Byzantine philosophy is an almost unexplored field. Being regarded either as mere scholars or as primarily religious thinkers, Byzantine philosophers have not been studied on their own philosophical merit. The eleven contributions in this volume, which cover most periods of Byzantine culture from the 4th to the 15th century, for the first time systematically investigate the attitude the Byzantines took towards the views of ancient philosophers, to uncover the distinctive character of Byzantine thought.

Over the last decades the problem of the existence of Byzantine philosophy has been posed in terms of the determination of its status, its function, and its subject matter. To a certain extent, this approach to Byzantine philosophy has been motivated by the increasing disciplinary autonomy reached by the other branches of what is nowadays called «medieval philosophy». A series of significant scholarly achievements over the last twenty years have contributed to the development of more-or-less (...) well defined scholarly fields of research concerning the medieval Latin, Arabic, and Jewish philosophical traditions. In regard to Byzantine philosophy the situation is much more complicated. In the first chapter of his La philosophie médiévale, Alain de Libera devotes his first words to the retarded scholarly development of the study of Byzantine philosophy. He claims that Byzantine philosophy has been mainly ignored and misunderstood, and has not been deeply studied. However, from the second half of the twentieth century one can find relevant and extremely important attempts to establish not only the basic features and developments, but the very existence of Byzantine philosophy. In this Forschungsbericht I shall attempt to reconstruct the scholarly debate on this topic, testing the main interpretive attitudes against some concrete cases of thinkers who lived in the area of the Eastern Roman Empire and who are labelled by most modern historians as «Byzantine». (shrink)

Since its publication in French in 1949 by the Presses Universitaires de France, Basil Tatakis' Byzantine Philosophy remains the sole work of its kind, an analysis of the rise of Christianity in the East and the civilization that grew out of it at the crossroads of Europe, Asia, and Africa.

This book analyses the process of development of Byzantine thought, which carries original solutions to fundamental philosophical questions and an original understanding of the world and humanity. The author defines the contents and characteristics of Byzantine philosophy, discusses the most important factors of its development as well as the role of Greco-Roman world and the place of Christian thinkers in this process. He also takes into consideration the Alexandrian school and the School of Antioch, the relationship between (...) Byzantine philosophy and Greek Patristics and the attempts to restore the Byzantine neptic thought after the fall of Constantinople. The study is based on Byzantine sources, written in Greek. (shrink)

The article summarizes the main achievements of the historical and philosophical thought of Greece in the study of Byzantine philosophy. Modern Greek researchers make a significant contribution to the formation of a theoretical and methodological basis for the study of Byzantine philosophy. Based on this basis, we can discover the origins, essential features and characteristic antinomies of Byzantine philosophy. The article examines the generalizing works of Greek scientists, in which Byzantine philosophy is (...) presented as a holistic phenomenon. Greek scholars perceive Byzantine philosophy as an integral part of the history of national philosophical thought. Therefore, the position of modern Greek thinkers is interesting and has a special heuristic value. (shrink)

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

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

Western studies tend to view Byzantine philosophy either as a minor offshoot of western European thought, or a handy storehouse for documents and ideas until they are needed. A scholar of philosophy (Aristotle U. of Thessaloniki), Tatakis (1896-1996) finds the view limiting, pointing out that during the Roman period, few Greeks learned Latin but Romans were not considered educated without a founding in Greek, and that Byzantine Christianity has its own trajectory unconcerned with how it deviates (...) from western orthodoxy. (shrink)

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

Linos G. Benakis, Byzantine Philosophy Β’, Athens 2013, pp. 544.

