Letters of Nicephorus Gregoras

[Beginning at the top of the page]

…to answer anyone at all regarding astronomy and everything that relates to it; for the rest, he persists in claiming that he is ready in all other matters. (We omit the details with regret.) Nicagoras, having turned and enjoined silence upon the crowd, reproached the lack of restraint in the laughter of the many, and said that not everything is given to everyone by God, but one thing to one person, and another to another... What is there, then, novel or worthy of laughter, if this wise man, Xenophon, who was born and raised among the Latins—among whom no astronomy, nor the many forms of wisdom that flourished among the Greeks, have any standing—remained himself also deprived of such things? For he will appear to be competent enough, perhaps, in other branches of knowledge. Xenophon, encouraged by such words, said: "You speak well, Nicagoras; for apart from astronomy and the subjects that follow it, I have learned all other forms of wisdom myself and am certainly capable of teaching them to others."

LETTERS OF NICEPHORUS GREGORAS.

I. ^A To the Prefect of the Table.

[From the Manuscript of the Electoral Library of Munich, edited and illustrated with annotations and Latin version by Fr. Xav. Berger in *Beiträge zur Geschichte und Literatur*... June 1805.]

You indeed, best of men, persist in raising our speeches with great encomiums to the height of the ether, so to speak; I, for my part, not having the means to compensate for your disposition ^D [Greek equivalent: I, for my part, not having the means to repay your disposition according to its worth, extend to you long thanks from my tongue. But I wish...]

also, by the very words which you approved of so highly, to provide an occasion to disclose to you a small part of my soul's mysteries, so that you might know clearly how, in fact, I was affected when I first saw you—if indeed the soul is a divine thing and its gaze extends with precision—and how subsequently time has confirmed my opinion of you; and why I prefer the praises that have come from you to the riches of Croesus and to all the things with which the majority of people shower me today.

^A There was once a wise man in Phrygia named Aesop, not by the wisdom of Pythagoras and Plato, nor by that of Empedocles of Acragas, nor yet of those others whose memory fleeting time has not been able to destroy; but the wisdom of Aesop the Phrygian had this particular quality, that he was self-taught and wise by nature, not through the company of wise men, nor through the constraints of art—such as the books of earlier times hand down to the ears of those who come later—for he strengthened his own natural gifts, whereas it has been the lot of those who later became objects of admiration for their wisdom to derive their greatness in different ways, some by associating with the wise men in Egypt, others by poring over their books, or [by associating with the] Stoa or the Academy. ^B

Letters of Nicephorus Gregoras; Letter 1

[The commentary discusses, among other things, the possibility that the prince mentioned was Alexander II Miklailovitch or Juan Danilovitch, noting the flow of communication between the Byzantine court and the Russian people. It suggests that the Greek language flourished in the court of Russian princes in the time of Nicephorus, and that the prince to whom Nicephorus wrote was not only able to understand the letter but to speak the language with great fluency.]

^{C D}

Academic practitioners; ^A but that man, left unrefined and uncultivated, having utilized only the power of nature, presented himself as no small prodigy to the wise men of the following age. When I first heard of him, I too counted it among fables, as something shaped by the Attics in a different way, and I rejected such figments as utterly unworthy of belief, counting this—like many of the Greeks' tales—among the older diversions of that race.

But after I was granted the trial of your acquaintance, and was able to experience the native capacity of your mind and that most ready fluency of tongue which scarcely stood in need of the cultivation of learning, I no longer clung with such obstinacy to my former opinion, nor did I consider the matter to be one exceeding the bounds of nature. Rather, having checked the course of my ship, I began to set aside this opinion of mine and to relax it, while at the same time, as is right, I endeavored to investigate the very nature of things by reason. I said: since water, flowing down from the clouds for the moistening of the earth, consists of the waters of the sea and of rivers, surely a river can by itself moisten the earth without clouds, just as we hear that the Nile, drawing up its waves from the bowels of the earth, takes the place of rain and irrigates the whole of Egypt. ^B And if this is so, it will be still more permissible to assert something of the sort regarding man, if one considers with oneself that the rational soul is, by its very nature, imbued with a prior knowledge of all sciences, but is disturbed by the weight of the body—whence arises the necessity that, through discipline applied from without like a remedy for a disease, recollection might be excited, yet in such a way that this necessity does not extend to all in the same manner. For it is reasonable, since an equally great difference is found between souls and between bodies, that the nobler souls should meet and be joined with more sincere bodies, and thus from their origin enjoy the faculty of being able to penetrate to a full knowledge of all things without any effort, apart from external disciplines.

For these reasons, therefore, I am ^C indebted to you for diverse favors, because you have first liberated me from a long-standing doubt by your noble and magnificent intellect, from which the most prudent counsels flow as from a fountain, and because you continue day by day that unfeigned benevolence which you began to show us; and most of all, because your illustrious tongue pours forth such bountiful praises upon me. Truly, I believe that even that Phrygian sage, ^D and however many others like him time has brought forth, owe great thanks to your nature (if there be any sense in them), through which the wondrous things handed down about them are now substantiated and rendered confessed and placed beyond all doubt.

To Zarides

The proverb, saying that "friends living in a distant place are not friends," has for a long time now dinned in my ears, challenging my belief and my mind, and, putting forward a plausible persuasion, it has remained to this day...

my thoughts, and, as it were, stirring up a civil war within them. For there was no one who could persuade me to attribute ^A trust to those whose character was less than upright, reflecting on my own mind, since I thought that friendship should be measured by character and not by the conditions of places; whereas regarding the characters of others, there was no one to whom I did not attribute it. And for a time the scales of my reasoning were evenly balanced. Now, however, the proverb has conquered and set up a manifest trophy, since you have thrust all the weight upon it. For though you yourself received many letters written by my own hand, you have not returned even a few to me; so you ought to consider how much pain it causes not to be a friend to one's friends. But farewell, and do not be too ready to grieve your friends.

The following letters were edited by Boissonade in *Anecdota*, vol. III, p. 187, from the Royal Codex 2991.

III. To the Great Domestic.

Cyrus, the king of the Persians, ^B used to seat those of his companions whom he most esteemed on his left side at banquets, perhaps considering them as guardians of his weaker side. But you seat all who are in need of your assistance—and you do this yourself—in the harbor of your right hand, so that they might be better protected; and you do not even deign to recognize the left hand for such acts of kindness of the right. And while he did so only at banquets, you, throughout all time, have been secretly banqueting everyone. And neither are the nights able to lull your such acts of kindness to sleep, nor are the days able to distract you and drag you away from such tranquility into the seas of political tumults; but you cause both to remain in their fitting place with a certain precision of the scales; for as the time passes in successions of days and nights, you have acquired goods that are more stable than time itself. For you put to the test the whirlpools of that man with your constant goodness of deeds; but he has not been able, even until today, to put your right hand to the test.

Since your field of goods is not of one kind, but rather manifold and diverse, rising from the rich depths of your mind, we have come to you again today, bringing this entreaty on behalf of him ^D whose protector you have often been and whose bestower of the greatest goods. Show yourself, therefore, to be a warm protector to him in his time of danger—to him who, now more than ever, is in need of your holy and most stable anchor—yes, before God, and by your accustomed magnanimity, most divine man, and worthy of all good men.

IV. To the same.

It comes to my mind, having borrowed from the Songs of the wise Solomon what is fitting for the present need, to speak to you, the creator of our joy: "Now the winter has passed, the rain has gone, the flowers have appeared, the voice of the turtle dove is in our land." Whence even the gloomy things have vanished, and all things are seen to be full of pleasure, and thanks be to God who has granted this joy to us. But it is necessary that those who are in prison and in bonds should also perceive such joy and brilliance, as if rising from the depths of Hades, and casting a free gaze toward you, the sun of the present spring's creator. And this will be most easily accomplished by one, the wretch who, having been crystallized by the hardness of his bonds, is being forced to settle into forced death; but, before he suffers this, look with compassion upon him also, O nature that is by nature compassionate. For if there was anything offensive and base in the man, surely the long lapse of time has cast it far away.

V. To Xanthopoulos.

My child, your need is—I am almost about to say—irresistible; and your magnanimity is a friend to me by paternal right. Moreover, the proverb ordains that the things of friends are common, and the discourses on brotherly love confirm this; therefore, give what we desire, and do not hesitate to ask for what we are able to give.

