Paulicians

[Arpa]

Thanks for your warm welcome.

 

Bavlikianner are the same bavghikianner. No mistake in pronounciation. In armenian L and GH are ''ldzort'' kirer, i.e. they replace each other. For example, Jerusalem is YEROUSAGHEM in Armenian.

==========

Correct!

 

The Latin/Greek L transliterates to "gh" as in Lazarus/Ghazaros, miele/meghr, sal/agh etc. There is a reason to this madness. During the pre-Mashtots era there was no L in the Armenian as we know it now, i.e it was not the glosso dental L(yun) of today but rather something like the French/German R. Try it an you'll see. Place the tip of your tongue behing your teeth and pronounce L, then raise the back of your tongue almost touching your palate and try again. Armenians did not, could pronounce L, it sounded like the sound of the latter exercise. Mesrop had to devise two letters, one to accomodate the original Armenian sound (gh) and the other(L)to accomodate Latin and Greek words.

 

The proper Armenian transliteration for Paulician would be Pavghikian (note the P as in Cha Pe Je). Further, the "v" would have been "u" as in Hyun. This letter following the letter Ayb was used to produce the sound of "o" which was eventually adopted during Kilikian times. Therefore if we track back- what we are reading as PaVghikian today, written as PaUghikian would be pronounced as Poghikian. Does the modern surname of Boghigian/Poghikian come from the days of the Paulicians?

 

Manicheian=Maniqeyutiun/Maniqeyakan

 

 

 

Have a nice day

 

Nmanapes

 

Arpa

[MosJan]

ArpaJan Welcome To Hye Forum . BArov es Yekel ...

MOvses

[MJ]

Dear Arpa,

 

Should I also use "ghusin" instead of "lusin?" Just kidding.

 

But it may be observed that the name Paul or Pavel is the Greek/Roman version of the Biblical Jewish name Savugh. In that sense I can understand where the "gh" in "Bavghikians" may come from. However, the name "Paul" is borrowed from Greek/Latin, not Hebrew, if I understand correctly. Why "Bavghikian?"

 

By the way, I don't mind the "gh" in Panlikians. I just mind the misplaced angry faces.

 

P.S. Isn’t it interesting that the two examples brought in above regarding the “ldzord kirer” are “Bavghikian” and “Yerusaghem?” Could you give some other examples? I am curious.

[MJ]

I just thought of "Gatoghigos," which is another foreign to Armenian word. Anything else?

[Twilight Bark]

Can I pitch in? Gallia <--> Kaghia

The tendency to turn "ll" to "gh" apparently goes back to the times when the Armenian language diverged from other indo-europen languages. The word "kaghak" (city) probably comes from the word for wall (the first towns were surrounded with a wall, and the wall really was the point of the town), as the w<-->k transformation is well known.

[Arpa]

Originally posted by MJ:

[QB]Dear Arpa,

 

Should I also use "ghusin" instead of "lusin?" Just kidding.

=======

 

Don't be shy. A very good question.

It is altogether possible that "lusin" is a relatively new word based on "luys", from the Greek "lux". It is also possible that before that we used the word "mah" for moon, the Persians still use it while our usage has been reduced (literally) to "mahik/little moon" to mean crescent. As we know "mah" also means death in Armenian. The latter is a variation on "mard/mart", a word that can be found in many languages all the way from Persian "mert" to Latin and English "mort(al)". The Armenian word "mard" to mean "man/mankind" simply means mortal/mahkanatsou.

 

But it may be observed that the name Paul or Pavel is the Greek/Roman version of the Biblical Jewish name Savugh. In that sense I can understand where the "gh" in "Bavghikians" may come from. However, the name "Paul" is borrowed from Greek/Latin, not Hebrew, if I understand correctly. Why "Bavghikian?"

There are several theories about the origin. One is that a certain Poghos of Samosat started the movement and another, more credible, is that the movement aimed to remove all extraneous mythology, be it of the OT or the NT and purify the religion solely based on the Epistles of Paul, i.e concentarte on the message rahter than the nature of the messenger.

