0

According to Ancient History Encyclopedia:

"Cathar beliefs ultimately derived from the Persian religion of Manichaeism but directly from another earlier religious sect from Bulgaria known as the Bogomils who blended Manichaeism with Christianity."

How is it that an influence is seen from the east regarding religion but not in other aspects such as language for the Cathars?

When I first thought about the term "languedoc" I thought about "langue d'occidental" but this is apparently not a valid connection.

  • 7
    Languedoc is where they spoke langues d'oc (as opposed to langues d'oil) dialects. Both are purportedly named after the way they pronounced 'yes'. Anyway, if your 3rd paragraph is your actual question, I suspect you should edit the question's title so it relates to the question. – Denis de Bernardy Sep 15 '19 at 16:16
  • 9
    Not sure what religion has to do with language. Can anyone name another occasion when religious change influenced linguistic change (absent colonialism or conquest)? What is the mechanism for the spread of Bogomil ideas into the Cathar region? – Mark C. Wallace Sep 15 '19 at 16:22
  • 2
    @Mikael Jensen When missionaries arrive at a foreign land, they usually learn the local language first and then use it to try to convert natives, instead of teaching the natives their language first and then trying to convert natives who understand their language. Thus hypothetical Bogomil missionaries in southern France would have learned the local language and dialect instead of trying to teach everyone Bulgarian. Missionaries only preach in their own language instead of the native language when they are part of a conquest, and you might remember that Bulgaria never conquered France. – MAGolding Sep 15 '19 at 17:04
  • 2
    In the same manner in which Europe adopted Christianity, without also adopting Hebrew as a language. – Lucian Sep 19 '19 at 0:18
  • 2
    Not sure why this question is proposed for re-open; as far as I can tell none of the issues raised in the comments have been addressed in the question. If there is evidence that some of the people had moved, following the Visigoths, then that evidence should be edited into the question. If there are other grounds for re-open, if there is something I've missed, please highlight. – Mark C. Wallace Nov 1 '19 at 16:39
14

First of all, religious ideas travel much more freely than languages. Christianity spread without Aramaic, Buddhism did not carry much Pali with it, etc. I would even argue that Islam spread in a much deeper way than Arabic, despite the central place of that language in that particular religion. The reasons for this are almost self-evident. It's a lot easier to adapt new religious ideas than it is to adapt a new language. Religious ideas are necessarily translated into local languages, even where the original languages of those religious movements do follow to some degree.

Secondly, the question seems to assume an absence of linguistic influence, but the evidence for that assumption is not clear. We should acknowledge that Greek had an obvious linguistic influence in Western Europe. That influence may have taken place through similar channels (i.e. the same trade routes) as the eastern ideas that influenced Catharism. Your observation might imply a hypothesis that Greek influence may be more evident in a southern language like Occitan as compared to French, but I have no idea whether linguists have already looked at this and what they have or have not found.

| improve this answer | |

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.