VI. To the most philosophical Joseph.

If you praise us for writing to our friends, one ought to imitate; but if you do not praise it, one ought to write and exhort that it is not right.

655

VII. To the Patriarch.

^A That Lesbian, Pittacus, used to consider it one of the impossible things for a man to find a good person, even if one were to search most diligently; but to Periander the Corinthian, while it seemed a difficult matter to obtain what one happens to desire, it seemed by far more difficult to find one who desires what is fitting. But (away with envy!) we see these things happening today—partly to you, and partly to me through you, so that all things are yours. For you are a good man, if any among men; this indeed is your first good. The second is that you are also good toward me, if anyone among all men is—this is common to us both, with you giving and me receiving. Of the other coupling, the former part appertains to me alone—how it is through you, and how it is by you, I mean the obtaining of what I desire; but the desiring of what is fitting, this alone of all men belongs to you. For as it is for all men to breathe, so to you it is an urge to do good to everyone, as if you were not brought into life for your own sake, but for the sake of others. Since, therefore, even today, acting in accordance with the tenets of your nature, you have done well by us in providing the security of your book, send it to us again, so that, as we proceed to what follows—now we ourselves, now so many of our friends—we might return to you many rounds of applause.

VIII.

^A ...how, having cast off not only from intelligence and strategic skill, but also from a noble soul, there remains a token and an encomium flowing through all time, while half-heartedness ^B gives to those who possess it, as though breaking into pieces the harmony of the whole body and taking away its best parts. Recognizing you as such a one today, noble sir, as a storehouse of many graces, and one who in no way falls short of exterior nobility in all that befits men who are highly prosperous in life, but who also cultivate a deep furrow through the mind, from which pure thoughts and lawful justice spring forth, I bring you this person here, one in need of your assistance, with great boldness, as one who, through good works and good ways, has stirred up the envious demon against himself. For while he expected to receive favors from those to whom he has done good, he receives instead rebukes and sorrows. And I know well that the matters of his release will appear easy to you, should you so desire, and you will relieve this wretched man of much burden and grief. And indeed, you will also gain from this ^C brilliant rewards from God.

The proverb says that it is a difficult thing "to taste the dog of the chase," for he would not even have a way for the tireless one to cease from the search thereafter. But to me it seems more difficult to cease if someone has tasted your honey. For you see the same ones pressing on again, and even again, and asking for their accustomed assistance from you, just as those on a safe ship are supported by a firm hope. Do not you, therefore, best of men, cease both from doing well yourself and from providing accustomed help to those in need.

IX.

They say that the Great Cyrus, after his triumphs over the Medes, the Assyrians, and Babylon, and after he had even crossed the river Euphrates and had brought under his sway all of Asia reaching to the sea—they say that he experienced greater pleasure in his soul ^D if someone had asked a favor from him than if someone had brought him all of Asia after having collected its silver. For thus do great and ambitious natures know how to judge, that the former is not...

And do not blame me for bringing you the petition from the first line, as they say, and one least worthy of your greatness; for to me this will be no small provision of hope for desiring to succeed in greater things in what follows; and what is more, for confirming the opinion of the majority, as many as have believed that I can do the greatest things with you.

X. To the great oeconomos, Bekkos.

The argument that the Pythagoreans thus deemed things divine—and more trustworthy than the oracles from Dodona—the doctrines of Pythagoras, that they, being silent for five whole years, would listen to what was said, neither casting an opposing ear nor letting slip an echoing tongue. And so, for my part, I make myself tonight voiceless but all-hearing toward you, if indeed you yourself would be willing to appoint yourself the judge of my words. And even if you bring a mocking tongue against me, or even if not, I shall stand before either, offering you a most ready ear. And to me, your decision shall appear better than the doctrines of Pythagoras to those Pythagoreans—or if you wish, even more secure than the oracles from the Delphic tripod. Thus, then, are you divine and venerable to me, both the best of all and wiser than others, and a judge superior to Minos. And if you have also the promised book for us...

If, then, you yourself have changed your country and us, your fellow-countrymen, ^A and have granted others the chance to enjoy your honey, and if you were to perceive that we are grieved—though we do nothing unreasonable, I imagine—you would not be perceiving anything new or unheard of, but something that has indeed happened many times. Yet, if we ourselves were to hold back, and were unwilling to lay blame upon your tongue, it is high time for you to consider how terrible it is to act unjustly toward such men, who are noble by nature and yield most easily if someone should ever be unjust to them. For the more those who suffer [injustice] yield and bow their necks to the injuries, the greater the crimes become in the eyes of those who see them.

^A And in the horse races and chariot-driving, those who truly compete and exult in their victories, and those who possess no stately chariots, nor are skilled in the pankration, yet rejoice with them and treat the crowns of the victors as a source of overflowing pleasure—Farewell.

XII. From the philosopher to the Metropolitan of Thessalonica, Glabas.

I do not know what anyone who has sense ^B would prize more in life than the company of good men, from whom one might deservedly profit, either by admiring their virtue or, at the very least, by condemning oneself when comparing one’s own life to theirs. In this there can be a turning away from the slide toward worse things, when one knows oneself to be accountable and condemned by every vote. For to one who accuses himself of being unholy and wicked, a certain forgiveness follows; for this is also a good. I, therefore, love the virtuous, but through weakness I cannot endure to live as they do. There are, then, many whom I admire, and in whose company I rejoice; but when they are away, I settle for another sort of company—what they call the "second best route" ^C —namely, that of writing.

But I count your manner to be extraordinary; for by all accounts you surpass those who have chosen the same path as you. I wished, therefore, to be with you, if it were possible, and to enjoy the goods that come from your company. But since it is not possible now to have this, being so far removed from your most honorable person, nor was it possible for me earlier to meet with you in the great city—for you were not master, as I learned, to meet with all those you might wish—now that you have been relieved of this necessity of following others' decrees (for God has moved you to a better state, granting you what you deserve), I ask you, even if I am deprived of the more valuable and primary company, to share that which is had through letters with me. For by doing this, you will appear to be, as you truly are, fair-minded, and you will show everyone how one ought to benefit friends, and you will grant me the greatest favor, by showing that I have some standing with you. And perhaps you will also benefit one who listens to your words, as those of great intellect are wont to do for those who pay careful attention; and I, being a lover of these things, will attend to them more genuinely, if for no other reason, then out of shame at being left so far behind in your pursuit of better things—you, whom light has set directly among us, who live in mist and are caught in wicked and incurable passions.

and you, too, will have done what is required; for in this way you would have displayed your own character to us, whole and not incomplete, as it is now. And even if I look toward you, I will not hesitate to repay you in kind; for it is just that, having received everything that is happening from you, I should myself pay back what is required. "Give something and take something," says one of the ancients; "for hand washes hand." If, however, you persist in silence, do not pursue me anymore with accusations of rudeness or of disdain for friends; rather, blame yourself for having fallen short of what is required, which would have surely moved me to write. For I, too, shall maintain a silence, as there is no one to prompt me; since even now I would not have recalled myself to write to you, having not been accustomed to doing so before, had not this noble youth [caused me to...] ^B half-heartedly you seem kind to me; for in that you desire my letters, remembering that old association, you seem to me to be acting as a decent man should. But in that, having the power to obtain what you desire, you did not choose to be the first yourself to use those who would move me to this—even if one were slow and sluggish—it seems to me you have omitted what is required. But since it is necessary for one of the best to become the leader, and you did not deign to take this upon yourself, even though it was possible for you to excel without reproach in such things, I become your guide in these matters, so that you might at least speak thus to me, looking to this as a model. If, therefore, from this point on, you lay aside your indolence and come to writing, we shall indeed praise you.