 

Paul's native name, as you mention was Saul, he adopted the Greek name of Paul after his conversion. The latter may have been dubbed on him partly because of his diminutive stature as Paulos/Polos means small in Greek. Observe many Greek surnames that end in -poulos to mean the son of or the little one. Even in the Armenian particularly in some Kilikian dialects, most notably those of Zeitoun and Marash "poloz/boloz" means child, little one.

The Translators of the Bible were very careful to distinguish the OT Saul and the NT Saul/Paul. The Latter is transliterated as Soghos while the former as Savugh.

 

null

[Twilight Bark]

[MJ]

Yabadabadoo!!!

 

Twice happy tonight! Got home between the trips, and a copy of the "Key of Truth: A Manual of the Paulician Church of Armenia" translated by Fred C. Conybeare and published by The Clarendon Press in 1898 was waiting for me.

[khodja]

I suggest that you also study the differences of belief between the Paulicians and their Tondrakian offshoot.

[MJ]

The next message represents the renown letter by Grigor Narekatsi, to dismiss from him the suspicions of belonging to the Tondraki "sect." I had read about this letter in many places. Finally, it was possible to read it. The material below is entirely due to Fred Coneybeare - with all the footnotes. I have made only two or three (I think) technical comments, while initializing them.

 

P.S. In the material below, Conybeare uses the epithet "heresy" to characterize Paulicians or the Tondraki. However, in the introduction of his book, he mentions that he is using the tem not in the sense of considering Paulicians and the Tondraki as a heresy, but just in the conventional historical sense, since historically these were qualified to be so.

 

[ December 01, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]

[MJ]

The original of the copy from which the following letter is printed by Father Basil Sarkisean1 in his volume of “Manichean Paulician Heresy” (Venice, 1893, in Modern Armenian), is preserved in a codex called the Book of Letters, which used to be in the library of the Fathers of Antony at Constantinople. This codex was written out in 748 of the Armenian Era = A.D. 1300, in Hromkla, by Thomas Vardapet, on charta bombycina, from an older copy which belonged to Gregory Vkayaser in the year 527 = A.D. 1079. The convent of Khjav, to the Abbot of which the letter was written, was very ancient, and was situated in the province of Mokatz.

 

About the year 987 accusations where made against many Armenian monks and priests of being secret or open members of Tondraki sect. Among those accused was Gregory of Narek, the famous saint and author of book of devotions which is still in the hands of every Armenian priest. A council was held at Ani before which he was acquitted, and, to fully exculpate himself, he was forced to write the following letter to the Abbot of Kdjav, who notoriously leaned to the side of the heretics.

 

Letter

 

 

Of the Grecious Droctor Gregory of Narek, which he wrote to the celebrated convent of Kdjav, concerning the tenets of the cursed Tondraki, Ians and Iamres, who came in the guise of sheep, but within is a ravening wolf; who moreover by his fruits was made known to all. Him the holy doctor having heard of, wrote in order to liberate others from the evil tenets: -

 

 

Lord Father2, I write this because an untrustworthy rumor of evil of tendency, -although those who heard it considered trustworthy, nor was there any ill-will to prejudice them – admits of no other means of contradiction.

 

For I heard that the unmentionable and obscene lechery of the heresy of the cursed Tondraki sect is mentioned among your poise ones. And I was lost in astonishment at a statement so improper on the part of the enemies of God, who declare that you furthermore reported to Mushel , a learned man by repute, that you had been satisfied by

 

----------------

1 Many of Father Sarkisean’s valuable notes I translate, adding his initials B.S.

2 Nothing more is known of this Abbot, nor do we know at all if any steps were taken inconsequence of to this letter to purge his convent of heresy (B.S).

B.S. Conjectures that Mushel was i.q. Mushel Bagratuni Abasean, mentioned by the historian Asolik as a governor of Karse in 984. But as he was a Vardapet, I doubt this identification. In any case it was honored name in Armenia from the earliest times. It is written with a strong l answering to Greek lambda. Or translate “that you (and) specially Mushel … reported that.”

