MAGNAURA - THE IMPERIAL UNIVERSITY OF CONSTANTINOPLE

Bogdan-Petru Maleon

Bogdan-Petru Maleon is an Associate Professor at the Faculty of History within

”Alexandru Ioan Cuza” University in Iaşi and Associate Researcher at the Romanian Academy,
Iaşi branch, the Institute of History “A. D. Xenopol” Iaşi. His interests regard mainly the
ecclesiastic history, the ideology, symbols and rituals of power in Byzantine and Post-Byzantine
area. He is the co-author of the work O istorie a Europei de Apus în Evul Mediu. De la Imperiul
Roman târziu la marile descoperiri geografice (A History of Western Europe in Middle Ages.
From the Late Roman Empire to the great geographic discoveries), Iaşi, 2010 and author of the
monographic work Clerul de mir din Moldova secolelor XIV-XVI (The Secular Clergy in
Moldavia between the 14th-16 th centuries), Iaşi, 2007. He edited, in collaboration, the volumes
Ideologii şi reprezentări ale puterii în Europa (Ideologies and representations of power in
Europe), Iaşi, 2009 and Confesiune şi cultură în Evul Mediu (Confession and Culture in Middle
Ages), Iaşi, 2004.

Key words: High studies, University, Byzantine Empire

The concept of University is intimately linked, through institutional genesis and

construction, to the Western educational model, though over the time it has been associated with
almost all forms of higher education. Beside the general semantic assumption, the archetypal
institutional model naturally retained the value of absolute referee, so that any case study
clarified its topic in relation to it. The Western medieval educational structures can be
understood in their specific only by reference to the associative spirit of this civilization, which
involved the emancipation of those with intellectual concerns and their grouping in professional
associations. Just like several models agreed by those who practiced productive jobs, new
corporations acquired a specific identity based on the privileges given by the papacy, Empire,

1
monarchy and various municipal governments. Depending on the relations with all these
instances, which varied from one case to another, the phenomenon of university faced a
multitude of particular phases. Beyond the relations with tutelary instances, the diversity of
cultural traditions of Latin pre-modern West favored, in its turn, the plural typology of higher
education. Referring to the organization of education known as studium generale, it must be said
that regardless of local specific, there were several fundamental principles at the core of any
structure of this type, such as administrative autonomy, determination and realization of
curricula, and the monopoly of conferring the academic titles. In order to defend privileges, the
members of these corporations used the right of strike and/or secession, which determined the
division of communities and sometimes caused the appearance of new universities. In direct
connection to this particular status, recognized by official acts, associations of professors and
students developed a strong solidarity that was the basis of constituting a body spirit. It involved
assuming specific symbols and a ceremonial framework, which marked the change of status of
all those who acceded to this structure of intellectual living. Each university cultivated its
identity in a frenzy manner, focusing on both its specific status and age. Regarding this last
point, it should be noticed the tendency of many Western higher education institutions to move
their origins as earlier back in time as possible. In addition to the past which can be reconstituted
in a precise manner, based on authentic documents, the institutional memory regularly made
appeal to traditions based on fiction. Thus, the humanists associated the origins of universities
with periods as close to classical antiquity, from a desire to make a connection between their
time and the one they so much admired. There can be mentioned here several of the most famous
universities in Medieval Europe, such as Bologna, founded, according to the tradition, by
Emperor Theodosios, the one in Paris, which linked its beginnings to Charlemagne, and the
university of Oxford, about which there have been some legends, one relating its existence to
Alfred the Great1. In reality, western universities were not related to ancient higher education
institutions, as they were actually entirely intellectual expressions of medieval civilization.
Unlike this area, in Eastern Europe the survival of Roman Empire ensured the continuity of
classical forms of instruction. At the same time, maintaining the state led to the imposition of a
different model of organizing higher education, which was conceived as a component of the

1
Walter Ruegg, Mythology and historiography of the beginnings, in Hilde De Ridder-Symoens (ed.), A
History of the University in Europe, Cambridge University Press, 1992, p. 7.