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

The article seeks to present an overview of the history of Byzantine philosophy. It takes its point of departure in the most important factors that influenced and shaped the Patristic thought. Subsequently, the paper considers the relative autonomy of Byzantine philosophy and offers a brief profile of major philosophers that contributed to the stream in the period from 9th to 15th century. From the numerous subjects that were taken into account by the most prominent Byzantine (...) philosophers, the article discusses such issues as: the view of God, the problem of ‘conceptual realism’, the relationship between such ‘disci plines’ as logic, metaphysics, ethics, aesthetics and philosophical anthro pology. Furthermore, such questions as the place of man in the world, the scope of their freedom and the problem of evil are also touched upon here. The paper concludes with some remarks on the develop ment of Byzantine philosophy after the fall of Byzantium. (shrink)

This is a report of the progress and activities of the project Thomas de Aquino Byzantinus during the last two years, with an emphasis on the Thomism of Bessarion and Scholarios and the transmission of some of Averroes’ doctrines in late Byzantium via the translation of some of Aquinas’ writings into Greek.

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

An eminent historian of philosophy once suggested that the term “Byzantine philosophy” is an oxymoron. Surely, if there is an neglected stepchild of the history of Western philosophy, it is the philosophy of the medieval Greeks. Even generations of learned students of medieval philosophy have generally accepted the commonplace that little original work was produced in the medieval Greek east—certainly none that demanded the intense attention given to Latin and Arabic philosophical literature. It is (...) hardly surprising, then, that histories of Byzantine thought have been few and far between. A list of the work of Klaus Oehler, Basil Tatakis, Milton Anastos, and a few others virtually exhausts the list of available studies. Moreover, one must go to a few modern Greek centers, such as Thessaloniki or Athens, to find anything like a continuous tradition of scholarship on the subject. (shrink)

Was the Byzantine thinker Nicephorus Blemmydes directly influenced in his views about human “proairesis” by the Stoic Epictetus or did he take over his views from the Neoplatonic Simplicius? After exploring Blemmydes’ reception of Epictetus, one can say that Blemmydes drew elements in a brief treatise under the title “De virtute et ascesi” from the mainly Neoplatonic Simplicius, who commented on the handbook by the Stoic Epictetus. Blemmydes, following Simplicius identifies “φ’ μν” with “aftexousion” and he designates “proairesis” as (...) an activity, which emanates from “aftexousion”. Blemmydes shows the moral power of “proairesis” as a transforming factor of human existence and the mediatory factor to the dialectical relation between man and God. For the completion of the study, the following sources have been used: Blemmydes’ De virtute et ascesi, Epictetus’ Handbook, and Neoplatonic Simplicius’ commentaries on the Handbook. I specifically focus on the views of Aristotle, Epictetus, and Neoplatonic Simplicius about “proairesis” and compare the views of Blemmydes to Simplicius’ ideas. I conclude that Blemmydes drew ideas from Simplicius, with regard to human “proairesis” and in the context of the practising and cultivating virtues in everyday life. (shrink)

This article examines the definitions of place or location (topos) and as a consequence, space, in Byzantine philosophy, from Maximos the Confessor to Photios. These philosophers draw, on one hand, on the Aristotelian, Platonic, and Neoplatonic sources, and on the other hand, on the Judeo-Christian tradition. Firstly, Maximos the Confessor sets out a novel definition in which place is conceptually inseparable from time, is needed for substances to exist, and in which place is the boundary between the created (...) and uncreated. In Anastasios of Sinai’s writing, God is the archetypical place for all things and is likewise necessary for substances. John of Damascus, in contrast, extends Aristotle’s definition of place in the Physics in new directions, by investigating the place of angels, which is determined by their incorporeal limits. Finally, Photios produces a systematic and astute account of how the properties of the containing and contained bodies come together to make places. The article concludes with an evaluation of these theories, and briefly considers their relationship to theories of place and location in modern physics. (shrink)

This book focuses on the intellectual relations between the Byzantine world and Renaissance Italy in the 15th century. The book consists of five independent chapters, which aim to present the complex ways the two cultures interacted. In the first chapter I present the way Modern Greek identity is attached to philosophical discussions and debates among the Byzantine scholars of the 15th century. In the following two chapters I focus on the transmission of knowledge from Western Europe and the (...) Arabic culture to the Byzantine philosophical community and its reactions. The last two chapters are dedicated to George of Trebizond and his efforts to transfer the Byzantine philosophical and scientific research to Renaissance Europe in order to renew philosophy and science. In sum, I support that, besides mutual reservations and skepticism, the two worlds, Byzantine and Renaissance, interacted in mutual benefit. (shrink)