XIV. To the most philosophical Joseph.

Aristotle, son of Nicomachus, and as many as are his followers, have not delivered as simple the name of friendship, but as manifold, and in many ways varying, and unfolding in more particular instances. For he does not mean merely political and tribal, or even familial and associative, and as many as have a similar and reciprocal relationship, but also those who are unlike and unequal; as many as they are in worth and time, and even of these, they have persuaded themselves there are friendships. Of greater, clearly, to lesser, and the reverse; and of those more divine to those more human, and the reverse; for from this is introduced the idea of the God-beloved, and the God-loving, and the simultaneously father-loving and child-loving. And if these things are so, it would not be unreasonable to call the relationship between us and the greatness of yours a friendship; in the substrate it is identical, but in the relationship it is differentiated. And so that the discourse may proceed toward its goal, there is, between the Persian Gulf and the greatest mountains, which Parasuras and Darandas divide toward the east, and the river Indus, a land—no simple name—Carmania. For the one part is peculiar to them, but the other is inhabited land; leaving the Median [territory] toward the north; toward the south, the Indians and the seas of the Indians. In this land, there is a story, that when they pledge friendship with one another, they loosen some of the veins on the face; and from this, allowing the blood to flow down into the drink, they toast one another; and they believe that tasting one another's blood is a pledge of a firm and secure friendship. ^C This, I myself, having received as a pure pledge, would have offered you my own—O most divine man—had you sought letters; one would perhaps not say that it is blood without a body, yet one would not be wrong in saying it is one of the soul's other ways, I think. I have given myself hopes filled with ease and delight, that the profit will follow upon the gift; I mean this: your discourses, which you labored over not for your own sake, just as the sea does not pour out its water for its own sake, but for as many as seek profit from it. But if you think it worth it for your own [works] to remain unbrought forth for our sake also, and these things bring great benefit to those who see them, while mine [bring] the opposite, and these, dragging a great deal of worthlessness after them, have nothing to prevent them from limping—for that which comes from me to you arrives, as I think, lacking nothing; but as for yours toward us, I have nothing to say.

Yet it ought to have been quite the opposite. For you bear the image of the great Father, who is more a lover of mankind than the human is a lover of God. Furthermore, by the gods of friendship, I do not see what good could come to another for the sake of something else; if indeed it is not that you have descended as much as we ought to be raised. Woe to my fortune! Did you put me, wretch that I am, in such a state of lack regarding your goods, so as to be an exile and a fugitive from the community of good men without any democratic decree? And before one inherits it from the potsherd [ostrakon] running out from Attica—and otherwise, every harmony must be removed from everything, if indeed this is the union of the mixed and the fellow-thinking of those who think differently. For it would not be, I think, without tension and relaxation. But if, saying these things, I speak well, then enrich us with your wise discourses. For this is our goal. But if not, then forgive me; for it is right that forgiveness follow those who have stumbled involuntarily. For just as to me, [who am] willing and speaking well, this happens [well], so [does it happen] if [one] speaks badly, but [is] unwilling. For since there is one knowledge of opposites, as the ancient philosophers dogmatize, it follows that, with good things being voluntary, bad things are to be considered involuntary; just as no one is a good man against his will, so no one is wicked ^D willingly.

But you, judge these things and divide them with your greatness of soul more wisely, and do not cease to discipline and regulate our affairs from the outside. For you to me are both a wise and unerring judge of virtue, a living Minos, and an oracular Apollo. But, oh, who would let pass the month of those days, in which, when we converse frequently, it might be granted to us to carry away every kind of benefit from your tongue, imitating the manner of fishermen, when they cast their nets down into the sea and draw up a varied catch from it? It occurs to me to do that very same thing, which...

they say the Poseidonians once did. ^A For it is said that after having established a colony from Attica against the Tyrrhenians, and having in the course of time lost their noble language and become estranged from their native dialect through contact with barbarians, they decided to set aside one of the Attic festivals; and in this festival, gathering together by tribes and clans, they would remind themselves of those old familiarities and of all their other ancestral customs and laws; and, shedding hot tears of remembrance at these things, they would then depart. This is precisely what I myself do not hesitate to do now; but I frequently come by your Academy and this walk of yours, and I bring to mind those associations of ours. And afterwards, when I do not find you to feast my eyes and ears upon, I depart full of tears and in confusion. But do not you cease to remember me in this way, even as I in turn remember you, in whatever way I can; and if we should see one another again before this life ends, for this one thing alone I would most readily trade all else.

XV. To the Grand Domestic.

^B You, even when present with us, are a delight to the eyes, and when absent, you provide in abundance a stage for the ears and the tongue; for not even for Croesus and Midas did such a high-valued wealth suffice for pleasure as it does for me to sit as a listener as others recount your praises, and in turn to become a resounding herald myself when others are silent. For there is not one at all among them who has not experienced you, as if from a lavish distribution of your own goods, as if from a multi-flowered paradise. For your stories become the sweetest fare for both the masses and the cities; and there are no festivals or marketplaces that are not filled with you. One person proclaims the harmony and elegance of your character; another, the truthfulness of your tongue; another, the readiness of your hand for good deeds; another, your spontaneous and effective contribution to all graces; and yet another, the revival of the discourses which, though fallen, you have raised up, doing good to cities, tribes, masses, and clans. And I myself rejoice when I hear all these people saying such things, and they in turn rejoice when I speak. For all the things that human beings are naturally celebrated for, all assembled into one, have produced your nature; and now it is not so much you yourself who enjoy these things, as all others who enjoy you. And this is truly expected, for we know that the Creator has set forth the greatest and most necessary of good things as common and public property. ^C For behold, the sun, the air, and the water lie before all living beings as common and public property due to the necessity of need, and all enjoy them more than they enjoy themselves. Just as all things that are receptive of the soul in the body, and the fish in the sea, and all the merchant ships that sail it, seek out the cargoes of profit; so do you, being a good of the highest order and most necessary to life, ^D stand as the provider of common goods to all, so that all enjoy you more than you enjoy yourself. For nature has poured out much joy upon your face; it has poured out fountains of benevolence on your right hand; and it has fitted the scales of truth brightly to your tongue. So that one may rightly say, following Plato: both what one ought to say, and what one ought to say, and that one ought to say it, and where one ought to say it; and by spreading the cheerful and the solemn over your character, it brings a certain delightful and inspired quality to stand out upon you. For just as the light of the sun’s ray, when mingled with the air, becomes a quality of color, so also your innate gentleness, breathing forth much and ineffable pleasure, when mingled with and blooming upon your character, becomes both color and a spontaneous quality for it; and it stands as a kind of inescapable net for those who see you—not dragging them along by any violent or forced skill, but rather all who are willing to suffer such a defeat do so in a state of great joy. And regarding the calm that ineffably grows upon your eyes, like the morning light, what could one say? How, even from afar, it welcomes and greets the intentions of those who approach, and promises better things, and as if by enchantment brings immediate, fulfilling joy to their expectations that shall soon reach their end. Such harmony your hand grants to your tongue, that whatever is not considered just for the hand to do, your tongue also considers it vain to speak. And whatever is said for the better by your tongue, that also, when performed by your hand, stands as most easily done. And, to speak simply, all things gathered together at once—tongue, hand, eyes, cheeks, eyebrows, the solemn smile, the spring of your disposition, and the harmony that follows these—become very clear heralds of the silent character of your soul. Thus it is easy not only for physiognomists, but for everyone simply and automatically to infer all the mysteries of good things that are chambered within your mind, as if through a mirror of the external character dancing around you. And there has come together in you that which the followers of Plato admire, claiming that virtue is the attainment of both bodily instruments and a bright fortune, and that nobility is to be recognized not so much from one’s decent ancestors as from one’s own goodness. And if someone from the ends of the earth, a lover from afar of the goods attributed to this imperial city, arrived to become an eyewitness of its position and beauty, and of all the admirable sights it is enriched with inside, and then sought to behold a man as well—all would, as if by a signal, rush forward and point to you and to no one else at all. For you alone on earth preserve the pristine and clear marks of the true ideal of humanity. However, among men, those

We have long heard how many, to whom heroic deeds had occurred in their time, were honored with stelae and statues, and were set up ^A in the midst of the air, that the ingenuity of those who came after might craft a kind of eternal relief for the mortal nature of those who stood firm in these things. But as for you, the souls of all, like some living stele and shining statue, inscribe you upon themselves, and transmit your name toward immortality along with the good qualities you possess, providing memories and books, which are even stronger than the arrows of time. Homer himself, however, says regarding the Athenian Menestheus:

No man on earth was like him To marshal his horses and his shield-bearing men,

thereby showing all who preceded him to be inferior to him. But you, having become like him in these later times in marshalling horses and shield-bearing men, ^B excel him; and Homer's greatest and most admirable language is henceforth sufficient for you for similar praise. For what he says of Menestheus also applies to you, having established yourself for the same achievement as his through the experience of the same exercises and the same arena of affairs. Come now, you have yourself added a more brilliant supplementary remark to what was said: namely, to adorn discourses, and cities, and tribes, and peoples. This was never granted to that man of old to witness, not even in a dream; for had it been, Homer would not have suffered unsaid so great a praise for a man who had surpassed him. Thus, you also surpass the wonders of the Homeric tongue yourself, by a wide margin of deeds. But may you be extending your life through long ages, so that you may be a common and public benefit to all, and may be casting life-giving rays upon the discourses themselves, and always bestowing life upon them.