------------------

 

a bearer of letters whom you had sent that they (i.e. the Tondraki) are not alien to the apostolic tradition1 ; and that you are keenly desirous to share in their lot and associate yourself closely with those who have been cut off by the sword of the avenging heathen Amir2 Apl-Vard, who is in fact a rod of wrath in the hand of Lord Jesus.

 

We learn from the same source that you ask, What writing directs any one to be anathematized ? asserting the marvelously composed letter of contradiction of our blessed Lord Ananias 3 , to be nonsensical or absurd, or spoken against God. Now, if all this has been inspired by you, - I omit to say agreed by you and (spare so to write) relished by you – than you have summed up in yourself the afore-written opinion that “their chosen food became loathing.”

 

There is much that is divine and everything that is apostolical that is yet denied and abolished by them. Of divine ordinances, there is the laying on of hands4 as the Apostles received it from Christ. There is the communion in his body5 , as the Apostle defined it, saying: In eating the bread of communion, we receive and eat God himself, who was united in flesh. This communion-bread, before which we tremble, Smbat6 thought to be ordinary bread. And as for the birth through spiritual throes, I mean by water and Spirit, of which it was declared that it make sons of God, concerning this, he taught others that it consisted of mere bath water.

 

And as to the exalted day of the Lord7, on which [the word of God] created the first light and perfected thereon the light off his rising, and prefigured by an economy the quickening light of his Advent, - this day, adorable for doth image, he has explained to them is to be counted just like any other days.

 

Then among the observances which we know to have been repudiated as neither apostolic nor divine, [we know to be] the mysterious prayers of genuflexion8 , though the Creator of all, Jesus Christ, bowing bent the knee. We know that the Font is denied by them, in which Christ himself was baptized; that the communion of immorality, which Lord

 

----------------

1 This testimony that the Abbot and Mushel had satisfied themselves after examination of Tondraki sect to be an apostolic church and to possess the apostolic tradition was a valid one, is both important and interesting. It is the claim which is made on almost every page of the Key.

2 This Amir cannot be identified with certainty. The reference proves that the Paulicians took the field against the Mahometan invaders, and were not spared by them.

3 This letter, written under compulsion of the Armenian Catholicos by Anaias of narek, Gregory of Narek’s uncle, is preserved but does not merit translation., being mere invective. Ananias was, like his nephew, accused of being a Tondraki or Paulician.

4 But we saw above that the prominent Armenian churchmen of the tenth century admitted that their heretical rivals had the true apostolical tradition.

5 The account preserved in the Key of the Paulician Eucharist is so fragmentary that it is not easy to say against what aspects of it Gregory of Narek directs his remarks. The grain of truth in them most be that the Paulicians rejected the orthodox sacraments in favor of their own.

6 Smbat (the same name as Sinbad) is stated below to have been the founder of the Tondraki Church.

7 The Key gives us no information as to how Paulicians regarded the Lord’s day.

8 We gather that the Paulicians preyed standing erect in the primitive Christian manner. The continuity of observance of their Church is strikingly illustrated by the fact that its modern adherents still forebid genuflexions, as we learn from the confession adduced in pp. xxv, xxvi of the Prolegomena.

-----------------------

 

himself gave unto all, is denied. We know their filthy habit of lecherous promiscuity1 , where the Lord reproved and suppressed even a glance. We know that they deny the adored sign2 (i.e. the Cross), which God, made man, raised and carried on is shoulder as his own glory and authority. We know of their anthropolatrous apostasy, more abominable cursed than idolatry; of their self-conferred3 contemptible priesthood, which is a likening of themselves to Satan ; of their depreciation of the sacrament (lit.) of marriage , which our Lord, by his own miracles , and through his own God-bearing mother, prized and honored. This sacrament (lit. crown) they contemn, and reckon the mere fact of union in love with one another to be perfect love, and from God and pleasing to Christ; saying that God is love and desires the love union alone, and not the sacrament of marriage (lit. crown). I know, too, of their railing caviling of the first-fruits , which Able and Noe and Abraham and David and Solomon and Elias appointed to conciliate the Divine wrath. We know how they dare to call the head of their abominable sect a Christ ; of whom Christ testified beforehand, saying, There shall arise false prophets. And this is the meaning of the prophet’s saying: The fool said in his heart, there is no God.

