ページの画像
PDF
ePub
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

PALAEMON (Пaλaíμwv), signifies the wrestler, as in the surname of Heracles in Lycophron (663); but it also occurs as a proper name of several mythical personages.

1. A son of Athamas and Ino, was originally called Melicertes. When his mother, who was driven mad by Hera, had thrown herself with her boy, who was either still alive or already killed, from the Molurian rock into the sea, both became marine divinities, viz. Ino became Leucothea, and Melicertes became Palaemon. (Apollod. iii. 4. § 3; Hygin. Fab. 2; Ov. Met. iv. 520, xiii. 919.) According to some, Melicertes after his apotheosis was called Glaucus (Athen. vii. p. 296), whereas, according to another version, Glaucus is said to have leaped into the sea from his love of Melicertes. (Athen. vii. p. 297.) The apotheosis was effected by the Nereides, who saved Melicertes, and also ordered the institution of the Nemean games. The body of Melicertes, according | to the common tradition, was washed by the waves, or carried by dolphins into port Schoenus on the Corinthian isthmus, or to that spot on the coast where subsequently the altar of Palaemon stood. (Paus. i. 44. § 11, ii. 1. § 3; Plut. Sympos. v. 3.) | There the body was found by his uncle Sisyphus, who ordered it to be carried by Donacinus and Amphimachus to Corinth, and on the command of the Nereides instituted the Isthmian games and sacrifices of black bulls in honour of the deified Palaemon. (Tzetz. ad Lyc. 107, 229; Philostr. Her. 19, Icon. ii. 16; Paus. ii. 1. § 3; Schol. ad Eurip. Med. 1274; Eurip. Iph. Taur. 251.) On the isthmus of Corinth there was a temple of Palaemon with statues of Palaemon, Leucothea, and Poseidon ; and near the same place was a subter-| raneous sanctuary, which was believed to contain the remains of Palaemon. (Paus. ii. 2. § 1.) In the island of Tenedos, it is said that children were sacrificed to him, and the whole worship seems to have had something gloomy and orgiastic about it. (Philostr. l. c.; Hom. Od. iii. 6.) In works of art Palaemon is represented as a boy carried by marine deities or dolphins. (Philostr. Icon. ii. 16.) The Romans identified Palaemon with their own god Portunus, or Portumnus. [PORTUNUS.]

2. A son of Hephaestus, or Aetolus, or Lernus, was one of the Argonauts. (Apollod. i. 9. § 16 ; Apollon. Rhod. i. 202; Orph. Argon. 208.)

3. A son of Heracles by Autonoe, the daughter of Peireus, or by Iphinoe, the daughter of Antaeus. (Apollod. ii. 7. §8; Tzetz. ad Lyc. 662.)

4. One of the sons of Priam. (Hygin. 90.)

PALAE PHATUS (Пaλaípaтos), the name of four literary persons in Suidas, who, however, seems to have confounded different persons and writings. 1. Of Athens, an epic poet, to whom a mythical origin was assigned. According to some he was a son of Actaeus and Boeo, according to others of Iocles and Metaneira, and according to a third statement of Hermes. The time at which he lived is uncertain, but he appears to have been usually placed after Phemonoe [PHEMONOE], though some writers assigned him even an earlier date. He is represented by Christodorus (Anth. Graec. i. p. 27, ed. Tauchnitz) as an old bard crowned with laurel:

δάφνῃ μὲν πλοκαμῖδα Παλαίφατος ἔπρεπε μάντις στεψάμενος, δόκεεν δὲ χέειν μαντώδεα φωνήν. Suidas has preserved the titles of the following poems of Palaephatus: "Eypaye dè (1) koσμoποιΐαν, εἰς ἔπη έ', (2) ̓Απόλλωνος καὶ ̓Αρτέμιδος γονὰς ἔπη γ', (3) Αφροδίτης καὶ Ἔρωτος φωνὰς καὶ λόγους ἔπη ε', (4) ̓Αθηνᾶς ἔριν καὶ Ποσειδῶ vος ἔπη α', (5) Λητούς πλόκαμον.

2. Of Paros, or Priene, lived in the time of Artaxerxes. Suidas attributes to him the five books of*Amiσтα, but adds that many persons assigned this work to Palaephatus of Athens. This is the work which is still extant, and is spoken of below.