LETTER XVI.

NOTICE REGARDING THE FOLLOWING OPUSCULA

Among the published works of Porphyry, scholars of old once reviewed a few short treatises regarding Homer. However, after Lambecius in his *Commentarii de bibliotheca Caesarea* indicated that the true author of these opuscula was Gregoras, it was finally permitted to print them under his name. In truth, in the Vatican codex 1098, the author's name is missing, and before the opuscula of Gregoras there are some by John Mauropous, metropolitan of Euchaita. Therefore, having consulted no previous edition, I decided to print the *Encomium on the Odyssey* and the *Moral interpretation of the wanderings of Ulysses*.

NICEPHORUS GREGORAS PROLOGUE OF ENCOMIUM ON THE ODYSSEY OF HOMER, IN BRIEF, CHARACTERIZING THE POET'S THOUGHT.

Poets and rhetoricians, and all who have chosen the philosophical life, have cared for virtue, some more and some less, according to whatever measure of it concerned them. But for Homer, who was wiser than all who have come into existence, the matter was of such concern ^C that it is not even possible to find where one might observe that he had written his poem without a concern for virtue. And therefore, when he is in earnest and prepares himself purely for the contest, he brings forward the most excellent maxims and adorns the characters of men with a superior training, but...

^A perhaps in an unseemly manner, he masks this and puts Odysseus at the head of the book; so that after the fall of Ilium and his undertaking of the return journey along with the others, he fell into many and great evils from that point on, which were perhaps not even easy to number, let alone to contemplate altogether according to their magnitude. For if he had immediately set himself in this way to the matter, he would have appeared slothful and lacking in color to the many, not having, as it were, such a wealth of experience, nor the other poetic power to move toward the subject. But now, because he has structured it this way, he has assigned to each part its proper due: for he provided the poetry with its customary luxury and beauty, so that it might in no way be curtailed from that quarter, and yet at the same time he ensured for the matter itself that it remained entirely sound, with nothing of those things that contribute to it being left out. For even if it is variegated with very many histories and myths, still not even so does he depart far from the subject, so that he does not return most quickly and proceed through the sufferings concerning Odysseus, for the sake of which he has veered off toward those things. And let no one think that the poetry is a mere fiction of Homer, who set forth a man who neither was such a one at any time, nor will ever be, such as he describes; even if he dared such a thing out of poetic license, he would not have harmed the goal in turn, especially since he gave an abundance of reasonable things to the matter. ^B And when it seems to some that he is doing something for the sake of play—be it telling myths, or the genesis of the gods, or their friendships or their strifes, or certain baser and jealous loves—and those very ones are recognized as treachery, which even one who observes carelessly might moderately censure in the man. For this divine man places the intellect as the ruler of the whole; to say nothing base, nothing unprofitable, even if we are not able to grasp sufficiently what he might intend of that poetic madness of his. For now he teaches theology, now piety; and since he goes through the genesis of the whole, at other times he gives forth certain naturalistic arguments; and sometimes he philosophizes about the interaction of the elements in relation to one another, and other times about their opposition, even if he performs these things under a baser guise. Again, descending from there as if from some vantage point, he involves himself with those whose needs require it, and maneuvers and orders various arts and practices, how these things ought to come to be and as they are becoming, according to what is best and as is fitting for the outcome; moreover, he adorns the peoples with knowledge, and instructs their ways; and he regulates souls, not toward themselves alone, but also harmonizing them well with one another. He refutes, and at times vilifies, the perversity of judgment, and ignorance and lack of learning; and everything that is referred to in a manner of wickedness is recognized as belonging to the worse part; proving himself an enemy to the divine, and an enemy to the human nature. To say it in a word, he establishes himself as a common classroom for men of divine and human learning.

^C But if indeed this great hero has been fashioned by the poetic muse, and has been fashioned most remarkably to be implanted in men like some divine teaching, so that—insofar as we suffer evils most especially from things that happen by nature and from external circumstances, as much as by chance and the wickedness of men, and indeed by the baseness of our own judgment and ignorance—we might meet them very wisely and magnanimously and nobly, and yet not surrender, nor betray the dignity of our nature, by changing along with the things that happen at any given time, and worse yet for those that are unwelcome. For he saw from experience what especially of the other evils assails men, and he directs his way toward himself; as it often happens from the manifold causes which the various motion of affairs abundantly provides. Now in this way we suffer, and now in that, and by whom and to whom these things come to pass. In which there is also a part better than the poetry, as if he had resisted and set himself into some great battle of courage, and struggled to emerge victorious over some terrible and invincible matter. For nothing appeared to the poet to be such as to arm the souls of men for the endurance of those calamities to which it happens that we fall at any given time. And so, being well prepared for this, he does not confess his purpose from the outset, so as to proclaim the matter and declare beforehand for the sake of what he is struggling; but also having concern for the worth of the speech, and mostly for the poetic excellence, for a time he [keeps] his goal under a certain mask, and not even this ^D is perhaps unbecoming.

Everyone knows, by one [instance] and often with two, and more than two, that such sufferings occur to men; and no one has been born without either suffering or existence who is ignorant of these things. Otherwise, this would not have been at all worthy of poetic freedom, so as to think something like this about him, or of the truth itself and of the matter, in which we all know some Odysseus to have come to be, a resourceful man, king of Ithaca and the Cephallenians, and furthermore father to Sisyphus, and grandfather to Autolycus—whom they also say pay penalties in Hades for their wretched judgment; and besides, his wife Penelope, the best of women and temperate and modest; and her father Icarius, and his only begotten son Telemachus. If we were to grant that Odysseus was a fiction to the poet, how would these things happen to this one, and the names and deeds of many more than these? But if we were to grant it entirely, and if all those things were nonsense for Homer and for the other poets, the man is most of all to be revered because, having nothing to say for any of all those who have suffered so many things, he nevertheless himself dared to fashion it, so that he might teach men through such an example not to be distressed by calamities, nor to bow down to terrible things, but to stand firm manfully, at least according to human power, looking toward such a monument. For I do not think that anyone would lament poverty here, while seeing and contemplating the misfortunes of the hero; nor would he lament destitution, or exile, or shipwreck, or to say nothing of dangers, or wandering, or the treachery of friends, or the abandonment of companions, or death itself, whether coming from nature or from outside force; nor even all those things that happen to men.

^A however they may occur and from whatever cause, would he consider those things which a man might suffer to be far secondary to his own misfortunes. He would philosophize genuinely, and would have a very great gratitude toward this poet, not only because he is able to teach every kind of virtue and human knowledge to one who is most capable, but because, even in that aspect in which we suffer terrible things, he stands out as the man who is named after ^B the poet; for this poem concerning Odysseus is, in truth, a common school, both for him who has not yet suffered, to prepare himself if he should suffer, and for him who has suffered or is suffering, to persuade him to persevere. So wisely and variously did the poet provide for men; and he mixed a common medicine of healing for all those suffering terrible things, by composing the wanderings of Odysseus and all that he has endured. And it is permitted to those who associate with this poem itself to see if these things are so, and if any benefit comes from thence, for those who, in the present, have need of it in relation to the death that is meditated upon by choice in philosophy.

NOTE THE WHOLE NARRATIVE OF ODYSSEUS, WHICH HOMER TELLS CONCERNING HIM.