 

Such then are the apostolic men of your Mushel who examines and finds them to be people of unswerving faith. These, then, are they whom my father’s brother, a Vardapet of great acumen, closely investigated, as being himself an apologist of God. And he, like a learned champion, radically demolished the fabulous blasphemies of the lawless Tondraki sect; and had he not done so we should hardly known from report even the name of foul creatures, so insignificant is their fame. What gifts then of election have they seen in the abominable Kumbricus , what trace of good in Simon , or what hope to look forward to in the antichrist, or all of whom they are disciples? For, forgetful of the ineffable favors and kindness bestowed on them through the Passion, they call these their refuge though they have lied about the same. For they are packs of dogs and bands of thieves, troops of wolves and arrays of devils; tribes of brigands and masses weevils,

 

-----------------

1 Here the malice of the writer has to be discounted. It was the regular and the stereotyped charge against all heretics, even the purest in their lives. It, of coarse, refers to their denial that marriage was sacrament.

2 See the Key, p. 115.

3 The Armenian word is a compound and = xxxxxxx [something in Greek – MJ], “with one’s own hand.”

See note 7, below.

See the Key, p. 119.

Perhaps the Key, p. 115, should be compared, where offerings of incense, candles, and victims are prohibited.

The elect one, according the Key, was the image of Jesus Christ on earth, his office was to reproduce on earth the life and calling of Christ himself. See the Key, pp. 95 and 106. The same charge of pretending that he was Christ or the Holly Spirit was advanced against Sergius the Paulician, who is identified by Dr. Mkerttschian and the historian Tchamitch with Smbat. See also the Prolegomena, pp. lxi foll.

The claim of those who used the Key and of him who wrote it was that the Paulician was the only true apostolic church. See above, note 1, p. 126, and Prolegomena, pp. xxxlil and xli.

Why was Gregory so anxious to disclaim all knowledge of the sect? Because he was accused of belonging to it. Was the accusation true? Probably he had, at least in secret, once belonged to it, for his enemies nicknamed him ‘Apostate.’

Gregory glances at ‘Election’ and ‘Elect ones’ of the Paulicians.

I.e. Mani called [something in Greek – MJ]. Gregory perhaps draws upon Photius or the Archelaus acts.

In the Key Simon Magus is mentioned on pp. 91, 92.

See the prayer in the Ordination Service in the Key, p. 108.

----------------------

 

hordes of savages and legions of crucifiers, congregations of evil ones and men of blood, swarms of poisonous snakes and herds of wild beasts, enemies of mankind, societies of wizards and heretics, the scorn not only of churchmen, but of heathen as well.

 

For I must relate what a certain valiant man said, who destroyed and pout to infamous death their cursed ancestors. This is what he said to the second Iamres1 ‘If Christ rose on the third day, then since you call yourself Christ2, I will slay you and burry you; and if you shall come to life again after third days, then I will know that you are Christ, even if even though you take so many days over your resurrection. Now he was in close contact with them as a neighbor, and he had learned the story of the bitter phrensy of these offenders from many who had told him, and certainly believed3 in the true resurrection of Christ, and was making mock of them as proper objects of ridicule, when he left behind him the memory of this laudable saying. For it was God and no earthly being who raised up this idea in him, and it was providence which enjoined to reprove or destroy the wicked according to their wickedness; just as providence gave for food the terrible serpent of land,and chastised the Jews through the Chaldeans, and in judgment overwhelmed those who crucified Jesus, by the hand of Titus and Vespasian and Adrian, and reprimanded the Egyptian nation with twofold destruction by the hand of Cyrus. And he is said to have hung up in the dread oracular temple of Beliar himself the lance with which he smote them. Now the very devils knew God the only-born and confessed him to be judge of all; but the foul Smbat, a second Simon, allowed himself to be worshiped by his disciples, men rooted in bitterness and sowers of tares; just like that wizard of Samaria, and Montanus and Pythagoras the illiterate and heathen philosopher.