Some

3. Of Abydus, an historian (iσTopikós), lived in the time of Alexander the Great, and is stated to have been loved (waidikά) by the philosopher Aristotle, for which Suidas quotes the authority of Philo, Пepl Tapadókov ioroplas, and of Theodorus of Ilium, 'Ev devTép Тpwikŵv. Suidas gives the titles of the following works of Palaephatus: Κυπριακά, Δηλιακά, 'Αττικά, Αραβικά. writers believe that this Palaephatus of Abydus is the author of the fragment on Assyrian history, which is preserved by Eusebius, and which is quoted by him as the work of Abydenus. There can, however, be little doubt that Abydenus is the name of the writer, and not an appellative taken from his native place. (Voss. de Hist. Graec. pp. 85, 375, ed. Westermann.) [ABYDENUS.]

4. An Egyptian or Athenian, and a grammarian, as he is described by Suidas, who assigns to him the following works: (1) Alyuπtiak) Deoλoyía. (2) Μυθικών βιβλίον α. (3) Λύσεις τῶν μυθι κῶς εἰρημένων. (4) Υποθέσεις εἰς Σιμωνίδην. (5) Tpwikά, which some however attributed to the Athenian [No. 1], and others to the Parian [No. 2]. He also wrote (6) 'IoTopia iðía. It has been Fab.supposed that the Mudikά and the Avσeis are one and the same work; but we have no certain information on the point. Of these works the Тpwikά seems to have been the most celebrated, as we find it frequently referred to by the ancient grammarians. It contained apparently geographical and historical discussions respecting Asia Minor and more particularly its northern coasts, and must have been divided into several books. (Comp. Suidas, s. v. Mакроképаλoι; Steph. Byz. s. v. Xapiμátai ; Harpocrat. s. v. Avσaúλns.)

[L. S.] PALAEMON, Q. REMMIUS, a celebrated grammarian in the reigns of Tiberius, Caligula, and Claudius, is placed by Jerome (ad Euseb.) in the eighth year of the reign of Claudius, A. D. 48. He was a native of Vicentia (Vicenza), in the north of Italy, and was originally a slave; but having been manumitted, he opened a school at Rome, where he became the most celebrated grammarian of his time, and obtained great numbers of pupils, though his moral character was so infamous that Tiberius and Claudins used to say that there was no one to whom the training of youths ought so little to be entrusted. Suetonius gives rather a long account of him (de Illustr. Gram. 23), and he is also mentioned by Juvenal on two occasions (vi. 451, vii. 251 -219). From the scholiast on Juvenal (vi. 451) we lean that Palaemon was the master of Quintilian.

There is extant a small work entitled Παλαίφα τος περὶ ἀπίστων, οι 66 Concerning Incredible Tales," giving a brief account of some of the most celebrated Greek legends. That this is merely an abstract of a much larger work is evident from many considerations; first, because Suidas speaks of it as consisting of five books [see above, No. 2]; secondly, because many of the ancient writers refer

to Palaephatus for statements which are not found in the treatise now extant; and thirdly, because the manuscripts exhibit it in various forms, the abridgement being sometimes briefer and sometimes longer. It was doubtless the original work to which Virgil refers (Ciris, 88):

"Docta Palaephatia testatur voce papyrus." Respecting the author of the original work there is however much dispute, and we must be content to leave the matter in uncertainty. Some of the earliest modern writers on Greek literature assigned the work to the ancient epic poet [No. 1]; but this untenable supposition was soon abandoned, and the work was then ascribed to the Parian, as it is by Suidas. But if this Palaephatus was the contemporary of Artaxerxes as Suidas asserts, it is impossible to believe that the myths could have been treated at so early a period in the rationalizing way in which we find them discussed in the extant epitome. In addition to which we find the ancient writers calling the author sometimes a peripatetic and sometimes a stoic philosopher (Theon, Progymn. 6, 12; Tzetzes, Chil. ix. 273, x. 20), from which | we must conclude, if these designations are correct, that he must have lived after the time of Alexander the Great, and could not therefore even have been the native of Abydus [No. 3], as others have maintained. It is thus impossible to identify the author of the work with any of the three persons just mentioned; but from his adopting the rationalistic interpretation of the myths, he must be looked upon as a disciple of Evemerus [EVEMERUS], and may thus have been an Alexandrine Greek, and the same person as the grammarian spoken of by Suidas, who calls him an Egyptian or Athenian. [No. 4.]