This book represents a series of incursions or philosophical forays between realms of Byzantine and Russian thought and territory long claimed by Western philosophy and theology. Beginning with thoughts inevitably rooted in the West, it seeks to penetrate as deeply as possible into Byzantine and Russian philosophical and spiritual landscapes, and to return with fresh insights. These are also incursions that move back and forth between the visible and the invisible realms, in the traditions of Plato and (...) his successors as well as the great monastics of Eastern Christianity. Foltz argues from various perspectives that the problematic relation between transcendence and immanence finds its answer in the philosophical and theological legacy of Eastern Christian thought, which has always sought to bring together strands tenaciously held separate in the West. This book transports contemporary readers to an ancient conceptual landscape as it expertly handles both Western and Byzantine ideas with a familiarity unusual to contemporary scholars. It is essential reading for all those wishing to engage the heart of Byzantine thought and employ its lessons to address the problems which plague Western philosophy and culture. (shrink)

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

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

The category of the Ethico-Aesthetics, introduced by Søren Kierkegaard, was applied to the study of Byzantine Philosophy by the Greek philoso­pher and theologian Nikolaos Matsoukas. Matsoukas vehe­mently rejected the identification of Byzantine philosophy with a strict Christian moralism. Rather, he viewed it as an ethos which did not lead the ascetics to display Manichean contempt for the body. It was thus a kind of ‘mild asceticism’. This ethical acceptance of the body turns against Neoplatonic speculation and (...) cultivates the habitus that leads to artistic creativity. Byzantine philosophy is thus situated at the midpoint between nominalism and realism, but standing against the realism of the archetypal ideas. The paper concludes with some considerations on the pragmatics of Byzantine philosophy in a Christian world. (shrink)

The Byzantine influence was at the very origins of the formation of various philosophic ideas in the medieval Russia. A major factor responsible for this influence was the Orthodox Church. Thus, it was owing to Byzantium that the foundations of Russian philosophy were laid and all its subsequent developments cannot be properly understood without considering the Byzantine influence.

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

The question concerning the view of Hugo Etherianus is placed here in a broader context of the processes that shaped and reshaped the Byzantine culture model between the 11th and the 12th century. The newly formed culture determined the cultural situation after the fall of Constantinople in 1204 and remained valid until the end of the Byzantine period. Characterizing the Byzantines relation to the West was the key component of this model. During various theological and philosophical debates between (...) Latin and Romaic thinkers in the 12th century in Byzantium, the nearly 20-year career of Hugo Etherianus occupied a prominent position in Constantinople. Hugo was the best Latin expert on Hellenic and Byzantine philosophy and theology in the 12th century, particularly associated with the new dialecticians. His writings and letters as well as his debates with various Byzantine philosophers and theologians are an important testimony on the parting of the Byzantine and the Latin intellectual traditions during the last quarter of the 12th century. (shrink)

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

"This volume brings together articles by sixteen leading scholars on a cross-section of Platonists authors-Christian and non-Christian-from early through late Byzantium philosophy, including the Capaddocians, Cyril, Proclus, Damascius, Dionysius, George of Pisidia, Nicetas Stethatos, Nikephoros Choumenos, Psellos, and George Palamas. The reception of Byzantine thought in the Latin tradition is also considered. The articles collectively show development in the Greek East on ontological issues such as the doctrine of the soul, as well as theological concepts of the One/God (...) and Trinity within a hierarchical universe. The volume considers exegetical questions relating to the use of Plato and the Platonists by Byzantine Christian authors"--. (shrink)

The aim of this short note is to draw the attention of scholars in the field of medieval philosophy to the publication of several volumes, already issued or in preparation, of the new Ueberweg dedicated to medieval philosophy in the Byzantine and Latin worlds. The note includes an overall description of these volumes and various references concerning the future development of the Ueberweg as a whole.