: J. HERGENRÔTHER, Photius, Patriarch von Konstanti-
nopel. Sein Leben, seine Schriften und das griechische Schisma. Nach
handschriftlichen und gedruckten Quellen, 3 vols., Regensburg, 1867-1869.
HrLLGARTH, Spain: J. HILLGARTH, Visigothic Spain and Early Christian Ire land,
in Proceedings of the Royallrish Academy, 62, C (1962), pp. 167-194.
HosPERS, Bibliography: A Basic Bibliography for the Study of the Semitic
Languages, ed. J. HosPERS, 2 vols., Leiden, 1973-1974.
HuGLO, Chants: M. HUGLO, Les Chants de la Missa graeca de Saint-Denis, in
Essays Presented to Egon Wellesz, ed. J. WESTRUP, Oxford, 1966, pp. 74-83.
 TRILINGUISM 113

RUSSEY, Church: J. RUSSEY, The Orthodox Church in the Byzantine Empire

(=Oxford History of the Christian Church), Oxford, 1986.

IL'INSKY, Opyt: G. IL'INSKY, Opyt sistematicheskoy Kirillo-Mefod'yevskoy bi-

bliografii, ed. M. POPRUZHENKO and S. ROMANSKI, Sofia, 1934.

JAmé, Review: V. JAmé, Review of Tunitsky, Kliment, in Archiv für slavische

Philologie, 35 (1914), pp. 577-585.
JANIN, Églises: R. JANIN, Les églises et les monastères des grands centres
byzantins. (Bithynie, Hellespont, Latros, Galèsios, Trébizonde, Athènes,
Thessalonique) (=La géographie ecclésiastique de l'Empire byzantin, 2),
Paris, 1975.
JANIN, Siège: R. JANIN, Le siège de Constantinople et le patriarcat œcumé-
nique. Les églises et les monastères (=La géographie ecclésiastique de
l'Empire byzantin, 3), Paris, 19692.
JUGIE, Schisme: M. JUGIE, Le schisme byzantin. Aperçu historique et doctri-
nal, Paris, 1941.

KACZYNSKI, Greek: B. KACZYNSKI, Greek in the Carolingian Age. The St. Gall
Manuscripts (= Speculum Anniversary Monographs, 13), Cambridge
(Mass.), 1988.
KACZYNSKI, Learning: B. KACZYNSKI, Greek Learning in the Mediaeval West:
A Study of St. Gall, 816-1022, Yale doctoral dissertation, 1975.
KAHL, Papst: R. KAHL, Papst Gregor der Grosse und die christliche Termino-
logie der Angelsachsen, in Zeitschrift für Missionswissenschaft und Reli-
gionswissenschaft, 40 (1956), pp. 93-111, 190-200.
KALAYDOVICH, Pamyatniki: K. KALAYDOVICH, Pamyatniki rossiyskoy sloves-
nosti XII veka, izdanyye s ob'yasneniyem, variantami i obraztsami po-
cherkov, Moscow, 1821.
KARABINOV, Triod': I. KARABINOV, Postnaya triod'. /storichesky obzor yeye
plana, sostava, redaktsiy i slavyanskikh perevodov, St. Petersburg, 1910.
KING, Rites: A. KING, The Rites of Eastern Christendom, 2 vols., Rome, 1947-
1948.
KIRILLIN, Simvolika: V. KIRILLIN, Simvolika chisel v drevnerusskikh skaza-
niyakh XVI v., in Yestestvennonauchnyye predstavleniya Drevney Rusi.
Schisleniye let. Simvolika chisel. "Otrechennye" knigi. Astrologiya. Mi-
neralogiya, ed. R. SIMONOV, Moscow, 1988, pp. 76-111.
KLOPSCH, Bildungsreform: P. KLOPSCH, Die karolingische Bildungsreform im
Bodenseeraum, in MASSER, Geistesleben, pp. 65-85.
KOROLEVSKY, Languages: c. KOROLEVSKY, Living Languages in Catholic Wor-
ship. An Historical lnquiry, London, 1957.
KRETSCHMAR, Drei-Sprachen-Haresie: G. KRETSCHMAR, Zur Drei-Sprachen-
Haresie, in Mezhdunaroden simpozium 1100 godini ot blazhenata konchina
na SV. Metodiy, ed. N. KOCHEV, I, Sofia, 1989, pp. 171-181.
114 F.THOMSON

