This is the first complete translation into English of the Chronicle of Theophanes Confessor, which covers the period AD 284-813 and is one of the most important sources of Byzantine history, that of the Arabs under the Umayyad and Abbasid dynasties and of other neighbouring peoples. The Chronicle is a compilation of earlier sources, many of them now lost: in order to use it critically the historian needs to know what texts Theophanes had in front of him and how he (...) handled them. These have consequently been indicated in the text in so far as they can be indentified. Full annotation has also been provided on points of historical and topographical interest. The career of Theophanes, the character of the Chronicle, its manuscript tradition, and the use of earlier sources are discussed in the Introduction. (shrink)

David Malament, now emeritus at the University of California, Irvine, where since 1999 he served as a Distinguished Professor of Logic and Philosophy of Science after having spent twenty-three years as a faculty member at the University of Chicago , is well known as the author of numerous articles on the mathematical and philosophical foundations of modern physics with an emphasis on problems of space-time structure and the foundations of relativity theory. Malament’s Topics in the foundations of general relativity and (...) Newtonian gravitation theory has grown out of a set of lecture notes on the foundations of general relativity that he has taught for many years. In full agreement with Manchak , it should be pointed out from the beginning that the book neither is and was never intended to be a graduate general relativity a .. (shrink)

ABSTRACT Modern elephant tusk is compared with Byzantine plaques as regards the surface microstructure by means of macrophotography. We are thus able to illustrate the differences between elephant bone and elephant tusk, whereas many exhibitions and publications wrongly refer to ivory as elephant bone. It is not uncommon in Greek and German literature to confuse elephant bone with elephant tusk. Bone is porous and white, whereas ivory is yellowish and compact with characteristic dentine structural lines. The structural lines of dentine (...) in plates made of organic mineralized tissues are diagnostic features of ivory that conclusively differentiate it from elephant bone. Dentine is also more compact than bone. Unlike bone, which is inexpensive and common, ivory is expensive and rare in keeping with the stature, wealth and power of Byzantine Emperors. (shrink)

Though parts of the text traditionally called Theophanes Continuatus go back to the time of Constantine VII, it is in fact a compilation of various texts put together by a later redactor in the reign of Nicephorus Phokas. Likewise, the original parts of text known as the De Cerimoniis were produced in the reign of Constantine, but the text has come down to us in a later redaction, apparently also from the time of Phokas. In the case of the De (...) Cerimoniis, the final redactor has been identified as Basil the parakoimomenos, the bastard son of Romanus I Lecapenus. Similar interests and coincidences of composition in the two texts, particularly in Book VI of Theophanes Continuatus and chapter I, 96 of the De Cerimoniis, suggest that the compiling of Theophanes Continuatus was also the work of Basil. (shrink)

This essay aims to articulate why the Orthodox have historically, and to the present, opposed cremation. Its primary line of argument is that inhumation is a site of “theophanic encounter”: a manifestation of the Glory of God. This theophanic quality is borne out in the scriptures and the Church’s liturgical experience. In particular, the connections between the funeral service and the entombed Christ on Holy Friday and Saturday properly situate the meaning of the post-mortem body. This intimate connection between the (...) deceased and their body is clear in Orthodoxy’s “hylomorphism,” the soul-body unity, which champions the eschatology of resurrection. Finally, all of the above is concretely experienced in the cult of the saints and their relics, which become vehicles for the divine energies: a theophany of Christ’s ongoing conquest of sin and death. Thus, cremation can only be viewed as a tragic misunderstanding of the dual meaning of “doxa” in Orthodoxy: right-belief and right-glory. (shrink)