 

I have set down a few points out of many, and I await your answer. For it is a leading principle of our Lord’s canon, which says: And by the words shalt thou be justified, and out of the works shalt thou be judged. But if you admire their writings4, we know that Satan too recited a psalm on the day of the temptation of the Savior of all. But unless you place on record a double curse and manifold anathema against their founder Smbat, and their dead and wizard-like cults and their profession of faith5; and unless you in writing declare that what they represent as good is mere ordure over and over, and find the same to be excess of apostasy, and intimate the same in your letter to me, which is the way in which it beseems you to clear your character and to get rid of the scandal and the prejudice: anyhow, know for certain that I have written entirely out of consideration for you good and peace and love. For if your citadel of refuge6 be betrayed by you, its own guardian, then of yourself will you become a traitor of your high office. And since this Mushel writes that he is a Vadapet7, you must arm a champion against the enemy and

 

---------------------

 

1 A sobriquet for Smbat.

2 .See above, note 7, p. 128.

3 Yet Gregory adduces this story by way of illustrating how the Tondraki were the scorn heathen as well as of churchmen. He was not ashamed to gloat over Mahometan mockery and murder of his own countrymen, and this although – as is clear from its context - the Paulicians had given their lives in order that to repeal the Mahometan invaders of Armenia. See the Prolegomena, pp. lxiii foll.

4 Or ore probably ‘grabanutiun [in Armenian – MJ] should be rendered “quoting of the Scripture.”

5 See the Key, pp. 93, 94 and 97.

6 i.e. the convent of the Abbot of which this letter is addressed.

7 Therefore Mushel was probably a doctor of the Armenian Gregorian Church.

 

--------------------------

 

 

repair the breach that has been effected, and defend exposed places, and be light and salt and mentor to him that is in the dark, according to the divine canon. But if your light to be his thinking darkness, he is beyond doubt a viperous sorcerer and sensless giver of poison. For his science is not holpen by the finger of God, his voice is ill-starred and inspired by evil, and his report is deceitful – destroyer of peace.

 

And now, with what conscience can he repeat the words: “Out of what writings can I anathematize one?” Paul anathematized even an angel that should think things alien to his gospel, and he did not scruple to repeat the anathema twice. And David cursed his transgressions and subscribed to reprimand. And the Lord saith of those who have deserted from the ranks and are altogether on his left hand: Depart from me ye cursed ones. And we received from the Council of Nice1, and learned an anathema on the vainglory of heretics, which is formally directed to be used twice over in the hymn of the confession of faith which follows after the reading of the gospel. An answer from the letters if Petros from Sahak prescribed forms of anathema against these excommunicated at Chalcedon. And there are the heads of Cyril of Alexandria’s anathema’s against Nestorius, and the Honoticon letter of the Emperor Zeno, which curses by name the utterly heretical sects.

 

Now if we are by ordinance obliged to curse those whose shortcomings are but in part, how much more2 must we curse the manyfoldly heretical ranks of this congregation, which is cut of from Christ and united by bond with Satan. And now, Lord Abbot, take no offence at the terms of my letter, nor take unfeigned love as if it were hatred. For the love of Christ compels me to this, and we only desire you to be spotless. And do you order to be copied volumes3 full of learning which the father Ananias, with great care, wrote against these schismatics.

 

------------------------

 

 

1 The anathema is still repeated by Armenians at the end of the Nicene Symbol.

2 This passage proves at least that Tondraki had nothing to do with Nestorians and other heretical sects enumerated in the Heneticon. See the Prolegomena.

3 This volume of Ananias is unfortunately lost. If it could be discovered, it might give valuable information. Nerses Shnorhali quotes it in his Epistola I (see Sancti Nersetis Clajensis Opera, vol. 1, pp. 58-64, Venice, 1823), but his citations, though valuable, hardly make up for the loss. Gregory Magistros, early in the eleventh century, also quotes this lost work of Ananias in his letter to the Patriarch of Edessa, which, along with the letter of Nerses Schnorhali, will be given in English below.

