Prayer holds a profound significance in a believer’s life, with Lord Jesus teaching specific teachings to his disciples on the subject. It serves as a communication tool bridging the connection between God and humanity, constituting a dialogue rather than solely a platform for pleas or requests. This research delved into the specific text of prayer, focusing on Matthew 6:9–13, commonly known as ‘The Lord’s Prayer’. While many Christians interpret it as a ‘prayer of supplication’, the study questioned whether it (...) truly falls into that category and explored potential contradictions.Utilising a qualitative approach with a pure exegesis study, the author employed hermeneutics based on John D. Grassmick’s steps of exegesis analysis. The examination was centred on the Byzantine Greek Bible text in the Gospel of Matthew 6:14–15. The aim was to grasp the essence of the message within the studied texts, emphasising Lord Jesus’ teachings. Results highlighted the significance of understanding the Lord’s Prayer as taught by Jesus in Matthew 6:9–13. The author emphasised the importance for Christians in Indonesia to comprehend the meaning of this prayer.Contribution: This reconstruction of Matthew’s understanding of the Lord’s Prayer using the Byzantine text anticipated contributions to HTS Theological Studies. The Our Father’s Prayer, a blessing to churches and Christians for over 2000 years, was explored for its proper grammatical translation and the profound contents taught by Jesus. This study aimed to assist Christians in understanding and applying the prayer in their lives, aligning with the true faith and fostering spiritual growth as intended by Lord Jesus. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Millennium Jahrgang: 11 Heft: 1 Seiten: 289-360.

Le lecteur moderne demeure dérouté par les ekphraseis de bâtiments des textes byzantins. Il est en effet difficile de les considérer comme des sources pour l'archéologie ou l'Histoire de l'art, et la recherche tend à leur égard à adopter deux approches : l'une, plutôt liée à l'Histoire et à l'Histoire de l'art, s'emploie à retrouver des éléments réels de bâtiments ou d'œuvres d'art dans ces textes ; l'autre, plutôt philologique, cherche à considérer ces textes en eux-mêmes pour leur valeur littéraire. (...) Serait-il cependant possible de chercher une voie médiane? Une voie qui accepterait qu'une part de l'étrangeté de ces textes, nécessairement due à la langue et à l'époque, le soit également parce que l'expérience de lecture entre Moyen Âge et époque moderne a radicalement changé. Il manquerait au lecteur moderne, non l'imagination, mais les mécanismes et les résultats de l'imagination médiévale. Les échos lexicaux et thématiques qui balisent le texte et qui en dessinent l'architecture en seraient la clef aboutiraient à un texte en 3D, c'est-à-dire une projection mentale de l'objet décrit non pas comme simple image donnée par l'information contenue dans le texte, mais comme image construite par la composition du discours. Ainsi, au fur et à mesure qu'un auteur décrit un bâtiment, le texte le construit en mots et in fine en a épousé la forme. (shrink)

Le lecteur moderne demeure dérouté par les ekphraseis de bâtiments des textes byzantins. Il est en effet difficile de les considérer comme des sources pour l'archéologie ou l'Histoire de l'art, et la recherche tend à leur égard à adopter deux approches : l'une, plutôt liée à l'Histoire et à l'Histoire de l'art, s'emploie à retrouver des éléments réels de bâtiments ou d'œuvres d'art dans ces textes ; l'autre, plutôt philologique, cherche à considérer ces textes en eux-mêmes pour leur valeur littéraire. (...) Serait-il cependant possible de chercher une voie médiane? Une voie qui accepterait qu'une part de l'étrangeté de ces textes, nécessairement due à la langue et à l'époque, le soit également parce que l'expérience de lecture entre Moyen Âge et époque moderne a radicalement changé. Il manquerait au lecteur moderne, non l'imagination, mais les mécanismes et les résultats de l'imagination médiévale. Les échos lexicaux et thématiques qui balisent le texte et qui en dessinent l'architecture en seraient la clef aboutiraient à un texte en 3D (trois dimensions), c'est-à-dire une projection mentale de l'objet décrit non pas comme simple image donnée par l'information contenue dans le texte, mais comme image construite par la composition du discours. Ainsi, au fur et à mesure qu'un auteur décrit un bâtiment, le texte le (re)construit en mots et in fine en a épousé la forme. (shrink)

The present contribution engages with two representative examples of middle-Byzantine ekphraseis, Photios’ description of the Virgin of the Pharos and Leo VI’s account of the church founded by Stylianos Zautzes. It aims at showing how these texts suggest modes of viewing the sacred space and decoration that pose, more than settle, questions about images and pictures, their intended function, significance and impact within their specific cultural frames of reference. Far from being neutral and disengaged, these verbal representations have a (...) specific agenda, which inflects the audience’s perception and interpretation of the decorated church space. Comparisons with coeval monumental evidence are also offered, in order to analyze textual and visual developments in parallel. (shrink)

Les nouvelles technologies semblent offrir la possibilité d'aborder les textes avec une grande facilité et l'illusion de pouvoir maîtriser toute la littérature. En réalité, pour utiliser toutes les potentialités des nouveaux outils informatiques, il est nécessaire d'acquérir une méthode de lecture originale des textes. L'A. illustre ce fait à partir d'une expérience acquise dans la production de concordances lemmatisées d'auteurs grecs patristiques et byzantins.