KUEV, Bortsi: K. KUEV, Bortsi sreshtu triezichnata eres, in Kirilo-Metodievski

stranitsi, ed; P. DINEKOV, Sofia, 1983, pp. 153-156.
KuEv, Chernorizets: K. KUEV, Chernorizets Khrabâr, Sofia, 1967.
KUEV, Eres: K. KUEV, Triezichnata eres i deloto na Kiril i Metodiy nafona na
srednovekovieto, in Konstantin-Kiril filosof. Materiali ot nauchnite kon-
ferentsii po sluchay 1150-godishninata ot rozhdenieto mu, ed. E. GEORGIEV
et al., Sofia, 1981, pp. 85-94.
KuEv, Geschichte: K. Kurnw [= KuEv], Zur Geschichte der "Dreisprachen-
doktrin", inByzantinobulgarica, 2 (1966), pp. 53-65.
KUEV, /storiya: K. KUEV, lstoriya na triezichnata doktrina i borbata na Kiril i
Metodiy sreshtu neya, in Pârvi mezhdunaroden kongres po bâlgaristika.
Sofiya 23 may-3 yuni 1981. Simpozium. Kirilo-Metodievistika i starobâl-
garistika, Sofia, 1982, pp. 28-39.
KULCSA.R, Eretnekmozgalmak: Z. KULCSAR, Eretnekmozgalmak a Xl-XlV. sza-
zadban, Budapest, 1964.
KUTSCHER, History: E. KUTSCHER, A History of the Hebrew Language, Leiden,
1982.

LATYSHEV, Mefodiya: V. LATYSHEV, Mefodiya patriarkha konstantinopol'skogo

zhitiye prep. Feofana ispovednika po moskovskoy rukopisi No.159, in Za-
piski Rossiyskoy Akademii nauk po istoriko-filologicheskomu otdeleniyu,
XIII, 4 (1918), pp. I-XL,1-120.
LATYSHEV, Menologii: V. LATYSHEV, Menologii anonymi byzantini saeculi X
quae supersunt, 2 vols., St. Petersburg, 1911-1912.
LAWSON, lsidori: C. LAWSON, Sancti lsidori episcopi Hispalensis De eccle-
siasticis officiis (= Corpus Christianorum. Series Latina, 113), Turnhout,
1989.
LECHNER, H ellenen: K. LECHNER, H ellenen und B arbaren im W eltbild der By-
zantiner, die alten Bezeichnungen als Ausdruck eines neuen Bewusstseins,
Munich, 1954.
LE CLERC, Guillaume: V. LE CLERC, Guillaume Duranti, évêque de Mende,
surnommé le Spéculateur, in Histoire littéraire de la France, XX, Paris,
1842, pp. 411-497.
LECLERCQ, Messe: H. LECLERCQ, Messe, in Dictionnaire d'archéologi-e chré-
tienne et de liturgie, XI/l, Paris, 1933, coll. 513-744.
LECLERCQ, Paris: H. LECLERCQ, Paris, in Dictionnaire d'archéologie chré-
tienne et de liturgie, XI/2, Paris, 1938, coll. 1696-1959.
LENTNER, Volkssprache: L. LENTNER, Volkssprache und Sakralsprache. Ge-
schichte einer Lebensfrage bis zum Ende des Konzils von Trient(= Wiener
Beitriige zur Theologie, 5), Vienna, 1964.
LOHSE, Texte: E. LOHSE, Die Texte aus Qumran. Hebriiisch und Deutsch. Mit
masoretischer Punktation, Übersetzung, Einführung und Anmerkungen,
Darmstadt, 197!2.
LOT, Époque: F. LOT, A quelle époque a-t-on cessé de parler latin?, in Archi-
vum latinitatis medii aevi. Bulletin Du Cange, 6 (1931), pp. 97-159.
 TRILINGUISM 115

LôWE, Deutschland: H. LôWE, Deutschland im friinkischen Reich, in B. GEB-

HARDT, Handbuch der deutschen Geschichte, 1, ed. H. GRUNDMANN,
Stuttgart, 19709, pp. 90-215.

