Earticle

슬라브인 토마스는 9세기 비잔티움에서 가장 주목할 만한 인물이자 군지휘관 이었다. 그는 821-23년에 미카일 2세에 대항한 가장 큰 전쟁을 일으켰다. 어떤 학자들은 이 전쟁을 반란이라 규정하고, 또 다른 학자들은 이 전쟁을 내란이라 규정한다. 비잔티움 사료들도 견해를 달리하고 있다. 토마스가 일으킨 전쟁은 다양하게도 성상파괴주의에 대한 대항, 사회혁명, 경제적 곤궁, 과도한 세금, 제 국내의 비그리스계 종족들에 의해 발생한 인민봉기, 토마스 개인의 야망 그리고 레오 5세에 대한 복수 등과 관련 있다. 그렇기 때문에 필자는 비잔티움 사료들 과 최근까지 연구자들의 연구에 근거해 이 전쟁을 사회혁명적 내전으로 정의하 고자 한다. 이 전쟁은 비록 내전이었지만 아랍과 불가리아가 협력내지는 동참한 전쟁이 다. 다시 말해 국제전으로 확대되었다. 그렇기 때문에 도덕적, 물질적으로 피해 도 컸다. 특히 함대의 손실은 치명적이었다. 이 손실의 여파는 시칠리아와 크레 타 상실과 연관 된다.

Thomas the Slav was most notable man and a Byzantine military commander in the 9th century. He provoked a wide-scale war in 821-23 against Emperor Michael II. Some scholars refer to this war as a revolt, Other scholars argue that this was the civil war. Byzantine sources had the diversity of opinions. The war provoked by Thomas the Slav has been variously attributed to a reaction against Iconoclasm, a social revolution, economic hardship, excessive taxation, popular uprising, a revolt by the Empire's non-Greek ethnic groups, Thomas's personal ambitions, and his desire to avenge Leo V. So I define that the war was the social-revolutionary civil war by the research of modern scholars and byzantine sources. The war was the civil war by joining with Arab and Bulgaria. It has expanded into International War. Therefore, moral and material damage therefore was also great. In particular, the loss of the byzantine fleet was fatal. The aftermath of the loss is associated with the loss of Sicily and Crete.

Мы рассмотрели в данной статье образование и развитие средневосточнославянских литературных языков(далее ЛЯ), сравнивая Юго-западную Русь и Московскую Русь, и пришли к следующим выводам: (1) После ‘Второго южнославянского влияния’ в Юго-западной Руси оформлена ‘проста мова’(далее ПМ), возникшая на основе делового языка Юго-западной Руси, и она функционировала как ЛЯ в 16-17 вв. наряду с церковнослвянским(лалее ц-сл.) языком, а в Московской Руси внутри ц-сл. языка произошла дифференция на две стилистические разновидности, одна из которых перешла в ‘простой русский язык(далее ПЯ)’ в 18 в. (2) ПМ и ПЯ ориентированы на ‘простоту’ языка и игнорирование нормы ц-сл. языка. (3) На ПМ оказывали большое влияние польский язык и польские текстовые образцы, а они в свою очередь трансплантировались просто в ПМ и с ней не сливались, что обусловило неустойчивость системы ПМ. В отличие от ПМ, в ПЯ огранически соединились ц-сл., деловой и разговорный языки, употреблявшиеся в Московской Руси, что могло гарантировать в некоторой степени устойчивость системы ПЯ. (4) Принадлежащие Юго-западной Руси территории изменялись в зависимости от политических перемен несколько раз, а Московская Русь сохранила свою политическую и государственную идентичность. (5) ПМ изчезла в истории, не оставив никакого следа в современном украинском и белорусском ЛЯ, а ПЯ является ростком русского национального ЛЯ 2-ой половины 18 в., который через период поиска нормы утвержден как современный русский ЛЯ. (6) Исчезновение ПМ и сохранение ПЯ зависят, прежде всего, от факторов (3)-(5), т.е. неустойчивости /устойчивости системы ПМ и ПЯ и нестабильности/стабильности политических обстоятельств Юго-западной Руси и Москвоской Руси.

This article aims to make assessment of the political activities of German politicians in the Grossdeutschtum in Austria right after the collapse of the Metternich system (1815-1848). Most German politicians in Austria insisted the Habsburg Empire not take part in the Frankfurt Parliament for the Unification of Germany under the Grossdeutschtum, which would lead the German and Czech areas of Aus-tria to the German Confederation. They were fully aware of the possibilities of the dissolution of the Habsburg Empire under the Grossdeutschtum. So they proposed the Frankfurt to include all Austrian territory to the Unifi-cation. But the Frankfurt did not agree with their proposal. Meanwhile the Slavs were not interested in the Unification movements in Germany after the March Revolution of 1848, insisting that the ethnic conflicts be resolved in Austria. The ethnic conflicts might trig the political movements to topple down the Absolute Monarchy System. In these political circumstances, the Slavs worked hard to introduce the Federalism into Austria as a solution to solve the inequality between the Germans and the Slavs. However, their idea was rejected by most German politicians who wanted to maintain their dominancy in Austria. Consequently, Franz Joseph I, who succeeded Ferdinand Emperor in December 1848, brought the Neoabsolutism in Austria, leaving the ethnic conflicts unsolved in the Habsburg Empire.