After the sacking of Troy, Odysseus was driven away ^B by violent winds, and he descended upon the Cicones and sacked their city, which is called Ismarus, now called Maroneia, and he intended to sail away; but his friends would not allow him. The next day, the mainland Cicones gathered in great numbers and fought them all day long; toward evening, those with Odysseus were defeated, having lost seventy-two men, that is, six men from each ship; for Odysseus had twelve ships. Defeated in this way, they sailed away against their will; caught by terrible winds and having reached land with difficulty, they lay there towards the shore for two full days. On the third day, having begun to sail, they were almost about to arrive at their homelands unharmed. But having been driven from the Malean promontory of the Peloponnese, they were carried for nine nights and days by terrible winds; on the tenth day, they ran upon the land of the Lotus-eaters, that is, the Camarinaeans; having taken on water, they dined near the ships; then they sent three men to see the land, who, having tasted the lotus, did not wish to return; but Odysseus, having bound them, sailed away. And they came by night, unknowing, to a small deserted island of the Cyclopes, which had many wild goats; of which, on the next day, having hunted one-hundred and twenty-eight, they feasted all day long. Toward evening, they saw a fire in the land of the Cyclopes, and heard a faint voice. The next day, Odysseus left the eleven ships at the small island, and sailed alone in his own ship toward the land of the Cyclopes, using oars, and having hidden this ship in a certain rocky and secluded ^D cove along with his companions, he took only twelve of his companions, and a wineskin of Maroneian wine and food, and entered the cave of the Cyclops, while he was occupied with the pasturing of his sheep. While his friends begged him to eat of the cheese and milk, and to take some from the sheep and depart, he did not wish to, until the Cyclops came toward evening, shut them inside the cave, and asked where his ship was, and what his name was. And he deceived him, saying that his ship had been broken by the swell, and that he was called "Noman"; and having taken two ^C of the companions of Odysseus, he devoured them; then likewise, the next day, having eaten two, and having locked the rest in, he drove the flock out to pasture; and those with Odysseus had prepared a sharpened stake, and put it into the fire, so that when it was dried it would be hardened; and they agreed to blind him; which they also did.

Having come toward evening, and having driven all the flocks into the cave, and having again eaten two of them, they poured wine for him at the command of Odysseus and, having become drunk, they blinded him; when he cried out, all the Cyclopes came; having heard him crying out that "Noman" had blinded him, and thinking he was mad, they went away. But at dawn he brings the flocks out, having sat by the door of the cave so that, later, having closed the cave and found them inside, he might finish them off; but they, having gone out under the sheep, and having put many into the ship, sailed away. Odysseus having shouted with his companions, the Cyclops, having heard, took up a huge stone, and having thrown it into the sea, the swell turned their ship back toward the land; but as they sailed away again and shouted exultantly, he prayed to Poseidon that they might not come to their own homelands; and again, likewise, having thrown a stone into the sea, he brought the ship back to the land; then, having been afraid and having sailed away, they came to the long island where their other ships were; and they found the others weeping; and then, having feasted, they went to sleep.

The next day, sailing with oars, they came to Aeolia, and having spent a month there, Odysseus having received the wineskin of the winds from Aeolus, they sailed away with the Zephyr for nine nights and days. On the tenth day, they saw Ithaca and men and fire and smoke. Odysseus, being exhausted and having fallen asleep, they untied the wineskin, thinking he had wealth in it; and the winds having gushed out, the swell snatched them and turned them back again to Aeolia. Aeolus, seeing them begging, drove them away as enemies to the gods; and they, rowing for six days, arrived on the seventh day at Laestrygonia; and the Laestrygonians went down and smashed the twelve ships

of theirs with stones, along with all their people. But Odysseus alone, having cut the stern cables of his own ship, escaped; and sailing with oars, they arrived at the Aeaean isle of Circe, who used to turn men into beasts. For two whole days they lay upon the earth watching, and on the third day, having divided into two parties, they stood; in one party was Eurylochus and twenty-two companions, and in the other Odysseus and another twenty-two companions, so that those with him might go up to Circe. Having gone up with them, they saw outside the courtyard of Circe wolves and lions, tame, wagging their tails at them. But when his friends had entered, he remained outside; and Circe turned them into swine, having given them wine mixed with cheese, barley-meal, and honey. Eurylochus came to Odysseus and the rest, speechless, with tears flowing ^B uncontrollably from his eyes, and with difficulty having come to himself, he recounted the whole matter. And Odysseus asked him to show him the way; as he would not be persuaded, Odysseus alone began the journey. Hermes meeting him, related all the affairs of Circe and gave him the *moly*, which is an herb that acts against magic. And thus, having gone to Circe, not only was he not turned into a beast, but having drawn his sword upon her, he persuaded her to turn his friends back again from swine into men. Having come down, Odysseus brought up his other friends, those with Eurylochus, and they spent a year around Circe, with Odysseus dwelling together with Circe.

But when they were about to sail, she told them that it was not fated for them to sail away otherwise, unless they went down to Hades and used prophecies from the soul of Tiresias. And so, sailing for the whole day, they went down through the Hesperian and Cimmerian Ocean, and having dug a trench a cubit deep and having slaughtered a ram and a female bird, they poured the blood into the trench and offered a libation to the dead, and souls came to drink the blood. But Odysseus, holding his sword, did not allow them to drink until they had told him what he wanted. First came the soul of Elpenor, who still lay unburied in Circe’s house; second was Anticlea, the mother of Odysseus; then Tiresias, who prophesied everything that was to happen to him. After all these things, the wives of the heroes also came, each of them saying who she was and all that she had suffered. Then, fearing that the Gorgon might come out, they embarked again into their ship as though towards the island of Circe, which lay towards the dawn, and sailed away. Having buried Elpenor, they sailed away from Circe, having taken the necessities, and Odysseus having learned from her—as if from Tiresias—about the Sirens, the Rocks, Scylla, Charybdis, the cattle of Helios, and everything simply.

Odysseus, indeed, having stopped the ears of his companions with wax, sailed past them, hanging from the mast and having his ears unable to hear. ^D Having passed the meadow of the Sirens and their songs, by which those who heard them were charmed and died, they released Odysseus from the mast. Then, having sailed past the Wandering Rocks, which clashed against each other and made a fearful noise (these are also called the Cyanean Rocks, and they lie between Cilicia and Pamphylia according to Homer), and some others, they went through Charybdis and closer to Scylla. And six men having been snatched by Scylla from the ship, the rest, using their rowing with greater intensity, fled; and towards night they approached the island of Helios, called Thrinacia; and Odysseus ordered them to sail past it, but they, not being persuaded, went out, and at first they lived by hunting and fishing.

But as the South Wind blew for a whole month, Odysseus having gone up into the interior of the island to pray, and having fallen asleep, those with Eurylochus slaughtered the cattle of Helios and ate them for six whole days. On the seventh, the terrible wind having ceased, they embarked to sail, were first shattered by a great West Wind, and then struck by lightning. Odysseus alone, holding onto the turning, was carried through the whole night. As the sun rose, being carried by the South Wind, he came around Charybdis, and having grabbed the fig tree that stood in those places, he hung onto it, while the timbers sank into the deep. But late, when they emerged, lowering himself from the fig tree, he grabbed onto the timbers; and for nine days he drifted thus. On the tenth, he arrived at the island of Ogygia, of Calypso, and for seven years he lived there with her. In the eighth year, he was released with a raft, Zeus having been angered at Calypso; and thus with the raft Odysseus sailed for seventeen days. On the eighteenth he saw Phaeacia, or the so-called Corcyra; but the winds having become angry through Poseidon, the raft was broken, and he drifted for two whole days. On the third day, Leucothea having taken pity on him, gave him her veil, with which he came out to the land of the Phaeacians, and having fallen in the woods, he slept.