 

 

Appendix I: The Key of Truth

Manual of the Paulician Church of Armenia

pp. 125-130

 

By Fred C. Conybeare

Oxford, The Clarendon Press, 1898

 

[ December 01, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]

[MJ]

From THE HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH, from the birth of Christ to the 18th Century: including the very interesting account of the Waldenses and Albigenses

By William Jones (1762-1843)

 

 

PAULICIANS

While the Christian world, as it has been the fashion to call it, was thus sunk into an awful state of superstition -- at a moment when "darkness seemed to cover the earth, and gross darkness the people" -- it is pleasing to contemplate a ray of celestial light darting across the gloom. About the year 660, a new sect arose in the east, under the name of PAULICIANS, which is justly entitled to our attention. It is much to be regretted that of this class of Christians, all our information is derived through the medium of their enemies. The two original sources of intelligence concerning them are Photius, b. 1. Contra Manichaeos; and Siculus Hist. Manicheor. and from them Mosheim and Gibbon have deduced their account of the Paulicians. The latter writer has entered far more fully into the subject than the former, and, what is singular enough, he has displayed more candor! I have collected from these two modern authors the concise account given as follows, and have aimed at impartiality.]

In Mananalis, an obscure town in the vicinity of Somosata, a person of the name of CONSTANTINE entertained at his house a deacon, who, having been a prisoner among the Mahometans, was returning from Syria, whither he had been carried away captive. From this passing stranger, Constantine received the precious gift of the New Testament in its original language, which, even at this early period, was so concealed from the vulgar, that Peter Siculus, to whom we owe most of our information on the history of the Paulicians, tells us, the first scruples of a Catholic, when he was advised to read the Bible, was, "it is not lawful for us profane persons to read those sacred writings, but for the priests only." Indeed, the gross ignorance which pervaded Europe at that time, rendered the generality of the people incapable of reading that or any other book; but even those of the laity who could read, were dissuaded by their religious guides from meddling with the Bible. Constantine, however, made the best use of the deacon’s present -- he studied his New Testament with unwearied assiduity -- and more particularly the writings of the apostle Paul, from which he at length endeavored to deduce a system of doctrine and worship. "He investigated the creed of primitive Christianity," says Gibbon, "and whatever might be the success, a Protestant reader will applaud the spirit of the enquiry." [Decline and Fall, vol. 10, ch. 54.] The knowledge to which Constantine himself was, under the Divine blessing, enabled to attain, he gladly communicated to others around him, and a Christian church was collected. In a little time several individuals arose among them qualified for the work of the ministry; and several other churches were collected throughout Armenia and Cappadocia. It appears from the whole of their history to have been a leading object with Constantine and his brethren to restore, as far as possible, the profession of Christianity to all its primitive simplicity.

Their public appearance soon attracted the notice of the Catholic party, who immediately branded them with the opprobrious appellation of Manichaeans; but "they sincerely condemned the memory and opinions of the Manichaean sect, and complained of the injustice which impressed that invidious name on them." [Gibbon, Ubi supra.] There is reason, therefore, to think, that they voluntarily adopted the name of Paulicians, and that they derived it from the name of the great apostle of the Gentiles. Constantine now assumed or received the name of Sylvanus, and others of his fellow laborers were called Titus, Timothy, Tichicus, etc. and as the churches arose and were formed in different places, they were named after those apostolic churches to which Paul originally addressed his inspired writings, without any regard to the name of the city or town in which they assembled for worship.

The labors of Constantine -- Sylvanus, were crowned with much success. Pontus and Cappadocia, regions once renowned for Christian piety, were again blessed with a diffusion of the light of divine truth. He himself resided in the neighborhood of Colonia, in Pontus, and their congregations, in process of time, were diffused over the provinces of Asia Minor, to the westward of the Euphrates. "The Paulician teachers," says Gibbon, "were distinguished only by their scriptural names, by the modest title of fellow-pilgrims; by the austerity of their lives, their zeal and knowledge, and the credit of some extraordinary gift of the Holy Spirit. But they were incapable of desiring, or at least of obtaining the wealth and honors of the Catholic prelacy. Such anti-christian pride they strongly censured."

