The Byzantine Catholics; a study of the attempt of a small circle of Byzantine pro-unionists to salvage the Union of Florence and heal the Schism...

在这个项目中，我想看看一小群拜占庭知识分子是如何试图挽救佛罗伦萨联盟，从而实现天主教和东正教的联合的。虽然这是一个激烈的宗教话题，但它也具有很强的政治重要性，因为奥斯曼人正处于吞并拜占庭残余领土的边缘，许多拜占庭人认为西方天主教的援助是他们最后的希望。我的研究将主要是文本（他们留下了大量迷人的文本，我的背景是经典），特别是询问各种修辞策略和方法，这些拜占庭天主教徒为了说服他们的同胞拜占庭人接受联盟。通过对一系列特别具有启发性的文本的深入分析，我希望能够阐明（仍然相对未知的）更广泛的社会、政治和宗教背景。因此，我的方法将在两个层面上：密切的文本接触（修辞策略，他们的知识世界），然后探索从这些近距离阅读中收集到的见解所揭示的更广泛的历史含义。简而言之，我想探索拜占庭天主教徒在做什么，以及这能告诉我们关于那个时期的什么。研究背景/重要性：修复东西方分裂的必要性在今天和在15世纪一样重要。事实上，正如我在前往不同的东正教中心（最著名的是阿陀斯、帕特莫斯和马尔萨巴）的旅行中所意识到的那样，今天围绕教会联盟的神学和教会问题或多或少与佛罗伦萨会议及其后续会议期间争论的问题相同。佛罗伦萨是这次对话的关键时刻，因为它作为一个大公会议的地位有争议（最初被东正教接受，后来被东正教拒绝）。因此，这次会议及其后果是我们在基督教谈判中最接近于确保东方东正教和西方天主教之间的联合，因此也是试图理解为什么它不起作用的最佳场所。尽管对理事会本身的研究相当充分，但关于理事会后果的学术研究却很少。毫无疑问，接下来的材料不像教会会议的行动和叙述那样平淡无奇，脱离了纯粹神学的领域，变成了充满情感的论战。不管原因是什么，虽然拜占庭帝国最后十年的戏剧性已经得到了很好的研究，但没有人仔细研究过一些拜占庭人在这种动荡的背景下为确保联盟的实施所发挥的核心重要作用。我的研究不仅试图填补我们对晚期拜占庭的理解中这一重要的历史空白，而且还希望通过对拜占庭研究领域的原始材料的密切文本方法来展示重要的见解。方法：如前所述，我将对我的资料来源采取严密的文本方法，特别关注我的研究对象所采用的修辞策略，以说服他们的对手接受联盟。这需要对辩论中提出的问题（文化的、个人的、神学的）保持敏感，并对作者可能使用的任何修辞上的轻浮保持警惕。由于教会联合的问题是一个高度文化、情感和修辞的问题，我相信这种密切的文本分析是真正理解拜占庭联合的复杂性的最好方法，从而获得对周围文化、历史和政治背景的更广泛的见解。

In this project I want to look at what a small group of Byzantine intellectuals did to try to salvage the Union of Florence and thereby bring about the union of the Catholic and Orthodox churches. Although a burning ecclesiastical topic, it also held a strong political importance since the Ottomans were on the verge of swallowing up what was left of Byzantium, and many Byzantines thought that western Catholic aid was their last hope. My study will be primarily textual (they left behind a great number of fascinating texts, and my background is in Classics), interrogating in particular the various rhetorical strategies and approaches these byzantine Catholics took in order to convince their fellow Byzantines to accept the Union. Using the insights gleaned from a close analysis of a set number of particularly revealing texts, I then hope to illuminate the (still relatively unknown) wider social, political, and religious context in which they were moving. My approach will therefore be on two levels: a close textual engagement (rhetorical strategies, their intellectual world), and then an exploration of the wider historical implications revealed by the insights gleaned from these close readings. In short, I want to explore what the Byzantine Catholics were doing, and what this can tell us about the period.Research Context/Importance:The need to heal the Schism between east and west is just as relevant today as it was in the fifteenth century. Indeed, as I have come to realise during my travels to various centres of Orthodoxy (most notably Athos, Patmos, and Mar Saba), the theological and ecclesiastical issues today surrounding Church union are more or less identical to those which were being argued over during the Council of Florence and its immediate aftermath. Florence is a pivotal moment in this dialogue because of its disputed status as an Oecumenical Council (initially accepted and subsequently rejected by the Orthodox). The council and its aftermath is therefore the closest we have ever come in ecumenical negotiations to securing union between Orthodox east and Catholic west, and therefore also best place to attempt to understand why it didn't work. Although the council itself has been quite well researched, there has been very little scholarship on council's aftermath. Doubtless this subsequent material is not quite as tame as the acts and narrative of a Church council, and departs from the realm of pure theology into emotionally charged polemic. Whatever the cause may be, although the dramatic last decade of the Byzantine empire has been quite well studied, nobody has looked carefully at the centrally important role played by some Byzantines in this volatile context to ensure the implementation of the Union. Not only will my research attempt to fill this vital historical gap in our understanding of late Byzantium, it also hopes to demonstrate the significant insights to be gleaned from a close textual approach to source material for the field of Byzantine studies in general.Methods:As stated already, I will be taking a close textual approach to my sources, focusing especially on the rhetorical strategies employed by my subjects to convince their adversaries to accept the Union. This requires being sensitive to the issues and problems raised by the debate (cultural, personal, theological), and alert to any rhetorical slights of hand my authors may employ. Since the question of Church union is a highly culturally, emotionally, and, consequently, rhetorically charged issue, I believe this sort of close textual analysis to be the best way of coming to a real understanding of the complexities of bringing about the Union in Byzantium, and thereby of gaining broader insights into the surrounding cultural, historical, and political context.