Fourth set-back_______________________________________________________________________________
Asia Minor 1050-1350, by Turks.
THE CATHAR MENACE:
There have been many heresies along the history of Christianity, but the
most threatening by far in de Middle Ages was that
of the Paulicians. The Paulicians had their roots in Armenia, were they
mixed Christianity with the dualist religion of Mani,
which was deeply rooted in the Gnosis. The final result was a cosmogony
where the "Good God" created the spiritual world
and two master angels: Satanael and Jesus; Satanael rebelled, and he created
the material world and the human beings,
where the souls of the rebelled or deceived angels live with subtleties
as the carnal passions or the worldly delights (demiurg).
In fact all matter was created so by this demiurg. The condemn for these
angels was the eternal reincarnation in
human or animal bodies until they unveiled that (gnosis) and joined the
sect. The Paulicians identified this demiurg with the
Christian God and rejected the equity of the biblical patriarchs (Moses,
Jacob, David, John the Baptist...) along with the
Old Testament and its Law, preferring the enemies of Yahweh (the Sodomites,
Pharaoh, Philistines, Herodes...). They also
rejected the birth of Christ, its death and its resurrection because he
was an ethereal angel, as Mary, and these facts were
only appearances; moreover, they rejected the ideas of a future Judgment,
or the existence of a Hell or Purgatory. Finally,
they rejected the divinity of Christ. The base of these beliefs were in
the four Gospels and some more of their own
(apocryphals). As consequence of their cosmogony, they developed different
customs, morals and beliefs than those of the
current orthodox Christians:
The diversification of their beliefs, each community developed its own system: from here the fact of the existence of many branches of this sect, expressed also by its different names (Bogomils, Cathars, Bulgars, Waldesians, Selicians...). Per example, in most of the Western branches, there was an extreme dualism: two gods, one as benevolent (Christ or Lucifer), and a second as malevolent, Yahweh. The Bogomil calendar had a week of six days (60 weeks a year), and each month had 6 weeks (or 36 days), conforming thus a year of 10 months; to arrive to 365 days, at the end of the year five days were added up to rest (as the "Death Days" of the Egyptians or the Mayans). There weren't holidays. Marriage was sin because it leads to sexual intercourse and it leads to bear children, attaching with the material world, condemning another soul, and creating more matter. As alternative, other various forms of sexual activity were encouraged in its place; the vulgar English expression 'bugger' is a corruption of 'Bulgar', the name often given to the Bogomils in the West because of their Balkan origin. The children can't be saved until they reached reason and joined the sect... the reader can think what it would have driven. The Messalian branch was the most radical about that, and they were the best "gourmets". The most ascetic currents called for the strictest avoidance of meat and other animal foods, wine, milk and sexual activity to don't be subject to the material world. But in general, the moral was lowered, due to an indifference placed on performance in the material world with the belief that all bodily sins would be erased by the rite of consolamentum before death; from that moment on, strict chastity and a state of endura or total and suicidal fasting was required, and there was no escape, physically, though they were sure to save their souls, so they died "pure". The rejection of the cross and the icons, made with matter; on the other hand, they had a symbol that resembles that of the Turkish flag, but in horizontal position.
The inexistence of churches, they had only special rooms in their houses dedicated to pray: four times by the day turned towards the Sun, and four times by the night turned towards the Moon. The rejection of the Catholic or the Orthodox churches, its influences, and its hierarchies, seen as Satanics. What was better, they saved so the tithe. Recanting of the christening, the cross, and the faith in the Church of Rome for the new converts. The rite is reported by Petrus Vallecernensis, in his Historia Albigensium ( Story of the Albigensians ) referring to the Provenzal Cathars. The possession of goods were seen as sin: the properties were given to the Cathar church. The rejection of the worldly authorities: against the kings or rulers, a nationalist or revolutionary instrument, as can be read after. They claimed that man should abstain from labour too, because "labour multiples the domain of the Devil". Finally, they claimed that riches are far to be saved; it would have been music for the ears of the poor. They maintained that it was lawful to conceal or even deny their ideas for fear of persecution; thus, many of them lived externaly as Catholics or Orthodoxs.
Because of this last fact, it is hard to track the real numbers of heretics,
and even the archaeology cannot help us here. But
there are written sources referring the Paulician sect that can guide us.