Roused by the growing importance of this sect, the Greek emperors began to persecute the Paulicians with the most sanguinary severity; and the scenes of Galerius and Maximin were re-acted under the Christian forms and names. "To their excellent deeds," says the bigoted [Roman Catholic] Peter Siculus, "the divine and orthodox emperors added this virtue, that they ordered the Montanists and Manichaeans (by which epithets they chose to stigmatize the Paulicians) to be capitally punished; and their books, wherever found, to be committed to the flames; also that if any person was found to have secreted them, he was to be put to death, and his goods confiscated. " A Greek officer, armed with legal and military powers, appeared at Colonia, to strike the shepherd, and, if possible, reclaim the lost sheep to the Catholic fold. "By a refinement of cruelty, Simeon (the officer) placed the unfortunate Sylvanus before a line of his disciples, who were commanded, as the price of their own pardon, and the proof of their repentance, to massacre their spiritual father. They turned aside from the impious office; the stones dropt from their filial hands, and of the whole number, only one executioner could be found; a new David, as he is styled by the Catholics, who boldly overthrew the giant of heresy." [Gibbon, ut supra.] This apostate, whose name was Justus, stoned to death the father of the Paulicians, who had now labored among them twenty-seven years. The treacherous Justus betrayed many others, probably of the pastors and teachers, who fared the fate of their venerable leader; while Simeon himself, struck with the evidences of divine grace apparent in the sufferers, embraced at length the faith which he came to destroy -- renounced his station, resigned his honors and fortunes, became a zealous preacher among the Paulicians, and at last sealed his testimony with his blood.

[it has been already stated that we derive all our information concerning the Paulicians, through the medium of their adversaries, the writers belonging to the Catholic church. It should not, therefore, surprise us to find them imputing the worst of principles and practices to a class of men whom they uniformly decry as heretics. Mosheim says, that of the two accounts of Photius and Peter Siculus, he gives the preference for candor and fairness to that of the latter -- and yet I find Mr. Gibbon acknowledging, that "the six capital errors of the Paulicians are defined by Peter Siculus with much prejudice and passion" (Decline and Fall, vol. 10, ch. 54.) One of their imputed errors is, that they rejected the whole of the Old Testament writings; a charge which was also brought, by the writers of the Catholic school, against the Waldenses and others, with equal regard to truth and justice. But this calumny is easily accounted for. The advocates of popery, to support their usurpations and innovations in the kingdom of Christ, were driven to the Old Testament for authority, adducing the kingdom of David for their example. And when their adversaries rebutted the argument, insisting that the parallel did not hold, for that the kingdom of Christ, which is not of this world, is a very different state of things from the kingdom of David, their opponents accused them of giving up the divine authority of the Old Testament. Upon similar principles, it is not difficult to vindicate the Paulicians from the other charges brought against them; but to do that would require more room than can be here allotted to the subject.]

During a period of one hundred and fifty years, these Christian churches seem to have been almost incessantly subjected to persecution, which they supported with Christian meekness and patience; and if the acts of their martyrdom, their preaching and their lives were distinctly recorded, I see no reason to doubt, that we should find in them the genuine successors of the Christians of the first two centuries. And in this as well as former instances, the blood of the martyrs was the seed of the church. A succession of teachers and churches arose, and a person named Sergius, who had labored among them in the ministry of the gospel thirty-seven years, is acknowledged, even by their vilest calumniators, to have been a most exemplary Christian. The persecution had, however, some intermissions, until at length Theodora, the Greek empress, exerted herself against them, beyond all her predecessors. She sent inquisitors throughout all Asia Minor in search of these sectaries, and is computed to have killed by the gibbet, by fire, and by the sword, A HUNDRED THOUSAND PERSONS. Such was the state of things at the commencement of the ninth century.

http://www.wayoflife.org/articles/jones19.htm

[CHE]

Strikes insane after 3 years is presented somebody in order to write here. Only that this somebody is not accidental. He is the last descendant of the Pauliciens !

 

No. I'm not crazy.

My real name is Constantine Paulicianis. I am Greek and I am living in Athens.

As you see I have the same name with the Founder of the paulicians and this is not accidental.

I am impressed from the work that you made. Unfortunately we remained only few from the Paulicians. In Greece we are this moment only 18 descendants from which only 2 we keep the name. Me and my cousin that we have the same full name.

