Manuel II Paleologus, Renaissance Europe and the Textus Receptus

In 1399, the city of Constantinople was under siege. The Ottoman Turks under Bayezid I had conquered virtually all of the Byzantine territories outside of the city itself. The emperor, Manuel II, was convinced that the only way to break the siege was a personal appeal to the powers of western Europe. For the first time in history, a Byzantine emperor headed west on an imperial tour.

What significance does this have in the discussion of the King James Bible?

More than you might think.

Manuel’s tour lasted three years. He visited the courts of England, France, the Holy Roman Empire (Germany), Denmark and Aragon (Spain). He carried himself as exactly what he was – the ruler of a culture that had survived for nearly 2,000 years. Manuel was educated and refined. He was a master of language, literature, science and politics. Everywhere he went, there was a swelling rage for Greek things. Dozens of contemporary accounts exist, gushing over the way he dressed and the way he spoke. He was such an impressive person that no one even brought up the religious differences that had divided Constantinople from the rest of Europe for ever 1,000 years.

Greek was very in that season.

Shortly before Manuel’s tour, the University of Florence had invited a Greek by the name of Manuel Chyrsoloras to teach Greek thinking and language. Manuel’s tour made Chyrsoloras and his students celebrities as well. Chyrsoloras taught many of the early humanists such as Leonardo Bruni and Ambrogio Traversari. His small group of close followers eventually rose to high level positions throughout Europe. Bruni became secretary to pope Gregory XII while Traversari was an influential thinker who did a number of key translations of ancient philosophy. Others such as Guarino de Verona traveled back to the Greek capital, learned Greek there and then brought manuscripts to Europe.

It was the rage for Greek things that was fueled by Manuel’s visits which ultimately resulted in the compilation of a Greek text for western Europe. Men like Traversari and Guarino spread their knowledge of the language through their own students and admirers. When Desiderius Erasmus learned Greek, it was from Chyrsoloras’ grammar, Erotemata Civas Questiones, which was printed first in Italy in 1471 and then made available to greater Europe in 1483.

People often wonder why there was no “standardization” of the Greek New Testament in Europe prior to Erasmus’ editions (1516, 1519, 1522, 1527, 1535). It was simply because no one in western Europe had learned Greek for 700 years, and they had extremely limited access to Greek texts of the New Testament – access so limited as to be virtually non-existent.

Manuel’s tour, coupled with the work of Manuel Chyrsoloras and his pupils, changed the way Europe viewed Greek culture and language. Once European Christians could access the Greek text of the New Testament, they began to question the Latin text they had received.

Unfortunately, they had access to very few manuscripts of the Greek text. There were a few – Vaticanus was probably brought to Italy after Constantinople was taken over by the Normans in 1204 – but they were not available to most people outside of the Papal palaces. After Manuel’s tour, more were brought over, but there were never a LOT of Greek manuscripts. (It is highly likely that among Guarino’s texts, there was at least a portion of the New Testament.)

Manuel’s son Constantine XI was the last emperor in Constantinople. In 1453, the great city of Constantinople fell to Bayezid’s grandson, Mehmet II. The flow of manuscripts ended abruptly once the Ottoman Turks took Constantinople and rechristened it Istanbul. The Turks sacked and burned most of the churches in the city and a thousand years of archives and literary treasures went up in flames.

For the next three hundred years or so, western Europe had no access to Ottoman territories. Practically the only Greek manuscripts they knew were those which had come to Europe via the short period between 1399 and 1453.

Once Erasmus printed a Greek text of the New Testament and Chrysoloras’ grammar was made available, Greek learning grew substantially. It was, however, confined to the study of the classical texts and the few Greek manuscripts that had made it to Europe. It would not be until the 19th century that anyone could penetrate the Ottoman controlled Middle East and find other texts.

The King James Only advocates demand that we accept the Textus Receptus as the absolute text of the Greek New Testament because it underlies the King James Version. They often support their position using the years in which it was the standard Greek text. The reality is that the TR was the result of a short interlude that allowed a few precious manuscripts into Europe.

History can be a stubborn thing, which is why many ideologues choose not to read it.

4 Responses to “Manuel II Paleologus, Renaissance Europe and the Textus Receptus”

  1. Erik,

    There are several questionable elements in this. Let’s start with the description of the tour undertaken by Manuel II. Figuring this was in the early 1400′s, how was he “the ruler of a culture that had survived for nearly 2,000 years” (1400-2000 = 600 B.C.)? And what religious differences had divided Constantinople from the rest of Europe since the 400′s (employing “for ever 1,000 years” — 1400-1000 = A.D. 400)?

    Yours in Christ,

    James Snapp, Jr.

    • 1. Nearly 2,000 years, overthrow of Roman king (509 BCE), conquest of Greece (146 CE)
      2. Sack of Rome (405 CE), Arian controversy (c. 300 CE), Council of Rome (382 CE), Achasian Schism (482 CE), iconoclast controversy (730 CE and on).

    • Albert says:

      I think the “religious differences” being referred to here are those resulting from the gradual split of the Church along Greek/Latin linguistic lines and the subsequent separation of theological emphases. Augustine, a figure who dominated the West, had little influence in the East. Similarly, the debate over Pelagianism never really gripped the East as it did the West and consequently the “free will” vs. grace arguments that were passed on from Augstine vs. Pelagius to Calvinism vs. Arminianism were never really a part of Eastern theology.

    • The Roman Empire always had a sort of floating division between the “Latin West” and the “Greek East.” Although united under one imperial power, it is important for people to remember that the eastern part of the empire was always more populated and more affluent than the west.

      For a long time the Germanic cultures that eventually usurped the name “Roman” under Charlemagne and his successors were pretty distinct from the Roman culture that had migrated east and mingled with the Greek culture already there.

Leave a Reply

*

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.

Staypressed theme by Themocracy