In 543 and 553, two church councils initiated by Justinian condemned Origen’s belief that stars possess rational souls. In this article, I place Justinian’s anathemas in the wider context of sixth-century debates on Biblical cosmology and on the validity of astral sciences. In the first part, I review the arguments for and against astral ensoulment and astral signification in Origen, Evagrius, and other Christian and Neoplatonic authors. The second part consists of an in-depth reading of two sixth-century Christian authors who reacted differently to Origen’s ideas: Sergius of Rešʿaynā (d. 536) and John Philoponus (d. ca. 570). While Sergius endorses and expands on the Origenian view by integrating Evagrian and Neoplatonic elements, I argue that John Philoponus constructs his arguments not only in opposition to Origen, but specifically as a reaction to the Origenist-Evagrian line of interpretation represented by Sergius. Finally, I offer a few examples of how Sergius’ and Philoponus’ divergent readings of Origen can contribute to a better understanding of later debates on similar issues in Byzantium and the Islamic world.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 396 | 72 | 7 |
Full Text Views | 72 | 6 | 3 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 181 | 15 | 4 |
In 543 and 553, two church councils initiated by Justinian condemned Origen’s belief that stars possess rational souls. In this article, I place Justinian’s anathemas in the wider context of sixth-century debates on Biblical cosmology and on the validity of astral sciences. In the first part, I review the arguments for and against astral ensoulment and astral signification in Origen, Evagrius, and other Christian and Neoplatonic authors. The second part consists of an in-depth reading of two sixth-century Christian authors who reacted differently to Origen’s ideas: Sergius of Rešʿaynā (d. 536) and John Philoponus (d. ca. 570). While Sergius endorses and expands on the Origenian view by integrating Evagrian and Neoplatonic elements, I argue that John Philoponus constructs his arguments not only in opposition to Origen, but specifically as a reaction to the Origenist-Evagrian line of interpretation represented by Sergius. Finally, I offer a few examples of how Sergius’ and Philoponus’ divergent readings of Origen can contribute to a better understanding of later debates on similar issues in Byzantium and the Islamic world.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 396 | 72 | 7 |
Full Text Views | 72 | 6 | 3 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 181 | 15 | 4 |