Needless to say, the impression of that Luciferian sect
on the men of the Middle Ages surely would have been much more than these
of the Heaven's Gate or the God's Children of
nowadays. Paulicianism was preached first in the VII C. by a Costantine
of Manali in the Monophysite regions of Pontus,
Cappadocia and Armenia with success, afterwards also was preached in Anatolia
proper gaining many converts from
Iconoclacism (Christians agaisnt images and icones). Another source for
expansion of Paulicianism was Armenian inmigration
towards western Anatolia in the VII-VIII centuries profiting from the mostly
unpopulated and devastated lands that suffered
Arab raids. Also it was eased since Armenian acted by then in Anatolia
as Lingua Franca for commerce when Greek was
the language of the power and of the administratition. The first Iconoclast
emperors - Leo III, the "Isaurian" (717-741) and
successors protected them; even Conybeare counts these emperors as practically
Paulicians themselves (op.cit.).
Constantine V (741-775) transferred large numbers of them to Thrace to
defend it against the Slavs (yet Pagans, and perhaps
from here it began the preach of the heresy over the balkanic Slavs...
in the Balkan Peninsula their new converts received
the name of Bogomils). Nicephorus I (802-811) tolerated them in return
for their service as soldiers in Phrygia and Lycaonia.
Michael I (811-813) began to persecute them and his successor Leo V, though
an Iconoclast, tried to refute the accusation
that he was a Paulician by persecuting them furiously. A great number of
them at this time rebelled and fled to the Saracens.
Theodora, regent for her son Michael III (842-867), continued the persecution;
hence a second rebellion under one Karbeas,
who again led many of his followers across the frontiers. From the second
half of the IX Century, the Orthodox Slav monks
Cirilius and Methodius, started to preach to the Bulgarians - Macedonians,
and some years after, the Bulgarian king made
his reign officially Christian (865), but the masses of peasants remained
Pagan for much time; and what was worst for
Christian preaching, is that according to Petrus Siculus' writtings, the
Paulicianists were sending missionaries to Bulgaria.
The Basileus (Caesar) John I Tzimiskes (969-976) sent more Paulicians to
Thrace to defend it, where they founded a center
at Philippopolis (Plovdiv). In the 971, much of the Bulgarian kingdom was
lost to the Orthodox Byzantine state, then, for
many Bulgarians would have been better to deal with Bogomilism rather than
with Christianity in a nationalist way (as the
Irish - Ulsterian example). Moreover, the christianization in this short
time would have not arrived to the mountainous regions:
in fact, the Bogomil strongholds where the mountains: Kosovo, Albania,
Bosnia and the Rodhopi Mountains (nowadays
inhabited by the Pomaks, islamized Bulgarians), note how Bogomilism could
be tracked taking in account the actual Balkan
Muslims. In Bosnia it was the official religion. In the Cathar Synod of
1167, it was agreed decisions applicable to 'the seven
churches of Asia", among which were "ecclesia Romanae (Greeks), Dragumetae
(Macedonians), Meliguae, Bulgariae and
Dalmatiae".
The impression among the clergymen wasn't lesser, in 1106, Theophylact
of Ohrid wrote to the Basileus John Comnenus:
"One of the monks and clergymen [a Bogomil leader called Vasiliy, Slav
name], to my misfortune, scorned God and became
a prey to shamelessness, rejecting the human feeling of shame, and assumed
the figure of a harlot, rejected his own image
and ate meat rather than fasting, [became] libertine rather than forbearing...
That is why I ordered that this contagious and
common
disease be expelled from these territories [...]" What would have meant
it, "contagious disease", in medieval times ?
To get some account of the presence of Bogomilism in the Balkans, there
is that a papal legate stated that in Hercegovina
bogomilism was general in 1180. By the synod of Turnovo (1211), the synod
of Zicha (1221) and other iniciatives related
to such heresy in the Balkans, we learn that this sect was still strong
around Plovdiv [Thrace] and Ohrid [Albanese
hinterland]. Note that these regions will become Muslim after the Otoman
invasion: Bosnians in Hercegovina, Turks
and Pomaks in Plovdiv, and Albanese In Orhid. In fact many of the Turks
that inhabited Thrace (Bulgarian and Greek
side), emigrated to actual Turkey after that Bulgaria and Greece gained
their freedom in the XIX Century.