MAKARY, Jstoriya: MAKARY [BULGAKOV], lstoriya russkoy tserkvi, 12 vols.,

St.Petersburg, 1877-189l3-1.
MALYSHEVSKY, Kirill: I. MALYSHEVSKY, Svyatyye Kirill i Mefody, in Trudy
Kiyevskoy dukhovnoy akademii, 2 (1885), pp. 84-121, 149-208, 380-419,
526-581; 3 (1885), pp. 49-105, 275-310, 424-469.
MANGO, Churches: C. MANGO and I. SEVCENKO, Some Churches and Mo-
nasteries on the Southern Shore of the Sea of Marmara, in Dumbarton Oaks
Papers, 27 (1973), pp. 235-277.
MANTHEY, Sprachphilosophie: F. MANTHEY, Die Sprachphilosophie des hei-
ligen Thomas von Aquin und ihre Anwendung auf Probleme der Theologie,
Paderborn, 1937.
MARTÈNE, Thesaurus: E. MARTÈNE and U. DURAND, Thesaurus novus anecdo-
torum, 5 vols., Paris, 1717.
MASSER, Aufgaben: A. MASSER, Aufgaben und Leistung der frühen volksspra-
chigen Literatur, in MASSER, Geistesleben, pp. 87-106.
MASSER, Geistesleben: Geistesleben um den Bodensee imfrühen Mittelalter,
ed. A. MASSER and A. WOLF(= Literatur und Geschichte am Oberrhein, 2),
Freiburg im Br., 1989.
MATHIESEN, Question: R. MATHIESEN, The Church Slavonie Language
Question: An Overview (IX-XX Centuries), in P1ccllm, Aspects, 1, pp. 45-65.
McNALL Y, Linguae: R.McNALL Y, The "Tres linguae sacrae" in Early Irish
Biblical Exegesis, in Theological Studies, 19 (1958), pp. 395-403.
METZGER, Commentary: B. METZGER, A Textual Commentary on the Greek
New Testament, London, 1971.
MEYER, Lexikon: H. MEYER and R. SUNTRUP, Lexikon der mittelalterlichen
Zahlenbedeutungen (= Münstersche Mittelalter-Schriften, 61), Münster,
1987.
MEYER, Zahlenallegorese: H. MEYER, Die Zahlenallegorese im Mittelalter.
Methode und Gebrauch (= Münstersche Mittelalter-Schriften, 25),
Münster, 1975.
MEYERS, Latin: J. MEYERS, Le latin carolingien: mort ou renaissance d'une
langue?, in Le Moyen Age, 96 (1990), pp. 395-410.
MoHRMANN, Études: C. MoHRMANN, Études sur le latin des chrétiens, 4 vols.
(= Storia e letteratura, 65, 87, 103, 143), Rome, 1958-1977.
MoHRMANN, Language: C. MoHRMANN, The Ever-Recurring Problem of Lan-
guage in the Church, in MOHRMANN, Études, IV (1977), pp. 143-159.
MosIN, Heretici: V. MosIN, Heretici trojezicnici u staroslovenskom prijevodu
Trioda, in Slovo, 22 (1972), pp. 117-125.
Mussrns, Greek: G. Mussrns, Greek in Palestine and the Diaspora, in SAFRAI,
People, II (1976), pp. 1040-1064.
116 P. THOMSON

NAEGLE, Kirchengeschichte: A. NAEGLE, Kirchengeschichte Biihmens quellen-

miissig und kritisch dargestellt, vol. 1. in 2 pts. (all published), Vienna,
1915-1918.
NEBBIAI-DALLA GUARDA, Bibliothèque: D. NEBBIAI-DALLA GUARDA, La Biblio-
thèque de l'abbaye de Saint-Denis en France. Du IXe au xv1ue siècle (=Do-
cuments, études et répertoires publiés par l'Institut de Recherche et
d'Histoire des Textes), Paris, 1985.
NIKL, Anteil: G. NIKL, Der Anteil des Volkes an der Messliturgie im Franken-
reiche von Chlodwig bis auf Karl den Grossen (= Forschungen zur Ge-
schichte des innerkirchlichen Lebens, 2), Innsbruck, 1930.

OBOLENSKY, Commonwealth: D. ÜBOLENSKY, The Byzantine Commonwealth.

Eastern Europe 500-1453 (= History of Civilisation), London, 1971.
ÜBOLENSKY, Cyrille: D. OBOLENSKY, Cyrille et Méthode et la christianisation
des Slaves, in Settimane di studio del Centro italiano di studi su/l'alto me-
dioevo, 14 (1967), pp. 587-609.
ÜGIYENKO, Yeres': 1. ÜGIYENKO, Tryyazychna yeres' za chasiv Kostyantyna y
Mefodiya, in Dukhovny siyach (1927), 27, pp. 9-11; 29-30, pp. 5-18; 31-32,
pp. 10-19;33,pp.5-12;34, pp.8-15;35,pp.5-10.
OMONT, Manuscrit: H. OMONT, Manuscrit des œuvres de saint Denis l'Aréo-
pagite envoyé de Constantinople à Louis le Débonnaire en 827, in Revue
des études grecques, 17 (1904 ), pp. 230-236.
OMONT, Messe: H. OMONT, La Messe grecque de saint Denys au moyen âge, in
Études d'histoire du moyen âge dédiées à Gabriel Monod, ed. E. LAVISSE,
Paris, 1896,pp. 177-185.
OSTROGORSKY, Background: G. ÜSTROGORSKY, The Byzantine Background of
the Moravian Mission, in Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 19 (1965), pp. 3-18.
OsTROGORSKY, Staatenhierarchie: G. OsTROGORSKY, Die byzantinische Staaten-
hierarchie, in Seminarium Kondakovianum, 7 (1936), pp. 41-61.