This essay analyzes the known evidence for Byzantine engagement with what are conventionally termed “alchemical” texts, theories, and practices of the Islamic world. Much of the evidence is difficult to date. Nevertheless, the aggregated direct, indirect, and circumstantial evidence suggests at least some engagement by Greek-speaking scholars throughout the Middle Ages. This engagement took various forms, from the use of Arabic, Persian, and Turkish terminology to the adaptation of whole Arabic treatises in Greek. Sometimes the Byzantine texts emphasize (...) their Islamicate sources, and sometimes they do not mention these sources at all. The resulting picture is still fragmentary, but it indicates that medieval Greek-speaking scholars were active in the circulation of chemical knowledge and techniques in the Mediterranean and Middle East. Byzantium, therefore, should no longer be left out of research into long-term patterns in the history of science. (shrink)

Byzantine intellectuals not only had direct access to Neoplatonic sources in the original language but also, at times, showed a particular interest in them. During the Early Byzantine period Platonism significantly contributed to the development of Christian doctrines and, paradoxically, remained a rival world view that was perceived by many Christian thinkers as a serious threat to their own intellectual identity. This problematic relationship was to become even more complex during the following centuries. Byzantine authors made numerous (...) attempts to harmonize Neoplatonic doctrines with Christianity as well as to criticize, refute and even condemn them. The papers assembled in this volume discuss a number of specific questions and concerns that drew the interest of Byzantine scholars in different periods towards Neoplatonic sources in an attempt to identify and explore the central issues in the reception of Neoplatonic texts during the Byzantine era. This is the first volume of the sub-series "Byzantinisches Archiv - Series Philosophica", which will be dedicated to the rapidly growing field of research in Byzantine philosophical texts. (shrink)

The ontology of artefacts in Byzantine philosophy is still a terra incognita. One way of mapping this unexplored territory is to delve into Michael of Ephesus’ commentary on Aristotle’s Metaphysics. Written around 1100, this commentary provides a detailed interpretation of the most important source for Aristotle’s ontological account of artefacts. By highlighting Michael’s main metaphysical tenets and his interpretation of key-passages of the Aristotelian work, this study aims to reconstruct Michael’s ontology of artefacts and present it as one instance, (...) which is perhaps exemplary, of the Byzantine ontology of artefacts. In particular, the study shows that this commentary holds a definite position on the nature of artefacts, according to which they are neither substances nor hylomorphic compounds. Indeed, artefacts lack a form altogether and their forms exist only in thought. As a result, Michael’s commentary provides an ontological interpretation of artefacts as accidental beings, i.e., as matter which acquires a mere property as opposed to a substantial form. While such an interpretation shows originality when compared to the Aristotelian text, it also indicates adherence to the reading established by Alexander of Aphrodisias, despite important departures concerning the status of natural forms. (shrink)

