Malevus

Tag: Byzantine

  • Philosophy in the Byzantine Empire

    Philosophy in the Byzantine Empire

    Byzantine philosophy consists of the works and philosophical currents expressed in Greek within the Byzantine Empire, starting in the 9th century and flourishing in the following century until the empire’s fall in the 15th century. Heavily influenced by Aristotelian, Platonic, and Neoplatonic ideas, Byzantine philosophy occasionally blurs with theology. It aimed to be a rediscovery, continuation, and reinterpretation of ancient Greek philosophy in light of the Christian faith as transmitted by the Orthodox Church.

    Origin and Definition

    Education in the Byzantine Empire

    Education was widespread among the Byzantines, with a higher percentage of men and even women, a rare phenomenon at that time, being literate compared to Europe or Arab countries. Primary education (propaideia) was readily available, even in villages, and secondary education (paideia—students aged 10 to 17) was fee-based. It took place in a school where the teacher, sometimes with the help of an assistant, taught the trivium (grammar, geometry, and astronomy) and the basics of the quadrivium (arithmetic, geometry, astronomy and music) by assimilating texts from classical antiquity.

    Higher education typically included rhetoric, philosophy, and law. Its purpose was to train competent officials for both the state and the church, at least until the latter established its own university (Patriarchal School) dedicated to clergy formation. The first institution dedicated to advanced studies was founded in 425 by Emperor Theodosius II (r. 402–450) under the name Pandidakterion (in Byzantine Greek: Πανδιδακτήριον, it was the origin of the University of Constantinople). It comprised thirty-one chairs dedicated to law, philosophy, medicine, arithmetic, geometry, etc., with fifteen taught in Latin and sixteen in Greek.

    The Conflict Between Christian Faith and Pagan Philosophy

    Jesus as a victorious emperor with Byzantine armor and purple cloak from Ravenna 6th century AD.
    Jesus as a victorious emperor with Byzantine armor and purple cloak from Ravenna 6th century AD.

    When Greek elites converted to Christianity and began studying Greek classics, a confrontation between “true philosophy,” i.e., Christian, and “false philosophy,” i.e., pagan, became inevitable. However, unlike what occurred in the West, neither Byzantine philosophers nor theologians completely rejected the Ancients; instead, they sought to use them for their purposes.

    Perhaps the best illustration of this approach is Basil of Caesarea’s (330–379) treatise, “Address to Young Men on the Right Use of Greek Literature.” This moderation (economia) was not universal, though. In the early stages of Christianization, Emperor Julian (r. 360–363) not only attempted to restore ancient Greek culture but also the ancestral religion.

    In the 5th century, the Prefect of Constantinople, Kyros Panopolites, was exiled from Constantinople for being too “Hellenic.” However, over time, a sort of osmosis occurred, so that by the early 8th century, John of Damascus (circa 676–749), a monk and theologian of Syriac origin but Greek language, could define philosophy as:

    1. The knowledge of existing things (onta),
    2. The knowledge of divine and human things,
    3. Preparation (melete) for death,
    4. Assimilation to God,
    5. The art (techne) of art, the science of sciences, and
    6. The love of wisdom.

    These definitions were drawn from Aristotle (1) and (5), the Stoics (2), and Plato (3) and (4); they were compiled by Neoplatonists from the school of Alexandria, such as Ammonius of Alexandria (a Christian mystic of the 3rd century), David the Invincible (an Armenian philosopher of the 5th and 6th centuries), and Elias of Alexandria (a philosopher from the School of Alexandria in the 6th century). John of Damascus summarized this thought in simple terms: “Philosophy is the love of wisdom, but true wisdom is God. Therefore, the love of God is true philosophy.”

    Though somewhat arbitrary, the evolution of Byzantine philosophy can be divided into three periods, each beginning with the establishment or re-foundation of a major school: the end of the Amorian dynasty; the beginning of the Macedonian dynasty (842–959); the end of the Macedonian dynasty; the beginning of the Komnenos dynasty (1042-1143); and the beginning of the Palaeologian dynasty (1259–1341).

    Equally arbitrarily, one could say that the first period was mainly dedicated to collecting and copying ancient authors, the second to commenting, paraphrasing, and critiquing them, while the third, marked by attempts to reconcile the Churches of Constantinople and Rome, would see a certain distancing in most philosophers allowing for the critique of ancient authors when they deviate from the official dogma, or, on the contrary, in some, the adoption of the Ancients at the expense of the Church’s doctrine.

    History

    The Precursors

    The foundations of Byzantine philosophy can be found in Proclus, a Neoplatonist philosopher born in Constantinople in 412 into a wealthy family, which allowed him to study philosophy in Alexandria and then in Athens under Plutarch the Younger, the founder of the Neoplatonic school in that city. He would become the third director of the same school in 438 and undertake the most extensive philosophical synthesis of the very end of ancient Greek antiquity. With his disciple Ammonius, who founded his own school in Alexandria, they set the philosophical curriculum and made significant contributions, including the theory of structure and reality.

    First Period: 843–959

    Leo the Mathematician
    Leo the Mathematician

    Emerging from the iconoclastic crisis (726–843), as intellectual life returned to normal, foreshadowing the Macedonian Renaissance, Emperor Michael III (r. 842–867) handed over the reins of power to his uncle, Caesar Bardas, for ten years. A competent intellectual himself, Caesar Bardas decided between 855 and 866 to create an educational institution housed in the Magnaura Palace, entrusting its direction to Leo the Philosopher, also known as Leo the Mathematician.

    Endowed with a great thirst for knowledge, Leo had initiated himself into all known sciences in his youth, including “philosophy and its sisters, namely arithmetic, geometry, and astronomy, and even music (i.e., the disciplines of the quadrivium).” He then opened his school in Constantinople, located in a private house, where he taught all intellectual disciplines to the sons of wealthy families destined for careers in the civil service.

    His reputation as a scholar reached the ears of Caliph al-Mamun in Baghdad, who requested Emperor Theophilus to allow Leo to come to his court. Out of patriotism or caution, Leo declined the proposal and was appointed metropolitan of Thessaloniki around 840. Deposed in 843 for being an iconoclast along with John the Grammarian during the restoration of the cult of images, he was chosen by Caesar Bardas to lead his educational institution.

    Little is known about this institution, which was supposed to give a new impetus to the study of ancient authors, except that Leo was to teach Aristotelian philosophy with the help of three colleagues whose names and functions are known: Theodore (or Serge), specialized in geometry; Theodegios, in arithmetic and astronomy; and Kometas, in grammar.

    With Leo, the figure of a personality more concerned with philosophy and science than with literature emerges, as evidenced by his library: Plato for philosophy, a treatise on mechanics by Kyrinos and Markellos for mathematics, and volumes by Theon, Paul of Alexandria, and Ptolemy for astronomy, inseparable from astrology at that time.

    The second prominent figure of this generation was the Patriarch of Constantinople, Photios I, one of the most significant figures in the classical studies of Byzantine history. Possessing encyclopedic knowledge and likely self-taught, he began his career as a teacher before being appointed protasekretis, meaning chief of the imperial chancellery, around 850. This was the position he held when he was appointed patriarch in 858, although he was a layperson. He received all the ecclesiastical orders in six days, contrary to canonical law, leading to his disapproval by Pope Nicholas I.

    The dispute between the churches of Constantinople and Rome escalated after the assassination of Caesar Bardas by Basil the Macedonian (r. 867-886). In the summer of 867, Photios convened a synod that declared the papacy and the Latin Church heretical. However, the same year, Basil had Michael III assassinated, dismissed Photios, and replaced him with Ignatius, who reclaimed his throne.

    Exiled to the Stenos Monastery, Photios eventually reconciled with the emperor, who appointed him as the tutor to his heir, the future Leo VI (r. 886–912), whose relationship with his father was strained. As soon as Leo took power, he hastened to rid himself of Photios, whose career was shattered. Removed from his positions, Photios was sent into exile where he passed away.

    His thoughts are evident in three main works: the Lexicon, an early work in which he explains the meanings of words found in the speeches and prose of antiquity, as well as the vocabulary of Christian authors requiring explanation; the Bibliotheca or Myriobiblos, an enormous work comprising 280 chapters corresponding to 1600 pages in modern editions, written for his brother Tarasios, summarizing the ancient Greek literature he read during his brother’s embassy; and the letters, some of which were included in the Amphilochia, addressed to Amphilohios, Metropolitan of Kyzikos, dealing with various theological and secular questions. In addition to comments on Aristotle’s Categories, they include discussions on the admiration expressed by Emperor Julian for Plato.

    One of Photios’ disciples was the Archbishop of Caesarea, Arethas (c. 850–932 or 944), who commented on Aristotle’s Categories and Porphyry’s Isagoge. He is particularly known for collecting and copying numerous texts from both classical antiquity and Christian authors of the patristic period, including the corpus of Plato.

    Without being a philosopher himself, Constantine VII (r. 913–959) would use the state’s resources to stimulate the initiatives of scholars, particularly through the copying and compilation of ancient works from antiquity. This period witnesses the waning of the philosophical revival and its transformation into a vast encyclopedic memory, with the most comprehensive illustration being the Suda. The Suda serves as both a dictionary presenting definitions of rare words in ancient Greek and complex grammatical forms and an encyclopedia commenting on individuals, places, or institutions.

    Second Period: 1042–1143

    Constantine IX Monomachos
    Constantine IX Monomachos.

    The second period begins with the ascent to power of Constantine IX Monomachos (r. 1042–1055), a senator who became emperor after marrying Empress Zoe (r. 1028–1050). Surrounded by intellectuals such as John Mauropous, Constantine Leichoudes, and John Xiphilinus, his reign would embody what is described as the “government of philosophers.” Like the first period, this second period starts with the establishment of a new school, this one dedicated to law.

    Constantine VII had wanted to breathe new life into the school of Caesar Bardas. To achieve this, he appointed the protospatharios Constantin, then Mystikos (an important office in the civil service with an unknown exact function), as in charge of philosophy, the Metropolitan of Nicaea Alexander in charge of rhetoric, the patrician Nicephorus of geometry, and the asecretary Gregory of astronomy.

    One essential discipline was missing, especially in an empire that was increasingly centralizing and bureaucratizing—the discipline of law, which had been taught in private schools until then. In 1047, Constantine IX established a new school, placing it under the nomophylax or “guardian of the laws,” and also housing it in the restored Magnaura Palace.

    However, among the sciences taught, philosophy retained its privileged position, as attested by the judge and historian Michael Attaleiates: “[Constantine Monomachos] invigorated a school of jurists and appointed a nomophylax. But he also took care of the teaching of high philosophy and appointed a Proedros (Byzantine court) of philosophers, a man who surpassed us all in his knowledge.”

    This man was Michael Psellos (1018–1078). A great scholar, he was also a prolific writer, covering diverse subjects such as etymology, medicine, tactics, law, and more. During his studies, he befriended individuals who would later hold key positions in the empire: the future Michael VII Doukas, John Mauropous, Constantine Leichoudes, the future “prime minister,” and John Xiphilinus, the future Patriarch of Constantinople.

    However, he had to abandon his studies due to his family’s modest income and take a position as a judge in Philadelphie, Asia Minor. Upon his return to Constantinople, he resumed his studies and taught philosophy at Saint Peter’s School (secondary education). Then, under Constantine IX, he joined the imperial chancellery and became a minister in all the governments from Constantine IX to Michael VII. Disgraced, he died in relative obscurity.

    His philosophical thoughts are encapsulated in his Chronographia, narrating events from 976 to 1078, and in about 500 letters he wrote in response to questions from correspondents or students since he continued teaching even after becoming a minister. Although he pays great attention to Aristotle’s work, his preferences undoubtedly lean toward Plato and the Neoplatonists, and he is recognized as a key figure in transmitting the Platonic heritage through the Middle Ages.

    His works show that he read and assimilated Plotinus, Porphyry, Iamblichus, and especially Proclus, whom he considers an authority among the ancients. He finds, among other things, a metaphysical system in Proclus that can be adapted to Christianity. However, his theories, for example, those contained in the Chaldean Oracles, were often seen as contrary to Orthodox theology, and he had to make a public confession of faith in his defense.

    His successor as the “consul of philosophers” would be John Italus (born around 1020; died after 1080). Born around 1020, he settled in Constantinople around 1050, where he attended the classes of Michael Psellos. A specialist in Plato, Aristotle, Porphyry, and Iamblichus, he began a teaching career at the Theotokos Euergetis (or Pege) Monastery. His reputation grew during the reign of Michael VII, and he was appointed to succeed his former master as the “consul of philosophers.”

    After a stay in Italy as an ambassador to the Normans, he returned to Constantinople, but in 1076–1077, a synod condemned his theories for allegedly exceeding the limits imposed on natural reason and the proper relationship between philosophy and theology. When Alexis I ascended the throne, he undertook to combat heresy at all levels, and against the patriarch’s advice, Italus was once again condemned following an autocratic trial. Barred from teaching, he was exiled.

    In fact, Italus’ positions were not significantly different from those of Psellos; what seemed unacceptable to the political and religious authorities of the time was his rationalistic approach to doctrines that the Orthodox Church considered beyond human understanding and within the sole purview of the Church to determine. In other words, Italus followed the Ancients’ conception that theology was an integral part of philosophy and not an autonomous discipline.

    The second successor to Psellos, likely appointed after the deposition of John Italus, was probably Theodore of Smyrna (mid-11th century, after 1112). Little is known about this high-ranking official in the Byzantine administration, except that he served as a judge, then as prōtoproedros, and finally as kouropalates. Only fragments of his literary activity, which must have been significant, have survived, including commentaries on Aristotle, a treatise against the Latin Church on azymes and the procession of the Holy Spirit.

    Erudite and historian Anna Komnene contributed to the advancement of philosophy by sponsoring a series of commentaries on certain works of Aristotle that were previously little known. Two of the authors who contributed to this work were Eustratius of Nicaea and Michael of Ephesus. Eustratius of Nicaea was a disciple of John Italus; he narrowly escaped Italus’ condemnation by subscribing to it. He retained his position as director of the School of Saint Theodore.

    Later, he gained the favor of Emperor Alexios Komnenos by defending the sovereign’s viewpoint on icons against accusations of iconoclasm made by Metropolitan Leo of Chalcedon.

    Eustratius was appointed Metropolitan of Nicaea. When the emperor sought to convert the Armenian minority (Monophysite) in Bulgaria, he composed a “dialectical discourse on the two natures of Christ” and the outline of two treatises on the same subject. However, similar to Psellos and Italus, the imprudence of his “dialectician” language scandalized the conservative-minded. A lengthy trial ensued in which the emperor and Patriarch John IX Agapetos attempted to plead in his favor, but the trial ended in his condemnation. Eustratius would die a few years later.

    In the surviving commentaries on Aristotle, Eustratius evidently follows the ancient Neoplatonists, although on some subjects, such as the knowledge of first principles, he supports theses closer to Christian doctrine. Unlike Plato and Aristotle, he does not believe that the human soul reappropriates the knowledge it had originally, nor does he hold that it possesses only virtual knowledge that gradually materializes. According to him, the human soul, as created by God, is already perfect, meaning it has full knowledge of first principles and immediately evident concepts. However, humans progressively lose this knowledge and understanding due to the instincts of their bodies.

    We know very little about the life of Michael of Ephesus, except that he taught philosophy at the University of Constantinople and, along with Eustratius of Nicaea, was part of the circle set up by Anna Komnene to continue the study of the lesser-known works of Aristotle. However, his reputation as a commentator on Aristotle was well-established, and his method of exposition and interpretation has been compared to that of Alexander of Aphrodisias, a commentator on Aristotle in the 2nd century. His commentaries on several works of Aristotle, especially Metaphysics, Parts of Animals, and Generation of Animals, align with the Neoplatonists and the tradition of Stephen of Alexandria.

    In the following century, Theodore Prodromos (circa 1100–circa 1170) continued the tradition of detailed commentaries on the works of Aristotle, notably on the Analytics, where the determining influence of Eustratius of Nicaea is palpable. A prolific author, he mainly worked in the fields of poetry and rhetoric, but he also contributed philosophically with another commentary on Aristotle’s Analytics, heavily influenced by Eustratius of Nicaea.

    Not all scholars of the time were fervent admirers of Aristotle, Plato, and the Neoplatonists. This was the case, among others, with Nicholas of Methone, bishop of that city around 1150, who, in the name of Orthodox Christianity, wrote a detailed refutation of Proclus’ Elements of Theology. According to him and conservative Orthodox theologians, Neoplatonic influences on Christian doctrine could lead believers away from true faith. Thus, he systematically opposed Proclus’ propositions, attempting to demonstrate that the first principle of the universe is “one,” considering this proposition contrary to the doctrine of the Trinity.

    The sack of Constantinople by the Crusaders in 1204 proved catastrophic for educational institutions. Many intellectuals had to emigrate, some to Italy, others to the Empire of Nicaea, where Theodore II (r. 1254–1258) himself was a scholar, authoring two works on natural philosophy, the Kosmikē dēlōsis (Cosmic Exposition) and the Peri phusikēs koinōnias (On Physical Community). In these works, he relied on simple mathematical schemes to understand the theory of elements and cosmology.

    Third Period: 1259–1341

    The Catalan Company led by Roger de Flor entering Constantinople by José Moreno Carbonero (1888).
    The Catalan Company led by Roger de Flor entering Constantinople by José Moreno Carbonero (1888).

    After the reconquest of the city by Michael VIII Palaiologos in 1261, official education was restored by the Grand Logothete George Akropolites, who established a modest school where courses focused on the philosophy of Aristotle, Euclid’s geometry, and Nicomachus of Gerasa’s arithmetic. In 1266, Patriarch Germanos III (Patriarch 1223–1240) restored the patriarchal school.

    However, it was under Andronikos II (r. 1282–1328) that a new imperial school, the Scholeion basilikon, was founded under the jurisdiction of the Grand Logothete Theodore Metochites. During this period, marked by attempts to reunify the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches, theological debate profoundly influenced philosophical discussions, with the question of the procession of the Holy Spirit (the Filioque controversy) remaining at the heart of this division.

    The central figure at the beginning of the Palaiologan restoration was Nikephoros Blemmydes. Born in 1197, he had to flee Constantinople with his family and seek refuge in Bithynia, where he studied medicine, physics, philosophy, theology, mathematics, logic, and rhetoric. After founding a school in Smyrna at the emperor’s request and then leading the imperial school of Nicaea from 1238 to 1248, he had to retire due to harassment from the city’s clergy.

    He then became a monk and, in 1241, founded a monastery in Emathia, near Ephesus, whose school focused on training future monks and novices. In a preliminary note to his treatise on logic, apparently written in 1237 at the request of Emperor John III Vatatzes (r. 1222–1254), he emphasizes the utility of logic in theology. His services were often required to defend the Orthodox position in the Greco-Latin debates of 1234 and 1250, including writing treatises on the procession of the Holy Spirit and being a defender of the ancient patristic formula that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father “through” the Son.

    More well-known as a historian, George Pachymeres (1242–circa 1310) taught at the patriarchal school and wrote an extensive treatise titled “Philosophia,” paraphrasing Aristotle and dealing not only with logic and natural philosophy but also with metaphysics and ethics, in addition to the last known Byzantine commentary on Plato, a continuation of the Parmenides, an incomplete commentary by Proclus in which he applies a “logical” (i.e., non-metaphysical) method of interpretation. He was also a great collector, translator, and editor of the manuscripts of philosophers.

    The reign of Andronikos II also saw the emergence of an original philosopher, Nikephoros Choumnos (circa 1250 or 1255–1327), who wrote on natural philosophy without reference to ancient authors. After serving as prime minister of the emperor for nearly eleven years, he was ousted by his great intellectual rival, Theodore Metochites. He then lived for some time on his estates before being appointed governor of Thessalonica, the country’s second-largest city, where he remained until around 1326, engaging in long polemics with his political and intellectual rival.

    Choumnos’ approach is unique in that he applies philosophical logic, that is, inference to universally accepted principles and definitions, to accepted theological ideas. While he proves to be an ardent defender of Aristotle, he does not embrace the entirety of his system. Instead, he prefers to provide a rational and philosophical justification for Christian theological doctrines. His attacks on Platonic theories of substance and form or his refutation of Plotinus’ theories on the soul aim to demonstrate the validity of Christian teachings.

    A rival to Choumnos, Theodore Metochites (1270–1332), succeeded in replacing the former as the Grand Logothete of Andronikos II. During this period, he established a public education service called the Mouseion in memory of the institution in Alexandria and proved to be a great patron of the arts and sciences. His political career was interrupted in 1328 when the emperor was dethroned by his grandson. After being exiled for a few months, he was able to return to Constantinople, where he retired to the Chora monastery, which he had restored.

    A statesman by day, Metochites, deeply immersed in the culture and language of ancient Greece, dedicated his free time to intellectual pursuits. A versatile writer, he admired Aristotle and especially Plato, but like Choumnos, he did not accept all their opinions. His Sēmeiōseis gnōmikai (Miscellanies) is a collection of one hundred essays on various subjects (politics, history, moral philosophy, aesthetics, classical Greek literature), in which he does not hesitate to criticize Aristotle’s obscurity and Plato’s use of dialogue. Many of his essays are reflections on the transience of human life, while others are paraphrases or commentaries on Aristotle’s philosophy as contained in his various treatises.

    Becoming an orphan at a very young age, Nikephoros Gregoras (circa 1295–1360) began his studies under the guidance of his uncle John, the Metropolitan of Heraclea. Around 1315, he arrived in Constantinople, where he studied logic and rhetoric under the future Patriarch John XIII Glykys and philosophy and astronomy under Theodore Metochites, who introduced him to Aristotle’s philosophy. Gregoras was to become the Metochites’ intellectual successor, establishing himself at the Chora monastery, where he directed a school.

    Having achieved an enviable reputation within the circle of Byzantine scholars and humanists, Gregoras became involved in the conflicts between Andronikos II and his grandson, Andronikos III, and later in those between John V Palaiologos (r. 1341 – 1376, 1379 – 1390, September 1390 – February 1391) and the future John VI Kantakouzenos (r. 1347 – 1354). However, what marked his philosophical activity the most was the long struggle he waged against the Calabrian Barlaam. Initially, in 1330, during a public debate initiated by Barlaam, and later from 1340 when Barlaam ignited the Hesychast controversy in Thessaloniki, which would divide the empire for ten years. Primarily a rhetorician, it was in this ongoing dispute until the end of his life that he touched on various philosophical subjects, including his criticism of Aristotle in the dialogue Florentius, evidently based on his first encounter with Barlaam.

    Gregoras also came into conflict with another theologian and philosopher who was also involved in the conflict between John V Palaiologos and John VI Kantakouzenos: Gregory Palamas (1296–1359). Of aristocratic origin, Palamas chose the monastic life on Mount Athos over imperial administration at a young age. Ordained as a priest in 1326, he began correspondence with Barlaam in 1336, leading to the development and structuring of his doctrine, Palamism.

    Soon, this religious dispute extended to civil society, with John VI, many important clergymen, and the monks of Mount Athos, whose spirituality was based on Hesychasm, siding with Palamas. The politico-religious crisis was resolved in 1347 when a council deposed Patriarch John Kalekas and confirmed the orthodoxy of Palamas’ theses. John Kantakouzenos then became co-emperor with young John V; Isidore became the patriarch of Constantinople; and Palamas became the metropolitan of Thessaloniki. While undertaking various diplomatic missions for the emperor, Palamas continued his struggle against Gregoras, writing his Four Treatises against Gregoras between 1356 and 1358.

    According to Palamas, while the substance (ousia) of God remains unknown to man, he can directly experience it through divine activities (energeiai) visible to him. In his “150 chapters,” Palamas denounces what he considers the erroneous views of ancient philosophers, both followers of Aristotle and Plato, devoting the first twenty-nine chapters to defining natural philosophy, placing facts concerning the world as a whole (as opposed to specific facts like astronomical phenomena) in the same epistemological category as facts concerning God and humans.

    During this third period, many philosophers tended to identify themselves as either “Aristotelians” or “Platonists,” contrary to the attempts of previous eras that primarily aimed to reconcile the two tendencies. Already present in Gregoras and Metochites, anti-Aristotelian sentiments became more evident in Georgios Gemistos Plethon (circa 1360–1452).

    Born in Constantinople between 1355 and 1360, Georgios Gemistos initially studied within the Platonic school of Constantinople. Later, in the cosmopolitan environment of Adrianople, where Christians, Jews, and Muslims taught, he returned to teach in Constantinople. However, his lectures on Plato caused a scandal and nearly led to his arrest for heresy. Emperor Manuel II Palaiologos (r. 1391–1425), his friend and admirer, chose to exile him to Mistra, which had become a significant intellectual center in the Despotate of the Morea (former country).

    As a member of the Byzantine delegation, serving as a lay delegate at the Council of Florence (1437–1439) when he was already in his eighties, he delivered numerous lectures in the city, reviving Platonic thought in Western Europe. It was during this time that he began using the pseudonym Plethon. Upon his return to Mistra, he was appointed to the Senate and became a magistrate of the city. He spent his final years teaching, writing, and continuing the feud with Gennadius II Scholarius, Patriarch of Constantinople and an advocate of Aristotle.

    Following his discussions with Florentine intellectuals, he wrote his pamphlet “On the Differences between Aristotle and Plato,” seeking to demonstrate Plato’s superiority to Aristotle. Despite Aristotle’s greater admiration for Western Europe, where the ancient Greek authors had been rediscovered, in part due to exiles from Constantinople fleeing the city after the Fourth Crusade and the subsequent civil wars, Plethon emphasized the weaknesses in Aristotle’s theories. This led to an immediate response from Patriarch Gennadius II Scholarius, titled “In Defense of Aristotle.” Plethon then published a reply, arguing that Plato’s concept of God was closer to the Christian doctrine than Aristotle’s. The dispute lasted for thirty years, concluding with Cardinal Bessarion’s publication of “Against the Slanderers of Plato” (circa 1469).

    Key Themes of Byzantine Philosophy

    Throughout its evolution, Byzantine philosophy focused on fundamental truths concerning man and the world in which he lives. In this sense, it remained “the science of the external,” while theology was “the science of the internal.” Both were complementary, whereas in the West, philosophy remained either the “servant” or the “background” of theology.

    In the West, classical humanities disappeared with the barbarian invasions, replaced by a profound distrust of “pagan ideas,” as evidenced by Tertullian’s question, “What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?” On the contrary, the Greek Fathers of the Church taught that God could be discovered through Greek philosophers. “All who live by applying the methods of reason (logos) are Christians, even if they are classified among atheists […] because each, through the presence of the divine logos within him, has spoken well […] and what every man has said, when he was well-guided, belongs to us Christians.”

    The Greek Church thus concluded that the study of ancient wisdom was both useful and desirable, provided that Christians rejected erroneous ideas, retaining only what was true and good. This perspective is expressed in the treatise of Basil of Caesarea, already mentioned, “Exhortation to Young People on the Best Way to Profit from the Writings of Pagan Authors.” The Greek Fathers of the Church did not seek to borrow the essence or content of ancient thought but aimed to adopt the method, technical means, terminology, logical structures, and grammatical elements of the Greek language to construct Christian theology and philosophy.

    For the Byzantines, the ultimate destiny of humanity was to achieve “theosis,” meaning union or integration with divinity (without being absorbed into it, as in Hindu pantheism). “Theosis” became synonymous with “salvation” or “eternal life in the presence of God,” while damnation was the absence of God in human life. The attainment of “theosis” was through religious experience.

    This concept was not far from ancient Greek thought, where theosis was not to be achieved through theology but through philosophy, study (paideia), and the development of intelligence. This idea was defined in the 4th century by the pagan rhetorician and philosopher Themistius (c. 317–c. 388): “Philosophy is nothing other than assimilation to god as far as this is possible for a human.”

    More theoretically, the main themes of Byzantine philosophy included:

    • The substance or essence of God in its three hypostases (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) and the two natures of the Son.
    • The creation of the Universe by God and its limits in time.
    • The continuous process of creation and the intention it reveals.
    • The world is perceived as a realization in time and space, with its hypostasis in the divine mind (nous).

    Other Philosophical Traditions

    A medieval Arabic representation of Aristotle teaching a student.
    A medieval Arabic representation of Aristotle teaching a student.

    Byzantine philosophy did not develop in isolation; it was one of the four major traditions of the Middle Ages, with the other three being Arabic philosophy, Jewish philosophy, and Latin philosophy. Arabic philosophy, expressed in Arabic and sometimes in Persian, was prominent from the 9th century until the death of Ibn Rushd (Averroes) in 1198.

    After that, religious intolerance hindered the independent development of philosophy. Starting shortly after Arabic philosophy and deeply connected to it, Jewish philosophy developed in colonies established in both the Arab world and Christian Europe, dwindling by the 15th century. In Latin Western Europe, an original philosophical movement emerged at the court of Charlemagne without a clearly defined end except for the Renaissance, which had varying starting points in different countries.

    Taken as a whole, what stands out more than their differences is what unites these traditions. All four drew from ancient Greek philosophy, particularly as taught by Neoplatonic schools, as their common heritage. Secondly, they influenced each other throughout their existence: medieval Jewish philosophers were deeply influenced by Arabic philosophers, and the translation of these philosophers transformed the philosophical course of Latin Western Europe from the 12th century onwards.

    Only Byzantine philosophy, relying on the ancient heritage, was less open to other currents, although there were various translations from Latin towards the end of the Middle Ages. Finally, these four philosophies belonged to cultures dominated by a revealed monotheistic religion. Although the relationships between these religious doctrines and philosophical speculations varied from one tradition to another, or even from one era to another within each, the questions they posed about the meaning of man and his relationship to divinity were substantially the same, and theological questions were to profoundly influence the development of philosophical thought.

    The Main Byzantine Philosophers Include:

    • Proclus, a Neoplatonist, born in Constantinople in 412 and died in Athens in 485. He is considered the precursor of Byzantine philosophy.
    • Stephen of Alexandria, born around 580 and died around 642.
    • John Damascene, born in Damascus around 676, died at the Mar Saba Monastery (Palestine) in 749.
    • Leo the Philosopher or Leo the Mathematician, born between 790 and 800, died in Constantinople after 869.
    • Arethas of Caesarea, born around 860 in Patras, still alive in 932.
    • Suda, a Greek encyclopedia from the late 10th century whose author or authors are anonymous.
    • Photius I of Constantinople, born around 820 in Constantinople, died in exile in 891 or 897.
    • Michael Psellos, born in Constantinople in 1018, died in Constantinople shortly after the death of Michael VII (1078).
    • John Italus, born in southern Italy around 1020, died after 1082.
    • Eustratius of Nicaea, born around 1050, died around 1120 or 1130.
    • Michael of Ephesus, mid-11th century.
    • Theodore Smyrnaios (Theodore of Smyrna), first mentioned in 1082, seemingly died after 1112.
    • Nicholas of Methone, born in the early 12th century, died in 1160 or 1166.
    • Nikephoros Blemmydes, born in Constantinople in 1197, died in Constantinople around 1269.
    • Nikephoros Choumnos, born in Thessaloniki around 1250 or 1255, died in Constantinople in 1327.
    • Theodore Metochites, born in 1270 in Constantinople, died in Constantinople in 1332.
    • Joseph the Philosopher, born in Ithaca around 1280, died in a monastery near Thessaloniki around 1330.
    • Gregory II of Cyprus, born in Lapithos (Cyprus) in 1241, died in Constantinople in 1290.
    • Nikephoros Gregoras, born around 1295 in Heraclea Pontica, died in Constantinople in 1360.
    • Gregory Palamas, born in Constantinople in 1296, died in Thessaloniki in 1359.
    • Plethon Gemistos, born in Constantinople between 1355 and 1360, died in Mistra in 1452.
    • Manuel Chrysoloras, born in Constantinople around 1355, died in Constance in 1415.
    • John Argyropoulos, born around 1395 in Constantinople, died in Rome in 1487.
    • Theodore Gaza, born in Thessaloniki around 1400, died in Rome around 1478.
    • Gennadius II Scholarius, born in Constantinople around 1400, died in Macedonia around 1473.
    • George Amiroutzes, born in Trebizond in the early 15th century, died around 1470.
    • Michael Apostolius, born in Constantinople around 1422 and died on June 18, 1478.
    • Andronikos Callistus, born in Constantinople in the early 15th century, died in London after 1476.
  • Leo the Mathematician: The Logician of Byzantine Philosophy

    Leo the Mathematician: The Logician of Byzantine Philosophy

    Leo the Mathematician (Λέων ό Μαθηματικός) or Leo the Philosopher (Λέων ό Φιλόσοφος) was a Byzantine scholar, philosopher, and religious figure born between 790 and 800, and he died after 869, likely in Constantinople. He served as the Metropolitan Bishop of Thessalonica from 840 to 843. He stood as a logician and philosopher of Byzantine philosophy at the tail end of the Second Byzantine Iconoclasm and the Macedonian Renaissance. Philosophy, mathematics, medicine, science, literature, philology, astronomy, and astrology were all areas in which Leo excelled. In Constantinople, he oversaw the Magnaura School of Philosophy and taught students Aristotelian reasoning. Even though he was an iconoclast, he preached a sermon in support of icons a few months after Emperor Theophilos died.

    buy toradol online https://resmedfoundation.org/documents/pdf/toradol.html no prescription pharmacy

    His only known works are a few comments placed in Plato’s conversation manuscripts.

    Biography of Leo the Mathematician

    Leo is believed to have been born in Thessaly and was related to John the Grammarian, who was also renowned for his profound knowledge. He pursued studies in Constantinople, where he learned “grammar and prosody,” the disciplines of the trivium. However, he could not find a school in the capital that could satisfy his thirst for knowledge.

    He then reportedly traveled to the island of Andros, where an old scholarly monk instructed him in rhetoric, philosophy, and arithmetic. Still dissatisfied, he visited monastery after monastery to consult books in their libraries, and at times, he withdrew to deserted places, immersed in his meditations. He thus acquired expertise in all sciences εἰς ἂκρον, at his fingertips: “philosophy and its sisters, namely arithmetic, geometry, and astronomy, and even music” (the disciplines of the quadrivium).

    Upon returning to Constantinople, he opened a school in a private house, where he taught all intellectual disciplines to the sons of wealthy families destined for bureaucratic careers. It is worth noting that if he was the cousin of John the Grammarian, who was also a highly learned individual, the latter had close ties to the emperors since the accession of Leo V the Armenian in 813. In the 820s, John was the tutor to the heir apparent Theophilos, and upon Theophilos’ ascension in 829, he became syncellus and collaborator to the emperor, entrusted with a diplomatic mission to Baghdad around 830. Leo, being John’s cousin, likely had access to the palace during this period.

    The Theophanes Continuatus reports a narrative deemed suspicious by historians: one day, one of his former students, whom he had taught geometry and who had become a secretary to a strategist, was captured by the Arabs during a battle. He became a slave at the palace of the Caliph al-Ma’mun in Baghdad and astonished the Caliph and the scholars around him with the extent of his knowledge of geometry. Learning that he owed all his knowledge to Leo, the Caliph sent him back to Constantinople with a letter addressed to his master, inviting him to come and teach in Baghdad.

    A possible depiction of Leo the Mathematician.
    A possible depiction of Leo the Mathematician.

    Leo, out of patriotism or caution, handed the letter to the logothete Theoktistos. Thus, Emperor Theophilos learned that he had a scholar in his capital envied by the Caliph. The Emperor granted him a pension, and his teaching was now done publicly in the Church of the Forty Martyrs. al-Ma’mun persisted and wrote directly to the Emperor, who refused the request. Leo may have still responded to consultations from the Caliph by letter. The details of this story, found only in Byzantine sources, are unclear, but if there is some truth to it, it likely occurred between the ascension of Theophilos in 829 and the death of al-Ma’mun in 833.

    Around 840, Leo was appointed Metropolitan Bishop of Thessalonica by Theophilos and John the Grammarian, who had been Patriarch of Constantinople since around 837. He emerged as one of the high-ranking officials of the iconoclastic clergy, although he did not take a known position in this domain. His homily composed for the Annunciation Feast in 842 has been preserved. It is more an exercise in erudition than piety and discusses religious images. In any case, he was deposed in 843, along with John the Grammarian, at the time of the restoration of the veneration of images.

    buy zanaflex online https://resmedfoundation.org/documents/pdf/zanaflex.html no prescription pharmacy

    However, he was not nearly as implicated in iconoclasm as John and did not suffer the same damnatio memoriae.

    After 843, at an uncertain date, the patrician, and later Caesar Bardas, brother of Empress Theodora and uncle of Emperor Michael III, established a school in the Magnaura Palace (a ceremonial hall in the imperial palace where ambassadors were received). This school served as a setting for the teachings of Leo and other scholars, some of whom were his former disciples. These included Theodore (or Serge), a confirmed disciple specializing in geometry; Theodegios, specializing in arithmetic and astronomy; and Kometas, specializing in grammar.

    Leo himself focused on philosophy, covering a range of disciplines. Little is known about the status and operation of this school, particularly whether it was purely a private patronage by Bardas or a more official institution. Around the same time, Photios I of Constantinople, nephew of John the Grammarian and a generation younger than Leo, provided similar education in his private residence. However, while Leo, like John, seemed primarily interested in the mathematical sciences of the quadrivium, Photios was more inclined towards the trivium, a philological and rhetorical culture related to human ethics.

    buy zithromax online https://resmedfoundation.org/documents/pdf/zithromax.html no prescription pharmacy

    Among the famous students of Leo during this period, which coincided with Photios’ time and during which he himself held a teaching position, was Constantine, known as “the philosopher” (827-869). He is better known by the monastic name Cyril, and, along with his brother Methodius, he left in 863 to evangelize the Slavs in Great Moravia, where he invented the Glagolitic alphabet for them. It may also be worth mentioning Leo Choirosphaktes, who dedicated a funeral epigram to the Mathematician.

    This teaching, heavily focused on the scientific legacy of ancient paganism, faced attacks from devout circles. Poems from a former student of Leo named Constantine have been preserved. In one text, he denounces his deceased master as a pagan (wishing him a pleasant stay in Hades with his friends Chrysippus, Socrates, Proclus, Plato, Aristotle, Epicurus, Euclid, Ptolemy, Homer, Hesiod, and Aratus). In another, he apologizes for his ingratitude toward his “second father” but expresses joy in finding a new master, Photios. There is no reason to believe, as some thought, that the author of these poems is Constantine “the philosopher,” who died before Leo.

    Leo was still alive in 869, the year he escaped the effects of an earthquake that he had predicted. The year of his death is unknown. He passed into the subsequent generations as “the most eminent man of his time in all kinds of science.” The school in Magnaura, which he had led, also left a lasting impression. His legend was somewhat intertwined with that of Emperor Leo VI the Wise, and the two figures were sometimes confused.

    Leo the Mathematician’s Intellectual Activity

    Leo has remained, for posterity, the man who, in the first two-thirds of the 9th century, developed and brought to prominence in Byzantium, particularly through research and transcription of forgotten ancient manuscripts, the mathematical sciences (arithmetic, geometry), the astronomy linked to them, and other natural sciences related to medicine. Over time, it seems that his interest, initially focused exclusively on the sciences of calculation and measurement, expanded to more literary and humanistic texts, notably the works of Plato. This evolution perhaps occurred under the influence of his younger contemporary, Photios, who was about twenty years his junior and whose interests were distinctly more literary. We have an epigram from Leo where he pays tribute to Photios and declares himself his student, calling him the “teacher for old men” (γεροντοδιδάσκαλος) in Plato’s “Euthydemus.”

    We can gain an understanding of Leo’s original culture by examining the small number of Greek manuscripts that remain from the period around 830-850, containing scientific works. The Vaticanus Graecus 1594, containing the Almagest and other works by Claudius Ptolemy, a manuscript that likely belonged to Leo; the 190 from the same collection, containing Euclid’s Elements and Data, followed by Theon of Alexandria’s commentary on Ptolemy’s Handy Tables; the 204 from the same series, containing a corpus of mathematicians and astronomers (Theodosius, Autolycus, Euclid, Aristarchus, Hypsicles, Eutocius, and Marinus); the Oxford Corpus Christi College 108 manuscript, a collection of biological treatises by Aristotle.

    We can also refer to Leo’s epigrams preserved in the Palatine Anthology, expressing his taste for scientific and technical questions. Poem IX, 578 is dedicated to Apollonius of Perga’s Treatise on Conics; IX, 200 focuses on the works of the mechanics Markellos and Kyrinos; IX, 201 is about the astrologer Paulus Alexandrinus; IX, 202 concerns a composite manuscript containing works by Theon of Alexandria and Proclus. These short poems likely served as ex-libris for manuscripts in his possession. He is the author of a few centos also preserved in the Palatine Anthology.

    Of Leo’s scientific commentaries, we have preserved a fragment on solar and lunar eclipses, astrological scholia on the ascendant of nativity, and a note on the fifth definition from Book VI of Euclid, transcribed in the margin of a manuscript (Bodleianus d’Orville 301, copied in 888 for Arethas of Caesarea).

    Leo is particularly remembered as an astrologer, which was the primary meaning of the Greek word μαθηματικός (Latin mathematicus) in the Middle Ages. Numerous predictions were attributed to him: a good harvest in Thessaloniki; the rise of Basil I the Macedonian; and the earthquake of 869 in Constantinople, which would have allowed him to escape. Moreover, he did not prophesy only through the stars; according to three chroniclers, he saw in the fall of a statue an omen of the assassination of Caesar Bardas. Several astrological writings have been preserved under his name. This trait aligns him with his cousin John the Grammarian, the “patriarch-sorcerer.”

    In the framework of philosophy, an epigram (IX, 214 in the Palatine Anthology) attests to Leo’s admiration for Porphyry’s Isagoge, a highly esteemed work in the Middle Ages. But one of his major achievements is his διόρθωσις or revision of the text of Plato’s Laws, the result of which is found in the Parisinus Graecus 1807 manuscript (the oldest manuscript of Plato that has come down to us, containing, in particular, the Republic, Timaeus, and Laws): the work was successfully carried out until Book V, at 743 b, as evidenced by the marginal note “end of Leo the Philosopher’s revision,” which is found in the manuscript and is reproduced in its copies. Par. gr. 1807 belongs to a group of manuscripts created between 850 and 880 by the groups of scholars formed around Leo and Photios.

    It mainly includes Plato’s dialogues, commentaries on these dialogues by Proclus, Damascius, and Olympiodorus the Younger, and commentaries on Aristotle by Alexander of Aphrodisias and Simplicius. Since its identification by T. W. Allen in 1893, this group of manuscripts has been called the Philosophical Collection or Platonic Collection. These manuscripts reflect an expansion of curiosity, especially under the influence of Photios, compared to an earlier period of Leo’s focus, aside from Aristotle’s Organon, on mathematicians and astronomers.

  • Languages of the Byzantine Empire

    Languages of the Byzantine Empire

    Throughout its thousand years of history, various languages were spoken and/or written in the territories of the Eastern Roman Empire (or “Byzantine Empire”). Some languages evolved, others disappeared, many left written records, and all are mentioned in historical sources.

    Scholarly Languages in Byzantine

    The Empire had two official languages: popular Latin and medieval Greek (Μεσαιωνική Ελληνική). Latin was gradually abandoned by the elites around the 7th century but evolved into Italic Romance languages in Roman Italy and Balkan Romance languages in the lower Danube basin.

    Widely understood, medieval Greek became prevalent in the East, where scholars wrote and could also express themselves in Koinè, the Greek language of the Hellenistic period, which has since become literary and scholarly. The Eastern Church initially used liturgical Greek (Ακολουθιακή Ελληνική) and later, in the Balkans, liturgical Slavic, employing the Cyrillic alphabet created for the Slavs by Cyril and Methodius. In Anatolia, the church used liturgical Greek and Armenian, whose alphabet is inspired by both Greek and Aramaic.

    However, the diverse populations and various religious denominations in the Empire spoke many other languages, most of which had their own literature and contributed to conveying the tales, legends, knowledge, and debates of their time.

    Common Languages in Byzantine

    Common Greek

    In Constantinople, along the coasts of the Balkan Peninsula and Anatolia, in Calabria, east of Sicily, and across all the islands of the Eastern Mediterranean, common Greek (Μεσαιωνική δημοτική), derived from the Attic Koinè, has always dominated, but with variations: Italic (Κατωιταλιώτικα) in Calabria and Sicily, Hellenic in the Balkans, around the Aegean and the Propontis, Micrasiatic in central and southern Anatolia, Notic in Cyrenaica and Egypt. To these variations, two dialects with Doric traits, also stemming from Koinè, should be added: Pontic around the Black Sea and Tsakonian in the Peloponnese.

    Hellenist linguists debate whether the current varieties of modern Greek stem from medieval varieties (which presuppose a continuity of Greek settlement in place, a dominant hypothesis in Greek historiography) or only from Μεσαιωνική δημοτική (“common Greek”) Hellenic (which presupposes a more modern repopulation from Greece, a dominant hypothesis in Turkish historiography).

    Byzantine Empire, c. 1180, at the end of the Komnenian period.
    Byzantine Empire, c. 1180, at the end of the Komnenian period.

    Demographers emphasize that one does not exclude the other, as under the pressure of military, economic, and environmental events, population movements have not ceased throughout history without the newcomers necessarily eradicating previous settlements (and their dialects). After the gradual settlement of the Turks in Anatolia in the 11th century, a Greco-Turkish dialect, Καππαδοκική Ελληνική / Cappadocian, developed in the Sultanate of Rum, whose name literally means “Sultanate of the land of the Romans,” also known as the “Sultanate of Iconium” and, in Turkey, the “Seljuk Sultanate of Konya.”

    Anatolian, Iranian, Thracian, and Illyrian Languages

    These are Indo-European languages spoken in the interior of the Balkans and Anatolia. In the Balkans (which were not yet called that; the word “Balkan” meaning “rocky slippery” is Turkish), Thracian and Illyrian languages were spoken, which later evolved either into Albanian dialects (Gheg, Tosk) or, through Romanization, into Vlach dialects north of the Jireček Line and, through Hellenization, into Greek dialects south of it.

    In the interior of Anatolia, besides the numerous Greek enclaves in cities, various Indo-European languages such as Phrygian, Thynian, or Bithynian (Thracian languages) and dialects descended from ancient Isaurian and Cappadocian (Indo-European languages claimed by present-day Kurds as proto-Kurdish but linguists classify them in the Anatolian family, not the Iranian family from which Kurdish originates) were spoken. It’s crucial not to confuse Anatolian Cappadocian with the later Greek Cappadocian that emerged after the arrival of the Turks. Sarmatian, Roxolani, and Alan mercenaries in the army also used Iranian languages.

    Romance Languages

    Byzantine studies, focused on the shift from Latin to Greek as the official language, often overlook the Romance component of the Byzantine Empire. However, in Byzantine Italy, Sicily, North Africa, or the Byzantine part of Hispania, Romance languages were spoken, as well as in the interior of the Balkan Peninsula, where the Romanization of Illyrian and Thracian languages, respectively, produced Dalmatian and Eastern Romance (mentioned by Theophylact Simocatta and Theophanes the Confessor), the origins of Eastern Romance languages. The Byzantine Papacy, in particular, perpetuated the use of not only liturgical but also epistolary and civil classical Latin, also employed by scholars like Cassiodorus.

    Later, starting in the 13th century, the colonies of Venetian and Genoese merchants established in Constantinople and other Byzantine ports spoke the corresponding dialects of northern Italy.

    buy levitra super force online https://jayhawkfoot.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/jpg/levitra-super-force.html no prescription pharmacy

    The annexation of the Ionian Islands and numerous Aegean islands (including Euboea, Crete, and Cyprus) by the Venetians imposed Venetian Italian as the lingua franca in these islands, leaving numerous place names and expressions in the local Greek language. Finally, the Latin Empire of Constantinople and the Latin states in the East established by the Crusaders in Greece promoted the use of medieval French and, in central Greece, Catalan in the armies and Latin colonies.
    buy bimatoprost online https://jayhawkfoot.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/jpg/bimatoprost.html no prescription pharmacy

    In popular Greek, the Latins are also indiscriminately called Franks (Φράγκοι): a designation more religious than linguistic.

    Slavic and Turkic Languages

    The flag of the Gagauz (Gök-Oğuz) people of Turkic origin.
    The flag of the Gagauz (Gök-Oğuz) people of Turkic origin.

    From the 6th century onwards, Slavic languages (such as Sorbian, which contributed to the emergence of Serbo-Croatian, and Slavic) were added to the indigenous languages of the Balkans, as well as the Iranian-Turkic languages of the early Bulgars (a nomadic people from the Pontic steppe adhering to Tengriism, who adopted Slavic and Christianity) and the Gök-Oğuz (claimed by the present-day Gagauzes). In Anatolia, starting in the 11th century, the Turks began to settle, Turkify, and Islamize their inhabitants; initially, they wrote their languages in the Greek alphabet.

    buy diflucan online https://jayhawkfoot.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/jpg/diflucan.html no prescription pharmacy

    Additionally, many mercenaries of the Empire, including Antes or Khazars, were speakers of Slavic or Turkic languages.

    Armenian and Caucasian Languages

    In eastern Anatolia, from Cilicia to the Black Sea (which was not yet called that; this name is from Turkish, and the sea was then called the “Pontus Euxinus”), Armenian (another Indo-European language) and Laz, similar to modern Georgian, dominated. Literary and liturgical Armenian was also present elsewhere in the Empire, where Armenian communities lived.

    Languages of East and North Africa

    The Southeast (Syria, Canaan, and the extreme Northwest of Arabia) of the Byzantine Empire was the domain of various Aramaic dialects, including Syriac from Edessa (the language of communication and liturgy for the Semitic Christians of the region), Mandaic dialects, and various versions of Neo-Aramaic. In cities, these dialects coexisted with medieval Greek. In Egypt, the vernacular language was Coptic, derived from ancient Egyptian.

    From the 8th century, after the intense Perso-Byzantine and Arabo-Byzantine wars, the long-standing Greek influence in the southeast of the Empire (for a millennium, in some places) and Latin influence in North Africa (for over six centuries) were erased. The Semitic populations (Syrians, Canaanites, Nabateans, etc.) and North Africans in the broad sense (the Egyptians and those commonly referred to today as Berbers) underwent linguistic and cultural Arabization and gradually became minorities among the Islamized Arabic speakers.

    In contrast, Hellenistic Judaism persisted for another thousand years through the “Byzantine Jews,” who spoke Yevanic, following the Jerusalem Talmud, and whose synagogues continued to use Hebrew in the liturgical context. They were gradually assimilated first by the Arab Jews of the East and later by the Sephardim from the Iberian Peninsula, transitioning to the Babylonian Talmud, Ladino liturgy, and Judeo-Spanish language. A minority eventually became Turkish-speaking and Muslim, and a few Greek Jews remain in the 21st century after the majority of the community was annihilated during the Holocaust.

    Other Languages

    From the 10th century, Varangian mercenaries, of Scandinavian Germanic origin, also served in the Byzantine forces; it is likely that one of them engraved the runes visible on the current Byzantine lion at the entrance of the Arsenal of Venice. Finally, some law enforcement forces with multiethnic recruitment, such as the Vardariots or Vardariotai (Βαρδαριῶται), may have spoken Iranian, Finno-Ugric, or Turkic languages.

  • Byzantine Science and Technology

    Byzantine Science and Technology

    Byzantine science and technology played a significant role in preserving knowledge from classical antiquity and transmitting it to the Arab world and Western Europe towards the end of the Middle Ages and the beginning of the Italian Renaissance. With a few exceptions, especially in the military domain, the Byzantines showed little innovation, both in scientific pursuits, focusing less on the theoretical aspects of sciences like mathematics or astronomy and more on their practical applications, and in technology, where they perpetuated techniques used in the Roman Empire.

    During that time, the concepts of science and technology differed greatly from what they are today. Sacred texts and philosophy were as much a part of it as mathematics and astronomy (high science) or astrology and alchemy (low science). In history, Universal Chronicles, widely popular in the Middle Ages, aimed primarily to demonstrate the role played by the Empire in the divine plan, while Histories served less as an objective account of past events and more as an apology for a prince and his family. The divisions between sciences were not rigid, and intellectuals could teach both medicine and philosophy.

    buy zofran online https://neramedprep.org/images/photoalbum/png/zofran.html no prescription pharmacy

    Therefore, categorizing a scholar into a specific field often reflected their primary area of expertise.

    Science in Byzantine

    Michael Psellos (left) with his student, Byzantine Emperor Michael VII Doukas.
    Michael Psellos (left) with his student, Byzantine Emperor Michael VII Doukas.

    Byzantine scientific production showed little notable progress compared to that of classical antiquity, from which it drew its sources. Nevertheless, it had the advantage of preserving and transmitting this knowledge to the Muslim world and the Europe of the Italian Renaissance. It relied on philosophy and metaphysics, supplemented by history, geography, mathematics, and astronomy. Despite some opposition to pagan tradition, many classical scholars, such as Michael Psellos or John Mavropous, held high positions in the Church.

    The writings of antiquity continued to be studied in the Byzantine Empire, thanks to the emphasis on classical studies by the Academy of Athens in the 4th and 5th centuries, the vitality of the philosophical academy of Alexandria, and the growth of the University of Constantinople, where only secular subjects were taught, with theology being taught at the Patriarchal Academy. Monastic schools focused on the Bible, theology, and liturgy.

    Monastery scribes concentrated on reproducing religious manuscripts, while works of pagan antiquity were transcribed, summarized, and annotated by civilians or clergy members like Photios, Arethas of Caesarea, Eustathius of Thessalonica, and Bessarion. The distinction between various sciences or their interrelation was much less rigid than today, and many scholars were polygraphers who wrote on diverse subjects. For example, in the early 12th century, Michael Italikos simultaneously taught sacred texts, mathematics (arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music), mechanics, optics, medicine, and philosophy.

    History

    In Byzantium, history takes two forms: either the description of events during a reign or a period, usually written to glorify a prince or a family, or a universal chronicle whose purpose is to convince the reader that the Byzantine world and the Orthodox faith, under the emperor’s guidance, reproduce on Earth the order desired by God in the heavens. While the former are written in a polished and sophisticated style, the latter are written in a language not far from everyday speech.

    An example of these universal chronicles is the one written by John Malalas (c. 491–578), a Syrian rhetorician of the 6th century and an official of the imperial administration. In his Chronographia, he recounts the history of the world from creation to “Emperor Zeno and the emperors who followed him.”

    Historia Chronica, 1691, John Malalas
    Historia Chronica. John Malalas.

    It would be impossible to enumerate all the Byzantine historians here.

    buy vermox online https://neramedprep.org/images/photoalbum/png/vermox.html no prescription pharmacy

    Let’s mention that, across the centuries, only the Byzantine historiographer Theophylact Simocatta, considered the last historian of the ancient world, lived in the early 7th century. He wrote a historiographical work titled Histories, following the historians of the 6th century (Procopius of Caesarea, Agathias of Myrina, and Menander Protector), narrating the reign of Eastern Emperor Maurice I (582–602). It constitutes an essential source of information on the Persians and the Slavs. Theophanes the Confessor (c. 758–818), aristocrat, monk, theologian, and chronicler, is primarily known as the author of an important Chronographia, continuing that of George Syncellus (died after 810) from Diocletian to the fall of Michael I Rangabe.

    In the 11th century, George Kedrenos, known as Kekaumenos, wrote a Universal Chronicle that, as was customary at the time, spans from the creation of the world to the accession of Isaac Komnenos (1057). It is one of the few sources on the cities of Khazaria after the sack of Itil (or Atil) in 969. The first child of Emperor Alexios I, Anna Komnene (1083-1153), wrote the Alexiad around 1148, an apologetic work dedicated to her father but also containing information on the Normans, Scythians (Pechenegs), and Turks, in addition to providing a Byzantine perspective on the history of the First Crusade.

    In the same century, John Skylitzes (circa 1040–early 11th century) authored the Synopsis Historiarum, a chronicle covering the period from 811 to 1057 (Amorian and Macedonian dynasties). It aims to be a continuation of the Chronographia by Theophanes the Confessor. In addition to transmitting historical knowledge from antiquity, many of these authors, building on the works of ancient authors, some of whom are known only through them, add data on the more recent world up to their respective times.

    Geography

    Constantine VII as sole emperor, 945–959.
    Constantine VII as sole emperor, 945–959.

    Byzantine geography was based on the works of Strabo (circa 60 BC–20 AD) and Pausanias (circa 115–180). It primarily involved descriptive geography with an economic purpose, with theoretical geography being almost entirely overlooked. For instance, the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, written in Greek between the first half of the 1st century and the 3rd century, is a narrative of maritime exploration describing navigation and commercial facilities from Roman-Egyptian ports like Berenice along the Red Sea coast, following the maritime route along the coasts of East Africa to India.

    The same utilitarian goal is evident in the work of Constantine VII (effective rule 944-959), De administrando Imperio (“On the Administration of the Empire”), where the emperor describes, for his son’s benefit, the countries and peoples surrounding the empire (Serbs, Croats, Rus’, Pechenegs, etc.), the routes through which they come into contact with Byzantium, and the means to form alliances with them against enemies (Khazars). A similar approach is found in the numerous reports of Byzantine ambassadors to foreign lands, such as Priscus (5th century) (on the court of Attila), Nonnosus (6th century) (on the region of the Red Sea), and Theodore Metochites (1270–1332) (on Armenia and Serbia).

    Cartography replaced the description of countries and cities with lists of names, as seen in the Synecdemus of Hierocles, a 6th-century catalog of nine hundred cities of the Byzantine Empire classified in approximately geographical order across sixty-four provinces. These works were often influenced either by the Byzantine cosmological vision of the world, as seen in Cosmas Indicopleustes (6th century), whose description of the world, titled Christian Topography, rejected the image of the world held by Greek scholars, deeming it incompatible with the teachings of the Bible, or by the uncritical acceptance of sources, as seen in Constantinople Porphyrogenitus’ De Thematibus, where the distribution of cities in ancient times would be identical to that of the 10th century, or by folklore information found in various descriptions of countries and their peoples.

    Mathematics and Astronomy

    In Byzantium, mathematics and astronomy were inseparable and jointly formed what is commonly referred to as the “high” scientific tradition, as opposed to the “low” tradition, which included alchemy and astrology. This tradition was based on the works of Euclid (3rd century BC), Archimedes (2nd century BC), and Ptolemy (1st century BC). John Philoponus (5th century) is likely the one who bridged the gap between Hellenistic and Byzantine science. A grammarian, philosopher, and Christian theologian, he wrote the earliest treatise on the planispheric astrolabe and its uses. Also during the time of Justinian I, Eutocius of Ascalon, a Greek geometer and author of commentaries on the writings of Archimedes and Apollonius of Perga, introduced Greek mathematics to Constantinople.

    The two architects of the Hagia Sophia in Constantinople, Anthemius of Tralles and Isidore of Miletus (6th century), were particularly known, the former as a mathematician specializing in the study of parabolas, and the latter for overseeing the publication of Archimedes’ treatises on the measurement of the circle, spheres, and cylinders.

    In the 7th century, Alexandrian science, where astronomy and mathematics held a prominent place, migrated to Constantinople. Stephanus of Alexandria (around 550–after 619) wrote a treatise on astronomy titled “Explanation of Theon’s Tables by Specific Examples,” connecting him to the “high science,” while various alchemy treaties preserved under his name linked him to the “low science.”

    Leo the Mathematician
    Leo the Mathematician.

    A new era began in the 9th century with Leo the Mathematician, a Byzantine scholar, philosopher, and religious figure who revived mathematical sciences, astronomy, and natural sciences. He played a crucial role in having the major works of ancient mathematicians such as Euclid, Diophantus, Apollonius, Ptolemy, Archimedes, and others copied.

    At the end of the first millennium, the “Macedonian Renaissance” (867-1056) would further develop the earlier Greek achievements, continuing the lineage of “commentators” while incorporating the scientific advancements of the Arabs and Persians, of which the Byzantines became experts. This penchant for transcribing ancient works continued until the 12th century.

    During the reign of Manuel I Komnenos (r. 1118–1180), an avid enthusiast of astronomy and astrology, Ptolemy’s “Treatise on Astronomy” was translated in Sicily, likely by Adelard of Bath. It is possible that it was from Italy that the Byzantines received Arabic numerals in the 12th century, which took a long time to spread. George Pachymeres (1242–1310), better known as a historian, was acquainted with them when he wrote his “Manual of the Four Sciences.”

    After a period of decline, interest in mathematics revived with Theodore Metochites (1270–1332), a statesman and intellectual who wrote an introduction to Ptolemy’s astronomy, a treatise on the mathematical form of philosophy, and numerous commentaries on Aristotle. A staunch advocate of Ptolemaic theories, Isaac Argyros, theologian, mathematician, and astronomer, would write a treatise on the astrolabe in the following century, two books on astronomy, an essay on square roots, a scholia (a comment) on Euclid, and a new edition of the commentary on Nicomachus.

    His contemporary, Theodore Meliteniotis (around 1320–1393), a high sacellarius (inspector of monasteries) and later, around 1360, director of the patriarchal school, wrote a treatise titled Three Books of Astronomy (Άστρονομική τρίβιβλος), making him the greatest astronomer of Byzantium alongside Nicephorus Gregoras (circa 1295–1360). Gregoras, however, is better known as a historian, thanks to his Roman History. Scientifically, his Treatise on the Astrolabe is preserved, and he was one of the first, since antiquity, to accurately calculate and predict the total solar eclipse of July 16, 1330.

    From this period on, the works of ancient Greek authors left Constantinople with emigrants who settled in the West. Alongside those already translated into Arabic, Latin, or Hebrew, these works would contribute to a mathematical renaissance.

    Physics

    In this field as well, the Byzantines continued the work of the ancient Greeks by copying, teaching, or developing their ideas to reconcile Greek thought with Christian conceptions of the universe. Their significant merit, however, lies in transmitting this knowledge to the Syrians, Arabs, and, in the 13th century, to Norman Sicily. Similar to geography, their interest focused more on the application of physics to technical problems than on theory.

    John Philoponus (also known as John the Grammarian—around 490–after 568), a philosopher and Monophysite theologian, challenged Aristotle’s theory that projectiles continue to move due to a driving force transmitted by the thrower (and not by the air’s push), replacing it with the theory of impetus. His critiques would inspire Galileo Galilei, who would cite him several times in his works.

    Aristotle’s Physics continued to be studied in Constantinople until the 14th century, with abundant commentaries by Simplicius (around 480–509), Michael Psellos (c. 1017–1078), Michael of Ephesus (11th century), and Theodore Metochites (1270–1332). Michel Psellos, among others, contributed numerous works on matter, color, motion, echo, rain, thunder, and lightning. His contemporary, Simeon Seth, authored a five-book Treatise on Physics (on the earth, the four elements, the sky, matter and soul, and the final cause), inspired by Aristotelian principles.

    In the realm of applied physics, General Belisarius (500–569) is credited with the invention or at least the implementation of the first “floating mills,” water mills installed on a boat in the course of a river or a stream. In 537, the supply of flour to Rome was interrupted during the siege of the Goths. Drawing on an idea from Vitruvius, a Roman engineer from the 1st century, Belisarius had these boats constructed, where instead of propelling the boat, the water was used to grind the grain.

    Medicine

    Much like in architecture, medicine is one of the sciences where the Byzantines surpassed their Greco-Roman predecessors and influenced both Arab-Muslim medicine and the development of medicine in Europe during the Renaissance. The works of Hippocrates and Galen formed the foundation of medical knowledge, enriched by scholars such as Oribasius (circa 325–395), a Byzantine compiler of medical knowledge who did not hesitate to correct faulty ancient methods; Aetius of Amida (6th century); Alexander of Tralles (6th century); and Paul of Aegina (7th century). Paul’s Collection of the Pleiades (in Greek: Epitomes iatrikes biblia hepta; in Latin: De Re Medica Libri Septem) is a compilation of seven books of texts from ancient physicians, foreshadowing the anthological approach of the tradition.

    A renewed interest in medical treatises emerged in the 10th century with authors like Meletius the Monk (9th century), Theophanes Nonnus (10th century), Simeon Seth (mentioned earlier, 11th century), Nicholas Myrepsos (13th century), author of a treatise in 48 books containing 2,656 formulas for medicines composed from 370 plants, and Joannes Actuarius (14th century), whose three preserved works primarily deal with dietetics, hygiene, and medications. In addition to the knowledge acquired from the Greeks, the Byzantines added insights imported from the Arabs and Persians. Simeon Seth was the first to mention oriental products such as cloves, nutmeg, and hemp seeds. Myrepsos’s treatise, on the other hand, includes numerous recipes from Sicily or of oriental origin.

    The particular attention given to hygiene and sanitary organization was a constant concern for the imperial administration and the Church, which was in charge, constituting an innovation compared to the Ancients. It inspired the establishment of hospitals, the training of physicians, and the preparation and preservation of medicines.

    The first hospital was probably founded by Basil of Caesarea (329-379), a bishop who built a hospice in each district of his diocese to accommodate the poor and the sick. In Caesarea itself, he constructed a complete “hospital complex,” including, in addition to a church, a nursing home for the elderly, a hospital for the sick, an inn for travelers and pilgrims, accommodations for service personnel, and schools for the orphans of the city. Subsequently, services would “specialize.”

    For example, the Pantokratoros Monastery founded in the 12th century had a hospital designed for fifty patients, men and women, distributed in five rooms (ὄρδινοι) of different sizes: a ward for the wounded with ten beds, one for patients with eye or abdominal ailments with eight beds, a room reserved for women with twelve beds, and two other rooms for ordinary patients. The staff consisted of specialist physicians, assistants, and pharmacists preparing medications.

    Technology in Byzantine

    Architecture

    The field of architecture is likely where the Byzantines excelled in surpassing their predecessors. From Constantinople to the construction of the Basilica of Hagia Sophia under Justinian, it essentially continued the traditional Roman architecture where vast buildings were dedicated to worship or public affairs and could accommodate large crowds. Subsequently, especially during the period when monasteries multiplied and buildings tended to be used by a limited clientele (officials and dignitaries) rather than crowds, the structures took on more modest dimensions. Succeeding the oblong-shaped basilica-plan churches, the cross-in-square church, built from a naos forming a square in which the four arms of the cross fit, became the archetype of Byzantine Orthodox churches.

    The center of the naos is usually surmounted by a dome. The Byzantines are credited with creating the “dome on pendentives,” with the first example being Hagia Sophia (563). While the dome was already known in Roman architecture, the use of pendentives allowed for considerable height and grandeur. After being employed in the plans of many Byzantine Orthodox churches, this style would be adopted in the construction of Muslim mosques.

    In addition to the buildings dedicated to worship, Byzantine architecture developed with numerous civil structures. The Grand Palace of Constantinople, now in ruins, constituted the largest architectural complex in Constantinople. Constantly expanded from Constantine the Great until the 10th century, it formed a somewhat eclectic ensemble of administrative buildings, courtyards, pavilions, and churches, reminiscent of the Kremlin in Moscow. The walls of Constantinople, along with the Theodosian Wall, with their 12 miles in length and imposing towers, resisted all enemies for over a thousand years.

    The water supply for the city, crucial during sieges, was ensured by vast cisterns, some underground, like the “Sunken Palace” (in Turkish, Yerebatan Sarayı). Initiated under Justinian in the 530s, this multifunctional structure housed an underground cistern measuring 452 by 213 ft, adorned with 28 rows of 12 columns each supporting a brick vault. In addition to the “Aqueduct of Justinian,” one can still admire the monumental bridge crossing the Sangarius River (now Sakarya), dating from the 6th century, as well as the bridge over the Karamagara in eastern Turkey, the first example of a pointed arch bridge. Dating from the 5th or 6th century, it is a single-arched bridge, 56 ft in length and 33 ft in height.

    Military Technology

    A Byzantine trebuchet and a Byzantine siege of a citadel. 11th century.
    A Byzantine trebuchet and a Byzantine siege of a citadel. 11th century.

    The most well-known Byzantine invention in the military field is undoubtedly Greek fire. Dating from the late 7th century, it is attributed to Callinicus of Heliopolis, an architect who sought refuge in Constantinople. Probably made from a mixture of pine resin, naphtha, calcium oxide (quicklime), sulfur, or saltpeter, Greek fire remained one of the most closely guarded military secrets, both in terms of its production and propulsion.

    In his book “De Administrando Imperio,” Emperor Constantine VII instructs his son and heir Roman II never to reveal the secrets of Greek fire production, which were “shown and revealed by an angel to the great and holy first Christian emperor Constantine,” who swore “to prepare this fire only for Christians and only in the imperial city.” The secret was so well kept that when the Bulgarians seized a large quantity of the liquid and siphons needed for its propulsion, they proved unable to use it.

    The liquid jet was heated and projected by a siphon from a bronze tube. It could burn on the water and could only be extinguished by sand, depriving the fire of oxygen, or with vinegar or old urine, probably due to a specific chemical reaction. Its use, especially against military fleets, had disastrous effects on the enemy and ensured the survival of the empire during the two Arab sieges of Constantinople (674-678 and 717-718).

    Soon, the Byzantines discovered that Greek fire could also be projected using incendiary grenades, which appeared shortly after the reign of Leo III (717-741) in the form of containers made of stone or ceramic. These relatively large containers were launched at the enemy using catapults or trebuchets, either already aflame or ignited by a flaming arrow after their launch.

    The traction trebuchet, a siege weapon also known as a mangonel, was already known in China in the 4th century BC. It spread to the West with the Avars and was adopted by the Byzantines in the 6th century. It used human force to propel projectiles towards the besieged walls. Its successor, the counterweight trebuchet, which uses a counterweight instead of human force, is probably of Byzantine origin and was first described by the historian Niketas Choniates when it was used by Emperor Andronicus I during the Siege of Zevgminon in 1165. However, it is not impossible that it had already been used by Alexis I, who, during the siege of Nicaea, is said to have invented new artillery pieces that were not of the conventional model and made a strong impression on the Crusaders, his allies.

    Similarly, the portable trebuchet (in Greek: cheiromangana) consisted of a sling mounted on a support that used a lever to launch projectiles. It was used by Emperor Nikephoros II Phokas around 965 to disperse enemy formations in open terrain. It is also mentioned in the tactics of General Nikephoros Ouranos (around 1000) and classified as a form of war weapon in the anonymous work “De obsidione toleranda.”

    Byzantine Relations with the Arab World

    Cultural and scientific exchanges between the Byzantine and Arab worlds were numerous and frequent. Within the Abbasid Caliphate itself, there were monasteries and Christian communities where Greek literature spread throughout the 8th century. The caliphs attempted to attract certain Byzantine intellectuals, such as Leo the Mathematician (9th century), to Baghdad. Photios (9th century), then a professor in Constantinople and future patriarch of Constantinople, likely worked in Baghdad during the embassies he led in 838, 845, and 855.

    The Byzantine Empire thus enabled the medieval Muslim world to acquire ancient and more contemporary Greek texts on astronomy, mathematics, and philosophy, which were then translated into Arabic. On the other hand, Byzantine scholars like Gregory Chioniades (early 13th century-early 14th century), who had visited the brilliant intellectual center of Maragha in Persia with its observatory founded in 1259 by Hulagu Khan, translated Persian astronomical tables into Greek, including Nasir al-Din al-Tusi’s Ilkhanate Tables, al-Khazini’s Sinjar Tables, and the tables and commentaries of his master Shams al-Bukhari. Other Byzantine scholars used transliterations of Arabic to describe certain scientific concepts rather than the traditional ancient Greek terms, such as the Arabic term “talei” instead of the ancient Greek “horoscopos.”

    Byzantium played a significant role not only in transmitting ancient Greek knowledge to Western Europe but also in introducing Arab knowledge. According to some historians, Copernicus or any other European author might have had access to Arabic astronomical texts, particularly those related to the “Tusi couple,” an astronomical model mentioned earlier and developed in 1247 by Nasir ad-Din at-Tusi. This model presented a version of the geocentric model of the solar system that did not use Ptolemy’s equant point and would be adopted by Copernicus for the first version of his heliocentric model in 1543. It was also through Arabic scientific texts that Byzantine scholars became acquainted with Sassanian and Indian astronomical theories.

    Byzantine Relations with the West

    During the early Middle Ages, the Greek language was virtually unknown in the West. Only a few texts by Aristotle (part of the Organon thanks to Boethius) and the early Church Fathers survived. A shift occurred with the development of trade between the East and the West after the early Crusades. In the cities of northern Italy and later in Rome (where the papacy had re-established itself in 1420 after a long stay in Avignon) and in Venice (including its university city, Padua), the economic and political bourgeoisie of the time increasingly became interested in the heritage of the ancient Greeks and Romans and their political thought.

    In southern Italy, a significant Greek community persisted in the 13th century, concentrated in the regions of Messina, Calabria, and Apulia. This community maintained its cultural identity through numerous contacts with Constantinople and its religious identity, both through its adherence to a liturgy distinct from the Roman liturgy and its recognition of the Patriarch of Constantinople as the true head of the Church.

    The first to show interest in the legacy of ancient and Byzantine Greece were Italian scholars such as Petrarch (1304-1374) and Barlaam of Seminara (1290-1314), who combined Latin and Greek culture, managed to obtain original Greek texts or personally traveled to Constantinople to study Greek. After the sack of Constantinople by the Crusaders (which led to the disappearance of many ancient works) and the city’s recapture by Michael VIII Palaiologos, the empire, reduced to a confederation of city-states, witnessed an intellectual revival known as the “Palaiologan Renaissance.”

    During this period, the Byzantines increasingly clung to their cultural roots, considering themselves heirs to the poets, philosophers, historians, and scientists of ancient Greece. One of the early representatives of this renewal was likely Nicephorus Blemmydes (1197–1269), who traveled through Greece in search of manuscripts for his teaching and wrote, among his numerous treatises, a manual on Aristotelian philosophy.

    While Petrarch and Boccaccio had expressed the desire to learn Greek to read ancient texts, it was with the arrival of a Byzantine diplomat, Manuel Chrysoloras (circa 1355–1415), that this dream could be realized. After an initial trip to Italy in 1394 to seek Western aid against the Turks, Chrysoloras arrived in Venice in 1396 and settled in Florence the following year. During the three years he spent there, he taught Greek to several humanists, including Niccolò Niccoli and Leonardo Bruni.

    Twenty years after Chrysoloras’s death, the Council of Florence convened to achieve the reunification of the Eastern and Western Christian Churches, facilitating the most significant encounter between Italian and Byzantine intellectuals of this pivotal period between the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. In November 1437, the emperor and a delegation of about 700 people, including Patriarch Joseph II, twenty metropolitans, numerous bishops, and theology-savvy laypersons, embarked for Venice.

    buy glycomet online https://neramedprep.org/images/photoalbum/png/glycomet.html no prescription pharmacy

    Among them was Gemistos Plethon (c. 1355 or 1360 – June 26, 1452), known as Plethon by analogy with his idol, Plato. Little interested in theological debates, he spent most of his time lecturing on the philosophical differences between Plato and Aristotle, which fascinated the Florentines. His treatise defending Plato and criticizing Aristotle sparked a controversy that continued in Rome long after the council and Plethon’s return to Mistra, where he spent his final days. It was probably his activity that inspired Cosimo de’ Medici to establish the Platonic Academy.

    One of his colleagues in the Byzantine delegation was Basilius Bessarion (1403-1472), who participated in the council with the pro-unionists and converted to Roman Catholicism at the end of the council. Rejected by his compatriots upon his return to Constantinople, he went back to Rome, where he had been made a cardinal, and brought many ancient manuscripts from Constantinople to protect them from the imminent Turkish invasion. These manuscripts were used, among others, by George of Trebizond, Theodorus Gaza, and perhaps Lorenzo Valla to translate and introduce several authors and Fathers of the Greek Church. His library, consisting of 746 manuscripts, was bequeathed to the Republic of Venice after his death, where, along with others, they would form the collection of the Biblioteca Marciana.

    The fall of Constantinople to the Turks in 1453 caused the exile not only of numerous Byzantine intellectuals and university professors but also of a considerable number of individuals working in their circles, such as scribes or anonymous translators. These individuals played a role, often obscure but nonetheless essential, in the dissemination of Greek texts. Moreover, not only did these emigrated artists and craftsmen bring with them many previously unknown manuscripts to the West, but they also corrected often corrupted texts that had already reached the West, especially through various Arabic versions.

    By collaborating with the Byzantine and Alexandrian commentators of Aristotle and Plato, they facilitated a better understanding of the original spirit of these texts. Finally, their collaboration with the emerging printing presses gave a new impetus to their teaching at various Italian universities.

  • Alchemy in the Byzantine World

    Alchemy in the Byzantine World

    Alchemy in the Byzantine world is part of a set of scientific practices inherited from ancient civilizations, such as the Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, and Mesopotamians, which Byzantine intellectuals studied, taught, and transmitted through scientific institutions like the University of Constantinople.

    Historical Background

    For ancient civilizations, alchemy was a coloring process used to modify objects, most commonly metals, to give them a new value. The modification is achieved using dyes or chemical elements. Ancient alchemy was also a way to express the mystical nature of the world and was often combined with philosophical, religious, or astronomical studies. This perspective on ancient alchemical practice was passed down to Byzantine scholars, for whom scientific practice was more about preserving and studying the great works of antiquity than introducing new developments. For example, the writings of Greek philosophers such as Plato, Aristotle, and Democritus held great importance in Byzantine scientific discourse.

    Generalities of Byzantine Alchemy

    Alchemy played a significant role in the work of Byzantine scientists, who often held ecclesiastical positions as well. For Byzantine intellectuals, alchemy represented a meeting point between the scientific and spiritual domains. Alchemy in the Byzantine world cannot be separated from philosophy, rhetoric, astronomy, astrology, and religious studies. Byzantine science is primarily known for sharing the scientific knowledge of ancient thinkers with other civilizations of their time, such as the Muslims or, following the fall of Constantinople, with the great thinkers of the Italian Renaissance. In this sense, Byzantine alchemists played a key role in the development of alchemy across Europe and the Middle East.

    Precursors of Alchemy in the Byzantine Empire

    Texts from the 4th Century

    Two of the earliest precursor texts of Byzantine alchemical practice are manuscripts that belonged to the Greek merchant Giovanni Anastasi in the 18th and 19th centuries. They were respectively transmitted to the Museum of Leiden in the Netherlands and the Kungliga Biblioteket in Stockholm. These two texts, likely originating from the Egyptian scientific tradition and dating back to the 4th century, compile several recipes related to the transformation of silver, gold, gemstones, and fabrics. They align with the so-called pseudo-Democritean tradition, stemming from the materialistic ideas of the Greek philosopher Democritus.

    These texts represent some of the earliest tangible examples of alchemical recipes that reached the Byzantine world and precede other foundational texts for Byzantine alchemical works, such as those of the Greco-Egyptian alchemist Zosimos of Panopolis.

    Zosimos of Panopolis

    The works of Zosimos of Panopolis go even further by establishing a connection between the transmutation of metals and religious practice. Zosimos’ works also depart from simple recipes to describe much more complex chemical processes. According to Zosimos’ writings, all substances are composed of a body (soma) and a volatile part (pneuma), attributable to their spirit.

    Alchemical practice, according to Zosimos, is essentially a process seeking to use fire, either through distillation or sublimation techniques, to separate the spirit from the body. This concept would have a significant influence on Byzantine and Arab philosophers in the following centuries, and Zosimos can be considered the first major philosopher in the Byzantine tradition.

    Stephanus of Alexandria and the School of Alexandria

    Cherub and Heraclius receiving the submission of Khosrow II. 1160–1170, Paris, Louvre.
    Cherub and Heraclius receiving the submission of Khosrow II. 1160–1170, Paris, Louvre.

    The beginning of the 7th century witnessed the emergence, in the realm of alchemy, of a circle of Alexandrian thinkers commonly referred to as the School of Alexandria, or the Philosophical Academy of Alexandria. This school encompasses several great thinkers, including Stephanus of Alexandria, an alchemist, mathematician, philosopher, and astronomer. Stephanus of Alexandria was one of the first Alexandrian thinkers to export his ideas to the Byzantine world, following an invitation to the court of the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius around the year 610.

    Stephanus of Alexandria and his compatriots, such as Olympiodorus the Alchemist, Synesius of Cyrene, and Aeneas of Gaza, dedicate themselves to the study of Greek, Roman, and Egyptian alchemy and philosophy. Synesius is notably credited with a commentary on the pseudo-Democritean writings dating back to 389, and Olympiodorus with a commentary on the works of Zosimos. Stephanus of Alexandria, on his part, provides several commentaries on the works of Plato and Aristotle, along with a mystical treatise on the transmutation of metals into gold. Commenting on Greek alchemical works, he asserts:

    “The wise speak in riddles as much as possible… Material furnaces, glass instruments, bottles of all kinds, alembics, and kerotakis [a metal plate placed on a container with burning coals to melt the wax and condense vapors]—those who attach themselves to these vain objects succumb under this tedious burden.”

    For him, alchemy was more of a mystical pursuit than a scientific one, dissociating itself from the material aspect of alchemy, which he defines as “the systematic study of the creation of the world through the word.” His works consisted of revisions of atomic concepts from the ancient era, such as the Stoic model wherein the spirit is composed of air and fire and has the ability to penetrate every element of the world and govern it.

    The spiritual aspect is an integral part of Stephanus of Alexandria’s work, illustrating the strong connection between sciences like alchemy and the ecclesiastical profession in the Byzantine Empire. Indeed, religious congregations and monasteries were significant centers of Byzantine science, and the teachings at the University of Constantinople were mostly delivered by men of religion.

    While Stephanus of Alexandria was not officially an ecclesiastic, several references highlight the importance of his Christian fervor in his works. King Heraclius is said to have invited Stephanus of Alexandria shortly after his ascent to power around 610, where Stephanus would have taught philosophy and alchemy for several years.

    The role of Emperor Heraclius in the development of a genuine alchemical domain among Byzantine thinkers is vaguely defined, but some claim that the pursuit of the philosopher’s stone had become an obsession for him. The ability to transform metals into precious metals held great allure for the rulers and societies of the time, even though alchemists, like Stephanus of Alexandria, appeared to dissociate themselves from the material aspect of this practice.

    A student of Stephanus of Alexandria, named Marianos or Morienus, is said to have introduced alchemy to the Muslim world by initiating the Umayyad Prince Khalid ibn Yazid around 675. Muslim princes were quickly drawn to the promises of this occult science and showed a keen interest in it in the following centuries.

    Michael Psellos

    Michael Psellos (left) with his student, Byzantine Emperor Michael VII Doukas.
    Michael Psellos (left) with his student, Byzantine Emperor Michael VII Doukas.

    After the death of Emperor Heraclius, the intellectual circles of Constantinople found their work contested by the Church. Consequently, Byzantine studies and writings experienced a significant decline in the centuries following the 600s.

    Scientific practice was banned from the Byzantine territory for several centuries before being reinstated during the reign of Emperor Constantine VII, known as the Porphyrogennetos or Purple Born (944–959). One of the central figures in Byzantine scholarship, and the one who would bring scientific practice to the forefront, is the scientist Michael Psellos (1018–1078).

    Michael Psellos is one of the most influential figures in Byzantine scientific history, credited with restoring the reputation of scientific institutions such as the University of Constantinople, which had seen a sharp decline since the end of Emperor Heraclius’ reign. At the age of 25, Psellos claimed to possess all the knowledge of the world. He quickly established himself as an exceptional speaker and became a renowned and respected professor, leading to an invitation by Emperor Constantine IX Monomachos to pursue a career in the imperial chancellery. Psellos played a crucial role in the administration of the empire.

    During his reign, Emperor Constantine Monomachos advocated for the restoration of the importance of culture in Byzantine society, providing a platform for intellectuals like Psellos and their teachings. It appears that Psellos took this opportunity to legitimize the alchemical domain, notably with his writings “Epistle on Chrysopoeia” and a letter addressed to Patriarch Michael I Cerularius (Patriarch of Constantinople) titled “How to Make Gold.”

    This letter posits that the transmutation of metals is a completely natural process and presents a series of recipes for transforming various metals into gold. However, according to the Belgian historian Joseph Bidez, who published Psellos’ writings in 1928, Psellos possessed inaccurate knowledge of alchemical processes. Despite this, Michael Psellos had an impact on the evolution of Byzantine culture and the restoration of alchemy as a subject of study on par with philosophy and rhetoric.

    The Transmission of Alchemical Concepts to the West

    Later on, alchemy became primarily the concern of the Arabs and then of great European alchemists like Nicolas Flamel, but Byzantine alchemy continued to influence its practice, notably through the writings of the Catalan scientist Arnoldus de Villa Nova, whose works are believed to have emerged in Southern Italy in the 14th century.

    His translations of alchemical works from the Byzantine Empire are thought to have influenced the practices of humanist thinkers during the Renaissance. The fall of Constantinople in 1492 is also said to have led to an exodus of thinkers and priests who possessed manuscripts containing alchemical processes still unknown to the West.