I feel like the last of the moicans! I am the last of the paulicians!!!

I will come back the next week because I don't have much time now and I am going to leave for Easter.

 

See you soon.

 

P.S. I say the truth.

Edited April 7, 2004 by CHE

[Arpa]

Strikes insane after 3 years is presented somebody in order to write here. Only that this somebody is not accidental. He is the last descendant of the Pauliciens !

 

No. I'm not crazy.

My real name is Constantine Paulicianis. I am Greek and I am living in Athens.

As you see I have the same name with the Founder of the paulicians and this is not accidental.

 

First off Konstantin, aka CHE welcome!

Kalimera?

You may be pleasantly surprised that you are not alone. There are many Armenians who may have the surname in some form or other. I have cited some of them in the item below. You may search the internet using any of the variations of the surnames. There may be even others that are so unrecognizably evolved that it would need an even wider imagination. If I may dare say that even such a common surname as Boghosian/Poghosian may somehow be ralated.

I am not sure how much you know about Armenian orthography and transliteration, a couple of hints may help better understand. Mainly in the so called Western Armenian (Istanbul Armenian) the sounds have been corrupted, so when we read Boghigian/Boghikian, Boghosian it was meant to be spelled as Poghikian or Poghosian, but when the Istanbul Armenians saw it spelled with the Armenian letter Pe (the 26th letter) which they were accustomed to read as Be (the second letter). You will see it better when you consider that those same people will write and pronounce Constantinople as GonsdandnuBolis or simply Bolis instead of Polis.

BTW. Konstan, how do you spell your surname in Greek?

As to the "o" and the "gh". Some time ago there was no "o" in the Armenian alphabet, the diphthong of "au"(ayb hyun), or to some "av"(ayb ve) was used to give the sound just as in the Latin "au" as in auto. Once the letter O was adopted during the Kilikian times many "au"s transformed to O as in Paulikian/Pavlikian rewritten as Poghikian.

As to the "gh" that is pronounced like the French and German R, it is a common and accepted phenomenon that the Latin L is transliterated to "gh" in the Armenian. Some good examples would be Lazarus-Ghazaros, Bartholomew-Barthoghomeos, yet you would probably understand even better when we consider the fact that the Greek "polos/poulos" which literally means "small" is transliterated into Armenian as Poghos/Boghos/Pavghos/Bavghos.

 

Here is one example. Note that the person mentioned here is a well known prominent Armenian. I have known others many who may in some way bear the surname in one form or other.

 

http://www.shoushihotel.com/htms/AIM.htm

 

The following item is extracted from this site;

http://armenians.com/forum/index.php?showt...100entry61864

 

And, Martin as to your question from long time ago; The Armenian term for Manicheian is "Maniqeiakan".

 

omit=======

 

BTW. You do realize that there still are Paulicians among us. I will explain, but first run a search using the keyword "Boghikian/Boghigian". You will be surprised to learn that the principal spokesperson for thr ARF has a name like Apo Boghikian. Boghikian is a corrupted [istanbulized, Hi! Paulos, Pavghos, Poghos, Boghos )form of Pavghikian, Pavlikian, Paulician, Boghikian]. Yes, There are several dynasties that have that surname, I have met some of them. It may be an attestmnet that the movement has not yet died. Ther were still Paulicians until the 1900's

 

omit=======

 

long as we understand the message. Do we?.

 

PAULICIANS

http://armenians.com/forum/index.php?showt...=20&&do=findComment&comment=45826

[CHE]

Kalimera !

 

First of all I would like to thank you for the precious informations that you gave me. It is real interesting to know that in various parts of the world, exist persons linked with a distant kinship.

My surname in Greek is Pavlikianis (the ton on the second ''a'').

As I told you before, there isn't any other descendant of Paulicians in Greece except me and my first cousin.

Unfortunately all the other children of my uncles and my father, are girls. So, there is only me and my cousin who can keep this historical name...

 

Anyway, I will continue the research based on the links that you gave me.

I am really grateful for this.

 

THANK U VERY MUCH.

[GAMALIEL]

MJ

 

The articles you have posted are very helpful. Thank You!