In that epoch (XI C.), the Bogomil heresy expanded with fortune on the
cities of Lengadoc (Provence, their name Cathars)
and of the Po Basin (Northern Italy, many names). Finally, in the XIII
Century, the Paulician sect almost disappeared in the
West through the preaching of Catholic orders firstly, its Inquisition
and conquest after: French in Langedoc, Imperial in
Italy. Its is said that in the West it almost disappeared, almost; yet
today many sects claim to be descendants of this sect,
but no much credit can be provided; where the sect really has survived
secretly is inside of the Freemasonry, with its deep
roots in the Middle Ages, otherwise, this fact is also unknown for the
majority of masons. In the East, what finally
swallowed the Bogomil sect was the islamization, as has been ascertained,
by the Turkish (XIV -XVI Centuries).
Not a set-back but perhaps a great loose: the unity of the Church was broken
officially in 1054, the East as Catholic, the
West as Orthodox.
ANATOLY (TURKEY) -
Great proportion as Orthodox and Hellenic in the time of the Muslim conquer
by Turkish tribes (XI c.). Above all
in major cities, in the Pontus area, the Aegean seashores, and in Cappadocia.
Other populations were Monophysite
Armenians, Paulician Armenians and badly known old nations (Phrygians,
Isaurians, etc.) that carried Paulicianism.
The Turkification might have been quick and absolute, at least for the
rural and nomadic peoples of Anatolia:
"The Emperor [Michel VI Stratioticus, 1056-1057], seeing that the Turks
were moving up and had got as far as the sea
of Pontus [Black Sea] taking captives, pillaging and burning [...]. As
they were empty of inhabitants [the towns and villages
of the Pontus region], this benefited the Turks who found there a place
to live." (Michael the Syrian). Notwithstanding,
Anatolia was sacked, depopulated and enpoverished since the VII Century
by continuous Arab raids, so that it left
a free way for future newcomers.
Before the Turks, Christianity was affected with similar Arab Maraboutism
and Animism, no matter if practitioners were
Orthodox or Paulicians (otherwise many Paulicians lived as nominal Orthodox
by sure), and such customs also were keept
by Muslims/Turks after the XI Century. Before that islamization took place,
it is known that in Bidana (Isauria) there was
a pilgrimage to honour St. Konon that included slaughtering of sheeps;
near Kybistra an unknown St. Paul who dwelt in
a spring healt by means of a palm tree; in the Asteles river (Frigia),
an oak that grew up from the blood of a St. Therapon
healt all diseases; in 753 we know of a Paphlagonian who went to offer
a cow to St. Theodore to sacrifice; and St. Nicolas
of Myra received offerings as blood of sheeps, wine, gold, etc. This type
of "Christian Maraboutism" along many
Animistic practices have been keept by many Georgians (see where Christianization
of Georgia), and it is known here
as "Anatolian-Caucasian Syncretism". This same Maraboutism was keept by
the Anatolians that became Turkish and Muslim,
but mainly changing names and religious afiliation: so today Saint George
is worshipped under the fugure of the Prophet Elias
and called Hidirellez or Hidir; similarly at Phrase, in Cappadocia, the
Turks used to pay their respects to Saint Savvas and used
to lit the candles; in the area of Akserai almost all the Christian saints
were respected; in Tripolis (Pontus) the Turks
worshipped together with Greeks the Virgin Mary, as in Cappadocia; or that
Saint Mamas' corpse was worshipped by
Moslems in his own church at Mamas (Cappadocia). A real proof of such transmission
of the Maraboutism is that the
same buildings were in common use both as Moslem sacred places, and Christian
churches; also is proof that Muslims
honour such saints slaughtering animals, and what ressembles more to maraboutism
is that such converted Muslim saints
punish those Muslims through corporal punishment and infliction of a sickness
if is not goodly attended/worshipped.
Of course, tree-worship is mantained all through Turkey also.
The radical decrease of the Christian proportion after 1914 is dued to ethnic cleansings of Greeks and Armenians, deported,
Year Total population Christians Muslims
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
1000 7500000 99% 0%
1200 7000000 (2/3 of Asia Minor is Selyuzid) 43% 56%
1520 5000000 8% 91%
1831 12% 87%
1881 21% 78%
1906 20% 79%
1914 11500000 19% 80%
1927 13000000 2% 97%
1995 62600000 0.1% 99%
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
but in the process nearly 900.000 Armenian men, women and children were assassinated, thanks to the secularizant
Turkish Youngs' government. They were the first example of methodic ethnic cleansing for some of the XX Century rulers:
the Fascist and Neopagan A. Hitler, the Communist and Atheist Joseff Stalin, or the Socialist and Atheist Slovodan Milosevic.