all nor rejecting all; accordingly, he had taken great pains to separate the true from the false in many of the narratives; he had visited the localities wherein they had taken place, and made careful inquiries from old men and others. The results of his researches are presented in a new version of fifty legends, among the most celebrated and the most fabulous, comprising the Centaurs, Pasiphae, Actaeon, Cadmus and the Sparti, the Sphinx, Cycnus, Daedalus, the Trojan horse, Aeolus, Scylla, Geryon, Bellerophon, &c. It must be confessed that Palaephatus has performed his promise of transforming the Incredibilia' into narratives in themselves plausible and unobjectionable, and that in doing so he always follows some thread of analogy, real or verbal. The Centaurs (he tells us) were a body of young men from the village of Nephele in Thessaly, who first trained and mounted horses for the purpose of repelling a herd of bulls belonging to Ixion, king of the Lapithae, which had run wild and did great damage: they pursued these wild bulls on horseback, and pierced them with their spears, thus acquiring both the name of Prickers (Kévτopes) and the imputed attribute of joint body with the horse. Actaeon was an Arcadian, who neglected the cultivation of his land for the pleasures of hunting, and was thus eaten up by the expense of his hounds. The dragon whom Cadmus killed at Thebes, was in reality Draco, king of Thebes; and the dragon's teeth, which he was said to have sown, and from whence sprung a crop of armed men, were in point of fact elephant's teeth, which Cadmus, as a rich Phoenician, had brought over with him: the sons of Draco sold these elephants' teeth, and employed the proceeds to levy troops against Cadmus. Daedalus, instead of flying across the sea on wings, had escaped from Crete in a swift-sailing boat under a violent storm. Cottus, Briareus, and Gyges were not persons with one hundred hands, but inhabitants of the village of Hecatoncheiria in Upper Macedonia, who warred with the inhabitants of Mount Olympus against the Titans. Scylla, whom Odysseus so narrowly escaped, was a fast-sailing piratical vessel, as was also Pegasus, the alleged winged horse of Bellerophon. By such ingenious conjectures, Palacphatus eliminates all the incredible circumstances, and leaves to us a string of tales perfectly credible and common-place, which we should readily believe, provided a very moderate amount of testimony could be produced in their favour. If his treatment not only disenchants the original myths, but even effaces their generic and essential character, we ought to remember that this is not more than what is done by Thucydides in his sketch of the Trojan war. Palaephatus handles the myths consistently, according to the semi-historical theory, and his results exhibit the maximum which that theory can ever present: by aid of conjecture we get out of the impossible and arrive at matters intrinsically plausible, but totally uncertified; beyond this point we cannot penetrate, without the light of extrinsic evidence, since there is no intrinsic mark to distinguish truth from plausible fiction."

The work Пepl aníσTwv consists of 51 sections, of which only the first 46 contain explanations of the myths. The remaining five sections are written in an entirely different style, without any expression of distrust or disbelief as to the common form of the myth; and as they are wanting in all manuscripts at present extant, they are probably the work of another hand. In the first 46 sections Palaephatus generally relates in a few lines the common form of the myth, introducing it with some such words as φασὶν ὡς, λέγεται ώς, &c.; he then expresses his disbelief, and finally proceeds to give what he considers a rational account of the matter. The nature of the work is well characterised by Mr. Grote (Hist. of Greece, vol. i. p. 553, &c.):-" Another author who seems to have conceived clearly, and applied consistently, the semi-historical theory of the Grecian myths, is Palaephatus. In the short preface of his treatise Concerning Incredible Tales,' he remarks, that some men, from want of instruction, believe all the current narratives; while others, more searching and cautious, disbelieve them altogether. Each of these extremes he is anxious to avoid: on the one hand, he thinks that no narrative could ever have acquired credence unless it had been founded in truth; on the other, it is impossible for him to accept so much of the existing narratives as conflicts It has been already remarked that the manuwith the analogies of present natural phaenomena. scripts of the Пepl 'Arioτwv present the greatest If such things ever had been, they would still con- discrepancies, in some the work being much longer tinue to be-but they never have so occurred; and and in others much shorter. The printed editions the extra-analogical features of the stories are to be in like manner vary considerably. It was first ascribed to the licence of the poets. Palaephatus printed by Aldus Manutius, together with Aesop, wishes to adopt a middle course, neither accepting | Phurnutus, and other writers, Venice, 1505, fol.,

