–

 Archimandrite Dorotheos (Dbar),

leading researcher at the department of history of Abkhazian Institute for Humanitarian Research named after D. Gulia ASA

Study of the issue of localization of the city of Koman on the territory of Abkhazia,

which began in the Abkhaz Scientific Society and continued in the Abkhazian Institute for Humanitarian Research

Report at the International Scientific Conference “Abkhaz Scientific Society – Forerunner of the Academy of Sciences of Abkhazia”, dedicated to the 100th anniversary of the formation of the Abkhaz Scientific Society.

In today’s message, I draw attention to the study of one very important church-historical issue, which begun in the Abkhaz Scientific Society in 1925 and completed at the Abkhaz Institute of Humanitarian Research named after. D. Gulia in 2021. I am talking about the possible localization of the city of Koman on the territory of Abkhazia.

As you know, at the end of the XIX century, a version of the death and burial of the great father of the Church, St. John Chrysostom (349/50–407) on the territory of Abkhazia, in the Guma region (Sukhum region) arose [Leonid Kavelin, 1885, p. 57–58]. A new toponym Komany appeared, as well as a large Orthodox monastery with several new Christian shrines: a church and a sarcophagus (tomb) of St. John Chrysostom, burial place and holy spring of St. Martyr Basilisk, the place of the third finding of the head of St. John the Baptist.

A new version of the place of death and burial of St. John Chrysostom became debatable. Some of the Russian pre-revolutionary researchers supported it, others refuted it [Dorotheos Dbar, 2020–2021, p. 83–90]. The October Revolution of 1917 and subsequent events did not allow church historians to continue studying this issue. However, unexpectedly for the researchers, the issue of localization of the city of Koman on the territory of Abkhazia was raised in the Abkhaz Scientific Society.

Thanks to the chronicle of the Abkhaz Scientific Society, published in its “Bulletin” for 1925 (No. 1–7), we found out that on May 28, 1925, a report by A. G. Ivanov “On the question of the location of the ancient city of Komany” was presented. A brief summary of the report is also given in the chronicle: “The speaker, on the basis of a critical examination of the available data (mainly Greek sources), comes to the conclusion that confinement of the location of the city of Komany to the area of Guma in Abkhazia, where the convent of St. John Chrysostom is now located, has no sufficient grounds” [Chronicle of Abkhaz Scientific Society, 1925, p. 4; Lakoba, Dbar, 2021, p. 66–78].

Unfortunately, we do not know anything about the above author, as well as about his report. Thus, we are deprived of the opportunity to get acquainted with the argumentation of A. G. Ivanov.

In the mid 90s XX century I returned to the question of the place of death and burial of St. John Chrysostom. Our research was completed in 2014 by writing a doctoral dissertation in Greek and defending it at the Aristotelian University of Thessaloniki (Greece) [Δωροθέου Dbar, 2016]. In 2020–2021, as a senior researcher at the Department of History of the Abkhazian Institute for Humanitarian Research, we published a large article in the “Bulletin of the Academy of Sciences of Abkhazia (series: Humanities)” entitled “Place of death and burial of St. John Chrysostom: Abkhazian or Pontic Komany? [Dorotheus Dbar, 2020–2021, p. 76–104, 97–118].

In it, we described in detail the history of the emergence of the Abkhaz version of the place of death and burial of St. John Chrysostom. In addition, we presented the history of our own research and the general conclusions of our doctoral dissertation.

The conclusions of our research work are as follows:

1. Based on the results of a thorough analysis of almost all sources of the biography of St. John Chrysostom, we came to the conclusion that the named saint, during his journey from Kukus of Armenia (or Cappadocia, modern Göksun, Turkey), from the place of his second exile to the place of final imprisonment – Pitius (modern Pitsunda, Abkhazia), died on September 14, 407 in the Pontic Komany (modern Gömenek, Turkey), before reaching the destination. We exclude the possibility of the death of St. John in the Armenian Komany (or Cappadocian, modern Şar, Turkey), although in some sources this ancient city was indicated as the place where Chrysostom died. We exclude the possibility of the death and burial of St. John in the Abkhazian Komany as well. The groundlessness of this version, which arose in 1884 and associated with the name of the “Greek archaeologist Constantine Vrissis”, was revealed during our research. Moreover, all our attempts to establish the identity of the above-named archaeologist, to find any of his publications, as well as to find the “mysterious manuscript” on the basis of which he made his discovery, were unsuccessful. We also believe that the place of death of St. John in in the village of Bizeri (modern Akbelen, Turkey), where, according to travelers, until the beginning of the 20th century, there was a tomb of Chrysostom, is also erroneous.
2. We were able to establish that St. John Chrysostom really died in the temple (martyrium) in Komany (where the tomb of the holy martyr Basilisk was located) and his body was laid to rest there. The saint who appeared in a vision to Chrysostom in Komany, 407 was (with the highest degree of probability) St. Martyr Basilisk, nephew of St. Theodore Tyrone, companion of the holy martyrs Eutropios and Cleonikos, who was martyred in the Pontic Komany between 309 and 311. Consequently, there is no doubt that the city of Komany, where St. John died and was buried, was located in Pontus, on the site of the modern Turkish settlement of Gömenek. As for the version according to which the saint who appeared to Chrysostom was Basilisk, bishop of the city of Koman (we have a message about this in one of the earliest biographies of St. John, in the “Dialogue” of Palladius), then (from our point of view) it is not sufficient least confirmed by data from other hagiological sources. In any case, even if further evidence is found that St. Basiliscus, Bishop of Comania, and St. The martyr, the warrior Basilisk of Koman, are two different people, one thing is certain and we know absolutely for sure: both of them – according to sources – were buried in the same place, in the Pontic Comani, and one of them in the same place in 407. appeared in a vision to John Chrysostom. As for the version according to which the saint who appeared to Chrysostom was Basilisk, bishop of the city of Komany (we have a message about this in one of the earliest biographies of St. John, in the “Dialogue” of Palladius), then (from our point of view) it is not sufficient least confirmed by data from other hagiological sources. In any case, even if evidence is found that St. Basiliscus, Bishop of Komany and St. Martyr, the warrior Basilisk of Komany, are two different people, one thing is certain and we know absolutely for sure: both of them, according to sources, were buried in the same place, in the Pontic Komany, and one of them in the same place in 407 appeared in a vision to John Chrysostom. Therefore, regardless of whether St. Basiliscus, Bishop of Komany and St. Martyr Basilisk of Komay were different people, or it is the same saint, the death of St. John occurred in the Pontic Komany, i.e., on the site of the modern Gömenek settlement in the territory of modern Turkey.
3. According to most sources related to the description of the history of finding and transferring the relics of St. John Chrysostom, it is obvious that the remains of Chrysostom were buried in the Pontian Komany (modern Gömenek, Turkey) and subsequently transferred from this city to Constantinople (modern Istanbul). The version of the transfer of the remains of Chrysostom both from the Armenian Komany (Cappadocia, modern Şar, Turkey), and from Pitius (modern Pitsunda, Abkhazia), as some sources reported, we exclude. We consider it important to emphasize that the very route of the procession participants who carried the remains of St. John, also completely excludes the possibility of transferring the remains of Chrysostom both from the Abkhazian Komany and from Pitius (Pitsunda).

Thus, on the basis of all the sources and materials reviewed by us in our doctoral dissertation, we conclude that the city of Komany, where St. John Chrysostom was buried, located in Pontus, on the site of the modern Turkish settlement Gömenek, near the city of Tokat.

Sukhum, November 22, 2022.

Literature

1. Δωροθέου Dbar, 2016 — Δωροθέου Dbar, αρχιμανδρίτη. Ο τόπος θανάτου και ενταφιασμού του Αγ. Ιωάννου του Χρυσοστόμου. Νέος Άθως: Εκδ. Ι. Μητροπόλεως της Αμπχαζίας, 2016.
2. Dorotheos Dbar, 2020–2021 — Dorotheos (Dbar), archimandrite. Place of death and burial of St. John Chrysostom: Abkhaz or Pontic Koman? // Bulletin of the Academy of Sciences of Abkhazia (Series: Humanities), 10 (2020), p. 76–104; 11 (2021), p. 97–118.
3. Lakoba, Dbar, 2012 — Abkhaz Scientific Society and its Destruction (1922–1931). Compiled by: S. Lakoba, A. Dbar. Sukhum: Press House, 2021.
4. Leonid Kavelin, 1885 — Abkhazia and the New Athos Monastery of Simon the Canaanite. With the plans of the Abkhaz seaside coast and the New Athos monastery. In favor of the monastery under construction. Compiled by A. L. [Archimandrite Leonid]. M., 1885.
5. Chronicle of the Abkhaz Scientific Society, 1925 — Chronicle of the Abkhaz Scientific Society // Bulletin of the Abkhaz Scientific Society. 1925. № 1–7.