An eleventh-century Greek text, in which a fourth-century patristic text is discussed, gives an outline of a solution to the Liar Paradox. The eleventh-century text is probably the first medieval treatment of the Liar. Long passages from both texts are translated in this article. The solution to the Liar Paradox, which they entail, is analysed and compared with the results of modern scholarship on several Latin solutions to this paradox. It is found to be a solution, which (...) bears some analogies to contemporary game semantics. Further, an overview of other Byzantine scholia on the Liar Paradox is provided. The findings and the originality of the discussed solution to the Liar Paradox suggest a change in the way in which Byzantine Logic is traditionally regarded in contemporary scholarship. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Journal of the History of Philosophy 41.3 (2003) 413-414 [Access article in PDF] Katerina Ierodiakonou, editor. Byzantine Philosophy and its Ancient Sources. New York: Oxford University Press, Clarendon Press, 2002. Pp. vii + 309. Cloth, $55.00.Talking about, let alone writing on "Byzantine Philosophy" within the English-speaking philosophical community could cause embarrassment. It is only recently that this field has gained a few notable entries in philosophical works (...) of reference like the Routledge Encyclopedia or the Oxford Dictionary—but still it cannot make its way into the histories of medieval philosophy, not to mention the general histories of philosophy. Byzantine Philosophy aims at providing good reasons for changing that tendency and seeks to "persuade [us] that Byzantine Philosophy is worth investigating" (13).The book contains eleven articles, plus Ierodiakonou's introduction and Linos Benakis's review of the current research, read in part at a Conference held in Thessaloniki, Greece in 1997, but it is more than a mere collection of conference papers. Written both by well-established and younger scholars from diverse disciplines, the volume focuses on the explicit or implicit dialogue of Byzantine thinkers with ancient Greek philosophy, one of the two ingredients of Byzantine Philosophy (the other being patristic thought).Ierodiakonou in her introduction prefers to make a few—but penetrating—remarks on the nature of Byzantine Philosophy and its proper study. Her arguments are presented in a non-conclusive form and they are intended to serve as guidelines to further research. While a longer discussion of the issues involved would be welcome by the less-specialized reader, her choice seems reasonable as long as one thinks—rightly in my opinion—that it is premature to embark on general methodological suggestions about how to investigate Byzantine Philosophy, or believes that scrutinizing the texts themselves is a more promising approach at this relatively early stage of research (as perhaps always).With one exception, each article deals at length with a special issue spanning from metaphysics to political philosophy and concentrates on individual thinkers from the patristic era to the Renaissance; the absence of philosophical theology is surprising. Expectedly the presence of Aristotle can be traced in logic: in an eleventh-century humble handbook (thoroughly analyzed by Jonathan Barnes); in Psellos's Paraphrase on Aristotle's De Interpretationeand in the anti-logical movement in the fourteenth century (Ierodiakonou); as well as in John of Damascus's discussion of will (Michael Frede). On the Christian-neoplatonic tradition are founded a nominalistic position of Basil of Caesarea concerning the semantics of proper names (Paul Kalligas); a sixth-century treatise On Political Science (Dominic O'Meara); Psellos's conception of philosophy (John Duffy); and the peculiar case of Chaldaean Oracles and their commentators (Polymnia Athanassiadi). The last article on the Renaissance controversy between Plethon and Scholarios over the primacy of Plato or Aristotle (George Karamanolis) brings the volume appropriately to an end.That Platonism and Aristotelianism nearly monopolize the contributors' concerns is justified but this must not give the simplified impression that Byzantine Philosophy can be exclusively explained against this background. Other Greek philosophical traditions, such as Stoicism, are mentioned as well, and the fourteenth-century interest in skepticism is densely discussed (Börje Bydén on Metochites). The first essay is an informative outline of the Greek-Latin Philosophical Interaction (Sten Ebbesen), whose inclusion in the volume makes a similar survey of ancient Greek-Byzantine philosophical interaction more warranted.The contributors do not confine themselves to resolving specific problems of a Quellenforschung, by identifying parallel texts or recurring arguments in order to establish the obvious dependence of Byzantine thought on Greek Philosophy. In fact, as many articles show, it is the very analysis of patristic and Byzantine texts that makes us return to their ancient sources and also makes clear how this revisiting can deepen our understanding of the texts and the philosophical problems they are trying to present or to solve. When doing philosophy, Byzantine thinkers have ancient Greek concepts in their minds, and quite often have ancient texts in their hands. Now it is up to us to evaluate... (shrink)

Mit dem hier zu besprechenden Werk legt der Verf. ein umfassendes Corpus der ihm bekannt gewordenen byzantinischen Bleisiegel aus Zypern vor. “Seals from Cyprus” bedeutet dabei sowohl Siegel, die aus Zypern stammen bzw. deren Inhaber auf Zypern ansässig waren, sowie Siegel, die an Dokumente angehängt waren, die aus anderen Reichsteilen nach Zypern geschickt wurden, und die man auf Zypern gefunden hat. Es versteht sich von selbst, daß das Corpus keineswegs als abgeschlossen gelten kann. Es umfaßt ca. 1250 Siegel. Weitere Siegel, (...) die dem Verf. nach Fertigstellung des Manuskripts bekannt geworden sind, werden in den Addenda publiziert. Für die Zukunft ist mit neuen Siegelfunden zu rechnen. (shrink)

