Greek Tradition and Latin Influence in the Work of George Scholarios - Byzantine Philosophy Book for History Students & Scholars | Perfect for Academic Research & Medieval Studies

Some people get all the attention and some people get very little.Despite being an interesting figure George Scholarios has recieved little attention in English outside of a few articles and chapters in books. Christopher Livanos' book is the first detailed study of aspects of Scholarios thought even though it is limited by the focus on Augustine and Aquinas influence on him. The book is relatively brief at only 150 pages long, with 15 of that being the bibliography and index.George Scholarios was one of the few Greek Theologians who knew Latin. While still a layman he attended the failed unionist council at Florence in 1439. His love of Augustine made him pro-unionist at Florence but he changed his mind a while later and became a staunch anti-unionist at the death of Mark of Ephesus. George Scholarios remained a simple monk but was appointed Patriarch of Constantinople by Mehmet the Conqueror in 1453.The book has four chapters. The first is background information on Scholarios and his times. The second chapter looks at thought of Scholarios and its sources. Livanos identities Athanasius of Alexandria and Augustine of Hippo as the main sources of Scholarios’ thought. Chapter three is about the conflict with Plethon, which I really enjoyed. It is one of the most famous episodes of Scholarios’ career but minor in the scheme of things. It always gets more coverage than it deserves. In this case it gets 25 pages. The last chapter is a rambling discussion of the importance of Scholarios.Livanos gives translations of every quote (along with the original Greek text) from Scholarios. I like the way Livanos lets Scholarios speak for himself. However, there are a number of problems with this book. Livanos gives no overview of the works of Scholarios. By all accounts Scholarios was a prolific author. So much so that, at one time, 3 or 4 authors with similar names were postulated. I also would have liked to have read something about Scholarios’ view of Islam.Scholarios was too much of an intellectual so he didn’t inspire devotion but he was the best intellectual defender of Orthodoxy available at the time. His acceptance of the Augustinian understanding of sin made him suspicious in the eyes of more Orthodox theologians. This may account for the reason why George Scholarios has never been canonised. I hope others can build on this great start by Livanos.