BYZANTINE, LITERATURE. - Excluded here is that of a purely secular character. Furthermore, the principal writers and writings belonging to the patristic era before the 8th century are treated in the individual entries. Of the writings of a liturgical and juridical character, moreover, discussion is given in dedicated chapters.
I. THE THEOLOGIANS
An enormous quantity of Byzantine writings are still unpublished, and therefore a definitive judgment is not yet possible. However, that tendency to regard the writers of "Byzantine questions" with contempt is increasingly being corrected. Byzantine theological production of the Middle Ages, although inferior to the Latin in scholastic speculation, is capable of standing comparison with it. Its characteristic note is that it developed in a closed circuit until the 14th century, when it begins to come under the influence of the West. Another characteristic is its close dependence on post-Nicene patristic writings, at times pushed to the point of a narrow conservatism resistant to scientific progress. The very attempt of John Italos and Michael Psellos (11th century) in a scholastic direction was cut short by the Byzantine authorities. Hence that lack of originality which pervades all Byzantine theology.
As regards non-polemical dogmatic theology, it was not much in vogue at Byzantium, where no "Theological Summae" were compiled apart from those of St. John Damascene and of Manuel Kalekas; the latter at the beginning of the 15th century. More personal in character and somewhat polemical are the dogmatic collections of Euthymius Zigabenus (Panoplia dogmatica), the Sacred Arsenal of Andronikos Kamateros, still unpublished, and the Treasury of Orthodoxy of Nicetas Acominatos, a bulky compilation in 27 books, not all of which have been published. I set aside, on the other hand, the monographs, such as those De vitae termino, written by Michael Psellos, Nikephoros Blemmydes, Mark of Ephesus and above all George Scholarios. The sacred homilies too are full of doctrinal content, such as those that celebrate the Mother of God. No one has spoken of her better than the Byzantine orators. They peacefully preach the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin while it was being disputed in the West. The doctrine of the universal mediation of Mary is likewise proclaimed without reticence by Theophanes of Nicaea (14th century) in a discourse recently published (M. Jugie, in Lateranum, new series, 1 [1935]). The contemporary Latin oratory has nothing that can compare with the beautiful homilies of Nicholas Cabasilas, of Gregory Palamas and of George Scholarios. It is easy to understand that polemical dogmatic production surpasses the irenic kind, if one thinks of the continuous religious controversies that took place at Byzantium. Once the iconoclast controversy was closed with the Feast of Orthodoxy (11 March 843), the last of those of the patristic era, the anti-Latin polemic was not long in flaring up. Photius opened fire with his Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit. The two themes of the procession of the Spirit and the alleged Latin liturgical abuses, especially that of the eucharistic use of unleavened bread, provided the principal material for the most famous Byzantine polemicists, among whom Nilus Cabasilas stands foremost (edited in part by E. Candal, in Studi e Testi,
As regards non-polemical dogmatic theology, it was not much in vogue at Byzantium, where no "Theological Summae" were compiled apart from those of St. John Damascene and of Manuel Kalekas; the latter at the beginning of the 15th century. More personal in character and somewhat polemical are the dogmatic collections of Euthymius Zigabenus (Panoplia dogmatica), the Sacred Arsenal of Andronikos Kamateros, still unpublished, and the Treasury of Orthodoxy of Nicetas Acominatos, a bulky compilation in 27 books, not all published. Monographs, on the other hand, were abandoned, such as those De vitae termino, written by Michael Psellos, Nicephorus Blemmydes, Mark of Ephesus and above all George Scholarios. The sacred homilies too are full of doctrinal content, such as those that celebrate the Mother of God. No one has spoken of her better than the Byzantine orators. They peacefully preach the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin while it was being disputed in the West. The doctrine of the universal mediation of Mary is also proclaimed without reticence by Theophanes of Nicaea (14th century) in a discourse recently published (M. Jugie, in Lateranum, new series, 1 [1935]). The contemporary Latin oratory has nothing that can compare with the beautiful homilies of Nicholas Cabasilas, of Gregory Palamas and of George Scholarios. It is easy to understand that polemical dogmatic production surpasses the irenic if one thinks of the continuous religious controversies that took place at Byzantium. Once the iconoclast controversy was closed with the feast of orthodoxy (11 March 843), the last of those of the patristic age, the anti-Latin polemic was not long in flaring up. Photius opened fire with his Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit. The two themes of the procession of the Spirit and the alleged Latin liturgical abuses, especially that of the eucharistic use of unleavened bread, provided the main material for the most famous Byzantine polemicists, among whom stand out Nilus Cabasilas (edited in part by E. Candal, in Studi e Testi, 116, Rome 1945), and George Scholarios, countered by other "Latin-minded" theologians such as Nicephorus Melissenos, George Metochites, George Acropolites, Demetrius Cydones, translator of St. Thomas, his brother Prochorus and Manuel Kalekas, who became a Catholic and then a Dominican, author of a polemical treatise Contra Graecos. In the first half of the 15th century shine the unionists who remained faithful to the union of Florence, namely Bessarion, Gregory Mammas and Joseph of Methone. Byzantine writings in the polemic against the Armenian Monophysites and against the Jews are rather scanty, and, what is more surprising, in that against the Muslims. The controversy over Palamism (v.), on the other hand, has given rise to a huge mass of books, almost all unpublished.
II. THE MORALISTS
The homilies inspired by the Holy Fathers, and especially by Chrysostom, are particularly rich in moral content. Many complete sermonaries for the whole year have come down to us, such as that of John Agapetus, called "Hieromnemon," a Byzantine patriarch in the 12th century, erroneously attributed sometimes to John Xiphilinus, sometimes to Theophylact of Bulgaria (under this name St. Eustratiades published half of them). Also worthy of note are the sermons of John Glykas, still unpublished, and those of Gregory Palamas, already published.
In the field of ascetics and mysticism, Byzantine literature has left us abundant and valuable writings, for the most part unpublished. The conferences of St. Theodore Studite to the monks are ascetic in character. But it was especially mysticism that enjoyed the preference of the Byzantines. The greatest mystic is Symeon the Younger, the theologian (949-1022), not always orthodox, whose life and doctrine his disciple Nicetas Stethatos illustrated for us (cf. I. Hausherr, in Orient. Christiana, 12 [1928], pp. 1-254). In the 13th and 14th centuries we encounter the representatives of Athonite Hesychasm with Gregory the Sinaite, Theoleptus of Philadelphia and Gregory Palamas. Nicholas Cabasilas wrote a true treatise on the spiritual life in his De vita in Christo, not free from Latin influences. In the 15th century George Scholarios condenses evangelical morality in a small masterpiece entitled: On the First Service of God or the Evangelical Law. Also in the field of morality the Byzantines had a taste for compilations, among which we shall mention The Interpretation of the Divine Commandments of the Lord by the monk Nicon of Raithu in the 11th century.
The recent works of Ehrhard, surveying the Byzantine hagiographic collections, almost always gatherings of panegyric sermons, contained in the various libraries, have revealed a very abundant material not yet exploited (cf. Texte und Untersuchungen, from vol. 50 onward). From this rapid survey it is evident that in the various branches of religious science the Byzantines produced notable works, not yet completely catalogued and imperfectly known. If they did not have the originality and the vast syntheses of the Latins, they must be credited with the great merit of having maintained direct contact with the great representatives of Greek patristics of the first seven centuries. However, having ignored the Latin tradition favored the schism and its persistence. There was too much polemic and too little serene attention to the truths of the faith. In some dogmatic points, as in Mariology, and in ascetics and mysticism, the Byzantines have nothing to envy in their Latin contemporaries.