Bessarion’s major philosophical treatise In Calumniatorem Platonis is a systematic approach to Platonic and Aristotelian philosophy written in response to George of Trebizond’s Comparatio Philosophorum Aristotelis et Platonis, which attacked Plato’s authority and proclaimed Aristotle’s superiority. A striking example of this is Bessarion’s attempt to defend Plato against George of Trebizond’s accusation that Plato did not offer sound arguments in favor of the immortality of the soul. In this article, I focus on Plato’s proof of the immortality of (...) the soul in the Phaedrus (245c5-246a2), as presented by Bessarion in the eighth chapter of the second book of the In Calumniatorem Platonis. The Phaedrusʼ proof is based on soul’s definition as a self-mover: since the soul always moves itself, it is the source of motion and is, therefore, ungenerated, imperishable and immortal. Bessarion’s interpretation of the Platonic proof gives the impression that Bessarion cites the text where Plato argues that the soul is immortal (245c5-9), and he summarises the text where Plato argues that the soul is ungenerated and imperishable (245d1-246a2). I argue, however, that Bessarion does not offer an original reading of the Phaedrus’ proof, and I also propose that Bessarion’s interpretation reflects his attempt to harmonize the Platonic and the Aristotelian views. (shrink)

Nine years before the fall of Constantinople, in 1444, cardinal Bessarion in his third and last letter addressed to Constantine Palaeologus, Despot of Mystra, expressed his deep concern about the economic, political, cultural, social and moral crisis, maintaining that the multidimensional crisis would inevitably lead to Byzantium’s decline. Bessarion stresses that the aristocracy’s biased policy, the burdensome taxation, the low level of business activity, the complete lack of technological advancements and the deficient education system not only shaped the (...) Peloponnesian state but also transformed the once brave, conscientious and studious Greeks into a cowardly, indolent and ignorant people. Realizing that the constitution of Greek society and the behavior of its citizens are impediments to modernization and to cultural progress, Bessarion proposes a series of reforms based on a revival of Ancient Greek culture and on technological advances of West that would lead to a well-governed, self-sufficient and independent Greek state. On 23 April 2010, 566 years after Bessarion’s letter, the Greek government requested financial assistance from the European Support Mechanism in order to avert the probability of default in Greece. The fiscal deficit, the swelling sovereign debt and the global financial recession shape Greece in crisis. The aim of this paper is to give an interpretative presentation of Bessarion’s letter with reference to modern Greece; to analyze the causes of the Byzantine Empire’s decline and the recommended reforms in comparison to the causes of the financial crisis in Greece and the implementation of austerity measures. I will prove that nowadays modern Greeks face the same problems with the Greeks of Peloponnese such as political corruption, administrative incompetence, excessive taxation, economic impoverishment, class inequality, unemployment, reduced business activity and inability to exploit natural resources. In this sense, I will show that the identity crisis of modern Hellenism was first cultivated and formed gradually from the Renaissance to modern Greece. (shrink)

Nel Marc. gr. Z. 333, testimone del testo astronomico intitolato Παράδοσις εἰς τοὺς περσικοὺς κανόνας τῆς ἀστρονομίας, copiato da Bessarione, sono presenti delle aggiunte, dovute all’intervento di Bessarione stesso, che si ritrovano nella tradizione manoscritta dell’opera soltanto nei discendenti del Marc. gr. Z. 333. Tali aggiunte sono tratte da un testo astronomico di Isacco Argiro e da una versione della Paradosis riveduta da Teodoro Meliteniote. L’analisi filologica e paleografica dimostra che in entrambi i casi le aggiunte sono ricavate da un (...) codice di Giovanni Cortasmeno. Ciò dimostra che il Bessarione ebbe Cortasmeno come maestro non solo nella filosofia aristotelica, ma anche nell’astronomia, e che dunque il suo interesse per questa scienza si sviluppò già nella fase poco nota della sua formazione giovanile a Costantinopoli, e non solo, come si riteneva sino ad oggi, sotto la guida di Giorgio Gemisto Pletone a Mistrà dopo il 1431. (shrink)

