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邦，从而实现天主教和东正教的联合。虽然这是一个炙手可热的教会话题，但它也具有强烈的政治重要性，因为奥斯曼帝国即将吞并拜占庭留下的东西，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，我的背景是古典文学)，特别是询问这些拜占庭天主教徒为说服他们的拜占庭同胞接受联盟而采取的各种修辞策略和方法。利用对一系列特别发人深省的文本的仔细分析所收集的洞察力，然后我希望阐明它们所处的(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进行：密切的文本接触(修辞策略，他们的智力世界)，然后探索从这些近距离阅读中收集的洞察力所揭示的更广泛的历史含义。简而言之，我想要探索拜占庭天主教徒在做什么，这能告诉我们关于那个时代的什么。研究背景/重要性：弥合东西方之间的分裂的需要在今天和15世纪一样具有现实意义。事实上，正如我在旅行中认识到的那样，东正教的各个中心(最著名的是阿托斯、帕特莫斯和玛尔萨巴)，今天围绕教会联盟的神学和教会问题，与佛罗伦萨议会及其直接后果期间争论的问题或多或少是相同的。佛罗伦萨是这场对话的关键时刻，因为它作为普世理事会(最初被东正教接受，后来被拒绝)的地位存在争议。因此，委员会及其后果是我们在东正教和天主教西方之间确保联盟的普世谈判中最接近的，因此也是试图理解为什么它不起作用的最佳场所。尽管理事会本身已经得到了很好的研究，但关于理事会后果的学术研究很少。毫无疑问，随后的材料并不像教会会议的行为和叙述那样温顺，并且离开了纯粹的神学领域，进入了情绪激动的争论。无论原因是什么，尽管人们对拜占庭帝国过去十年的戏剧性进行了很好的研究，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。我的研究不仅将试图填补我们对拜占庭晚期的这一重要的历史空白，它还希望展示通过密切的文本方法为拜占庭研究领域的一般资料收集的重要见解。方法：如上所述，我将对我的资料来源采取密切的文本方法，特别是我的主题使用的修辞策略，以说服他们的对手接受联盟。这需要对辩论(文化、个人、神学)提出的问题和问题保持敏感，并对我的作者可能使用的任何修辞上的轻蔑保持警惕。由于教会联合的问题是一个高度文化、情感和修辞方面的问题，我相信这种密切的文本分析是真正理解在拜占庭实现联合的复杂性的最佳方式，从而获得对周围文化、历史和政治背景的更广泛的洞察。

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.