Abstract
The Byzantine attitude toward the study and use of logic was ambivalent. Although some Byzantine thinkers argued that logic is of no value in the search for true knowledge, and so logical studies should be dismissed, some others treated logic as the preliminary stage of the philosophical curriculum as well as an instrument in defending Christian doctrines or in rejecting heretic and pagan views. Thus, there were Byzantine philosophers who wrote commentaries and paraphrases of the Aristotelian Organon, small essays on specific logical issues, and brief introductions to logic. Their interpretations of Aristotle’s texts are not always original, but they are worth studying as important sources of ancient logic and as stepping-stones in the history of logic.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Bibliography
Primary Sources
Anonymus Heiberg. (1929). Anonymi logica et quadrivium, J. L. Heiberg (Ed.). Copenhagen: Andr. Fred. Høst.
Arethas of Caesarea. (1994). Arethas of Caesarea’s Scholia on Porphyry’s Isagoge and Aristotle’s Categories (Codex Vaticanus Urbinas Graecus 35) (Corpus Philosophorum Medii Aevi: Commentaria in Aristotelem Byzantina 1), M. Share (Ed.). Athens: The Academy of Athens.
Eustratios of Nicaea. (1907). Eustratii in Analyticorum posteriorum librum secundum commentarium (Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 21.1), M. Hayduck (Ed.). Berlin: Reimer.
George Scholarios. (1936). Œuvres complètes de Gennade Scholarios (Vol. VII), L. Petit, X. A. Sideridès, and M. Jugie (Eds.). Paris: Maison de la bonne presse.
John Italos. (1924/1926). Johannis Itali Opuscula selecta, Vol. I: De arte dialectica & Vol. II: De syllogismis, De arte rhetorica, G. Cereteli (Ed.). Tbilisi.
John Italos. (1956). Ioannes Italos Quaestiones quodlibetales (AΠOPIAI KAI ΛYΣEIΣ) (Studia Patristica et Byzantina 4), P. Joannou (Ed.). Ettal: Buch-Kunstverlag.
John Italos. (1966). Ioannis Itali Opera, N. Ketschakmadze (Ed.). Tbilisi.
John Italos. (1999). Byzantinische Kommentatoren der aristotelischen Topik. Joannes Italos & Leon Magentinos, S. Kotzabassi (Ed.). Thessaloniki: Vanias.
Michael of Ephesus. (1898). Alexandri quod fertur in Aristotelis Sophisticos elenchus commentarium (Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 2.3), M. Wallies (Ed.). Berlin: Reimer.
Michael Psellos. (1992). Michaelis Pselli Philosophica minora, 1. Opuscula logica, physica, allegorica, alia, J. Duffy (Ed.). Stuttgart: Teubner.
Nikephoros Blemmydes. (1885). Nicephori Blemmidae Epitome logica, J. Wegelin (Ed.). In J.-P. Migne (Ed.), Patrologia graeca (Vol. 142, pp. 685–1004). Paris.
Photios. (1986). Photii Epistulae et Amphilochia (Vol. V, qu. 137–147), L. G. Westerink (Ed.). Leipzig: Teubner.
Sophonias. (1884). Anonymi in Aristotelis Sophisticos elenchos paraphrasis (Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 23.4), M. Hayduck (Ed.). Berlin: Reimer.
Theodore Prodromos. (1887). Théodore Prodrome sur le grand et le petit. In P. Tannery (Ed.), Annuaire de l’Association pour l’encouragement des études grecques en France (Vol. 21, pp. 104–119).
Theodore Prodromos. (1963). Ξενέδημος ἢ φωναί. In J. A. Cramer (Ed.), Anecdota graeca e codicibus manuscriptis Bibliothecarum Oxoniensium (Vol. III, pp. 204–215). Oxford, 1836 (Reprinted Amsterdam).
Secondary Sources
Benakis, L. (1988). Commentaries and commentators on the logical works of Aristotle in Byzantium. In R. Clausen & R. Daube-Schackat (Eds.), Gedankenzeichen. Festschrift Klaus Oehler (pp. 3–12). Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
Cacouros, M. (1994–1995). La tradition du commentaire de Théodore Prodrome au deuxième livre de Seconds Analytiques d’Aristote: quelques étapes dans l’enseignement de la logique à Byzance. Diptucha, 6, 329–354.
Ebbesen, S. (1981). Commentators and commentaries on Aristotle’s Sophistici Elenchi: A study of post-Aristotelian ancient and medieval writings on fallacies (3 Vols.). Leiden: Brill.
Ierodiakonou, K. (1996). The hypothetical syllogisms in the Greek and Latin traditions. Cahiers de l’Istitut du Moyen-Age Grec et Latin, 66, 96–116.
Ierodiakonou, K. (2002). The anti-logical movement in the fourteenth century. In K. Ierodiakonou (Ed.), Byzantine philosophy and its ancient sources (pp. 219–236). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ierodiakonou, K. (2005). The Byzantine reception of Aristotle’s categories. Synthesis Philosophica, 39, 7–31.
Podskalsky, G. (1977). Theologie und Philosophie in Byzanz. Munich: Beck.
Sinkewicz, R. E. (1980). A new interpretation for the first episode in the controversy between Barlaam the Calabrian and Gregory Palamas. Journal of Theological Studies, 31, 489–500.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature B.V.
About this entry
Cite this entry
Ierodiakonou, K. (2020). Logic, Byzantine. In: Lagerlund, H. (eds) Encyclopedia of Medieval Philosophy. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1665-7_305
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1665-7_305
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-024-1663-3
Online ISBN: 978-94-024-1665-7
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Humanities