‘The Byzantine Role in the Making of the Corpus of Classical Greek Historiography: A Preliminary Investigation,’ Journal of Hellenic Studies 132 (2012) 71-85 (original) (raw)
Related papers
The present paper proposes a new periodization model for the history of Byzantine literature between the 11th and the 15th century. The paper examines first the use of the historical model in the periodization schemata of various overviews of Byzantine literature along with the essentialist and teleological concepts inherent in this model. Two further sections present the arguments concerning the insignificance of 1204 and 1453 for a literary history of Byzantium because both dates did not leave a visible imprint on the way people wrote after the disasters had occured, while their presence as historical markers of an abrupt end obscures the continuities and the important changes that took place around them. In two last sections the paper offers two new boundaries that are not instantaneous moments in history but fluid and broad segments of time in its unbroken stream. The years around 1050 and 1350 are marked by a series of changes in the way logoi were perceived both in school and in actual practice, and it is, therefore, proposed that Byzantine literature from the eleventh century onwards is shaped by two fluid periods: 1050-1350 and 1350-1500.
The Origin of the Byzantine Text: New Perspectives in a Deadlocked Debate
In this thesis, the author explores the deadlocked debate about the origin of the Byzantine text and presents some new perspectives that have the potention to bring this polarised debate to a more satisfactory conclusion. On the one hand, the debate is studied from a 1) historical, 2) theological, and 3) epistemological and sociological perspective. It is found that the different historical considerations have led to opposite conclusions about the origin of the Byzantine text. Next, it is found that the different theological perspectives not necessarily lead to opposite conclusions. Finally it is found that epistemological and sociological considerations are not persuasive to uphold this polarised debate. On the other hand, it is argued that many historical arguments need more investigation, before they can serve as real arguments. Moreover, it is argued that when the Byzantine text is studied from the perspective of language development and the possible influence of the lectionaries, alongside with the production of a comprehensive textual commentary by Byzantine text defenders, this debate can be brought to a more definite end. The leading question was: Why has the discussion about the origin of the Byzantine text got bogged down in a polarised debate, and what will be the best way to escape this impasse?
Literature: No longer the Cinderella of Byzantine Studies
E. Fiori and M. Trizio (eds), 24th International Congress of Byzantine Studies 1: Proceedings of the Plenary Sessions (Venice 2022), 141–60., 2022
This paper offers an overview of recent developments in philology and literary studies, arguing that the field has become more modern and inclusive, thus gaining a central place in Byzantine Studies at large. Three concepts are used to structure the discussion and target different areas of interdisciplinarity: metaphrasis, reception and hybridity. Theory is identified as crucial and necessary to the advancement of Byzantine Studies, along with an awareness of reception processes and our own role as scholars. Such a development, it is argued, can revitalise the study of Byzantium within the broader Humanities.
Proceedings of the Plenary Sessions. The 24th International Congress of Byzantine Studies, 2022
OPEN ACCESS: http://doi.org/10.30687/978-88-6969-590-2 The present volume collects most of the contributions to the plenary sessions held at the 24th International Congress of Byzantine Studies, and incisively reflects the ever increasing broadening of the very concept of ‘Byzantine Studies’. Indeed, a particularly salient characteristic of the papers presented here is their strong focus on interdisciplinarity and their breadth of scope, both in terms of methodology and content. The cross-pollination between different fields of Byzantine Studies is also a major point of the volume. Archaeology and art history have pride of place; it is especially in archaeological papers that one can grasp the vital importance of the interaction with the so-called hard sciences and with new technologies for contemporary research. This relevance of science and technology for archaeology, however, also applies to, and have significant repercussions in, historical studies, where – for example – the study of climate change or the application of specific software to network studies are producing a major renewal of knowledge. In more traditional subject fields, like literary, political, and intellectual history, the contributions to the present volume offer some important reflections on the connection between Byzantium and other cultures and peoples through the intermediary of texts, stories, diplomacy, trade, and war.