The article compares selected chapters devoted the problems of mind (anima) from two philosophical courses by Georgii Konyskyi, taught at Kyiv-Mohyla Academy in 1747-1749 and 1749-1751 academic years. As Konyskyi taught his first course using verbatim Teofan Prokopovych’s philosophical course of 1706-08 academic years, the article compares the doctrines on mind by these two Mohylian authors. It also shows the evolution of Konyskyi’s views. -/- There are common elements between the philosophy of mind of Prokopovych and Konyskyi: their interpretations of (...) Aristotle’s definition of the soul; the scholastic concept of the man as an integral mind-body entity; the problem of the unity and multiplicity of forms. It is shown that Prokopovych and Konsyskyi understood the three-level structure of a human soul in the same way as Francisco Suarez and Rodrigo de Arriaga. -/- However, there are some differences between these two Mohylian professors. They interpreted differently sensitive and intellectual cognition. Prokopovych upholds the scholastic doctrine of species. Konyskyi, in his second course, abandons this doctrine and defends the doctrine of impressiones. They are developed by the phantasmata – not received from objects. The impressions are modifications of animal spirits by direct or indirect impact of objects on senses of a human being or any other animated being. In the doctrine on intellectual powers, Prokopovych upholds the scholastic distinction between active and passive intellect. Konyskyirejects this common for scholastic tradition distinction and considers that passive intellect can do full-scale intellectual activity. The influence of Early Modern philosophy, especially Cartesianism, was the reason why Konyskyi changed his position. (shrink)

The modern critical approach to things hagiographical still wavers when it comes to taking leave of twelve lines of iambic invective, branded with wonderful delicacy of touch on the saintly foreheads of two Palestinian brothers, Theodore and Theophanes, the so-called “Graptoi”. Barry Baldwin, noting that C.A. Trypanis, unlike the great B. Bury and others, was inclined to disbelieve the story, could not help expressing the hope that it was true (An Anthology of Byzantine Poetry, Amsterdam 1985, pp. 142–3). It is (...) of course only one of the many stories concocted by iconodule propaganda. The central question has to be formulated in more general terms: how is history made? History here primarily in the sense of the construction of the past by the Byzantines themselves, was embodied in historical narratives moving between hagiography and historiography. Trying to lay bare the basis and elements of such constructs will always remain a major task of critical historical scholarship. (shrink)

The article supplements the publication of the introduction to Theophan Prokopovych’s philosophical course (taught at Kyiv-Mohyla Academy in 1707-09). It analyses characteristics of Prokopovych’s manuscript in comparison with the manuscript of Georgiy Konyskyi’s philosophical course (taught in 1747-1749). The latter turns out to be a copy of the former, as it does not contain significant differences. The article describes the editorial principles of Prokopovych’s Prooemium and the significance of the text as well as gives short exposition of the content with (...) the analysis of references by Prokopovych. It explains some codicological and textological characteristics of both manuscripts. The analysis of textual relation between the two manuscripts shows that Konyskyi’s manuscript contains much more mistakes than Prokopovych’s manuscript. Most of more than a hundred variations between the manuscripts are mistakes in Konyskyi’s manuscript. The author supposes that the student, the scribe of Konyskyi’s manuscript, not completely understood rather complicated style of Prokopovych. Prokopovych’s position about the style of exposition shows balancing between humanistic and scholastic ideas. It states that Prokopovych refers usually to ancient authors. The references in the text are quite detailed, but not enough accurate. Half of them (6 out of 12) happen to be incorrect. It is probable that Prokopovych made references from memory. (shrink)

This article explores Karl Rahner’s assessment of Augustine’s treatment of Old Testament theophanies and the Incarnation. It scrutinizes Rahner’s contention that Augustine deviated from the Christological interpretation held by earlier church fathers and finds that while Augustine’s interpretation differs from the majority of his predecessors, he is not the first significant church father to embrace such a view. Moreover, Augustine’s approach to the theophanies is shown to have deep roots in both tradition and scripture, challenging the explanatory power of the (...) Christological interpretation. The article then argues that it is unreasonable to link Augustine’s theophanic non-peculiarity directly to a rejection of incarnational peculiarity. In addition to the absence of definitive texts denying Christ’s incarnational peculiarity, along with texts clearly affirming it, Augustine’s close association between the missions and processions—an association that ultimately supports Rahner’s Rule—eliminates the possibility of him rejecting the Son’s incarnational peculiarity. Consequently, Rahner’s assertion about Augustine’s alleged denial of incarnational peculiarity lacks solid grounding in Augustine’s body of work. (shrink)