Les érudits byzantins ont composé, principalement à des fins éducatives, des paraphrases et des commentaires sur la logique aristotélicienne et, en particulier, sur le De interpretatione. Certaines de ces œuvres trahissent clairement leur origine ancienne et d'autres témoignent soit de traditions anciennes perdues, soit des tentatives des Byzantins d'expliquer le texte d'Aristote. Mon but est de présenter les commentaires byzantins sur les premiers chapitres du De interpretatione, dans lesquels nous trouvons des traces de la théorie de la signification d'Aristote. Je (...) commence par rassembler le matériel textuel pertinent du XIe au XVe siècle, ensuite, je discute des points de vue byzantins sur quatre sujets qui ont un intérêt philosophique et historique : les mêmes pensées sont-elles partagées par tous? En quoi les ressemblances, les symboles et les signes diffèrent-ils? Les noms sont-ils par nature ou par convention? Les parties des noms composés signifient-elles? (shrink)

The study deals with ekphraseis on works of art and poses the question as to how far these texts can be a reliable source for the study or even the reconstruction of the artefacts they describe. Based on reception theory and readerresponse criticism, in the paper is proposed that as every text, byzantine ekphraseis on artworks presuppose an audience or readership, i. e. the one the author had in mind and on the basis of which he encoded his (...) message. In order to decode this message and by extension to extract any information about the described works of art we must aim to discover their “intended reader”, and identify his or her “horizon of expectations. This proposal is tested in the study of a well known piece of this kind, Manasses’s description of a mosaic floor with a depiction of Earth. The author’s dialogue with the earlier tradition of ekphraseis, his readership’s “horizon of expectations” combined with historical facts, allow us to suppose that Manasses is describing a composition with Xenia scenes and an asarotos motif created in the early byzantine period and preserved in the Great Palace of Constantinople up to the twelfth century. (shrink)

In this article, we present a colophon epigram found in the manuscript Napoli, Biblioteca Nazionale, gr. II C 33. We edit the text, provide a translation and commentary and supply it with a thorough metrical analysis. Throughout the article, we investigate whether the scribe meant this colophon to be one text or three separate texts. By doing so, we will touch upon broader issues, such as Byzantine metrics in general and the Byzantine habit of compiling texts (...) from an antiquarian perspective. (shrink)

The Discriptio Hispaniae is a passage from the Geometry of Gisemundus, also entitled Ars Gromatica Gisemundi, a medieval treatise of agrimensura written by an unknown author, probably a monk known as Gisemundus who had some agrimensorial experience. The work was compiled around AD 800 by collecting passages of a range of sizes, from just a few words to several pages, extracted from ancient and medieval sources. Although modern research into Roman agrimensorial texts has admitted the importance of the AGG, its (...) corrupt condition has not invited sustained analysis. The passage now known as the Discriptio Hispaniae, a short section from chapter three of the second book of the AGG entitled III De segregatione provinciarum ab Augustalibus terminis, is particularly interesting for the information that it provides concerning the territorial division of Hispania in Late Antiquity. This article presents an edition and English translation of the Discriptio Hispaniae and argues that the most likely point of origin for the Discriptio Hispaniae is during the Byzantine occupation of parts of southern Spain during the second half of the sixth century and the first quarter of the seventh century. We suggest that the Discriptio Hispaniae was preserved because the Byzantine authorities were keen to keep on record information about the borders of the province of Carthaginensis, perhaps the main theme in the text. (shrink)

This study concerns an inventory of books, dated 1428/29, inscribed in Sofia, Dujčev gr. 253 (olim Kosinitsa 265), fol. 290r. Although the text was obscurely published in 1886, the vicissitudes of this codex over the following century impeded further research and the inventory continues to be overlooked in studies of Byzantine libraries, books and reading. A new edition, furnishing corrections and filling lacunae, together with a first translation and palaeographical analysis, provide a foundation for introducing this rare document (...) and re-evaluating its context and significance. While the limited prior scholarship generally presumed compilation in a monastic library in 1428/29 and pursued inquiries based on that surmise, examination of Dujčev gr. 253 draws attention to annotations by a member of the Laskaris Leontares family, dated 1431-1437,which place the codex in private possession during this period. A survey of thirteen extant codices variously connected to this distinguished aristocratic dynasty, c.1400 - 1455, elucidates acquisition, ownership and use of books in this socio-cultural milieu, with particular reference to this family’s history and social networks. Comparative assessment of this sample of thirteen codices and the 21 items recorded in the book-list of 1428/29 affirms the view that it relates to a private rather than an institutional library and distinguishes its potential value for investigating aristocratic book culture in the late Byzantine era. (shrink)

: Byzantine philosophy is an unexplored field and one of the more neglected periods in the history of philosophy. Although Byzantine philosophers often have received credit for transmitting ancient philosophical texts, they have not been studied for their own philosophical merit. In order to make easier the study of Byzantine philosophy, to introduce it to a broader academic public and to promote teaching of the subject at the university level, I propose to edit a three-volume sourcebook of (...) Byzantine philosophical texts with English translation and comments, containing the most important texts from the ninth to the fifteenth century, covering the areas of logic, epistemology, natural philosophy, psychology, ethics and politics. Keywords: Byzantine philosophy, Byzantine logic, Byzantine natural philosophy, Byzantine psychology, Byzantine ethics, Byzantine politics, sourcebook. (shrink)

