This thesis presents an examination of the change in position of George (Gennadios) Scholarios on the question of the Union of the Roman and Eastern churches. The question I will address concerns the reason for Scholarios’ dramatic change of position from pro-Union to anti-Union, within a few years of the Council of Florence 1438-1439, where the Union of churches had been agreed. I will argue that Scholarios’ changed position on Union is best explained by political factors that influenced his decision, and was not simply governed by the theological questions debated at the Council of Florence. In Chapter One, the Introduction, I will introduce a critical analysis of the existing field of research, to set the thesis in the context of Scholarios scholarship that has previously been undertaken. In Chapter Two, Research Questions and Methodology, I will outline the scope of this thesis, discussing the crucial questions that need to be addressed and the method I will use to develop my arguments. In Chapter Three I examine the key cultural role that the philosophy of Aristotle and Aquinas played in the fifteenth century, and the extent to which Scholarios’ views were formed and shaped by this philosophical context. This chapter will argue that these philosophical influences provided the initial motivation that moved Scholarios towards Union. As the implications of such political aspirations warrant further investigation; I go on to examine Scholarios’ writings, not only on philosophy, but also on theology. I will explore whether the political guidance offered in taking up the study of philosophy was also to be discerned in the study of theology. In Chapter Four, I will examine how Aristotelian philosophy was deployed as an explanatory tool in interpretations of polemics, debates, and panegyric and rhetoric works of the period. I will suggest that Byzantine preambles, poems, sermons and theological panegyrics were also subject to general imperial legislation. In Chapter Five, I will argue that Scholarios’ study of Aristotelian philosophy allowed him to form a view of how the political future of the Empire might to be developed. I explore Scholarios’ visionary ideas of reform and contrast these with Plethon’s political perspective. I suggest that the acrimonious relationship between Scholarios and Plethon was due to their political and philosophical differences, which defined the way they viewed the future of the Empire. In Chapter Six, I argue that the primary key to comprehending the relationship between East and West lies in understanding the vested commercial interests. I argue the Byzantine state had deteriorated owing to foreign powers—the Italian city states, Catalonians, Franks and the Ottoman Turks—attempting to acquire and dominate the commercial and strategic political domains of the Eastern Roman Empire. This was initially driven by trade and commercial rivalry between the Latins; commercial interests also prompted the development of naval and military power by the Latins at the expense of the Eastern Roman Empire, which eventually left the Empire militarily and financially destitute. One result of this deterioration in the commercial and military power of the Empire was to allow the progressive rise in dominance of the Ottoman Turks. In light of the dangerous situation the Empire was facing, Scholarios—in the service of the imperial bureaucracy and under the dominance of the Emperor’s political policy—sought to solve the dilemma and reconstruct the Empire's political power. In Chapter Seven, I will argue that these political events, together with the political aspirations of Scholarios, led to his change of position from pro-Union to anti-Union. I will suggest that examination of the cultural, commercial and political influences in play leads to the conclusion that Scholarios’ pro-Union position was primarily motivated by the objective of obtaining military aid. When it became apparent that such aid was not forthcoming, his position changed from pro-Union to anti-Union, as it was politically expedient for him to do so in light of the growing dominance of the Ottoman Turks. I argue that Scholarios followed the political policy concerning pro-Unionism proposed by Dimitrios Kydonis, and it was not until the political event of the Battle of Varna in 1444, when the Latin military forces lost to the Ottoman Turks that Scholarios formally openly declared his anti-Union stance. In the conclusion, I will argue that, following my presentation of the evidence as outlined above, the political motivations constitute the strongest reasons for Scholarios’ decision to change his stance on the Union. This conclusion allows us to understand the vested commercial and political interests at stake, since the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine state), had deteriorated owing to the dominance of foreign powers. The ramifications are to be seen in the outcome of the Council of Florence where the Byzantines sought the aid from the West, but also demonstrated its dependency upon them. In the light of the growing power of the Ottoman Turks, the Emperor’s political policy sought to solve the dilemma and reconstruct the Empire's political power.