PASSICOS, Code: Code de droit canonique, ed. J. PASSICOS, Paris, 1984.

PEETERS, Hilarion: P. PEETERS, S. Hilarion d'lbérie, in Analecta Bollandiana,
32 (1913), pp. 236-269.
PEETERS, Orient: P. PEETERS, Orient et Byzance. Le tréfonds oriental de l'ha-
giographie byzantine(= Subsidia hagiographica, 26). Brussels, 1950.
PETKANOVA, Chislata: D. PETKANOVA, Chislata V prostrannoto zhitie na Kiril,
in Studia slavica mediaevalia et humanistica Riccardo Picchio dicata, 1
vol. in 2 pts., ed. M. CoLLUCCI et al., Rome, 1986, pt. Il, pp. 563-576.
PETKANOVA, Znachenieto: D. PETKANOVA, Znachenieto na chislata'v starobâl-
garskata literatura, in Starobâlgarska literatura, 13 (1983), pp. 12-28.
P1ccmo, Aspects: Aspects of the Slavic Language Question, ed. R. P1ccmo and
H. GOLDBLATT, 2 vols.(= Yale Russian and East European Publications,
4/a-b), New Haven, 1984.
P1ccmo, Guidelines: R. PICCHIO, Guidelines for a Comparative Study of the
Language Question among the Slavs, in P1ccmo, Aspects, 1, pp. 1-42.
 TRILINGUISM 117

P1ccmo, Myastoto: R. PICCHIO, Myastoto na starata bâlgarska literatura v kul-

turata na srednovekovna Evropa, in Pârvi mezhdunaroden kongres po
bâlgaristika Sofiya. 23 may-3 yuni 1981. Plenarni dokladi, Sofia, 1982, pp.
110-160.
P1ccmo, Questione: R. P1ccmo, Questione della Zingua e Slavia cirillometo-
diana, in Studi sulla questione della Zingua presso gli slavi, ed. R. P1ccmo,
Rome, 1972, pp. 7-120.
PoDSKALSKY, Sicht: G. PODSKALSKY, Die Sicht der Barbarenvolker in der spiit-
griechischen Patristik (4.-8. Jahrh.). Zum 1100-jiihrigen Todestag des hl.
Methodius, in Orientalia christiana periodica, 51 (1985), pp. 330-351.
PODSKALSKY, Theologie: G. PODSKALSKY, Griechische Theo/ogie in der Zeit
der Türkenherrschaft (1453-1821 ), Munich, 1988.
PODSKALSKY, Verhiiltnis: G. PoDSKALSKY, Das Verhiiltnis von Griechen und
Bulgaren. Nach einem Brie/ des Patriarchen Jeremias 1. (1541) an das
Athoskloster Kutlumus, in Byzantinoslavica, 29 (1978), pp. 29-43.
POL!KARPOV, D ictionarium: F. POLIKARPOV, Dictionarium trilingue. hoc est
Dictionum Slavonicarum Grecarum & Latinarum thesaurus. Ex varijs anti-
quis ac recentioribus libris collectus et iuxta Slavonicum alphabetum in
ordinem dispositus, Moscow, 1704. Reprint ed. H. KEIPERT (= Specimina
philologiae slavicae, 79), Munich, 1988.
PONERT, Deutsch: D. PoNERT, Deutsch und Latein in deutscher Literatur und
Geschichtsschreibung des Mittelalters (= Studien zur Poetik und Ge-
schichte der Literatur, 43), Stuttgart, 1975.
PONOMAREV, Vopros: A. PONOMAREV, Vopros 0 yazyke V dele SV. Kirilla i Me-
fodiya, in Strannik, 3/5 (1885), pp. 158-163.
POPOV, Obzor: A. PoPOV, /storiko-literaturny obzor drevne-russkikh polemi-
cheskikh sochineniy protiv Latinyan (Xl-XVv.), Moscow, 1875.
POPOV, Proizvedeniya: G. Popov, Triodni proizvedeniya na Konstantin Pres-
lavski (= Kirilo-Metodievski studii, 2), Sofia, 1985.
POPOV, Spomenavane: G. Popov, Za edno spomenavane na triezichnitsi v Bi-
tolskiya triod, in Starobâlgarska literatura, 3 (1978), pp. 86-90.
POPRUZHENKO, Bibliografiya: M. POPRUZHENKO and S. ROMANSKI, Kirilome-
todievska bibliografiya za 1934-1940 god, Sofia, 1942.
POTKANSKI, Konstantyn: K. POTKANSKI, Konstantyn i Metodyusz, Cracow, 1905.
PRALLE, Gebrauch: L. PRALLE, Der Gebrauch griechischer Texte in der ro-
mischen Liturgie. Nach Mitteilungen von Liturgikern des 16. Jahrhunderts,
in Theologische Quartalschrift, 128 (1948), pp. 385-397.
PRITZ, Christianity: R. PRITZ, Nazarene Jewish Christianity. From the End of
the New Testament Period until lts Disappearance in the Fourth Century
(=Studia Post-Biblica, 37), Leiden, 1988.