Bessarion’s major philosophical treatise In Calumniatorem Platonis is a systematic approach to Platonic and Aristotelian philosophy written in response to George of Trebizond’s Comparatio Philosophorum Aristotelis et Platonis, which attacked Plato’s authority and proclaimed Aristotle’s superiority. A striking example of this is Bessarion’s attempt to defend Plato against George of Trebizond’s accusation that Plato did not offer sound arguments in favor of the immortality of the soul. In this article, I focus on Plato’s proof of the immortality of (...) the soul in the Phaedrus, as presented by Bessarion in the eighth chapter of the second book of the In Calumniatorem Platonis. The Phaedrusʼ proof is based on soul’s definition as a self-mover: since the soul always moves itself, it is the source of motion and is, therefore, ungenerated, imperishable and immortal. Bessarion’s interpretation of the Platonic proof gives the impression that Bessarion cites the text where Plato argues that the soul is immortal, and he summarises the text where Plato argues that the soul is ungenerated and imperishable. I argue, however, that Bessarion does not offer an original reading of the Phaedrus’ proof, and I also propose that Bessarion’s interpretation reflects his attempt to harmonize the Platonic and the Aristotelian views. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Byzantinische Zeitschrift Jahrgang: 111 Heft: 3 Seiten: 641-658.

Ambrosianus B 165 sup., a 14th-cent. Constantinopolitan manuscript containing Proclus' In Parmenidem, was once owned by the Cardinal Bessarion, who has read, corrected and annotated the text with remarkable care. In this contribution, we provide an analysis of Bessarion's work on this manuscript, thus offering a case-study of his philological method. We also discuss some quotations from this text in Bessarion's works, which testify to the importance of his knowledge of Proclus for his own writings. In addition, (...) Bessarion's Greek scholia on books II and III of Proclus' commentary are edited here for the first time. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Byzantinische Zeitschrift Jahrgang: 108 Heft: 2 Seiten: 735-752.

Bessarion, bishop of Nicaea and later cardinal of the Roman Church, was one of the most significant figures of the fifteenth century. He devoted himself to preserving the Greek heritage, to uniting the Orthodox and Latin Churches, and to promoting a crusade against the Ottomans. The aim of this paper is to interpret Bessarion’s views concerning the salvation of Byzantium by giving an overview of his key works, orations and letters, focusing on the rise of the Ottomans: his (...) Oratio dogmatica pro Unione delivered to the Byzantine delegation at the Council of Florence on 13 and 14 April 1439; his Epistola encyclica addressed to the Greeks on 27 May 1463, when he was appointed Latin Patriarch of Constantinople; his third and last letter sent to Constantine Palaeologus, Despot of Mystra, in the middle of 1444; his letter addressed to the Doge of Venice, Francesco Foscari, written on 13 July 1453, shortly after receiving the news of the fall of Constantinople; and his Epistolae et Orationes contra Turcos composed on the occasion of the capture of the Venetian colony of Negroponte by the Ottomans (12 July 1470). (shrink)

The art historian Alessandro Giovanardi has recently published a monograph on one of the important representatives of the Russian religious-philosophical renaissance of the beginning of 20th century – Vladimir Nikolayevich Zabugin. This volume, written in Italian, aims to provide a comprehensive overview of Zabugin's intellectual biography, philosophical and aesthetic ideas and opens up a completely unknown corpus of the author’s works as well as the history of the reception of his heritage. The monograph underlines the contribution of Vladimir Zabugin in (...) Italian and European humanitarian culture and defines his heritage as a rare synthesis of the finest erudition and Christian spirituality. (shrink)

The series Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca et Byzantina: Series academica is published by the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences, and functions as a complement to the series Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca et Byzantina: Sources and Studies. The editions and source collections of the Series academica provide a basis for research on Byzantine philosophy and education and on the lasting impact of peripatetic philosophy in the Greek middle ages. The series succeeds to the Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca directed by Hermann Diels and (...) published by the Royal Prussian Academy of Sciences. The publication schedule of the series includes editions of commentaries by Alexander of Aphrodisias, Simplicius, John Philoponus, Michael of Ephesus, Nicephorus Blemmydes, George Pachymeres, Theodore Metochites, George Scholarius, and Bessarion. The series is also open for preliminary studies and companion volumes. https://www.degruyter.com/view/serial/CAGB-B. (shrink)

The rediscovery and revaluation of ancient Greek philosophy was one of the most relevant results of the rebirth of the classical studies in the Renaissance, and, thanks to pivotal figures such as Marsilio Ficino and Pico della Mirandola, Platonism became a cornerstone in the history of Western thought. Nevertheless, before the flowering of Platonic studies, a struggle between the supporters of Platonic and Aristotelian philosophy exploded: this is the so-called Plato-Aristotle controversy. The key figures of this controversy were George of (...) Trebizond, who produced a treatise against Plato, and Cardinal Bessarion, who replied to George of Trebizond in the In calumniatorem Platonis. Shortly after, Bessarion's protégées Domizio Calderini and Niccolò Perotti wrote two treatises in support of his patron, which represent the most significant products of the last stage of the Plato-Aristotle controversy. In this volume I reconstructed the different phases of the controversy, and then I focused on Calderini and Perotti's works, that I edited, translated and commented for the first time. The book provides the first general overview on the Plato-Aristotle controversy, and an in-depth analysis of these two treatises, which were produced at the crossroad of Platonism, Medieval philosophy and Modern thought. (shrink)