Now, Nausicaa, the daughter of Alcinous, together with her handmaidens, having come to wash herself and to take pleasure in games with the handmaidens, and as they played ball with each other, a noise occurring, Odysseus awoke and implored her. She, having given him food and clothing, ordered him to come to her father’s house and to implore her mother, Arete, so that he might obtain whatever he wished. Having arrived there, he was questioned by Alcinous and Arete, and he recounted the whole story we have mentioned. And having received sufficient gifts from them, he was sent to Ithaca. In the evening, having embarked on the ship for Phaeacia, and having arrived there around the morning star, and having entered as a beggar, he came to Eumaeus the swineherd, and to the other shepherds, and also to the suitors of his own wife; and having been treated very badly by them for many things, he made himself known to his dearest son, Telemachus, and...

to his servants; having been recognized first by his dog, he made himself known to his own wife and, having slept with her, he recounted everything in detail. But on the following day, at dawn, he goes out toward the field. And the relatives of the suitors, having learned what happened, first of all went to the house of Odysseus ^A and bury the dead, which he had left in a very poor condition when he sailed away for Ilion with the other allies. Then, having armed themselves, they too go out toward the field to fight against Odysseus; but by the counsel of Athena they are reconciled and cease their strife. And Odysseus, having gone to the Eurytanes, a nation of Epirus, according to an oracle, offers the accustomed sacrifices; and, having turned back already very old, he is killed by Telegonus, the son born to him by Circe.

ANNO DOMINI MCCCXL. NILUS CABASILAS METROPOLITAN OF THESSALONICA NOTICE (From the *Diatribe on the Nili* of Leo Allatius, no. xiv)

We read that Nilus Cabasilas was Archbishop of Thessalonica. Neander writes about him, calling him a learned man and not at all favorable to the papacy, because in very many of his writings he most sharply refuted both the idolomania and also the pride with which he elevated himself above God and the Church. Joannes Matthaeus Caryophyllus, in the Preface to the life of Nilus the Younger, says: "But would that after these two renowned Nili there had not existed a third, the prelate of Thessalonica and a leader of the schismatics' empty talk, who presented the excellent name of virtue as a fountain of most abundant false waters to all good men." You will see his most pernicious dicta and opinions, together with their refutations, edited *Deo dante* after the history of this holy Father, so that it may be plain to all what the difference is between the Nili and Nilus; and finally between the ancestral theology of the Greeks and the discordant novelties of the schismatics. What he promised, Caryophyllus performed in part, a man indeed worthy of a longer life: for thus he would have cast down and dissolved the remaining falsehoods dictated by this Nilus against the Roman Church. There exists a treatise by the same Nilus, in which he strives to explain that there has been no other cause hitherto than that the Pope is unwilling to yield legitimate cognition of a controversial matter to a universal council; but rather he alone wishes to sit as master and arbiter of the controversy, while wishing others to be as disciples listening to his command; and that this is most alien to the laws and actions of the Apostles and the Fathers. His two books *On the Primacy of the Pope*, from the Vatican library, translated by Bonaventura Vulcanius. Added to these is a separate book *On Purgatorial Fire*, by the same interpreter, Lyon, 1595, in 8vo, and in Greek and Latin at Hanau, at the Wechelian press, by Claudius Marnius, 1608, in 8vo. The Gesnerian epitomizer writes that this same treatise was translated into Latin by Illyricus [(a)]. His *Clear and brief response to the Latins* is set forth as a sort of *Enchiridion* for those who wish to fight against him. In it, he treats of the primacy of the Pope, refuting him by means of the most ancient councils [(b)] and other ancient monuments, in order to show that he

is not of divine right, but merely conceded by the Fathers and emperors, and that his preeminence is not such and so great a matter as the Pope now usurps for himself without any right. It is true that this infamous schismatic, or rather heretic, most notable for the stains of six hundred wicked deeds, handed down to posterity similar, nay even worse, writings; but by what probable or necessary documents, or—to speak more explicitly—with what senseless darts? They are trivial, and worth nothing, and are not actual arguments, but are twisted to curry favor with the most wicked men, which is clearly gathered from the conclusion of the work. *A Summary of the Sayings*: "So long as the Pope preserves order, and stands with the truth, and does not depart from the first and primary authority, and is the head of the Church, and the supreme high priest, and the successor of Peter and of all the apostles, it is necessary for all to obey him, and there is nothing which detracts from his honor. But if he has departed from the truth and does not wish to return to it again, he will suffer the fate of those who are condemned." The sum of these sayings is this: As long as the Pope preserves order and stands with the truth, he is not removed from his first and proper principate, and he will be the head of the Church and supreme pontiff, and the successor of Peter and the other apostles, and it is necessary that all obey him; and there is nothing that detracts from his honor. But if indeed he has receded from the truth, which he once held, and is unwilling to return to it, he shall be liable to the punishments of the condemned. Brass glitters, but pale gold is better. It has not yet been proven—either by Nilus or by anyone else—through reasoned arguments, nor will it be proven hereafter by anyone, that the Pope has not preserved order and has set aside the truth. By what reason, therefore, is he removed from his first and proper principate? And therefore, why is he neither head of the Church, nor supreme pontiff, nor successor of Peter and the apostles? Let them establish in the eyes of men what that thing is which finally detracts from his honor. Nor does the rest of the cohort of schismatics dissent from Nilus. And of these things, we shall speak more fully elsewhere; for now, let it suffice to have touched upon them.

Concerning this Nilus of Thessalonica, Bonaventura Vulcanius writes in the letter to the reader prefixed to the said booklet: "Opinions among scholars vary concerning the author of this writing. This variety arises from the fact that many men were named Nilus." Neander adds: "When Nilus lived is not sufficiently certain. He certainly lived after the times of Charlemagne, the first German emperor; for he makes mention of the seventh synod several times (c)." Be it so: he lived after the times of Charlemagne, since he reaches the name of the seventh synod. It is not, however, sufficiently established at what time he lived. Salmasius, in his writings on the booklets of Nilus of Thessalonica, writes to the reader that he is certain this Nilus is very recent; for he mentions Thomas Aquinas in his other writings, which have not yet been published, and that Thomas is very recent. He could, however, have defined the times more certainly, since no small span of time intervenes between Thomas Aquinas and this Nilus. We therefore judge that this Nilus lived under John Cantacuzenus, together with Nicholas Cabasilas, to whom there exists a theological epistle by the same Nilus, as attested by his kinsman (d), the beginning of which is: "Concerning the meaning of your writings," in Vatican Codex 632, as well as to Demetrius Chrysoloras and the brothers Demetrius and Prochorus Cydones, for which Prochorus there exists an Oration of Demetrius to the patriarch Philotheus. Beginning: "Now I have with difficulty demonstrated the work of a man, not until long after." And what proves the matter even more, there is also read now in the Vatican Library, in codices 673, 674, and 1222, the response of John Cantacuzenus to the dictates of Prochorus: *On the Essence and Operation of God*. Beginning: "Concerning the kinds of the operation of God, according to the promise in the preamble." Item, by the same: *Antirrhetica against the sayings of the holy fathers brought forward by Prochorus Cydones*. Beginning: "In general, O man, I ought not have had to apologize regarding the things said." Other commentaries composed at the same time also prove the same age, such as that of Demetrius Chrysoloras: *A Summary Discourse against the Latins, from which he made Nilus, Archbishop of Thessalonica*. Beginning: "The ancient glory of the Church is that the Spirit is from the Son." Item, by the same: *A refutatory dialogue of the discourse which Demetrius Cydonius wrote against the Lord Nilus Cabasilas of Thessalonica*. Beginning: "Great indeed is the war of those of the same race against us," and finally, so as not to pile up more things here, the *Refutations by Demetrius Cydonius against those of Cabasilas on the chapters of the blessed Thomas concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit*. Beginning: "The zeal of this man against the Latins is great and admirable." And that I may not abuse your patience, you may see for yourself in the *History* of Cantacuzenus, and most especially in book v, chapter 16. There the emperor Cantacuzenus narrates that, desiring to be freed from troubles and sighing for a peaceful and quiet way of life, when he had decided, having transferred the empire, to follow the rules of the monks, he added as companions to this withdrawal Nicholas Cabasilas and Demetrius Cydonius, who had reached the height of external wisdom, and who, philosophizing in their habits, had embraced a celibate life, free from the disturbances of marriage. Therefore, they held the chief place of grace, friendship, and familiarity with the emperor. Salmasius notes further in the same place that this most learned man errs, not in a small degree (e), who...

makes the same Nilus identical with a certain Nicolaus, bishop of Methone, and calls this Nilus double-named, because he had made use of codices which contained other treatises of his, or of a not very dissimilar argument, upon which the name of Nicolaus was sometimes added. He refers to Cabasilas. Nor does he consider Nilus and Nicolaus the same for any other reason. Salmasius exposes the argument as fables, and with a not dissimilar example he explodes it, saying that he himself in a codex of the Palatine library had found some disputations of Nicolaus of Methone against the Latins, and also a Dissertation of Basil, metropolitan of Thessalonica, and that he could have used this same argument to create a one-and-threefold Geryon from these three: Nilus, Nicolaus, and Basil. For that he attempts to prove the same thing from the affinity of style, he himself knows what that is worth; for he who reads many writings of this kind by the recent Greek Fathers, both handwritten and printed, knows that they are similar in argument and style: yet he has never concluded from that that the authors, who were different, must be confounded, but has merely conjectured that they lived in the same age, because they seemed to be the same in style.