Another matter would be to know how much Christians found the Turks, or
at least what types (Orthodox, Monophysite,
Paulicianist, Syncretic). As it has been ascertained many times before,
the ethnical compositions are crucial to know the
religious proportions. The reader should license me to adjudicate Orthodoxy
for the Greeks, Monophisism for the Armenians,
and Syncretism or Paulicianism for Armenians latterly islamized and turkized.
Why these adjudications ? Well, everybody
knows: Greeks and Turks have had ever tense relations, and it would be
rare to find an islamized Greek as to find today an
islamized Jew, or a Palestinian embracing Judaism; and among the medieval
people, whether Christians, Muslims, or Jews, they
perceived ethnicity largely in terms of religious affiliation. Otherwise,
it is easy to track the turkized Greeks (Karamanlis: with
their own dialect, being Orthodox, and writing Turkish with Greek characters);
or the islamized ones (in the area of Trabzon,
but keeping their particular Greek and concealed Christianity). The traditional
religion of the Armenians has been ever a
Christian branch of monophysism, at least nowadays, but in the Byzantine
period, all the sources were recording the relation
among Armenians and Paulicians, even confusing all of them: "They increased
[the Paulicians] in numbers until all the
inhabitants around Philippopolis [actual Plovdiv] were heretics. Then another
brackish stream of Armenians joined them."
(The Alexiad XIV,VIII). In fact, where there were Armenians, there were
Paulicians. Yet today, this relation can be seen:
the areas most densely populated of Armenians in the XIX Century, are today
the stronghold of the Alevism (an heterodox
islamic sect). Moreover, the beliefs and practices commonly held by the
Alevis are very related to the ancient Paulicianism...:
Pantheism, they don't see Allah as a god of justice, of punishment or of reward as in the Koran. Otherwise they recognize the Koran, but as an irrelevant book that should be read esoterically. They reject the existence of Heaven and Hell, and commonly they adhere to the reincarnationist belief. Almost no Alevi practices ritual prayer five times a day or goes to a mosque (cami) for the prayer service at noon on Fridays. Assemblies (cuma aksamlari, literally, "Friday nights") have been traditionally held on Thursday by night and are conducted with great secrecy in lodges (tekke) inside of particular houses. The assembly is leaded by a guru (dede), performing animal sacrifices (kurban), and leading the members - males and females - when dancing the "Semah", a dance characterized by turning and swirling, and symbolizing the putting off of one's self and union with God (ecstasy). Sins must be confessed at the guru. Avatars: the most important of them would be Ali (from there "Alevism"); he is seen as semi-divine, or even as a sort of Christian Logos. Existence of innumerable superstitions. The Sufi elitist variance of the Alevism, the Bektashi sect, is usually antinomian (ideological immoralism) at least in appearance: due to their most high knowledge, it allows them to don't follow the islamic mandates or laws (shariah). Also hermetism and initiations are maintained. The most radicals of them hold the belief that the orthodox Muslims are in fact devil-worshippers and get the figure of Ali, killed by the orthodox Muslims, as a flag against them. Also, they do not recognize Mohammed and do not view the Koran as a perfect book. Taking into account all these matters, and due to the absolute secrecy kept, joint to the obviously concealment of beliefs from the public, many critical non-Alevis agree on the rumor that during cem ceremonies held in the evenings, Alevis extinguish all lights and then commit incestuous and adulterous orgies (mum söndü). These rumors are fueled more if possible with the unions that dedescreate with two matrimonies for mutual aid...
