Abstract

Summing up current discussion this article presents a detailed critique of Carlo Maria Mazzucchi’s suggestion that Damascius, the last head of the pagan Neoplatonist school of Athens, was the author of the enigmatic Pseudo-Dionysian corpus. Mazzuchi’s approach grasps better the probable context of the emergence of the Dionysian Corpus than mainstream interpretation, which accepts the author’s overt claim of Christianity, resorts too easily to rather twisted theories of pseudonymic writing and overrates the autonomy of the Corpus Areopagiticum in relation to Proclus. Contrary to the opinions that dismiss speculation about the identity of the writer as meaningless in the absence of new data this article considers such attempts necessary and useful. The article agrees with Carlo Maria Mazzucchi’s general thesis that the Corpus was a creation of pagan philosophers in the Neoplatonic academy of Athens after Proclus. However, it argues that Mazzucchi misjudged the perspective regarding the future that prevailed in the Athenian school and in particular Damascius’ willingness to accept a compromise with Christianity at the cost of polytheism as articulated in Proclus’ theology of the classes of the gods. As a result a more credible version of the crypto-pagan hypothesis could be developed, namely to see the Corpus Dionysiacum as a purely instrumental stratagem aiming to protect Proclus’ works in order to resurrect more easily the polytheistic religion in better times, which according to the Neoplatonists’ cyclic view of history were destined to return one day.

Highlights

  • The aim of this paper is to discuss how far and in what ways the “crypto-pagan hypothesis” of the origin of the Corpus Areopagiticum could be defended

  • The article agrees with Carlo Maria Mazzucchi’s general thesis that the Corpus was a creation of pagan philosophers in the Neoplatonic academy of Athens after Proclus. It argues that Mazzucchi misjudged the perspective regarding the future that prevailed in the Athenian school and in particular Damascius’ willingness to accept a compromise with Christianity at the cost of polytheism as articulated in Proclus’ theology of the classes of the gods

  • By the term ”crypto-pagan” I do not mean that the Christian content of the Corpus is damaged due to Dionysian thinking being so saturated with pagan Neoplatonism

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The aim of this paper is to discuss how far and in what ways the “crypto-pagan hypothesis” of the origin of the Corpus Areopagiticum could be defended. By the term ”crypto-pagan” I do not mean that the Christian content of the Corpus is damaged due to Dionysian thinking being so saturated with pagan Neoplatonism (nobody could seriously nowadays deny in scholarly debate that the Corpus is thoroughly permeated with Neoplatonic ideas). I use the phrase “crypto-pagan hypothesis” in a stronger sense, meaning a claim that it would be fruitful to view the Corpus not as a theoretical attempt at synthesising Christian and Neoplatonic ideas but as a purely instrumental historical document, evidencing a stratagem forged for the service of the self-defence of the Athenian School of Later Neoplatonism. Other contributing factors to these tendencies are the view that it is meaningless to investigate the classic question of authorship (on the grounds that it is unsolvable) and the emphasis on the independence, originality, and profundity of the Dionysian project in its relation to pagan Neoplatonism, and especially to Proclus

A Crypto-Pagan Tale
59. Already a classical study
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call