2
administration, rather than an autonomous structure. Due to the perpetuation of studies and the
role of imperial power, there was a different perspective than the Western world’s, in terms of
relations between secular and ecclesiastic education. Although one can not speak of a clear
separation of secular and theological knowledge, the education of the Churchmen in Byzantine
Empire was reserved for the Patriarchal School in Constantinople in which most teachers came
from the clergy of Hagia Sophia. It is well known that, in Western Europe, the Church tried and
mostly succeeded in imposing a monopoly on knowledge, making from the control on
universities a crucial stake in the process of asserting its supremacy. This way it should be
understood that the faculties of theology were the most important within the Western
universities, and the chancellors, as representatives of ecclesiastic authority, had an important
role of control, with some notable exceptions, such as that of Bologna. Based on these distinctive
features, it must be also noticed that another major difference between the two types of
universities resides in the goal of academic training. Due to the survival of Roman establishment
in the East, higher education could have perpetuated classical traditions, totaling the experience
of some famous schools, such as those from Athens and Alexandria. Along with the political
structures, there also survived an educational ideal with a strong civic component that involved
the formation of a citizen able to be useful to the community. Unlike this state of facts, during
the first phase of Western higher education development, corresponding to the
institutionalization of universities in the 12th – 14th centuries, in addition to concrete goals of
training especially legal specialists useful for state and municipal bureaucracies, knowledge in
itself was a strong motivation for studious youth. Throughout its existence, Byzantine higher
education was under the control of imperial power, interested in obtaining well-trained personnel
for administration. Furthermore, the sustainability of higher education in Constantinople was
determined by the periodic state intervention, as the imperial laws had the role to push and
reorganize academic structures. Thus, the University of Constantinople must be
methodologically analyzed in relation to the rulers’ interest for education in general and higher
education in particular. One can speak about a subordination of the Western university to the
political power only from late middle ages and early modern era, when countries showed an
increasing interest in controlling these institutions, both for symbolic benefits and the need to
train specialized personnel for their growing bureaucracies.

3
 *

Restoring the history of higher education in Constantinople is a difficult task for the
historian. The first obstacle is the significant difference in the quality of different types of
sources and their distribution in an uneven manner on the scale of Byzantine history. Within it,
there were well-documented periods, generally corresponding to epochs of cultural grow, while
others were lacking of information or data were almost inexistent, as it happened in the periods
of stagnation or setback for the entire Byzantine civilization. Another feature of the testimonies
about higher education in Constantinople is that most information refers to the administrative
structure and teachers, the sources being poorer about the curricula and the school atmosphere.
However, corroborating various types of sources made it possible to reconstitute the
development of high-level education in the Byzantine capital. Although academic studies had a
remarkable continuity here, there were important changes over the time. They referred to the
institutional structure, content and importance of studied matters, and the place classes were
held.
The history of higher education in Constantinople began with the founding of the new
capital on the Bosporus in 330. During the 4 th century, the pagan tradition continued at the level
of higher education here, especially since, within it, there activated several important intellectual
figures, such as the famous rhetor Libanius. Emperor Theodosius II reorganized the academic
institution founded by Constantine the Great on the Capitol, the decree from 425 creating an
auditorium that included 31 departments, where teaching was done in Greek and Latin.
Emperors before Theodosius had appointed professors on the recommendation of the Senate, and
paid them stipends. After 425 the higher education in the capital became a monopoly of the
university and the professors were appointed by the urban prefect acting for the emperor. They
were given senatorial ranks after 20 year service in their chairs2. From these findings it appears
that, during the first phase of its existence, the university in Constantinople illustrated the two
major features of Empire’s culture: continuity of pagan traditions and bilingualism.
In the times of Justinian I, legal education dominated the academic environment in the
imperial capital. This should be considered natural, given the high project regarding the

