1,720,973 research outputs found
<Articles>Transfer of the Jurisdiction of Mt. Athos : Patriarch and Emperor in Late Byzantium
No full text個人情報保護のため削除部分ありギリシア北東部カルキディケ半島の北端に位置し、正教修道制の一大中心地として現在においても名高いアトス山は、長らくビザンツ皇帝に直属し、その保護の下で独自の地位を築いていたが、一三一二年、突如として教会ヒエラルヒーからの独立特権を解除され、コンスタンティノープル総主教の管轄下に移行された。これまでの研究では、この出来事は修道制の影響力増大という末期ビザンツにおける国制的特徴を示す画期的な事件として理解されてきた。本稿においては、パライオロゴス朝成立以降におけるアトス山の政治的位相の変化と一三一二年の管轄権移行に至る具体的過程を跡付け、当時の政治的コンテクストの中でそれが有した意義を実証的に検討することを試みた。この考察の結果、移行措置は、アトス山において発生した内紛が発端となったこと、教会の集権化を目指した総主教と、不穏な教会情勢の回復を帝位の安定に直結させようとした皇帝、両者の異なる教会政策の接点として実現したことが明らかになった。Mt. Athos, locate in the northernmost projection of the Chalkidike peninsula in northeast Greece, has been the most important center of Eastern Orthodox monasticism and has been called the Holy Mountain since the tenth century. In the tenth and eleventh centuries Athos attracted considerable imperial attention and was put directly under the jurisdiction of the emperor as a privilege. In November 1312, however, the emperor Andronikos II dissolved the privilege, which had set Athos free from episcopal control, and decreed that the monasteries of Athos should come under the direct authority of the patriarch of Constantionople. This transfer of the jurisdiction of Athos from the emperor to the patriarch has been considered by scholars like G. Ostrogorsky and D. M. Nicol as the epochal event reflecting the rise of influence of Byzantine monasticism upon the emperor. Their explanation, though, lacks concrete analysis which is necessary to adequately grasp the political context in late Byzantium. After examining the change of political phase of Athos after the stormy debate concerning the Church Union of Lyons (1274), the process by which Athos was set under the church, and the significance of the transfer in the church policies of both the patriarch and emperor, the paper concludes that the transfer was realized as a connecting point between the policies of patriarch Athanasios, who tried to strengthen the weakened authority of the patriarch and reform various abuses in the church, and that of emperor Andronikos, who tried to save a difficult situation in the church by employing the proper patriarchs as his political instruments
<書評>A.E. Laiou and R.P. Mottahedeh eds., The Crusades from the Perspective of Byzantium and the Muslim World
Get PDF<Note>Who was the Monk Athanasios of Mt. Galesion? : Some Remarks on the Copyist of One Thirteenth-Century Byzantine Manuscript (Codex Paris. Gr. 857)
No full textThe purpose of this paper is to identify the copyist of one thirteenth-century Byzantine manuscript, Codex Parisinus Graecus 857 (hereafter abbreviated as P), This manuscript, which contains the fourth part of Paul Evergetinos' monastic florilegium, known as Synagoge or Evergetinon, has neither illustrations nor descriptions of contemporary events and thus has remained virtually unknown to historians and art historians alike. It has, however, attracted the attention of some philologists and paleographers since the eighteenth century. The reason for this is the specific information provided by the copyist about himself in the colophon. He revealed therein that he was a monk named Athanasios, and moreover that he copied P in the monastery of Mt. Galesion in 1261. The two proper nouns and one specified date reminded some scholars of the Patriarch Athanasios I of Constantinople (1289-93, 1303-9), a radical, ascetic reformer of the late Byzantine church and society. This Patriarch Athanasios is generally considered to have lived between c.a. 1230 and 1320 and is reported by his two hagiographers to have stayed at Galesion for many years during his early life. From these pieces of evidence, they have assumed or asserted that the copyist Athanasios should be identified with Patriarch Athanasios. If their assumption is correct, it not only challenges the prevailing view that no holographic manuscript with the signature of Patriarch Athanasios survives, but also supports the hagiographical reports of his stay at Galesion. What is more, it enables us to estimate the influence of reading and copying Paul Evergetinos' Synagoge upon the later Patriarch Athanasios. In this paper the scholarly debate on Athanasios, the copyist of P, is first surveyed. After careful examination of the points made by B. de Montfaucon, F. Halkin, N. Wilson, J. Declerck and E. Patedakis, it becomes clear that the theory of the identity of the two Athanasioi, supported by Declerck cautiously and Patedakis boldly, lacks crucial evidence and still remains a hypothesis. For instance, Declerck, whose study is undoubtedly the best and most detailed, raised five points which he considered as supportive evidence, but his argument does not necessarily exclude the possibility that another Athanasios, not the later Patriarch, was engaged in copying P at Galesion. Secondly, an additional four pieces of supportive evidence are proposed and discussed. Three of them are related to the P text itself, while the other is related to the script style. As for the former, there appear to be three traces of the Synagoge that are reflected in the life and thought of Paeriarch Athanasios. One is the Hypotyposis (monastic rules or so-called monastic typikon) composed by Patriarch Athanasios in 1305 and applied to all the monasteries in the empire. It has been noted that his Hypotyposis has many similarities with the Hypotyposis made by the disciple Timothy for the monastery of Theotokos Evergetis founded by Paul Evergetinos, and Timothy certainly referred to Paul's Synagoge in writing his Hypotyposds. Second is the emphasis put by Patriarch Athanasios upon the significance of the priesthood for monks. At several stages of his life, Athanasios accepted priestly offices, though reluctantly, and became deacon, priest and patriarch. In the Synagoge, the final theses (the second half of part IV) were exclusively assigned to questions and answers about the significance of the priesthood for monks. Third is the ambivalent stance of Patriarch Athanasios in Byzantine hesychasm. Gregory Palamas mentioned this Athanasios as one of its forerunners, but otherwise there is no clear evidence for his involvement with hesychasm. By the same token, the Synagoge itself is an ambivalent text in terms of hesychasm. The fourth point concerning the script style is the possibility that P's copyist, Athanasios, was familiar with and influenced by a unique script style that had been developed at Galesion during the thirteenth century. This seems to agree with the hagiographical reports that Patriarch Athanasios stayed at Galesion for eighteen years. Strictly speaking, there is no proving the theory of the identity of P's copyist, Athanasios, and Patriarch Athanasios as Declerck suggested, but it is important that in addition to the points made by Declerck four further points can be posed in its support and that no counter-evidence has been found thus far. It is almost certain that a young monk named Athanasios, who later became patriarch and a reformist, copied P during his long stay at Galesion
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Get PDF“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Get PDFWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Get PDFWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
- …
