Byzantium

doi:10.1017/CHO9781107446953.006

3 - Byzantium

from I - Fundamentals

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 August 2014

Katerina Ierodiakonou

Edited by

Robert Pasnau

Edited in association with

Christina van Dyke

Show author details

Katerina Ierodiakonou: Affiliation:
University of Athens
Robert Pasnau: Affiliation:
University of Colorado Boulder
Christina van Dyke: Affiliation:
Calvin College, Michigan

Book contents

Get access

Summary

PHILOSOPHY IN BYZANTIUM

The Greek-speaking scholars of Byzantium – the eastern part of the Roman Empire, which was not devastated in the fifth century by barbarian invasions – have often been praised for their diligence in copying a great number of ancient philosophical texts, thus making an invaluable contribution towards the preservation and transmission of these texts for the generations to come. It is more often than not overlooked, however, that in Byzantium the works of ancient philosophers were arduously copied in order to be closely studied, commented on, and otherwise used for educational purposes. There is ample evidence that, at least from the ninth century to the fall of Constantinople in 1453, the Byzantines seriously engaged in a fervent dialogue with the different ancient philosophical traditions. This dialogue resulted in the composition of many philosophical works that belong to various genres of philosophical writing, including paraphrases, extended commentaries, commentaries in question-and-answer form, small handbooks, treatises on specific topics (sometimes in dialogue form), and letters and orations with philosophical content.

Though philosophy in Byzantium was undoubtedly influenced by ancient Greek philosophical doctrines – which, after all, provided the Byzantines with both a well-articulated theoretical framework and a sophisticated philosophical language – its character could not but also be influenced by the Christian faith in which the Byzantine thinkers were deeply immersed. For they read and criticized the ancient philosophical texts in the light of their Christian beliefs and with the purpose of either rejecting pagan views or trying to incorporate them into their Christian outlook. Indeed, the connection between Byzantine philosophical works and theology is admittedly so strong that in recent years it has constituted the basis for seriously questioning the autonomy of Byzantine philosophy.

Type: Chapter
Information: The Cambridge History of Medieval Philosophy , pp. 39 - 49

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CHO9781107446953.006 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Tatakis, Basil, La philosophie Byzantine (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1949)

tr. Moutafakis, N., Byzantine Philosophy (Indianapolis: Hackett, 2003)

Oehler, Klaus, Antike Philosophie und byzantinisches Mittelalter (Munich: Beck, 1969)

Lemerle, Paul, Le premier humanisme byzantin (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1971)

Podskalsky, Gerhard, Theologie und Philosophie in Byzanz (Munich: Beck, 1977)

Hunger, Herbert, “Philosophie,” in Die hochsprachliche profane Literatur den Byzantiner (Munich: Beck, 1978) I: 3–62

de Libera, Alain, La philosophie médiévale (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1993) pp. 9–51

Cacouros, Michel, “De la pensée grecque à la pensée Byzantine,” in Mattéi, J.-F. (ed.) Encyclopédie philosophique universelle (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1998) IV: 1362–84

Benakis, Linos, “Bibliographie internationale sur la philosophie Byzantine (1949–1990),” in Bibliographie Byzantine publié à l’occasion du XVIIIe Congrès Internationale d’Études Byzantines (Athens: Comité hellénique des études byzantines, 1991) 319–77

Benakis, Linos, “Die theoretische und praktische Autonomie der Philosophie als Fachdisziplin in Byzanz,” in Asztalos, M. et al. (eds.) Knowledge and the Sciences in Medieval Philosophy (Helsinki: Yliopistopaino, 1990) I: 223–7

Ierodiakonou, Katerina (ed.) Byzantine Philosophy and its Ancient Sources (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002)

Cacouros, Michel and Congourdeau, Marie-Hélène, Philosophie et sciences à Byzance de 1204 à 1453 (Leuven: Peeters, 2006)

