Divinity Atlas

Sacred Correspondences
Sign In
Text size
100%
Theme
Source

The Bosnian Church: A New Interpretation (Fine, East European Monographs, 1975)

John V. A. Fine Jr., East European Quarterly, 1975

John V. A. Fine Jr. was a historian of the medieval Balkans. This 1975 monograph re-examined the Bosnian Church's own charters, testaments and other surviving records and argued against the long-standing view, dating to Franjo Racki's nineteenth century work, that it was Bulgarian Bogomilism transplanted into Bosnia; Fine found a native monastic and ascetic body whose surviving documents show no clear dualist theology. Its limit is that it argues chiefly from what the Church's own scanty records say and do not say, and the identification it rejects has never fully disappeared from later writing, including some scholarly writing, as later surveys of the debate note.

Facts
Citation
Author
John V. A. Fine Jr.
Publisher
East European Quarterly (East European Monographs no. 10), distributed by Columbia University Press
Publication Year
1975
Source Type
Monograph
Assessment
Reliability Tier
1
The study that overturned a century of received opinion identifying the Bosnian Church with transplanted Bulgarian Bogomilism, working directly from the Bosnian Church's own surviving records; still the reference point every later treatment of the question argues with or from.
Connections

Associated With

Bogomilism, Religions

This source names Bogomilism directly: "century work, that it was Bulgarian Bogomilism transplanted into Bosnia; Fine found a native monastic and ascetic body whose surviving documents show no clear dualist theology."

Source The Bosnian Church: A New Interpretation (Fine, East European Monographs, 1975)John V. A. Fine Jr.
Claims Backed By This Source (9 claims)

This source backs 9 claims across the atlas. As facts: 6 well-attested, 1 scholarly debate. As cited relationships: 1 holds. Plus 1 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.

Disposition By Topic

  • Sources, 7 claims: 6 well-attested, 1 holds.
  • Religions, 2 claims: 1 scholarly debate, 1 general references.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share a thought.
Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.