2
J. A. S. Evans, The Age of Justinian. The circumstance of imperial power, Routledge, 1996, p. 27.

4
legislation systematization initiated by the emperor and put into practice by a team of eminent
lawyers led by Trebonian. During this period, higher education in law was extended from 4 to 5
years and one of the components of the famous Corpus Juris Civilis, the law manual known as
Institutiones, was specifically designed for training jurists. By paying attention to the Roman law
studies, Justinian manifested himself as a worthy descendant of Roman emperors, while his
quality as a Christian emperor was highlighted by a measure taken in 529, which forbade the
pagan professors to teach in higher education of the Empire.
After Justinian’s death in 565, until the arrival of Heraklios on the throne in 610, the higher
education in Constantinople faced a decline, particularly accentuated during Phocas’ tyrannical
reign. Heraklios revived the academic institution in the capital, which in his times was called
Pandictatorion and within it the studies maintained their bilingual nature. In the second half of
the 7th century there was a decline of the ancient culture, works of religious expression replacing
the classical heritage3.
The university of Constantinople reached a critical point of its existence during the
iconoclast period, commonly known by specialists as a cultural contraction. Some later writings,
dating from the 10th – 11 th centuries, referred to Leo III the Isaurian as burning down the building
reserved for higher education, occasion on which teachers lost their lives and the library was
destroyed. The modern historians’ researches revealed that there were never taken such extreme
measures, and although the university studies faced a pronounced decline, perhaps an academic
institution continued to exist. The premises of a new era of cultural boom occurred in late 8 th
century and early next one, when cursive writing generalized, which facilitated the people’s
access to knowledge. On the one hand, this type of writing was easier to be performed, and, on
the other, required less space, which compensated the increased costs, caused by replacement of
papyrus by parchment.
A key moment in the evolution of the university was linked to the reforms initiated by
Emperor Theophilos (829-840). During his ruling the academic institution in Constantinople was
placed near the Church of the Forty Martyrs, and was headed by one of the greatest scholars of
the time, Leo the Mathematician. Byzantine sources suggested that his fame was so great that it
exceeded the boundaries of the Empire. According to several accounts, Emperor Theophilos

3
J. F. Haldon, Byzantium in the seventh century: the transformation of a culture, Cambridge University
Press, 1990, p. 425-435.

5
appointed Leo the Mathematician to the post after he had been courted by caliph Mamun who
had heard of him from one of his disciples, who was taken prisoner by the Arabs4. Emperor
Theophilus promoted Leo as archbishop of Thessaloniki, in 840, but he was removed in 843,
under the regency of Theodora, once with the return to the cult of icons. Leo returned to
Constantinople and adapted to the new situation, which showed that he was not a convinced
iconoclast 5. According to Paul Lemerle, Caesar Bardas, the maternal uncle of Emperor Michael
III, named Leo as head of the new school of Magnaura a little after 8556. It was an institution
that continued the academic structure organized by Theophilos and where, along with Leo, there
worked some of the greatest scholars of the time. Leo the Mathematician was a scholar with
broad concerns in science, technical field and philosophy. He was also interested in geometry,
mechanics and medicine, and sciences we consider today as occult, namely astrology and
alchemy. The latter concerns were encouraged even by the Emperor Theophilos, intensely
preoccupied with finding the future. During this sovereign’s time the higher education in
Constantinople was restrained, but Caesar Bardas gave it a new dimension7. The essence of
higher education reform initiated by him consisted in the centralization and systematization of
studies at Magnaura. One may say that, through this vast intellectual effort, the so-called
Macedonian Renaissance was announced by Leon the Mathematician’s work8. The quality of
studies and the fact that teachers were well prepared made the Byzantines hotly argue whether
this public institution deserved to be called „university”9. The new center of higher education
and its head were fundamental marks of the Byzantine higher education, which juxtaposed in
time. Despite this perception, the palace of Magnaura did not always host the academic
institution that functioned in the imperial capital, but became its seat only in the 9 th century, after
several centuries of existence. The privileged place that tradition reserved for this building was
due to the fact that it was associated with a time of revival of higher education after a long