Cacouros, Michel, “Recherches sur le commentaire inédit de Théodore Prodrome aux Analytiques postérieurs, livre II d’Aristote,” Atti della Accademia Pontaniana n.s. 38 () 313–38; Ierodiakonou, Katerina, “The Byzantine Reception of Aristotle’s Categories,” Synthesis Philosophica 39 (2005) 7–31Google Scholar

Bydén, Börje, Theodore Metochites’ Stoicheiosis astronomike and the Study of Natural Philosophy and Mathematics in Early Palaiologan Byzantium (Gothenburg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis, 2003)

Mercken, H. P. F., “The Greek Commentators on Aristotle’s Ethics,” in Sorabji, R. (ed.) Aristotle Transformed: The Ancient Commentaries and their Influence (London: Duckworth, 1990) 407–43

Ierodiakonou, Katerina, “Byzantine Commentators on the Epistemic Status of Ethics,” in Adamson, P. et al. (eds.) Philosophy, Science, and Exegesis in Greek, Arabic, and Latin Commentaries (London: Institute of Classical Studies, 2004) 221–38

Demetrakopoulos, John, “Nicholas Cabasilas’ Quaestio de rationis valore: An anti-Palamite Defense of Secular Wisdom,” Byzantina 19 (1998) 53–93Google Scholar

Barber, Charles, “Living Painting, or the Limits of Pointing? Glancing at Icons with Michael Psellos,” in Barber, C. and Jenkins, D. (eds.) Reading Michael Psellos (Leiden: Brill, 2006) 117–30

Trizio, Michele, “Byzantine Philosophy as a Contemporary Historiographical Project,” Recherches de théologie et philosophie médiévales 74 (2007) 247–94Google Scholar

Kapriev, Georgi, “The Modern Study of Byzantine Philosophy,” Bulletin de philosophie médiévale 48 (2006) 3–13Google Scholar

Karamanolis, George, “Plethon and Scholarios on Aristotle,” in Ierodiakonou, K. (ed.) Byzantine Philosophy and its Ancient Sources (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002) 253–82

Benakis, Linos, “The Problem of General Concepts in Neoplatonism and Byzantine Thought,” in O’Meara, D. J. (ed.) Neoplatonism and Christian Thought (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1982) esp. pp. 75–86 and 248–9

Ammonius, , In Porphyr. (Comm. in Arist. Graeca IV.3: 39–42, 68–9, 104–5)

, Elias, In Porphyr. (Comm. in Arist. Graeca XVIII.1: 45–8); David, In Porphyr. (Comm. in Arist. Graeca XVIII.2: 113–16); Olympiodorus, Prolegomena (Comm. in Arist. Graeca XII.1: 19)

Ierodiakonou, Katerina, “John Italos on Universals,” Documenti e studi sulla tradizione filosofica medievale 18 (2007) 231–47Google Scholar

, Proclus, Elements of Theology (ed. Dodds, pp. 23, 24, 116); Syrianus, In Metaphys. (Comm. in Arist. Graeca VI.1: 83)

Lloyd, A. C., “Neoplatonic Logic and Aristotelian Logic,” Phronesis 1 (1955–6) pp. 62–3Google Scholar

Barnes, Jonathan’s commentary to his translation of Porphyry’s Isagoge, p. 41

Ierodiakonou, Katerina, “Metaphysics in the Byzantine Tradition: Eustratios of Nicaea on Universals,” Quaestio 5 (2005) 67–82Google Scholar

Lloyd, A. C. does in The Anatomy of Neoplatonism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990) pp. 70–5

Tatakis, , La philosophie Byzantine, pp. 170–1

Joannou, Périclès-Pierre, Christliche Metaphysik in Byzanz: Die Illuminationslehre des Michael Psellos und Johannes Italos (Ettal: Buch-Kunstverlag, 1956) pp. 140–6

“Die Definition des Seins bei Eustratios von Nikaia: Die Universalienlehre in der Byzantinischen Theologie im IX Jh.,” Byzantinische Zeitschrift 47 (1954) 358–68

“Der Nominalismus und die menshliche Psychologie Christi: Das Semeioma gegen Eustratios von Nikaia,” Byzantinische Zeitschrift 47 (1954) 369–78