QUASTEN, Expositio: J. QuASTEN, Expositio antiquae liturgiae Gallicanae Ger-

mano Parisiensi ascripta (= Opuscula et textus historiam ecclesiae eiusque
vitam atque doctrinam illustrantia. Series liturgica, 3), Münster, 1934.
118 F.THOMSON

QUASTEN, Influence: 1. QUASTEN, Oriental Influence in the Gallican Liturgy, in

Traditio, 1 (1943), pp. 55-78.

RABIN, Hebrew: C. RABIN, Hebrew and Aramaic in the First Century, in

SAFRAI, People, II (1976), pp. 1007-1039.
RACK!, Viek: F. RACK!, Viek i djelovanje sv. Cyrilla i Methoda slovjenskih apo-
stolov, 1vol.in2 pts., Agram, 1857-1859.
RAMSHAW-SCHMIDT, Christ: G. RAMSHAW-SCHMIDT, Christ in Sacred Speech.
The M eaning of Liturgical Language, Philadelphia, 1986.
RATCLIFF, Expositio: E. RATCLIFF, Expositio antiquae liturgiae gallicanae
(=Henry Bradshaw Society, 98), London, 1965 (published 1971).
RESNICK, Lingua: 1. RESNICK, Lingua Dei, Zingua hominis: Sacred Languages
and Medieval Texts, in Viator, 21 (1990), pp. 51-74.
RICHTER, Sprachenpolitik: M. RICHTER, Die Sprachenpolitik Karls des Grossen,
in Sprachwissenschaft, 7 (1982), pp. 412-432.
RosENSTOCK-HUESSY, Frankreich: E. ROSENSTOCK-HUESSY, Frankreich-
Deutschland. Mythos oder Anrede, Berlin, 1957.
RüGER, Aramiiisch: H. RüGER, Aramiiisch Il. lm Neuen Testament, in Theo-
logische Realenzyklopiidie, ID, Berlin, 1978, pp. 602-610.

SAFRAI, People: The Jewish People in the First Century. Historical Geo-
graphy, Political History, Social, Cultural and Religious Life and Insti-
tutions, ed. S. SAFRAI and M. STERN, 2 vols. (= Compendia Rerum ludai-
carum ad Novum Testamentum, I/1-2), Assen, 1974-1976.
SALA VILLE, Introduction: S. SALA VILLE, An Introduction to the Study of Eastern
Liturgies, ed. 1. BARTON, London, 1938.
SCHNEEMELCHER, Problem: W. SCHNEEMELCHER, Das Problem der Sprache in
der Alten Kirche, in Das Problem der Sprache in Theologie und Kirche.
Referate vom Deutschen Evangelischen Theologentag 27 .-31. Mai 1958 in
Berlin, ed. W. SCHNEEMELCHER, Berlin, 1959, pp. 55-67.
SCHÜRER, History: E. ScHüRER, History of the Jewish People in the Age of
Jesus Christ (175 B.C.-A.D. 135), ed. M. BLACK, 3 vols., in 4 pts., Edin-
burgh, 1973-1987.
SCHÜTZ, Lehrer: 1. SCHÜTZ, Die Lehrer der Slawen Kyrill und Method. Die
Lebensbeschreibungen zweier Missionare, St. Ottilien, 1985.
SCHWARZ, Jesus: G. SCHWARZ, "Und Jesus sprach". Untersuchungen zur ara-
miiischen Urgestalt der Worte Jesu (= Beitriige zur Wissenschaft vom
Alten und Neuen Testament, 118), Stuttgart, 19872.
SEVCENKO, Paradoxes: I. SEVCENKO, Three Paradoxes of the Cyrillo-
Methodian Mission, in Slavic Review, 23 (1964), pp. 220-236.
SEVENSTER, Greek: 1. SEVENSTER, Do You Know Greek? How Much Greek
Could the First Jewish Christians Have Known? (= Supplements to Novum
Testamentum, 19), Leiden, 1968.
SIRADZE, Svyazyakh: R. SIRADZE, 0 starobolgarsko-gruzinskikh literaturnykh
svyazyakh, in Palaeobulgarica, 1/2 (1977), pp. 63-73.
 TRILINGUISM 119