4
On the offer made to Leo the Mathematician to go to teach in the Caliphate, see Deno John Geanakoplos,
Byzantium. Church, Society and Civilization Seen through Contemporary Eyes, University of Chicago Press, 1984,
p. 343 - 344.
5
Warren Treadgold, The Macedonian Renaissance, in Renaissances Before the Renaissance. Cultural
Revivals of Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages. Edited by Warren Treadgold, Stanford University Press, 1984, p.
87.
6
Paul Lemerle, Byzantine Humanism, Australian Association for Byzantine Studies, 1986, p. 349.
7
Warren Treadgold, op. cit., p. 87-88.
8
Ibidem, p. 85.
9
Ibidem, p. 87.

6
rebound. Precisely for this reason, University of Constantinopolis or the Magnaura Palace
University or in Greek Pandidakterion tes Magnauras was usually considered the oldest
university in Europe. The name of the building was of Latin origins (magna aura), and referred
to the main hall for ceremonies in the western academic tradition (aula magna). It suggested that
it was conceived like a large hall, able of hosting an important number of people on official
ceremonies and meetings. It was mentioned by the name of Magnaura for the first time in the 6 th
century, so this lack of information made Cyril Mango argue that the Senate House was known
as Magnaura after the 6 th century10. He made this identification starting from the location of
these buildings in the same area, as the Senate Hall was near the Grand Palace and Hagia Sophia,
built in 360 and then rebuilt by Justinian I11. Contrary to Cyril Mango’s opinion, Chronicon
Paschale and a number of sources in early 7th century mentioned Magnaura and the Senate
House at the Augustaion, as two different buildings. According to Rudolph Stichel’s opinion,
Magnaura was preceded by a forecourt situated east of the Augustaion and separated from it by a
street running behind the abs of Hagia Sofia. The author claimed that Magnaura was, in its
original stage, a reception hall in the magister officiorum’s praetorium in northern part of the
Great Palace, near Chalke, the main gate of the imperial palace12. The construction was
associated with the imperial palace in Constantinople, a vast complex stretching over
approximately 100 ha and containing pavilions, churches, residential quarters, reception halls
and even an indoor reading school13. This building, located on the northern side of the Great
Palace, was facing east and had the main entrance from the west; it had a basilica form 14 and the
two ends of the western facade were flanked by porticoes15. Its primary role was to receive
ambassadors with pomp and circumstance, and during the middle Byzantine period it became a

10
“One may conclude, therefore, that the Senate House was either destroyed or came to be known by a
different name. Could it not, indeed, have become the palace of the Magnaura?” (C. Mango, The Brazen House. A
Study of the Vestibule of the Imperial Palace of Constantinople, Copenhagen, 1959, p. 57). The authors insisted on
the idea that it was the same with the Senate House, also in The Art of the Byzantine Empire (312-1453), University
of Toronto Press in association with the Medieval Academy of America, 1972, p. 209, n. 134.
11
According to Procopius, Senate House was one of the edifices built by Justinian (Cyril Mango, The Art of
the Byzantine Empire (312-1453), p. 109).
12
Herakleios rebuilt Magnaura after it had previously been restored by Justinian I, after it had been burned in
the Nika riot.
13
J. A. S. Evans, op. cit., p. 24, 34.
14
Rodolphe Guillard, Études sur le Grand Palais de Constantinople, ”Byzantion”, XXXIV, 1964, p. 141.
15
Ibidem, p. 142-143.