“The Aristotelian corpus and Christian Philosophy in Byzantium between the Ninth and Fifteenth Centuries: Readings and Traditions” is the topic of Section I of SIEPM Commission VIII: Byzantine Philosophy. Aristotle’s writings, which were assimilated variously, function as a meta-text of medieval intellectual culture. Between the nineth and fifteenth centuries Byzantine thinkers developed stable and functional strategies for integrating Aristotle’s philosophical methodology into different theological and philosophical contexts. The project will study the influence of Aristotle on Byzantine (...) metaphysics, epistemology, physics and ethics. We shall attempt to reconstruct the Aristotelian roots of key conceptual models in Byzantine philosophy that played a major role in theological discussion and exposition, such as the metaphysical status of hypostasis, the paradigm of essence-energy, the use of the categories for developing the concept of the image, the transformation of Aristotle’s concept of the soul in lig... (shrink)

We are going to present a panorama of Byzantine Philosophy. As starting point should be considered the Patristic Thought, which preceded the Byzantine Philosophy and was established in the first centuries A.D. into the Greek-Roman world. It was based on the Old and New Testament, the apostolic teachings, as well as on Judaism and Greek Philosophy. Also, the Ancient Oriental Religions – especially those of the Greek-Roman period, i.e. the Gnosticism- exerted an influence on it. The Patristic Thought (...) and the Ancient Greek Philosophy were the two main pedestals of Byzantine Philosophy. But, we cannot separate completely Patristic thought from the Byzantine Philosophy, first because the Byzantine Philosophy used all the corpus of the preceded texts of the Church Fathers and second because the Patristic Thought was continued to the end of Byzantium in interaction with Byzantine Philosophy. When we use he term Byzantine Philosophy we refer to the ideological currents that flourished from the 9th century till the 15th in the geographical area of the Greek East. Its main task was the quest for truth from the metaphysical point of view. In this era we have not only commentaries and scholastic works, but also an assimilation of the previous philosophical and scientific developments in purpose of an interior evolution. The opposition to, and the use of, the Western scholasticism were also another two special characteristics of Byzantine Thought. The use of the logical works of Aristotle and the metaphysics of Plato made up its main theoretical body, always in relation to the Christian dogmas. The logical, metaphysical, cosmological, ethical, aesthetical and anthropological subjects were closely connected with the fixed Christian view of the World, God and Man. But despite the influence of the Christian religion and the Aristotelic, Platonic, Stoic, Neoplatonic etc. teachings, today we can arrive at the conclusion that from the ninth through the fifteen century a relative autonomy of Philosophy in Byzantium was emerged. Also, the Philosophical thought in Byzantium gave some new solutions to the old problems and dared sometimes to proceed in new rational, mystical or even empirical elaborations of original philosophical questions. (shrink)

Ce volume comprend les laquo;Actesraquo; de la Table Ronde reacute;aliseacute;e au sein du XXe Congregrave;s International d'Eacute;tudes Byzantines (Paris, ...