This most learned man, whose name he has suppressed, and whom Salmasius refutes regarding his conjectures about Nilus and Nicolaus, is Bonaventura Vulcanius, whose words must be submitted to a more accurate examination, and here I shall not be loath to add some things from his Preface to the reader, prefixed to the treatise of Nilus, bishop of Thessalonica, On the primacy of the Roman Pope: "My codex at the beginning of the book explicitly bears the name of Nilus, Archbishop of Thessalonica; but since in the same codex there are other treatises not dissimilar in argument to this one, I find in them sometimes the name of Nicolaus, Bishop of Methone, and sometimes also added the name of Cabasilas. From which I am almost persuaded that this Nilus of ours was double-named, that is to say, that Nilus and this Nicolaus were one and the same author. Nor does it move me from this opinion that the one was Bishop of Methone, while the other was Archbishop of Thessalonica. For it was common, both then and now, that bishops be promoted from one see to another more distinguished one, or otherwise to an archbishopric. Added to this is the fact that the lucubrations of Nicolaus of Methone ^B which exist today, whether printed or handwritten, clearly agree with the style and thread of the discourse of this Nilus. Moreover, a treatise of Nicolaus of Methone is printed among the liturgical authors, and from his other manuscript works, which I have seen in certain libraries of Italy and Spain, there are his seven orations, on the life in Christ, which some—a fact which weighs heavily for me—attribute to Nilus, nor in my opinion are they mistaken. There exists also with me a distinguished work of the same Nicolaus of Methone, in which he most learnedly refutes the Platonic Theology of Proclus, which consists of 211 propositions, in most of which he—whether he be a philosopher of greater accuracy or a sharper enemy of Christ—attempts to overthrow the principles of the Christian religion by philosophical arguments and demonstrations. The title of the book runs as follows: Nicolaus, Bishop of Methone, Exposition of the Theological Elements of Proclus Lycius the Platonic philosopher, etc. The theological refutation by Nicolaus, Bishop of Methone, of the information of Proclus Lycius the Platonic philosopher. These books, I say, written by Nicolaus of Methone, very closely resemble the terse and indeed elegant style of this Nilus of ours. I have wished to warn you of this, candid reader, leaving to you the free judgment of the whole matter."

This most learned man, whoever he was, makes Nicolaus Cabasilas and Nilus one and the same; and since the memory of Cabasilas has been obliterated, it is no wonder if he has thrust the Methonian into his place. There is a great interval of time between Nicolaus Cabasilas and the Methonian, since the Methonian is much older than Cabasilas. If the Methonian, as the Gesnerian Epitomator relates, flourished in the year 1230, under the Lascares, who wrote many things against the pontificals, which are read in manuscript in libraries, as is also his oration to those who waver and say that the consecrated bread and wine are not the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and is read today in the Library of the Holy Fathers of Margarinus Bigneus: Cabasilas, however, flourished in the year 1314. There are, therefore, eighty-four years between the Methonian and Cabasilas, if what the epitomator has determined is true. And that the matter may become more clear, John Veccus flourished under Michael Palaeologus the first in the year 1271. But Veccus, much older than Cabasilas, writes, and plainly dissolves the arguments of the Methonian against the procession of the Spirit also from the Son, after so many years. Therefore, Nicolaus of Methone and Nicolaus Cabasilas cannot be one and the same author. Add to this that Nicolaus Cabasilas, although he may have followed and fostered the opinion of Nilus on the procession of the Holy Spirit against the Latins, nevertheless, as far as I know, nothing has been found in libraries written and composed by him on that argument against the Roman Church to this day. ^C

There have been published (f) by Nilus, Archbishop of Thessalonica, in Greek and Latin, an Oration demonstrating that the cause of the schism of the Latin and Greek Churches is no other than that the Pope, which is a matter of controversy, refuses to refer cognizance and judgment to an ecumenical council: but wishes to sit alone as master and judge of the controversy, while treating the others like disciples who must keep silent and listen, which is indeed alien to the laws and actions of the Apostles and the Fathers. Also, a work of his On the primacy of the Pope, to which have been added several other things concerning the controversies of the Greeks, by the effort and labor of Claudius Salmasius (g) and Bonaventura Vulcanius, with some notes, published at Hanau by the Wechelian press at the house of Claudius Marnius and the heirs of Joannes Aubrius 1608, in 8vo. This ^D

^A also, a little work, Matthias Illyricus translated from Greek into the Latin tongue, as the epitomizer Gesner writes. It cannot be denied that this schismatic work was dictated by a tongue suffused with poison, and therefore pestiferous in the extreme, and for that reason it was most acceptable to the heretics. But the blasphemies which he vomits against the Roman Church, and the arguments by which he disseminates darkness in those works, were exploded by many at the Florentine synod itself, and after the synod by others most learnedly and eruditely; and now at last ^B they have been weakened and utterly shattered by Joannes Matthæus Caryophilus, bishop of Iconium, in his *Confutation of Nilus Cabasilas*, published in Greek and Latin at Paris, 1662, in 8vo.

What I have seen myself are: *Book against the Latins, in which is contained a response to the Latins, as it were a handbook set before those wishing to contend against them*; in Latin: *A contest against the Latins like a handbook, serving those who wish to contend with them*. The beginning: *Of the dogmas in theology, some are stated explicitly*. Which he expressed more modestly than the heretics themselves; for I have not seen what the epitomizer [k] suggests: *Against the tyranny of the Pope and the Latins*. All these items exist in Greek manuscripts, and have been published in Latin, having been translated by Illyricus.

*Discourses of the Latins concerning the Holy Spirit, from which they think the Holy Spirit also proceeds from the Son*. Beginning: *First of all, what is the ancient belief of the catholic Church*.

*Regarding the conclusion, or concerning the Holy Spirit. First Discourse*, ^C in Latin: *Ad conclusionem, sive de Spiritu sancto, Oratio prima*. Beginning: *And these things the Church of the Latins, supporting its own belief*.

*Second Discourse*. Beginning: *That even the tradition of the apostles*.

*Third Discourse*. Beginning: *Furthermore, also from the decrees of the...*

*Fourth Discourse*. Beginning: *Nay more, also from the holy and ecumenical council*.

*Fifth Discourse*. Beginning: *And furthermore, also from the holy and ecumenical sixth council*.

*Solutions of the propositions of the Latins, from which they think they can conclude that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son*. Beginning: *Anything rather than such things could become true*.

*That the Latins, using syllogisms, cannot prove that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son*. Beginning: *The remaining syllogisms, to which so much strength belongs*.

*Solutions of the syllogisms of the Latins concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit*. Beginning: *This is clear also from irrefutable arguments*.

*By the same, some pieces concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit*.

Concerning the immense mass of this Niliac volume, Cardinal Bessarion ^D says to the Greeks, according to Syropulus in his *History of the Council of Florence*, sect. 6, c. 12: "However, if the work regarding the addition," says Cabasilas, "fills four leaves, and the discourses which we have spoken to it are one book, but to that regarding the belief, where he writes an entire book, shall we not be able to say, many and good things?" For we ought not to be terrified of the Latins, if indeed Cabasilas, while writing about the addition, filled only the leaves of one book; yet what we have poured forth here on the same subject rises to a volume. Therefore, when Cabasilas fashioned an entire codex in illustrating the dogma itself, shall we not be able to publish on that same dogma things much more distinguished than what has been published hitherto?