and has since that time been frequently reprinted. | ments were accustomed to shut themselves up for The following is a list of the principal editions:- days and nights together in a corner of their cell, By Tollius, with a Latin translation and notes, and abstracting their thoughts from all worldly Amsterdam, 1649; by Martin Brunner, Upsala, objects, and resting their beards on their chest, 1663, which edition was reprinted with improve- and fixing their eyes on their bellies, imagined ments under the care of Paulus Pater, Frankfort, that the seat of the soul, previously unknown, was 1685, 1686, or 1687, for these three years appear on revealed to them by a mystical light, at the disdifferent title pages; by Thomas Gale in the Opus- covery of which they were rapt into a state of cula Mythologica, Cambridge, 1670, reprinted at extatic enjoyment. The existence of this light, Amsterdam, 1688; by Dresig, Leipzig, 1735, well described by Gibbon as "the creature of an which edition was frequently reprinted under the empty stomach and an empty brain," appears to care of J. F. Fischer, who improved it very much, have been kept secret by the monks, and was only and who published a sixth edition at Leipzig, 1789; revealed to Barlaam by an incautious monk, whom by J. H. M. Ernesti, for the use of schools, Leipzig, Cantacuzenus abuses for his communicativeness, as 1816. The best edition of the text is by Wester- being scarcely above the level of the brutes. Barmann, in the "Mutoypάpor: Scriptores Poëticae laam eagerly laid hold of the opportunity afforded Historiae Graeci," Brunswick, 1843, pp. 268- by the discovery to assail with bitter reproaches the 310. (Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. i. p. 182, &c.; fanaticism of these Hesychasts (novxáčovтes) or Voss. de Hist. Graec. p. 478, ed. Westermann; Quietists, calling them 'Oupaxóuxo, Omphalopsy Westermann, Praefatio ad Muloypápovs, p. xi. chi, "men with souls in their navels," and identi&c.; Eckstein, in Ersch and Gruber's Encyklopä-fying them with the Massalians or Euchites of the die, art. Palaphatus.) fourth century.

PALAESTINUS (Пaλaiσтîvos), a son of Poseidon and father of Haliacmon. From grief at the death of his son, Palaestinus threw himself into the river, which was called after him Palaestinus, and subsequently Strymon. (Plut. De Fluv. 11.) [L. S.]

PA'LAMAS, GREGORIUS (Tpnyópios & Пaλauâs), an eminent Greek ecclesiastic of the fourteenth century. He was born in the Asiatic portion of the now reduced Byzantine empire, and was educated at the court of Constantinople, apparently during the reign of Andronicus Palaeologus the elder. Despising, however, all the prospects of worldly greatness, of which his parentage and wealth, and the imperial favour gave him the prospect, he, with his two brothers, while yet very young, became monks in one of the monasteries of Mount Athos. Here the youngest of the three died; and upon the death of the superior of the monastery in which the brothers were, which followed soon after the death of the youngest brother, the two survivors placed themselves under another superior, with whom they remained eight years, and on whose death Gregory Palamas withdrew to Scete, near Berrhoea, where he built himself a cell, and gave himself up entirely, for ten years, to divine contemplation and spiritual exercises. Here the severity of his regimen and the coldness of his cell, induced an illness which almost occasioned his death; and the urgent recommendation of the other monks of the place induced him then to leave Scete, and return to Mount Athos; but this change not sufficing for his recovery, he removed to Thessalonica (Cantacuzen. Hist. ii. 39).

The monks were roused by these attacks, and as Gregory Palamas was eminent among them for his intellectual powers and attainments, they put him forward as their champion, both with his tongue and pen, against the attacks of the sarcastic Calabrian. (Cantacuz. l. c.; Niceph. Greg. Hist. Byz. xi. 10; Mosheim, Eccles. Hist. by Murdoch and Soames, book iii. cent. xiv. pt. ii. ch. v. § 1, &c.; Gibbon, Dec. and Fall, c. 63.)