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Byzantine Matters by Averil CameronPanagiotis RoilosAveril Cameron. Byzantine Matters. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2014. xviii + 164 pp. 3 black-and-white maps. Cloth, $22.95.From C. P. Cavafy to W. B. Yeats, Ezra Pound, and more recently, Julia Kristeva, literary authors and intellectuals have eloquently (and as a rule more effectually than academics) shown that Byzantine matters are of noteworthy relevance to broader, i.e., not only (...) scholarly, domains of (post)modern culture too. Despite (or, at times, even because of) certain rather ineluctable limitations mainly deriving from its marked genre (general survey of the state of the field), Byzantine Matters belongs to that rare group of scholarly books that contribute considerably to the promotion of the Byzantine “cause” beyond the confines of the specific research and academic area. Written by one of the most eminent and influential scholars of late antiquity and early Byzantium, this book fulfills its valuable self-imposed aims: in a commendable, as a whole, interdisciplinary manner, it outlines the research trajectories that Byzantinists should pursue today, if they wish to expand their field’s methodological self-awareness and achieve a competitive level of theoretical sophistication.An important constituent of Averil Cameron’s critique of widespread preconceptions about Byzantium even in contemporary scholarly discourses (either in [End Page 719] the specialized research field or, more explicitly, in relevant ones) is her exposure of the detrimental ideological parameters of the exoticism and exceptionalism that often inform approaches to that past culture. The author’s task is not easy; on the contrary, it is bound to cause some distress or uneasiness in conservative scholarly circles (or “schools”).Cameron begins her discussion of the present state of Byzantine studies and of the related research desiderata by diagnosing the “absence” of Byzantium from hegemonic historiographic discourses in the so-called Western world. Origins and causes of this “absence” are astutely (albeit partially) traced back to influential Anglo-centric interpretive paradigms, these being of entirely derogatory (see Edward Gibbon’s notorious “history” and more recently the dogmatic conservatism of Arnold Toynbee and Samuel Huntington) or exoticizing, Orientalizing orientation (as exemplified in the activities of, e.g., Robert Byron and David Talbot Rice). Byzantium is shown to have been reduced to the state of the historical and historiographical “subaltern” of the West (9). Although I would have preferred to describe this idiosyncratic position of Byzantium in the dominant historiographic practice and the imaginary of the West in terms of what elsewhere I have defined as “para-marginality,” I must stress that Cameron’s sensitive outline of the Byzantine “absence” from established scholarly paradigms attests to her openness to sophisticated methodological schemata that might contribute to a creative and, whenever necessary, critical dialogue of Byzantine studies with related disciplines and broader theoretical debates.In her reappraisal of current scholarly views concerning the status of Byzantium as an empire, the author rightly emphasizes the adaptability and flexibility of Byzantine sociopolitical and economic structures and mechanisms, thus exposing the widespread view of an “unchanging Byzantium” as a mere “popular myth” (35). Equally noteworthy is her focusing on the contribution of ritual occasions and performances of ideologically and politically manipulated rhetoric to the reaffirmation, communication, and effectiveness of imperial power in Byzantium.Cameron’s learned approach to Byzantine art, which is introduced with a general discussion of the attraction it held for British authors (where, however, Ruskin’s work is conspicuously missing), and to the current state of its research places a judicious emphasis on the tension between iconoclasm and iconolatry as well as on issues of periodization. Of special significance is Cameron’s reference to the performative functions of icons in Byzantium and her call for new, interdisciplinary approaches to Byzantine art. However, the opposition between the written word and the image that the author, endorsing Michael Squire’s approach (74), puts forward is an unconvincing rhetorical construct rather than an always valid hermeneutic tool. Theology and religious practice in Byzantium never really reduced the written word to a state inferior to that of the image, as is evinced not only by the frequent coexistence of text and pictorial representation in Byzantine art but also by the extremely... (shrink)

L'A. analyse quatre miniatures de la Bible de Léon, personnage de la cour byzantine vers 940, et particulièrement celle de Moïse sur le mont Sinaï. La démarche semble intéressante puisque c'est la première expression d'une nouvelle iconographie amorcée après la crise iconoclaste. L'A. suit l'évolution exégétique de la révélation sur le mont Sinaï à travers le discours des théologiens iconodules dans le contexte plus large du texte et de l'image. A la lumière de ce développement, il est possible d'entrevoir (...) dans la Bible de Léon un écho visuel de la théologie post-iconoclaste. (shrink)

Maas hat einfach den von Heinrich Kirn im Jahr 1880 edierten Text („Theodor von Mopsuestia und Junilius Africanus als Exegeten. Nebst einer kritischen Textausgabe von des letzteren Instituta regularia divinae legis“, Freiburg i. B.) ohne jede eigene Bearbeitung und weitere Aufbereitung abgedruckt (S. 118–234; S. 266–269 Kirns Zitatenregister übernommen; doch keine Berücksichtigung des Textes im Sach-und Autorenregister S. 275–280). Selbst die seit 1947 bekannten zusätzlichen neun Handschriften (M. L. W. Laistner: Harv. Theol. Rev. 40, 1947, 19–31), hat Maas nicht (...) auf ihre Qualität und Bedeutung geprüft, sondern sie S. 116f. nur aufgezählt. Nützlich ist die beigefügte englische Übersetzung, doch hatte bereits J. F. Collins im Jahr 1998 eine solche Übersetzung im Internet zugängig gemacht (ccat.sas.upenn.edu/jod/texts/junillus.trans.html). Rückverweise vom Text auf die Einleitung oder erläuternde Sachanmerkungen zu Text und Übersetzung finden sich nicht. Und auch die Bezüge der Einleitung auf den Text sind nicht präzis. Der Schwerpunkt der vorliegenden Untersuchung liegt also nicht auf Text und Übersetzung der Instituta, sondern auf der Einleitung zum Text (S. 1–115), was ja schon die Titelgestaltung des Buches vermuten läßt. (shrink)