SLAVEVA, Eres: L. SLAVEVA, "Triezichnata eres" vo Klimentoviot prevod, in

Glasnik na Institutot za natsionalna istoriya, 17 (1973), pp. 157-167.
SNOPEK, Konstantinus: F. SNOPEK, Konstantinus-Cyrillus und Methodius, die
Slavenapostel. Ein Wort zur Abwehr für die Freunde historischer Wahrheit
(=Opera Academiae Velehradensis, 2), Kremsier, 1911.
SNOPEK, List: F. SNOPEK, List papeie Hadriana II. v pannonské legendé a bulla
Jana VIII. Industriae tuae, in Sbornik Velehradsky, 6 (1877), pp. 1-105.
SNOPEK, Opusculum: F. SNOPEK, Opusculum contra Francos, in Jagié-Fest-
schrift. Zbornik u slavu Vatroslava J agiéa, ed. F. PASTRNEK, Berlin, 1908,
pp. 284-290.
SNOPEK, Slavenapostel: F. SNOPEK, Die Slavenapostel. Kritische Studien, zu-
gleich als Replik gegen meine Rezensenten (= Opera Academiae Velehra-
densis, 5), Kremsier, 1919.
SUNTRUP, Zahlenbedeutung: R. SUNTRUP, Zahlenbedeutung in der mittelalter-
lichen Liturgieallegorese, in Archiv für Liturgiewissenschaft, 26 (1984), pp.
321-346.
SV ANE, Konstantinos: G. SVANE, Konstantinos (Kyrillos) og Methodios Sla-
vernes apostle, Copenhagen, 1969.

TARCHNISVILI, Geschichte: M. TARCHNISVILI and J. ASSFALG, Geschichte der

kirchlichen georgischen Literatur auf Grund des ersten Ban des der geor-
gischen Literaturgeschichte von K. Kekelidze (= Studi e testi, 185), Rome,
1955.
TAYLOR, Phenomenon: J. TAYLOR, The Phenomenon of Early Jewish-Christia-
nity: Reality or Scholarly Invention?, in Vigiliae christianae, 44 (1990), pp.
31.3-334.
THÉRY, Études: G. THÉRY, Études dionysiennes, 2 vols.(= Études de philo-
sophie médiévale, 16 & 19), Paris, 1932-1937.
THOMSON, Sensus: F. THOMSON, Sensus or Proprietas Verborum. Mediaeval
Theories of Translation as Exemplified by Translations from Greek into
Latin and Slavonie, in Symposium Methodianum. Beitrage der Intema-
tionalen Tagung in Regensburg (17. bis 24. April 1985) zum Gedenken an
den 1100 Todestag des hl. Method, ed. K. TROST et al.(= Selecta Slavica,
13), Neuried, 1988, pp. 675-691.
TOMKINS, Conference: The Third World Conference on Faith and Order Held
atLund August 15th to 28th, 1952, ed. O. TOMKINS, London, 1953,
TORREY, Period: C. ToRREY, The Aramaic Period of the Nascent Christian
Church, in Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die
Kunde der iilteren Kirche, 44 (1952), pp. 205-223.
TSONEV, Râkopisi: B. TSONEV, Slavyanski râkopisi v Berlinskata dârzhavna
biblioteka, in Sbornik na Bâlgarskata akademiya na naukite, 31 (1937), pp.
1-79.
TUNITSKY, Kliment: N. TUNITSKY, Svyatoy Kliment, yepiskop slovensky. Y ego
zhizn' i prosvetitel'naya deyatel'nost', Sergiyev Posad, 1913.
120 F. THOMSON

UsENER, Dreiheit: H. USENER, Dreiheit, in Rheinisches Museumfür Philologie,

58 (1903), pp. 1-47, 161-208, 231-362.