Il 29 maggio 1453, dopo un assedio di circa otto settimane, Costantinopoli fu conquistata dal sultano ottomano Mehmed II. La caduta della città fu un duro colpo per la cristianità occidentale, che non era riuscita a valutare la gravità della sua situazione e aveva mandato, nonostante molte promesse, un aiuto del tutto insufficiente. Le polemiche sui mancati soccorsi coinvolsero principalmente il pontefice Niccolò V, il re di Napoli Alfonso d'Aragona e Venezia. La decadenza dell'impero bizantino era tuttavia cominciata da lungo tempo, era stata accelerata dalle funeste conseguenze della quarta crociata ed era divenuta irreversibile allorché i Turchi, impadronitisi dell'intera Asia Minore, avevano attaccato e sistematicamente occupato i territori bizantini in Grecia e nell'Europa orientale. I sovrani della dinastia paleologa si convinsero che solo da Occidente sarebbe potuto giungere a Bisanzio un soccorso efficace e, per ottenerlo, si rivolsero ai papi, all'imperatore, ai sovrani dei principali stati europei, alle repubbliche e ai principati italiani. Condizione irrinunciabile posta dall'Occidente per l'invio di adeguati soccorsi era l'unione delle Chiese greca e latina, che i Bizantini sostenvano dovesse essere ricercata solo attraverso un concilio ecumenico. Il Papato, dopo la conclusione del Grande Scisma e il ristabilimento dell'unità nella Chiesa romana, dovette affrontare la sfida del movimento conciliare; esso la vinse, grazie anche al successo conseguito nel 1439 a Firenze, dove fu proclamata solennemente l'unione di cattolici e ortodossi. Eugenio IV, dopo una lunga contrapposizione con il concilio di Basilea, aveva trasferito il sinodo in Italia, dove, nella prima metà del Quattrocento, si stava assistendo alla graduale formazione di entità statali territoriali: alcune di esse, le repubbliche di Venezia e Genova in particolare, avevano svolto per secoli un ruolo politico-economico di primo piano nell'Oriente bizantino. / On 29 May 1453, after a siege of some eight weeks, Constantinople fell to the Ottoman sultan, Mehmed II. The fall of the city came as a bitter shock to Western Christendom, which had failed to see its plight and had, in spite of promises, sent it negligible help. Bitter controversies followed, involving mainly pope Nicholas V, the king of Naples, Alfonso of Aragona, and Venice. The long decline of the Byzantine Empire, which had been quickened by the outcome of the fourth crusade, became irreversible as the Turks conquered the whole of Asia Minor and occupied the Byzantine territories of Greece and Eastern Europe. The Palaelogan emperors were persuaded that Byzantium could be saved only by Western help; to obtain it, they addressed popes, the Western emperor, European Kings and Italian states. The main condition for proper aid from the West was the union of Greek and Latin Churches; in Byzantine opinion, however, it might be attained exclusively through an oecumenical council. Papacy, after the vicissitudes of the Great Schism, had to face the challenge of the conciliar movement, which it won thanks to the successful, even if ephemeral, result of the council of Florence as well. There, in July 1439, the union between Catholic and Orthodox Churches was solemnly celebrated. The synod had been moved by pope Eugenius IV, after harsh quarrels with the council of Basel to Italy, where, in the first half of fifteenth century, bigger territorial states were forming. Some of them had been long time playing an important political and economical part in the Byzantine East.

The study begins with the development of the nature and character of fifteenth century Italian humanism. It then proceeds to delineate the humanist methodological approach to three key areas; rhetoric, grammar, and historical criticism. Having thus laid this necessary foundation, the work examines selected portions of the debates of the council with regard to each of the three key areas, in order to ascertain whether or not a humanistic approach was utilized by the Latin participants in their argumentations. This investigation concludes that the Latin advocates of the council did indeed employ humanist methodology in both the preparation and presentation of their arguments in the debates. Therefore, such evidence strongly suggests that an appreciation and acceptance of the humanist approach to rhetoric, grammar, and textual criticism existed in the church in the early decades of the fifteenth century.

La thèse a pour but la reconstruction historiographique de la réception des Mémoires byzantines de S. Syropoulos, en Europe, dans le XVIIème siècle. Depuis les remarques faites par V. Laurent dans son édition (1971), la recherche entend reconsidérer les acquisitions antérieures sur la fortune de ce texte, pendant la publication de l’editio princeps en 1660, v. Introduction. À travers l’histoire de la découverte du manuscrit BNF, Paris. gr. 427, on ira à reconstruire l’épisode propagandiste qui a donné lieu à l'intérêt érudit pour la narration florentine de Syropoulos, v. Ch. I; un commentaire aux épîtres relatif à l’iter éditorial suivi pour la princeps donnera aussi des détails sur les érudits engagés, v. Ch. II; enfin, un examen philologique et historique de la version latine du texte grec, interdit par l’Inquisition de Rome en 1682, v. Ch. III. En plus, la thèse presentera la première transcription de la versio latine inédite conservée dans le manuscrit BNF, Paris. Suppl. gr. 317 (sectiones II, IV, IX), avec introduction. Les résultats montrent comment la critique textuelle et la propagande, dansl’édition byzantine de cette oeuvre, ont contribuées à la constitution d'une méthode ecdotique raffinée, plus tard encodée dans la définition des critères scientifiques de la pratique philologique et historiographique. / The aim of the dissertation is to outline the historical reception of S. Syropoulos’ byzantine Mémoires, in Europe, during the XVIIth century. Following the notes proposed by V. Laurent in his edition (1971), the research intends to reconsider the previous data collected on the fortune of the text, especially at the age of the editio princeps publication (1660), see Introduction. The episode of the first rediscovery of the manuscript BNF, Paris. gr. 427 will be useful to delineate the propagandistic climate in which the text was read and excerpted, see Ch. I; a comment on an important epistolary dossier will provide an insight on the publishing iter of the editio, and, above all, about the people involved, see Ch. II; lastly, a philological and historiographical analysis of the latin versio, prohibited by the roman Inquisition in 1682, see Ch. III. In addition, the thesis presents the first transcription of the unpublished latin version (sections II, IV, IX) preserved in the manuscript BNF, Paris. Suppl. gr. 317, with introduction. The results proves how textual criticism and propaganda — for the edition of this byzantine major oeuvre — actively contributed to established a philological method surprisingly refined, later heightened with the definition of the common criteria typically used by modern literary criticism and historiography.