Die vorliegende Arbeit besteht, von Beigaben wie Indizes und Bibliographie abgesehen, aus einer 124 Seiten umfassenden Einleitung und einer 328 Seiten umfassenden vollständigen Werkausgabe des bisher wenig bekannten Antipalamiten Theodoros Dexios. Seine Schriften, eine von POLEMIS (P.) als „Appellatio“ bezeichnete Beschwerde über die Voreingenommenheit des Ioannes Kantakuzenos auf dem Konzil von 1351, zwei Briefe und ein von P. so genannter „Tractatus brevis de Christo ipso splendente in Transfiguratione“ sind anonym überliefert, zudem auch ohne Überschriften. Zu Beginn der Einleitung wird G. (...) MERCATIs Annahme, daß die Schriften von Dexios verfaßt wurden, gegen J. MEYENDORFF, der sie dem Arsenios von Tyros zuwies, überzeugend verteidigt. Der Autor des 1. Briefes vertrat die merkwürdige Meinung, daß das Thaborlicht mit dem menschlichen Körper Christi identisch gewesen sei (XVI). Diese Ansicht kritisierte Isaak Argyros in seinem Brief an Gedeon unter Namensnennung des Dexios, wie Mercati bereits feststellte (XXIII f.). Daß die genannten Schriften, die teils in Vat. Gr. 1111, teils in Vat. Gr. 1823 überliefert sind (XIII), auf denselben Autor zurückgehen, ist daraus zu erschließen, daß der Schreiber von Vat. Gr. 1823 in Vat. Gr. 1111 Autorenkorrekturen vornahm (XV f.). Ein wichtiger Punkt der Widerlegung Meyendorffs besteht auch darin, daß dieser die Worte des Dexios, die sich auf den Schluß des vom „seligen Gregoras“ inspirierten Glaubensbekenntnisses der Antipalamiten im Jahr 1351 beziehen, nämlich „an letzter Stelle war in ihm (dem Bekenntnis) folgendes zu lesen: ‚Hinsichtlich des Kalabrers Barlaam und des Akindynos sagen wir, daß wir damit einverstanden sind, was die heilige Kirche Gottes entschieden und festgelegt hat‘ (220), indem wir auf unseren Patriarchen verwiesen“, auf Ignatios von Antiochien, den Vorgesetzten des Arsenios, bezog, dieser schmähliche, wenn auch wohl postume Verrat an Akindynos (so unsere Meinung) aber laut P. eine Anerkennung des Tomos von 1341 bedeutet, mit dem Patriarchen demnach Kalekas gemeint ist (XX f.). P. weist nach, daß der Brief des Dexios, auf den sich Argyros in seinem Brief an Gedeon bezieht, trotz gleicher Thematik nicht mit dem von ihm herausgegeben Brief I identisch ist, sondern etwas früher (XXVI versehentlich „later“) geschrieben wurde (XXVI–XXVIII). Die Datierung der „Appellatio“ auf die Zeit zwischen 1351 und 1354 (Sturz des Kantakuzenos) ist sicherlich richtig. Da Gregoras in seinen zweiten „Antirrhetikoi“ wie Dexios von der Nichtveröffentlichung des Tomos von 1351, der Unvollständigkeit der erworbenen Abschrift wie auch von der Gefahr spricht, durch den Herrscher ermordet zu werden (s. JÖB 36, 1986, 263 f. 276), ist laut meiner Datierung (s. JÖB 27, 1978, 146, Nr. 70) 1353 als wahrscheinliches Datum der Abfassung anzusehen. P. verfaßte eine bemerkenswerte Anmerkung zu Georgios von Pelagonia (XXXI f., A. 65). Die Identifizierung des Georgios Gabrielopulos mit Georgios, dem Philosophen, geht auf R.-J. LOENERTZ und F. TINNEFELD zurück, die mögliche Identifizierung des Georgios von Pelagonia mit Gabrielopulos auf mich (s. PLP II, Nr. 3433 und Talbot in ODB II 838 f., die PLP ausschreibt). Inzwischen bin ich zu dem Schluß gekommen, daß Georgios von Pelagonia, der an Akindynos Kritik übt, auf Grund seiner guten Informiertheit kein anderer sein kann als Akindynos, der wegen seiner Voreingenommenheit gegen Barlaam im Jahr 1341 Selbstkritik übt. Akindynos stammte aus der Region von Pelagonia. Möglicherweise ist er nach seiner Flucht aus Konstantinopel 1347 mit Hilfe Stefan Dušans sogar Bischof von Pelagonia geworden. (shrink)