VAILLANT, Textes: A. VAILLANT, Textes vieux-slaves, 2 vols.(= Travaux pu-

bliés par l'Institut d'Études Slaves, 8/1-2), Paris, 1968.
VAN DEN"800M,Muttersprache: GREGORIUS VON BREDA[= G. VAN DEN
BooM], Die Muttersprache. Eine missions- und religions-wissenschaft-
liche Studie über die Sprachenfrage in den Missionsgebieten (=Missions-
wissenschaftliche Studien, 7), Münster, 1933.
VAN DER MENSBRUGGE, Expositio: A. VAN DER MENSBRUGGE, Expositio missae
gallicanae est-elle de Saint Germain de Paris (t 576)?, in Messager de
/'Exarchat du Patriarche russe en Europe Occidentale, VIII/32 (1959), pp.
217-249.
VARTOLOMEEV, Konstantin: o. VARTOLOMEEV, Konstantin-Kiril Filosof i uche-
nieto za pravata na choveka, in Vtori mezhdunaroden kongres po bâlga-
ristika. Sofiya, 23 may-3 yuni 1986. Dokladi, XXI, Sofia, 1989, pp. 245-254.
V AVRfNEK, Introduction: V. VA VRfNEK, The Introduction of the Slavonie Li-
turgy and the Byzantine Missionary Policy, in Beitriige zur byzantinischen
Geschichte im 9.-11. Jahrhundert, ed. V. VAVRINEK, Prague, 1978, pp. 255-
281.
VLASTO, Entry: A. VLASTO, The Entry of the Slavs into Christendom. An
1ntroduction to the M edieval His tory of the S lavs, Cambridge, 1970.
VoGEL, Pépin: C. VOGEL, La réforme cultuelle sous Pépin le Bref et sous
Charlemagne (deuxième moitié du vm• siècle et premier quart du 1x•
siècle), in E. PATZELT, Die karolingische Renaissance, Graz, 19652, pp.
173-242.
VOGEL, Réforme: C. VoGEL, La réforme liturgique sous Charlemagne, in
BRAUNFELS, Karl, II (1965), pp. 217-232.
VoRONOV, Istochniki: A. VoRONOV, Glavneyshiye istochniki dlya istorii Svya-
tykh Kirilla i Mefodiya, in Trudy Kiyevskoy dukhovnoy akademii, 4 (1876),
pp. 118-225; 1 (1877), pp. 76-149; 2, pp. 143-202; 3, pp. 435-478; 666-731.
VoRONOV, Voprosu: A. VoRONOV, K voprosu ob istochnikakh dlya istorii svya-
tykh Kirila (sic) i Mefodiya, in Trudy Kiyevskoy dukhovnoy akademii, 1
(1878),pp. 220-245.

WEISS, Greek: R. WEISS, Medieval and Humanist Greek, Padua, 1977.

WEISS, Studio: R.Wmss, Lo studio del greco all'abbazia di San Dionigi duranti
il medioevo, in Rivista di storia della chiesa in Jtalia, 6 (1952), pp. 426-438.
WEITHMANN, Bevolkerung: M. WEITHMANN, Die slavische Bevolkerung auf der
griechischen Halbinsel. Ein Beitrag zur historischen Ethnographie Süd-
osteuropas (= Beitriige zur Kenntnis Südosteuropas und des Nahen Orients,
31), Munich, 1978.
WILcox, Semitisms: M. WILCOX, Semitisms in the New Testament, in Aufstieg
und Niedergang der romi.schen Welt. Geschichte und Kultur Roms im
Spiegel der neueren Forschung, II, 25, 2, Berlin, 1984, pp. 978-1029.
 TRILING UISM 121

WILCOX, Ta).,i8a: M. WILCOX, Tcû..tecx 1couµ(t) in Mk.5 ,41, in LOGlA. Les pa-
roles de Jésus - The Sayings of Jesus. Mémorial Joseph Coppens, ed. J.
DELOBEL (= Bibliothec a ephemerid um theologica rum Lovaniens ium,
59),
Louvain, 1982.
WILMART , Germain: A. WILMART , Germain de Paris. (Lettres attribuées à
saint), in Dictionna ire d'archéologie chrétienn_e et de liturgie, 6/1, Paris,
1924, coll. 1049-1102.
WôLFFLIN -TROLL, Joca: E. WôLFFLIN -TROLL, Joca monachorum. Ein Beitrag
zur mittelalte rlichen Riithsellit eratur, in Monatsbe richte der Koniglich
Preussisc hen Akademie der Wissensch aften zu Berlin. Aus dem Jahre
1872, Berlin, 1873, pp. 106-118.
ZAGIBA, Messe: F. ZAGIBA, Die Messe in griechisch er Sprache, in
Musik in
Geschicht e und Gegenwart. Allgemein e Enzyklopiidie der Musik, ed. F.
BLUME, IX, Kassel, 1961, coll. 158-160.
ZAGIBA, Missionssprache: F. ZAGIBA, Das Slavische als Missionssprache (lin-
gua quarta) und das Altkirchenslavische ais Zingua liturgica im 9.110. Jhdt.
(Eine Einführun g in die Problema tik des Altkirchen slavischen ais Lehr-
und Liturgiesp rache), in Studia palaeoslovenica. Josepho Kurz septuage-
nario dedicatum, ed. B. HAVRANEK, Prague, 1971, pp. 401-414.
ZAGIBA, Slavische : F. ZAGIBA, Das Slavische ais Missionssprache.
Die sog.
"Zingua-quarta" -Praxis der bayerisch en Mission, in Die Welt der Slaven,
12 (1967), pp. 1-18.
122 F. THOMSON