Figures:
before the abolition of the Bektashi Order in 1826, annual statistics were
kept, and these figures showed the number
of Bektashis to be 7.370.000: seven million being in Anatolia, and 120.000
in Stambul [it would have meant that almost all
Turks were Alevis]; likewise "The Perennial Dictionary of World
Religions" (Keith CRIM, 1989 - seen in ADHERENTS.COM)
states that the number of Muslims affiliated with Sufi brotherhoods during
the early Ottoman period (XVI c.) was certainly not
less than half the population and may have been as high as 80 percent;
In the WHITE's book (1913), he stated that in "Asia
Minor, about one-fourth of the population is Christian [25%, Orthodox as
well as Monophysite], and of the remainder,
perhaps a fourth is composed of Shiites or Alevis [19%]"; some years after,
Besim Atalay, delegate of the Grand National
Assembly, writing in 1924 estimated their numbers at 1,500,000; where Hasluck
in "Christianity and Islam Under the Sultans"
(1929) referred that Bektashis themselves claimed 3.000.000 as their total
number [around 20%]. Actual estimations by Alevi
writers and certain spokespersons claim that Turkey's population today
is one-third Alevi-Bektashi, or more than 20 million
[33%], lower estimates ranging from 10 to 12 million [20%]. The cipher
most credible would be 17 - 20 millions of an amount
of 64.500.000 inhabitants [around a 28%], according to the Summer International
Linguistics, SIL.ORG. If we recognize that
Alevism has its real roots in Paulicianism, we have a comment by Anna Comnena
in her "Alexiad" (XV, VIII), written in the
XII Century: "After this, in the course of the years of his reign, a very
great cloud of heretics arose".
It has been demonstrated how quick the Bogomils - Paulicians were ready
to accept Islam (In 1520, i.e., sixty years after
Bosnia's conquest by the Turks, Sarajevo was 100% Moslem), and it could
be stated that almost the majority of the new
converts came from the Paulicist Armenians; remember that Paulicism was
also a political or nationalist instrument, being
anti-Byzantine, being anti-government. Also, it would mean that Armenians
were surpassing the Greeks in Asia Minor,
and some proofs can be adduced:
Strabo relates that Lydians retained many customs, but not so their language: in his time they were mainly hellenized. [Aegean Asia Minor] But Saint Jerome (he again !) stated around the year 400 of the persistence of a different language among the Galatians [Celtic surely, in the region of Ankara]. In the "Life of St. Theodore of Sykeon" we can read how the saint pronounced 'In truth children, we have eaten like Galatians'. Then, one can think that Galatians were yet a distinct ethnic group: Theodore was born in Galatia around 560, and it would be rare to hear "I've eaten as a French" by a French, isn't ? Around 500 AD, unruly Isaurians, mainly soldiers and masons, spoke their own language. Also Phrygian was probably still extant, since it appears in inscriptions as late as the third century AD (Mango). Council of Trullo (held in 661), canon XCV: "for there are many heretics here, especially those who come from the region of the Galatians" A great immigration of Armenians started in the sixth century, many settled in Cappadocia and other parts of eastern Anatolia close to their original homeland, others in Thrace, others in the region of Pergamon, and the last great migration, was towards Cilicia (SE Turkey) where they created an independent state: Little Armenia, or Nova Armenia. The Armenians, since the middle ages, have been in large measure a diaspora people. The linguists argue that Phrygian and Armenian are very close linguistically, and that it is probably fair to say that they were also close ethnically [brothers one could say; or even father one, son the other...]. Perhaps the Byzantines confused Armenians with Phrygians, or may be Byzantines called "Armenians" all the Phrygians, who knows. In the Suda, a Byzantine Encyclopaedia of the IX Century, among some definitions we find statements for ancient peoples in present: "Mura, a place in the eparchy [province] of the Lycians."; "Lydian...: For the Lydians are a comic target because they satisfy their genital urges with their own hands." Bekeselene: the children called out "bekos." The Phrygians call bread by this name." Due to the losses of Egypt, Syria, and the Balkans, joint the constant Arab plunderings, Byzantium entered into a phase of general ruralization; it would have lead to a weakness of the hellenization, the resurgence of the local languages, or/and the colonization of expanding nations (Armenians...). It is attested a general depopulation of the Anatolian Plateau in the XI Century. Recently discovered sources of the 12th and 14th centuries mention a Christian community, which lived between Samsun and Ordu (Canik region), the members of which are referred to as Cans (=Chans, no Greeks). According to one argument, the name of Canik is derived from the name of this Chan or Tzan tribe. After the effective conquest of the area by the Seljuks in the 13th century this region was subjected to intensive Turk colonization. Strange fact is that Greek was present in the XIX