Palamas and his friends tried first of all to silence the reproaches of Barlaam by friendly remonstrance, and affirmed that as to the mystical light which beamed round the saints in their seasons of contemplation, there had been various similar instances in the history of the church of a divine lustre surrounding the saints in time of persecution; and that Sacred History recorded the . appearance of a divine and uncreated light at the Saviour's transfiguration on mount Tabor. Barlaam caught at the mention of this light as uncreated, and affirmed that nothing was uncreated but God, and that inasmuch as God was invisible while the light of Mount Tabor was visible to the bodily eye, the monks must have two Gods, one the Creator of all things, confessedly invisible; the other, this visible yet uncreated light. This serious charge gave to the controversy a fresh impulse, until, after two or three years, Barlaam, fearing that his infuriated opponents, who flocked to the scene of conflict from all the monasteries about Thessalonica and Constantinople, would offer him personal violence, appealed to the Patriarch of Constantinople and the bishops there, and charged Palamas not only with sharing the fanaticism of the Omphalopsychi, and with the use of defective prayers, It was apparently while at Thessalonica, that but also with holding blasphemous views of God, his controversy began with Barlaam, a Calabrian and with introducing new terms into the theology monk, who having visited Constantinople soon after of the church. A council was consequently conthe accession of the emperor Andronicus Palaeolo- vened in the church of St. Sophia at Constantinople gus the younger in A. D. 1328 (ANDRONICUS III.), (A. D. 1341) in the presence of the emperor, the and professed himself an adherent of the Greek chief senators, the learned, and a vast multitude of church, and a convert from and an opponent of the the common people. As it was not thought adLatin church, against which he wrote several works, visable to discuss the mysteries of theology before obtained the favour and patronage of the emperor. a promiscuous multitude, the charge against PalaBarlaam appears to have been a conceited man, mas and the monks of blasphemous notions respectand to have sought opportunities of decrying the ing God was suppressed, and only the charge of holdusages of the Byzantine Greeks. To this super- ing the old Massalian heresy respecting prayer, cilious humour the wild fanaticism of the monks of and of using defective prayers, was proceeded Athos presented an admirable subject. Those of with. Barlaam first addressed the council in supthem who aimed at the highest spiritual attain- | port of his charge, then Palamas replied, retorting

upon Barlaam the charge of blasphemy and perverseness. In the end the council decided in favour of the monks, and Barlaam, according to Cantacuzenus, acknowledged his errors, and was reconciled to his adversaries. Mortified, however, at his public defeat, he returned to Italy, and re-church, a synod was summoned, after various conconciled himself to the Latin church. Nicephorus Gregoras states, that the decision of the council on the question of the Massalian heresy charged against the monks, was deferred, that Barlaam was convicted of malignity and arrogance, and that the heresy of Palamas and his party would probably have been condemned also, had not the completion of the business of the council been prevented by the emperor's death, A. D. 1341. (Cantacuz. c. 40; Niceph. Gregor. c. 11.)

wife of Cantacuzenus, by persuading her that the recent death of her younger son, Andronicus (A. D. 1347), was a sign of the Divine displeasure at the favour shown by the emperor Cantacuzenus to the Palamites. To restore peace, if possible, to the

ferences had been held between the emperor, the patriarch Isidore, Palamas, and Nicephorus Gregoras. Isidore died A. D. 1349, before the meeting of the synod, over which Callistus, his successor, presided. When it met (A. D. 1351) Nicephorus Gregoras was the champion of the Barlaamites, who numbered among their supporters the archbishop of Ephesus and the bishop of Ganus or Gannus: the archbishop of Tyre, who was present, appears to have been on the same side. Palamas was the leader of the opposite party, who having a large majority and the support of the emperor, carried every thing their own way; the archbishop of Ephesus and the bishop of Ganus were deposed, Barlaam and Acindynus (neither of whom was present) were declared to be excommunicated, and their followers were forbidden to propagate their sentiments by speech or writing. (Cantacuz. Hist. iv. 23; Niceph. Gregor. Hist. Byz. xvi. 5, xviii. 3-8, xix., xx.) The populace, however, favoured the vanquished party, and Palamas narrowly escaped their violence. Of his subsequent history and death nothing appears to be known.