Sommaire.

Les SS. Cyrille et Méthode et une prétendue hérésie occidentale: le "Tri-

linguisme". Contribution à l'étude des théories patristiques et médiévales
concernant les langues sacrées.
Dans la littérature consacrée aux recherches cyrillo-méthodiennes, on
admet communément comme un axiome que le "trilinguisme" décrit dans les
Vies de Cyrille et Méthode - c'est-à-dire la doctrine selon laquelle les célé-
brations liturgiques ne peuvent être célébrées qu'en hébreu, en grec et en latin
- aurait été formulé au 4• s. par S. Hilaire de Poitiers, aurait ensuite été déve-
loppé et approfondi par S. Isidore de Séville au 7e s., et aurait régné dans
l'Église d'Occident pendant tout le Moyen-Âge. En fait, aucun théologien
occidental n'a jamais défendu pareille théorie, et tous les passages cités dans
la littérature scientifique à l'appui de cette théorie sont tirés de leur contexte
et se rapportent en réalité à l'emploi des trois langues dans le seul rite latin.
Une étude attentive des Vies des SS. Cyrille et Méthode montre que les
principales objections de l'Occident portaient non sur l'emploi du slavon, mais
sur l'invention d'un nouvel alphabet par S. Cyrille.

CBRTbie KnpnJI n MecjJo,1;nR n MHc/JH'/eCKaR Jana,1;HaR epecb « rpn-

RJbI'lHe». BKJia,4 B HJy'leHne narpncTH'leCKHX H cpe,1;HeBeKOBbIX reopniî 0
CBRU<eHHbIX R3bIKax.

B HayKe nocBRU\eHHO.l'! K1-1p11JJJJO Me<1>0.a1-1escKo.l1 npooJJeMaTHKe cTaJio

aKc.HoMo.l'!, 4TO «TpHR3bI4He», 01111cattHoe s )l(lfTHRX KttpHJIJia H Mecpo,aHR,
TO eCTb y4eHHe cor JiaCHO KOTOpOMY oorocJiy)l(eHHe .aonycKaeTC51 TOJ!bKO
Ha espe.l'!cKOM, rpe4ecKOM H JiaTHHCKOM 513bIKax, ObJJio ccjJopMyJIHposatto
CB. Y!JiapHeM nttKTaB.H.l'!CKHM B 4-0M BeKe ObIJIO TIOTOM no.apooHO pa3paoo-
TaHO CB. 11CH,ll0p0M CeBHJibCKHM B 1-oM BeKe, 11 rOCTIO,llCTBOBaJIO B 3ana,11-
HO.l1 UepKBH B TeL1eH:11e scero cpe.aHeseKOBbR. Ha caMOM .aeJie, HH O.llHH
3ana,aHb1.l1 oorocJIOB He nptt.aep)l(HBaJicR TaKo.l'! TeopHH, 11 sce MecTa
1\11THpOBaHHbie B HayKe B .llOKa3aTeJibCTBO Teop1111 BblpBaHbl H3 KOHTeKCTa If
OTHOC51TC51 B .ae.l1CTBHTeJibHOCTl1 K ynoTpeoJieH11IO scex Tpex 513bIKOB B
0,LIHOM JiaTl1HCKOM OOrOCJiy)l(eHl1H.
np11 BHl1MaTeJibHOM 11CCJie,llOBaHl111 )1(11Tl1.l1 KHp11JIJia 11 MecjJO,llH51 OKa-
3bIBaeTC51, 4TO r JiaBHbie Jana.aHbie so3pa)l(eHHR KacaJI11cb He ynoTpeoJieH115!
CJiaBRHCKOro 7!3bIKa, a 11306peTeHHR HOBO.l'! a30YKl1 K11p11JIJIOM.