Century were it was also spoken around III BC: Greece, of course, Aegean coasts and islands, Cyprus, major Anatolian cities, Northern Anatolian coast (Pontus), Southern Anatolian coast (Panphilia and Cilicia), and in a small part of Cappadocia (famous region being the place of the subterranean cities and churches; and the only place where saints and martyrs came form Asia Minor, excepting the coastal zones ...). Indeed, this situation is how if Greek would not have made any real progress... More strange if possible, the survivence of the Greek tongue in the major cities, places where the weak languages are firstly eliminated, or the non-existence of Greek villages in isolate or mountainous areas, were a language that goes to extintion would be keept longuer. In the past century, out of the traditional Armenian homeland, the Armenians filled the merchant and manufacturer classes inside of the cities being serious rivals for the Greeks in wealth and importance. And now a question of logic: if Armenians in cities were so wealthy, how we can explain that they were before poor immigrants ? It is that the Turks are too lazy ? My hypothesis, is that Armenians were the majority in Asia Minor when the Selyuzids arrived; after, the Paulicianist Armenians converted easily to Islam (as the Bosnian case), along with many Monophysite Armenians (as the Syrian or Egyptian cases), being all of them turkized. The remaining of the Christian Armenians, would have been of two types: one urban and wealthy, as were the rich mozarabians in Spain; and the other as farmers that resisted more easily the conversion to Islam and the turkization by living in isolate and mountainous areas, less controlled. The orthodox Muslims call the Alevis "Türkmen". How can be understood that ? I think that the ethnic ascription for this religious group was because they were perceived by other nations as Turks, but we know that Turks arrived from Central Asia without Alevism but Muslim orthodoxy; indeed it would have occurred if Armenians would have changed of religion and nationality by one new... The Armenian genocide of 1915-1916 effectively wiped out the Armenian population of Turkey, claiming some 1.5 million victims [representing that a 14% of the total inhabitants of Turkey], the terrible gaps in the ranks of the sedentary Armenian populations were filled by nomadic Kurdish, shepherds from the south-east; but this Kurdish penetration of Armenia had begun already by the tenth century AD. About the Greek fate in Asia Minor, was somewhat less letal: they were exchanged for Turkish populations of Greece. Before that and the W.W.I, they were approximately 1.750.000 (Greek Patriarchate statistics of 1912; the Turkish Official Statistics of 1910). It would have represented a 16% in Anatolia. The Greeks in Turkey were called "Rum", Romans.
These data leads me to give these final statistics: when the Turks arrived
in Asia Minor, they would have found a 16% being
Greek-speaking and Orthodox, a 14% Armenian and Monophysite, a 10% of nomad
pagan Kurds, and a little portion as
Assyrian Monphysites in the South-East (3%); the remainder (57%) was the
effect of turkization. As we know today that
Alevis were around two thirds among the Turkish-speaking population, we
get a sure 40% of Armenian Paulicianists in the
pre-Ottoman period. The not ascrived cluster would have been proportionately:
a 4% Orthodox, a 4% Monophysite, and a 9%
Paulician...; notwithstanding, I would suggest an overwhelming Armenian
Monophysite origin for this group.
The map of the Turkish conquests in Anatolia over the Byzantines:
Sixth wave 1050-1250__________________________________________________________________________
South
Spain (conquered to the Arabs and colonized by the Catholic Castillans);
Romania (by the Vlach immigration from
Macedonia
and South Serbia). Mongol tribes are Christianized partially (see its main
explanation under "Asia").
Dacia
becomes Roman in the opening of the II Century. No evidence of Christianity
in the Roman epoch has been found,
neither
in archeology, nor in documents. Time after, the Roman legions had to give
up Dacia in 271 A.D. due to the relentless
attacks
of barbarians. It was robbed and plundered by the Goths, the Sarmatians
and other peoples allied with each other.
Emperor
Aurelian"...Being convinced that the province with its diminished population
could not be kept under control, gave
it
up and withdrew his troops under organized circumstances. In 271 the army's
still remaining units were withdrawn and the
population
was transferred into Moesia". The withdrawn colonists, probably all or
mostly Latin speaking, were settled just
across
the Danube in the Roman province of Moesia Superior (Upper Moesia). Then,
Dacia falls over a dark age: abandoned
cities,
scarce population, no archeological evidence of Christianity, and any document
referring to bishropics in the region.
We
must wait until the coming of the Vlachs ( > Vallaquia ), from their homeland,
in Macedonia and Greece, - where even
today
Romanic speakers remain -, to find the first proofs about the effective
christianization of these lands (for an exhaustive
explanation
see "Balkans").