At the beginning of the 9th c. George Syncellus began to write a universal chronicle, the second part of which was completed by the monk Theophanes. According to Byzantine tradition this monk was Theophanes the Confessor. But 10th-century sources note that this Theophanes was the grandfather or greatuncle of the emperor Constantine VII, which is historically impossible. This prompted P. Speck to invent “another Theophanes”, who lived during the second half of the 9th c. and was the editor of the (...) Chronicle of Theophanes. The hypothesis turns out to be unfounded and untenable. Also untenable and unrelated to the sources is the hypothesis of C. Zuckerman that the author of the Chronicle is another Theophanes who lived at the same time as the Confessor. This study, after an analysis of sources, proves in both cases that they are historical phantoms. (shrink)

This paper analyses the concept of the Imagination of Henry Corbin (1903–1978) in relation to Daisetsu T. Suzuki (1870–1966). Besides being a renowned orientalist and scholar of Islamic thought, Corbin was a philosopher par excellence whose original thought deserves to be studied. So, I present this paper as a contribution to the evaluation of Corbin as a philosopher. In doing so, I shall shed light upon the philosophical affinity between Corbin and Suzuki, which has thus far rarely been discussed in (...) depth. Their ideas, in fact, resonate with each other—or Corbin is sympathetic to Suzuki—at a deep level, especially on the argument of Imagination, through Suwedenborgian thought, into whom both channel their interests. An exploration of this relationship of influence with Suzuki shall make a great contribution to a better understanding of Corbin’s own concept of Imagination, which could shake up our taken-for-granted idea of “imagination.”. (shrink)

The short catalogue of the manuscripts of the monastery of St. John the Forerunner tu Bazelonos written by Minoïdes Mynas in February 1845 is edited and the entries matched with the only other known catalogue penned by A. Papadopulos-Kerameus in 1909, based on a visit to the monastery in 1884. Two of the manuscripts contained in the catalogue of Mynas can be identified ; the rest is probably lost. An inscription contained in manuscript nr. 39 of the monastery and transcribed (...) by Papadopulos-Kerameus identifies Manuel I. Komnenos as the founder of the convent. (shrink)

Der einzige aus Byzanz erhaltene (fast) vollständig illustrierte Historikertext ist nun endlich durch eine Facsimile-Ausgabe in Originalgröße der Forschung zugänglich, während das Original leider für immer dem Tresor anvertraut wurde. So war es dem Rezensenten auch nicht möglich, die farbliche Qualität der Ausgabe mit dem Original zu vergleichen. Auf diese Weise stehen nun auch alle Textteile und die verschiedenen Randscholien (die in der Ausgabe von Thurn nicht vermerkt sind) der paläographischen und kodikologischen Forschung zur Verfügung. Ein Rückgriff auf die Illustrationen (...) bei S. Cirac Estopañan (Barcelona-Madrid 1965) und A. Grabar – M. Manoussacas (L'Illustration du manuscrit de Skylitzès de la Bibliothèque Nationale de Madrid, Venedig 1979) und die in der Literatur fast gänzlich vergessene Teilausgabe von A. Božkov (Miniatjuri ot Madridskija rŭkopis na Ioan Skylica, Sofia 1972) sind nicht mehr nötig, sofern die mehr als 400 € teure Ausgabe erreichbar ist. (shrink)

Cet ouvrage est une réédition numérique d’un livre paru au XXe siècle, désormais indisponible dans son format d’origine.

Volume 32, Issue 3-4, September - December 2019, Page 232-234.

Both the continuity of the history of Ottoman thought with Islamic thought and its relationship with the "new" movements of thought that emerged in the Western world have not yet been analyzed on a solid ground. In particular, the connection that Ottoman scholars established or failed to establish with the developments in the Western has been handled with various biased and superficial evaluations. One of the critical points that will contribute to a meaningful discussion of this issue is the translation (...) and commentary of Ioannes Cottunius' partial commentary and partial summarization of Aristotle's Physics into Arabic under the title al-Taʿlīm al-s̱ālis̱ by Asʿad al-Yānyawī as a member of the translation committee that established in the Tulip Period. In this study I will share some observations on why this work on Aristotle's physics was chosen for translation at a time when the new understanding of physics was thought to have become widespread in Europe, and whether the translation contains a new interpretation beyond a mere transmission. These determinations, which also include the criticism of some readings in the modern literature, will be largely based on the introduction (muqaddima) of the manuscript. (shrink)