68 Chapter 2 2.1 Introduction Πολλάκις δὲ καὶ ἐν ἑτέροις τόποις μεταβαίνοντες οἱ θεοφιλεῖς οὗτοι πατέρες, ἥκιστα τὴν ἡσυχίαν ἤμειβον, ἀλλ’ οἱ αὐτοὶ ἦσαν, καὶ καταμόνας ἀσκούμενοι καὶ κοσμικοῖς συνδιάγοντες καὶ τοὺς τόπους ἀμείβοντες· τοῖς γὰρ κατὰ Θεὸν ζῶσι πᾶς τόπος ἀσφαλής· οὐ γὰρ ἐν τόπῳ ἡ ἀρετὴ περιγράφεται. And often these god-loving fathers while moving to other places, they changed not in the least with regard to their hesychia, but they remained the same, both while exercising in solitude and while passing time together with worldly people, and while changing places: since for the ones living according to God every place is safe, for virtue is not circumscribed in a certain place.215 - Life of Elias the Younger 30 In the previous chapter, the analysis of the term stabilitas loci has illustrated how using an etic term that was not used in the contemporary sources to describe aspects of Byzantine monasticism may lead to wrong conclusions.216 Although etic terminology and approaches are often necessary and helpful to understand past societies, at times, the downsides outweighed the benefits. In contrast, emic terms and approaches, such as departing from the language used in ancient sources themselves, offer valid alternatives. As language is an important factor in both shaping and restricting thought, looking at the terminology that is or is not used in historical sources is particularly relevant for uncovering past perceptions. Accordingly, this chapter will adopt an approach centred on emic terminology. It will look at a specific term present in Byzantine monastic texts related to mobility: hesychia. From the outset it should be clear that this study does not aim to find a single term that can be used as a standard reference point when thinking about Eastern Roman ideas of monastic mobility and immobility. As seen via the analysis of the term stabilitas loci, concerns about monastic mobility are context-dependent and cannot be captured by one term (and certainly not by stabilitas loci). This was the case in late antiquity and it is my hypothesis that this holds true for the middle-Byzantine period. Rather, this chapter engages with the following question: what can we learn about attitudes towards monastic mobility and immobility in the middle-Byzantine period by studying how an emic term is related to (im)mobility in its narrative contexts? The term selected for this analysis, hesychia, is treated as a potential way into uncovering middle-Byzantine views on monastic mobility, but it is not seen as an umbrella term describing these attitudes. The analysis focusses 215 I am grateful for Stratis Papaioannou for reading together passages of the Life of Elias the Younger during the online Dumbarton Oaks 2020 Medieval Greek Summer School. This experience certainly improved my understanding of the text. 216 On the distinction between emic/etic, see footnote 124.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw