Sergei Mariev – författare

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

The general scope of the present volume is to present a variety of approaches and topics within the growing field of research on Byzantine aesthetics. Theurgy in Neoplatonic and Christian contexts is represented by the contributions of W.-M. Stock and L. Bergemann; theories of beauty are at the centre of interest of the papers by S. Mariev and M. Marchetto. A. Pizzone approaches Byzantine aesthetics by looking for aesthetic experience in the literary texts, while the remaining contributions explore issues related to the iconoclast controversy: An important moment in the development of Byzantine philosophy on the eve of iconoclasm is the primary interest of A. del Campo Echevarría, who looks at the question of universals in John of Damaskos. The relationship between image and text in Byzantine illustrated manuscripts occupies the attention of B. Crostini. D. Afinogenov explores from a philological perspective the fate of important iconophile terminology in Old Bulgarian, while L. Lukhovitskij reconstructs from historical and philological perspectives the historical memory of the iconoclast controversy during the Late Byzantine Period.

Die intensive Auseinandersetzung mit Johannes von Antiochien im 19. und 20. Jh. hat eine solide Basis dafür geschaffen, den Text philologisch und historisch aufzuarbeiten. Zu den wichtigsten Ergebnissen dieser Auseinandersetzung zählt vor allem die Scheidung der Gesamtmasse der Exzerpte aus der Edition von Müller (1851) in zwei Gruppen. Ursprünglich auf der Basis des Stilkriteriums vorgenommen, später durch die Quellen-und Verwandschaftsverhältnisse bestätigt, die zwischen Johannes von Antiochien und einer großen Zahl byzantinischer Geschichtschreiber bestehen, wurde diese Ansicht von allen führenden Philologen der letzten zwei Jahrhunderte als richtig akzeptiert, obwohl die Frage, welche der beiden Gruppen den Namen von Johannes von Antiochien zu Recht trägt, für manche kontroverse Diskussion sorgte. Diese Frage wird in der vorliegenden Edition zu Gunsten des "Konstantinischen" Johannes entschieden, die Entstehungszeit des Werkes wird somit ins 6. Jh. gesetzt. Die editorischen Richtlinien, die die Ausgaben der traditionsreichen Reihe Series Berolinenis des CFHB prägen, und die sich bewährt haben, wurden selbstverständlich umgesetzt. Darüber hinaus bietet die Edition eine Übersetzung der Fragmente ins Englische.

The late Byzantine age, from the conquest of Constantinople by the Crusaders in 1204 to the fall of the last independent Greek territories to the Ottomans in 1461, was not only a period of political decline, but also of intensive cultural activity. The essays assembled in this volume discuss the works and lives of various authors (Nikephoros and Theodoros Xanthopoulos, Theodoros Metochites, Nikephoros Gregoras and Manuel Philes), they investigate issues such as ancient Greek and contemporary Western influences on the literary production, and discuss themes of material culture and, with a clear focus on Constantinople, of social, administrative and economical history.

The importance of Bessarion's contribution to the history of Byzantine and Renaissance philosophy and culture during the 15th century is beyond dispute. However, an adequate appreciation of his contribution still remains a desideratum of scholarly research. One serious impediment to scholarly progress is the fact that the critical edition of his main philosophical work "In Calumniatorem Platonis" is incomplete and that this work has not been translated in its entirety into any modern language yet. Same can be stated about several minor but equally important treatises on literary, theological and philosophical subjects. This makes editing, translating and interpreting his literary, religious and philosophical works a scholarly priority. Papers assembled in this volume highlight a number of philological, philosophical and historical aspects that are crucial to our understanding of Bessarion's role in the history of European civilization and to setting the directions of future research in this field.