The cause which Barlaam had forsaken was taken up by another Gregory, surnamed Acindynus [ACINDYNUS, GREGORIUS]; but the party of the monks continued in the ascendant, and Palamas enjoyed the favour of John Cantacuzenus, who then exercised the chief influence at the court of the emperor, John Palaeologus, a minor [JOANNES V. CANTACUZENUS; JOANNES VI. PALAEOLOGUS], to such a degree that it was reported that Cantacuzenus intended to procure the deposition of the patriarch of Constantinople, Joannes or John Calecas or Aprenus [CALECAS, JOANNES], and to elevate Palamas to his seat (Cantacuz. Hist. iii. 17). In the civil war which followed (A. D. 1342 -1347), between Cantacuzenus and the court (where the Admiral Apocaucus had supplanted him), Palamas, as a friend of Cantacuzenus, was imprisoned (A. D. 1346), not however on any political charge, but on the ground of his religious opinions; for the patriarch now supported Gregory Acindynus and the Barlaamites against the monks of Athos, who were favourable to Cantacuzenus. The Barlaamites consequently gained the ascend-attack. The last seven books (xviii.-xxiv.) of ancy, and in a council at Constantinople the Palamites, as their opponents were called, were condemned. The patriarch and the court were, how ever, especially anxious to clear themselves from the suspicion of acting from political feeling in the imprisonment of Palamas. When the entrance of Cantacuzenus into Constantinople, in January 1347, obliged the court to submit, Palamas was released, and sent to make terms with the conqueror. (Cantacuz. Hist. iii. 98; Niceph. Greg. Hist. Byz. xv. 7,9.) The patriarch Calecas had been deposed by the influence of the empress mother, Anna, just before the triumph of Cantacuzenus, and Gregory Palamas persuaded Cantacuzenus to assemble a synod, by which the deposition was confirmed, and to banish Calecas to Didymotichum. Acindynus and the Barlaamites were now in turn condemned, and the Palamites became once more predominant. Isidore, one of their number, was chosen patriarch. (Cantac. Hist. iv. 3; Niceph. Greg. xv. 10, 11.) Palamas himself was soon after appointed archbishop of Thessalonica; though, as that city was in the hands of some of the nobility who were hostile to Cantacuzenus, he was refused admittance, and obliged to retire to the isle of Lemnos, but he obtained admittance after a time. This was in A. D. 1349. (Cantac. c. 15; Niceph. Greg. 12.) Meanwhile, the ecclesiastical troubles continued: the Barlaamites withdrew from the communion of the church; their ranks received continual increase, and Nicephorus Gregoras, the historian, adroitly drew over to their side the empress Irene,

The leading tenets of the Palamites were the existence of the mystical light discovered by the more eminent monks and recluses, in their long exercise of abstract contemplation and prayer, and the uncreated nature of the light of Mount Tabor, seen at the transfiguration of Christ. The first attracted the notice and animadversion of their opponents, but the second, with the consequences really or apparently deducible from it, was the great object of

|

[ocr errors]

the Historia Byzantina of Nicephorus Gregoras are taken up with the Palamite controversy: and in the bitterness of his polemic spirit he charges Palamas with polytheism (xviii. 2. § 4); with converting the attributes of the deity into so many distinct and independent deities (xxii. 4. §9); with affirming that the Holy Spirit was not one alone, or even one of seven (an evident allusion to Revel. i. 4), but one of “ seventy times seven (xxiii. 3. § 4); with placing in an intermediate rank between God and angels a new and peculiar class of uncreated powers (καινόν τι καὶ ἴδιον ἀκτίστων γένος eveрyev) which he (Palamas) called “the brightness (λаμжрóτητa) of God and the ineffable light" (øŵs äßßntov); with holding that any man by partaking of the stream of this light flowing from its inexhaustible source, could at will become uncreated and without beginning (dκтlστ éléλovti ylveolai кal ȧváрxw (xxiii. 3); and with other errors which our limits do not allow us to enumerate (ibid.). It is plain, however, that these alleged errors were for the most part, if not altogether, the inferences deduced by Nicephorus Gregoras and other opponents from the Palamite dogma of the uncreated light, and not the acknowledged tenets of the Palamite party. The rise, continuance, and vehemence of the controversy is a singular manifestation of the subtilty and misdirection of the Greek intellect of the period. The dogma of the uncreated light of Mount Tabor has apparently continued to be the recognised orthodox doctrine of the Greek Church (Capperonnerius, Not. ad

« 前へ次へ »