The Byzantine dreambook known in the tradition as The Oneirocriticon of Achmet has had a long and influential history both in its field and in scholarship. It is the longest of the eight surviving Byzantine books on dream interpretation, and most likely also the oldest. It was compiled during the Macedonian renaissance—specifically, the two termini of 843 and 1075 can be established—possibly in the reign of Leo VI (r. 886–912), to whom it may have been dedicated, and possibly (...) through the influence of his Arab minister Samonas. It was translated early into Latin, in 1176 (by contrast, the famous ancient dreambook of Artemidorus was not translated until 1539), and “through this translation found its way into several European and vernacular languages from the late thirteenth century onward” (p. 4). The scholarly study of the work began in 1577, with the preface Johann Loewenklau wrote for his Latin translation of the Greek text, and continued apace to this day. The book by Maria Mavroudi under review here, from which this information is taken (chapter 1), is the latest in a long series of studies. It is also the most exhaustive and meticulous in its research and the first fully to take into account, in a professional and exemplary manner, the Arabic sources of the work. Exhaustive, but perhaps also exhausting—one may object that 471 pages of text (exclusive of prefatory material and bibliographies and indices) for a study of a mere dreambook may be too many, though apparently necessary, for Mavroudi's book contends against the weight of previous scholarship and offers much needed correctives. (shrink)

quippe Byzantium fertili solo, fecundo mari, quia uis piscium in metapontum erumpens et obliquis subter undas saxis exterrita omisso alterius litoris flexu hos ad portus defertur.For Byzantium is favoured with fertile soil and teeming seas, since a multitude of fish, bursting out and spooked by rocks slanting beneath the water, leave off the curve of the opposite shore and are wafted to these harbours. That is the text of the second Medicean and all of its descendants. For centuries now (...) the unfitness of the words in metapontum has been obvious to editors. J. Lipsius conjectured innumera Pontum, G. Brotier innumera Ponto, N. Bach and G.A. Ruperti immensa Pontum. F. Ritter returned to the problem again and again, first proposing immensa Ponto, then immensum Ponto, i.e. ‘immensa multitudine’, and finally in meatu Ponti. Bach's and Ruperti's remedy is clearly the most efficient. Modern editors agree in printing uis piscium immensa Pontum erumpens, ‘an immense multitude of fish, bursting out of the Pontus'. Neat, but perhaps unnecessary. My object here is to defend the text of the manuscripts. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Human Perfection in Byzantine Theology: Attaining the Fullness of Christ by Alexis TorranceJoshua H. LimHuman Perfection in Byzantine Theology: Attaining the Fullness of Christ by Alexis Torrance, Changing Paradigms in Historical and Systematic Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020), ix + 239 pp.As a part of the series Changing Paradigms in Historical and Systematic Theology, Alexis Torrance's Human Perfection in Byzantine Theology examines the role (...) of Christ's human perfection within key figures in the Byzantine tradition against the backdrop of trends in contemporary Orthodox theology. Torrance seeks to uncover a common "Christocentrism" within the Byzantine tradition that challenges the contemporary tendency among contemporary Orthodox theologians to "unmoor" theological anthropology from the doctrine of the humanity of Christ. Indeed, according to Torrance, some of these approaches go so far as to risk the danger of "theological shipwreck" (1). As general representatives of the tendency Torrance has in mind, we can name such figures as John Zizioulas and Vladimir Lossky, whose personalist anthropologies depart from the tradition by "bypassing or deferring Christology" (10) In the case of Zizioulas, for instance, Torrance sees the disintegration of theological anthropology into "a sentimental application or projection of worldly and hazy concepts of personality and 'community' to both the Godhead and the people of God" (10). If, for Torrance, the above thinkers appear to represent a wayward tendency (even if he takes issue with certain of their "starting points," Torrance nevertheless seems to agree with most of their conclusions), it is Fr. John Behr whose theology Torrance likely has in mind as risking "theological shipwreck."As we shall see, the overall intelligibility of Torrance's work appears only in the final chapter, against the backdrop of Behr's "unmistakably Christocentric" (206) anthropology. While Torrance joins Behr in bemoaning the non-Christocentric character of much of modern theological anthropology, nevertheless, he sees Behr's project as positing a Christocentrism that flies in the face of the Byzantine tradition. In light of Behr's Christocentrism (and in a way that is reminiscent of Gaudium et Spes §22), Torrance wishes to [End Page 373] show that, for any genuinely Byzantine doctrine, Christ, in his particular and enduring humanity, must be the starting point of the human ideal: "Human perfection and human destiny are only revealed, known, and bequeathed in the person of Jesus Christ, the God-man" (11). To this end, Torrance proposes a "fresh Christocentric paradigm" (3).Torrance's study provides insight into important texts which both implicitly and explicitly reflect the priorities of the Fathers. Taking the historical and systematic approach of Georges Florovsky's "neo-patristic synthesis" as his cue, Torrance highlights the centrality of Christ's humanity in four key figures. He examines the immovability of the human will in the eschaton in Maximus the Confessor (ch. 2), the particular ("depictable") and enduring humanity of Christ in Theodore the Studite (ch. 3), the attainability of human perfection in Symeon the New Theologian (ch. 4), and the possibility of deification through uncreated grace in Gregory Palamas (ch. 5). In each of these thinkers Torrance discovers a "thoroughly Christocentric gaze" (37), which begins from the concrete and particular human nature of Christ, and thereby provides a contrast with the abstract tendency of certain contemporary Orthodox thinkers. However, as we shall see, on account of the ambiguity surrounding the term "Christocentric," it is not always clear whether or how Christ's humanity and human perfection figure into the themes discussed. More problematically, it is not always clear whether Christ's perfect humanity provides an insight into human perfection or human nature, as such.For the purposes of this review, we will focus on Torrance's chapter on Theodore the Studite. Torrance's treatment of Theodore is distinct from his treatment of other Byzantine figures inasmuch as Theodore's teaching on Christ's depictability is historically situated in an explicitly Christological debate. While the studies on Maximus, Symeon, and Palamas certainly have themes that, in one way or another, advert to Christ's humanity, nevertheless none of particular issues treated can be said to have Christ's humanity as their essential starting point. This is to say that Christ's human perfection... (shrink)

