Dissertation committee:
1. Σοφία Μεργιαλή-Σαχά, Αναπληρώτρια καθηγήτρια, Τμήμα Ιστορίας-Αρχαιολογίας, ΕΚΠΑ
2. Τριανταφυλλίτσα Μανιάτη-Κοκκίνη, Επίκουρη καθηγήτρια (αφυπηρ.), Τμήμα Ιστορίας-Αρχαιολογίας, ΕΚΠΑ
3. Στυλιανός Λαμπάκης, Ομότιμος διευθυντής ερευνών, Τομέας Βυζαντινών Ερευνών, Εθνικό Ίδρυμα Ερευνών
4. Αικατερίνη Νικολάου, Καθηγήτρια, Τμήμα Ιστορίας-Αρχαιολογίας, ΕΚΠΑ
5. Αντωνία Κιουσοπούλου, Καθηγήτρια, Τμήμα Ιστορίας-Αρχαιολογίας, ΕΚΠΑ
6. Γεράσιμος Μέριανος, Κύριος ερευνητής, Τομέας Βυζαντινών Ερευνών, Εθνικό Ίδρυμα Ερευνών
7. Ιωάννης Χατζάκης, Κύριος ερευνητής, Κέντρο Ερεύνης Ιστορίας του Ελληνικού Δικαίου, Ακαδημία Αθηνών
Summary:
The subject of the present thesis is the investigation of the intellectual horizon and culture of the members of the upper clergy (deacons, priests, bishops), who were active from the mid-14th to the mid-15th ce. in byzantine territory and outside it, in all the areas in which they were ecclesiastically dependent on the Patriarchate of Constantinople. The byzantine clergy constituted a particular social group with certain common characteristics. Its members were located in all social strata, whereas the main distinction between them was the ranks of the priesthood and, secondarily, the choice of the married or monastic way of life. Their role in the late byzantine society was wide-ranging since the scope of their activities was wide too. Its extent was due both to the earlier byzantine tradition and the historical conditions of the period under consideration. It is particularly noteworthy that as the imperial power was collapsing, the patriarchal one increased, a fact that led the clergymen to fill the gaps especially in the areas of the education and law. The thesis is structured in four parts. First, an overview of the history of byzantine education is given, followed by a presentation of the byzantine tradition of double knowledge, that is the sacred and the profane and concluded with an investigation of the attitude of the clergymen of the period under consideration on the question of knowledge and their testimony on the state of education at that time. The second part mainly studies the social specificity of the clergy. After a brief survey of the terminology found in the sources, we deal with the composition of society in Byzantium and the position of the clergy within it. The next chapter is particularly useful, as it contains a reference to the various categories of clergy, their demographic situation and their geographical distribution, a choice that helps the reader to better understand what follows. The third part sets out first the conditions for the ordination of the clergymen and then the various duties they had to perform in the context of their priestly or other professional duties. From the abundance of data available to us, we have chosen to examine two cases of duties, namely the legal responsibilities of clergymen involved in ecclesiastical or secular justice and notary work, as well as tax inventories. These are treated as indirect evidence of the educational status of the clergy, hence the concept that underlies them is the role of education in the ordination of prospective clergy and subsequently in the assumption of office. The fourth and final part explores the intellectual horizon of the clergy of the empire through a synthetic examination of a series of factors. This is achieved through four chapters in each of which the clergy’s relationship to a form of intellectual culture is explored. In particular, the clergymen are examined as students and teachers, as manuscript owners, as writers, commentators and translators, and finally as musicians. Taking into account the activity of clergymen in the areas examined and comparing the data between the three priestly ranks, we conclude that deacons had increased secretarial and, secondarily, legal duties. On the other hand, those who belonged to the rank of priests dominated the field of notarial work and more broadly of the law. Bishops were the least involved. In the educational sector (schools, training of clergy, catechesis) the contribution of the deacons was small, in contrast to that of the other two levels, which was double and at the same time equal. Book possession was more widespread among priests, with bishops and deacons following behind. Conversely, in the field of writing and translation, the bishops held the first place, followed by the priests and lastly the deacons. The musical education of the clergymen, as expressed through music composition, was represented mainly by the priests and secondarily by the bishops. Finally, if we extend the comparison between the two main categories of clergy (married and monastic), we find that the unmarried clergy excelled in manuscript collections, writing, music, and participation in secular courts.
Keywords:
Education, Ιntellectual life, Orthodox clergy, Patriarchate of Constantinople, Palaiologi, Byzantine Empire