This article presents the first detailed account of Giorgio Benigno Salviati's discussion of the will written in Urbino during the mid-1470s and the early 1480s. A Franciscan friar and a prominent professor of theology and philosophy, Salviati was a prolific author and central figure in the circles of Cardinal Bessarion in Rome and of Lorenzo de' Medici in Florence. This article focuses on his defense of the Scotist theory of the will. It considers its fifteenth-century context, in which both (...) humanist and scholastic thinkers dealt with the question of the intellect and the will. While basing himself partly on authorities such as Aristotle, Augustine, and Thomas Aquinas, Salviati is clearly aware of the novelty of his theory, and its important implications for ethics and theology. (shrink)

The beginning of the fifteenth century marks a new stage in the reception of the Platonic dialogues in the Latin West. Throughout the medieval period only four dialogues of Plato--the Timaeus, Phaedo, Meno, and part of the Parmenides--were accessible to Latin readers, and the study of Plato was almost wholly confined to the first of these texts, which is chiefly concerned with natural philosophy. In the first half of the fifteenth century this situation changed dramatically: six new dialogues or parts (...) of dialogues were translated by Leonardo Bruni, the Republic was translated three times, George of Trebizond made versions of the Laws, the Epinomis, and the Parmenides, and a dozen other dialogues were made available in Latin by various other translators. With the work of Marsilio Ficino, who published in 1484 the first translation of the Complete Works, the translation activity of the fifteenth century come to fruition. ;The renewed interest in translating Plato in the early fifteenth century was not however at first a renewal of Platonism. The translation of Plato made part of a cultural program whose premisses were in fact foreign to Platonic thought; Plato was instead put to the task of showing that pagan literature was compatible with Christianity, or read as a wise sage full of melodious maxims in usum scholarum, or so twisted as to endorse with his authority some political belief of the translators. These ulterior motives had their influence on the translations themselves, which were frequently excerpted, bowdlerized, or otherwise expurgated of inappropriate sentiments. Such philosophical understanding of Plato as the early humanists displayed was derived from the Philosophica of Cicero. ;It is only with the Plato-Aristotle controversy of mid-century that some more sophisticated understanding of Platonic philosophy begins to emerge. Despite the central role Plato played in his apocalyptic theology, George of Trebizond does not seem to have had a very firm grasp of Platonic thought, but his opponent in the controversy, Cardinal Bessarion, was able to draw upon the philosophical sagacity of the Byzantine and Western scholastic traditions, and produced a more penetrating, if at times incoherent, interpretation of Plato's thought. It is only with Marsilio Ficino however that philosophical understanding was combined with the philological attainments necessary to produce a respectable translation of Plato, and this may account for the great success Ficino's translations enjoyed in subsequent centuries. (shrink)

Michael Apostolis (c. 1422–1478),¹ the Greek scholar and prolific author of the fifteenth century, studied in Constantinople under John Argyropoulos (1395/1405–1487)² and taught at Katholikon Museion (Xenon). After the fall of Constantinople, Apostolis shared his time between Crete, Constantinople and Venice, where he improved his Latin. He became Bessarion’s (1408–1472) protégé only briefly, because the latter did not like the polemic overtone of his treatises and came quickly to dismiss his views on the preponderance of Platonic over Aristotelian philosophy. (...) After losing Bessarion’s favor Apostolis returned to Crete, where he worked as a copyist. In addition he established a school.³ In several letters sent to his friends and colleagues he complained about his poverty and the difficulties he faced.⁴ Apostolis appreciated the Platonic philosophical tradition, particularly the philosophy of Georgios Gemistos Pletho (c. 1360–1454). Apostolis’ religious views seemed to be influenced by Pletho’s polytheism, despite his claim that he was nothing but Christian, namely a supporter of the Union of Orthodox and Catholic Church.⁵ Apostolis took part in the dispute between Platonists and Aristotelians that embroiled also the Greek speaking philosophical community throughout the fifteenth century.⁶ Apostolis wrote in favor of Plato with enthusiasm and in a polemic tone. Specifically, he confronted Theodoros Gaza⁷ (1398–1475), a well-known scholar, translator and author of the treatise Adversus Plethonem pro Aristotele,⁸ who was also Bessarion’s protégé. In his Ad Theodori Gazae pro Aristotele de substantia adversus Plethonem obiectiones⁹, Apostolis turned to Bessarion in order to gain his favor and support. (shrink)