Michael Psellos has long been known as a key figure in the history of Byzantine literary and intellectual culture, but his theoretical and critical reflections on literature and art are little known outside of a small circle of specialists. Most famous for his Chronographia, a history of eleventh-century Byzantine emperors and their reigns, Psellos also excelled in describing as well as prescribing practices and rules for literary discourse and visual culture. The ambition of Michael Psellos on Literature and (...) Art is to illustrate an important chapter in the history of Greek literary and art criticism and introduce precisely this aspect of Psellian writing to a wider public. The editors of this volume present thirty Psellian texts, all of which have been translated - some in part, most in their entirety - into English. In the majority of cases, the works are translated for the first time in any modern language, and several are discussed at length here for the first time. They are grouped into two separate sections, which roughly translate to two areas of theoretical reflection associated with the modern terms 'literature' and 'art.'0. (shrink)

Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians, read on important Christian feasts, can be commented on from various perspectives: as a documents about mission, about warning with regard to the difficulties concerning the life of a believer, as one about the differences between Jews and Christians, or/and as one about freedom. It seems to us that within this text the Apostle intended to emphasize especially the latest aspect. St. John Chrysostom considered this document so important that he included it in his (...) Liturgy. (shrink)

Our research on the texts of the Byzantine historians and chroniclers revealed an apparently curious phenomenon, namely, the abandonment of terminally ill emperors by their physicians when the latter realised that they could not offer any further treatment. This attitude tallies with the mentality of the ancient Greek physicians, who even in Hippocratic times thought the treatment and care of the terminally ill to be a challenge to nature and hubris to the gods. Nevertheless, it is a very curious (...) attitude in the light of the concepts of the Christian Byzantine physicians who, according to the doctrines of the Christian religion, should have been imbued with the spirit of philanthropy and love for their fellowmen. The meticulous analysis of three examples of abandonment of Byzantine emperors, and especially that of Alexius I Comnenus, by their physicians reveals that this custom, following ancient pagan ethics, in those times took on a ritualised form without any significant or real content. (shrink)

It is the aim of this article to identify possible sources of additional texts for October in the many Slavonic copies of the October menologion, and also to show how the pre-metaphrastic Byzantine October menologion once might have looked, based on the evidence of the Slavonic translated menologia.

This paper shows that the protagonists of Byzantine Passions are often depicted as attaining holiness while on the move: after their arrest by pagan soldiers, Christian martyrs are subjected to travels for legal reasons. Drawing on the anthropological concept of liminality, I will suggest that such inflicted travels or transfers in Byzantine Passions serve as liminal phases between interrogation, torture, imprisonment, and execution, by which the protagonists ascend to the state of holiness. The paper, structured in three major (...) sections, focuses on scenes of ‘imprisoned martyrs on the move’ as delineated in both pre-Metaphrastic and Metaphrastic martyrdom accounts. After a concise introduction to the theoretical background and the text corpus of this study, the main sections explicate the motif of imposed movement in conjunction with the literary construction of holiness, the spiritual formation of the audience, and the structure of a martyrdom narrative. (shrink)