What indeed this Nilus accomplished in this very great work and vast mass of writing, and how he directed his forces in the sea and ocean of evils against the Latins, and organized his troops in his heart and in writing, Nicolaus Cabasilas, nephew of said Nilus by his brother, has not inconsiderately distinguished for us in a *Protheoria* of this work, which, lest you lose time and labor in searching for those things, we shall append here:

*Protheoria, exhibited very clearly by the nephew of him who composed this excellent treatise, in brief words, as far as possible setting forth the whole of the subject matter. This book consisted indeed*

^A of the argument against the innovation of the Latins, yet it maintains that same order as all the discourses that have been set forth, through which the Latins appear to conclude the addition to the Creed. First, the discourse is directed toward the conclusion of the Latins, demonstrating that the proposition opposed to it is true in all respects, proving that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father alone; and it shows this by testimonies of the Holy Scripture and of the holy Fathers, whom it is necessary for the Latins to believe even as it is for us. For from the primary premises of the faith, from the words of the Lord and the apostles, ^B and from the ecumenical councils, and from the successors of the apostles, and from nearly all the theologians, the truth concludes that the Holy Spirit has his existence from the Father alone. And this having been shown in five books, he proceeds to the propositions; for this is the ancient custom in the Church, when she battles against heretics for the sake of the right doctrines, first to show the true glory regarding God, and then to resolve the objections of those of the opposing side, which is most evident to those who have gone through the Acts of the ecumenical councils. And since the propositions of the Latins are taken partly from the Holy Scripture and the theologians, ^C and partly from human reasoning and knowledge of existing things, the discourse against them is twofold. And the former reveals that they are misinterpreting the divine concepts of the Scripture, and that the Fathers, through what they wrote, provide no help to the Latins; the second book refutes their absurd syllogisms. And so that the truth might appear on every side to be with us, testimonies were also brought forward from the Acts of the eighth ecumenical council, through which it appears that it became the common belief of the whole Church that the Holy Spirit has his existence from the Father alone. For upon the reign of the Macedonian, ^D and of Photius the patriarch, and of Pope John, a council having been assembled at Constantinople, and having deliberated in common regarding the procession of the Holy Spirit, it appeared that the addition of the Latins was absurd, and worthy of anathema and such things. In which the affairs of the Church were settled, and the Greeks persuaded the Latins to remove the addition from the Creed. But since they parted ways again and were united for the worse, and the filth of the Latins pours out over our Church, and other good things of those among us were corrupted by the leaders of that time, this book was also made to disappear from the records of this ecumenical council, as they fled from the evidence of those things, even though we have the canons of the eighth ecumenical council among us, and the Latins themselves admit that an eighth ecumenical council took place. Thus, the book of the history of this council having been made to disappear, the blessed Nilus, who composed this book, gathered together a few parts that had been omitted from here and there, and added them to his treatise against the Latins, as clear testimonies of the truth. For it appears from these that both the ecumenical council was established in the times I mentioned, and that the addition of the Latins was removed from the Creed of the faith, and that the concord and peace of the churches took place upon these things.

^A Wherefore, if that Sgyropoulos of yours, and those whom he reports to have been called to the council, had excelled in theological art and faculties, and had not been versed in the utmost ignorance of matters, they would have appealed to them, not to Cabasilas. But it is no wonder: a jackdaw seeks a jackdaw. But what of the Thessalonians in their manuscript Synodicon, which the editors of the new one rejected as profane and impious? "Eternal be the memory of Nilus, most holy metropolitan of Thessalonica, who strove for the Church of Christ at once by his words, by his deeds, and by divine writings, and who put to shame and refuted the empty babbling of Barlaam and Acindunus [r] with wise discourses and irrefutable proofs." Eternal memory to Nilus, most holy archbishop of Thessalonica, who by discourses at once, and actions and divine commentaries, elucidated for the Church of Christ, and by God-given discourses, which could not be resisted, and by demonstrations, brought to contempt and put under condemnation the vain clamors of Barlaam and Acindunus. Nor in any other manner does Symeon of Thessalonica, in his *Dialogue Against Heresies*, say: "And yet another, Nilus, a most divine man, who had received the presidency of the Thessalonians, though he did not succeed in arriving at it, who wrote most brilliantly and very truly and strongly against the innovation of the Latins, and against this wretched heresy of Barlaam and ^B Acindunus." And also with another Nilus, a most divine man, and likewise supreme prelate of the city of Thessalonica, whose power to attain the see, however, did not exist, although he composed brilliant and most faithful and very robust Commentaries against the new wickedness of the Latins, as well as against this unhappy heresy of Barlaam and Acindunus. Ride, I pray, the putrid ineptitudes of the Thessalonians in their Synodicon. They are silent about that which in Nilus they acknowledged as most excellent, and which he defended most fully—namely, the Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father alone—lest they seem injurious to the Latins, and be brought into infamy because they openly criticized the opinion of the Latins to the people; but they praise him for a very small and contemptible matter, and one on which there was not one single opinion among the Greeks, namely, the condemnation of Barlaam and Acindunus, against whom it is still debated whether Nilus wrote anything at all; although he did go over to the opinion of the Palamites. What they also do regarding other bishops of the said city added to the new Synodicon: they are most verbose in other things that do not offend the Latins, but they are silent on those written against the opinion of the Latins, as if they did not exist. But concerning these, more fully elsewhere, the mentioned bishops also being included. How much, finally, this Nilus availed for the exposition of theological matters, read the *Tractatus* of Georgius Trapezuntius to John Cuboclesius concerning the Procession of the Holy Spirit also from the Son, edited by me in Greek and Latin, volume 1 of *Græcia orthodoxa*. You will not repent of such reading.

Joannes Spondanus [s] writes in his *Annals* for the year 1622: "Later, Nicolaus Cabasilas was made bishop of Thessalonica, whose many writings exist, but they are stained with the soot of the Greek schism; against whom the same Demetrius [t], learned in Greek and Latin, is said to have written in defense of Saint Thomas Aquinas, whom Cabasilas was the first to attack, whose ancient works he also translated into the Latin tongue, just as those of Augustine and others, whom Volaterranus and ^C others praise as a learned and also a holy man." There are, however, those who confuse the aforesaid Nicolaus with Nilus, also called Cabasilas, archbishop of Thessalonica, who lived at this same time. Whether he was the same man, or another, or whether he held that see before or after Nicolaus—a matter I see being debated—it does not, however, much signify. He is found to have written two little tracts against the primacy of the Roman pontiff, which heretics kiss with devotion. See, reader, the ignorance of the writer of the *Ecclesiastical Annals* in these few words. He does not even distinguish what he perceives with the sense of his eyes. He saw the title of the book, which heretics kiss, and the name of the author prefixed; and he does not discern what is most prompt to the eyes. This is to be blind in the sun, and to be blinder than blindness itself. The author of the libels against the primacy of the Roman pontiff is Nilus. Many other things circulate under the name of Nicolaus Cabasilas, here, there, and everywhere. Therefore, they judge wrongly who confuse Nicolaus with Nilus, as Spondanus does with them. And since one is Nicolaus and another is Nilus, if you wish to be an experienced historian, it was for you to unravel in what age they lived, and who held the Thessalonian see before, and who held the Constantinopolitan see after. But you answered the controversy quite amply, saying it little signifies. Quite acutely, but ridiculously. Whoever in the future shall be uncertain of anyone's opinion, they will be amply and oracularly satisfied ^D to remove the doubt by this Spondanic response; although it little signifies. Nicolaus wrote many things, but they are stained with the soot of the Greek schism. It is true that he wrote many things, which Catholics translated into the Latin tongue and edited as opportune and conducive for Catholics against the ravings of the heretics. And if anything escaped him inadvertently, which to some seemed not safe enough for all, these same Catholics attempted to excuse it. But someone—I know not who—said, "Do not wash the Ethiopian white." The bow will not always strike whatever it threatens. And Spondanus himself in these *Annals* of his—how many lies, how many falsehoods, how many things incorrectly and ingeniously insinuated, does he malignantly and calumniously sprinkle, which would require a volume, and I know not if even expurgated they would deserve esteem? Therefore, there is nothing of Nicolaus that invades the primacy of the Pope. And this Demetrius Cydonius did not write for Saint Thomas against Nicolaus, who never sharpened his tongue against the said saint, but against Nilus who had done so, as is gathered from the titles of the books which survive to this day [u]. Demetrius of Ku-