7
multipurpose building where receptions, church councils and higher education classes were
held16.
Although it seemed that scholar Photios did not teach at Magnaura before becoming
patriarch for the first time, in 85817, he was an essential factor in the revival of Byzantine culture.
The author of the famous compilation Bibliotheca was one of the most known teachers in
Constantinople, among his disciples being also Constantine/Cyril, the future apostle of the Slavs.
According to the tradition, the latter studied philosophy at Magnaura with Leo the
Mathematician, but this episode is still controversial18.
A new reform of higher education was initiated under Emperor Leo VI, who paid special
attention to legal studies, based on Prochiros Nomos of Basil I and the 60 books of Basilicals.
The successor of this emperor, scholar Constantine VII Porphyrogenitos developed his father’s
work, recruiting the best teachers and expanding the studied matters. Thus, beside the
philosophical and legal studies, a major importance was paid to practical sciences, among which
the most outstanding was medicine. At the same time, there was organized a more rigorous
academic hierarchy, having in center the titular professors, holders of departments, seconded by
their assistants. This process of institutionalization also involved the formal framework
consisting in a series of ceremonies, clothes and specific symbols. The supreme scientific
recognition was conferred by the title of philosopher, which corresponds today to that of doctor.
After Constantine VII’s reign the university in Constantinople entered a new period of routine,
but did not cease to remain the main cultural focus in Byzantium, to which young people from
the whole Empire was heading.
Although the Byzantine higher education had undergone a process of coagulation in the 9 th
and 10th centuries, some researchers argued that during that period there was no imperial
university in its actual meaning in Constantinople19. According to this view, only in the half of

16
J. A. S. Evans, op. cit., p. 35. According to Litprand of Cremona “there in Constantinople, next to the
palace, a building of extraordinary size and beauty which the Greeks call Magnavra <<strong breeze>> (magna
aura)” used by emperors when giving solemn audiences (Cyril Mango, The Art of the Byzantine Empire (312-1453),
p. 209).
17
Andrew Louth, Greek East and Latin West. The Church AD 681-1071, New York, St. Vladimir’s Seminary
Press, 2007, p. 158-159.
18
Paul Lemerle, op. cit., p. 185-191. It is though certain that after graduation he was appointed chartophylax
at Hagia Sophia in times of patriarch Ignatios, and after that was appointed teacher of philosophy at the Magnaura.
19
A. P. Kazhdan and Ann Wharton Epstein, Change in Byzantine culture in the eleventh and twelfth
centuries, University of California Press, 1985, p. 121 şi n. 4.

8
the 11th century there was in the imperial capital a small private law school, which was
transformed into a state institution by an edict promulgated by Constantine IX. This superior
school, totally under the state’s control, was organized through an imperial edict promulgated
sometime between April and September 1047, most certainly in April20. The school was led by a
nomophylax (“guard of the law”), a real head of the higher legal education, an inviolable high
official, who was paid in gold, silk, garments and food21. The first holder of that office was the
famous jurist John Xiphilinos. The higher legal education was free, and the evidence of
graduation consisted in a certificate offered by the nomophylax, compulsory for notary or lawyer
practicing22. Concrete information on the organization of these higher legal institutions is very
limited. However, it is certain that this school occupied the large building complex of the
monastery of St. George of Mangana, but its program of studies is unknown23. Paul Lemerle
claimed that it would have been „un grave erreur que de parler de cette école de droit comme
d’un établissement <<universitaire>>”24.
In 1047 also, Constantine IX introduced the office of “consul (hypatos) of philosophers”,
paid by the treasury and charged with the distribution of salaries to those teachers under his
control. Michael Attaleiates showed that the Emperor Constantine IX established the office of
“chief of the philosophers, a man superior to the rest of us in knowledge” 25. No doubt, this
characterization concerned Michael Psellos, the first holder of this office and one of the most
famous intellectuals of the 11 th century. He left a series of descriptions on the way classes were
held; thus, the didactic activity was based on the maieutics method, and students wrote down the
teachers’ answers on the board or parchment. According to the great Byzantine scholar, ancient
literature was highly studied, especially at the faculty of philosophy, where students began their
instruction with the Homeric poems. In fact there were several schools of philosophy that usually
worked inside monasteries, but it is not clear whether these schools were branches of the central
theological or philosophical institution26. According to Deno John Geanakoplos “certain

20
Paul Lemerle, <<Le gouvernement des philosophes>>, L’enseignement, les écoles, la culture, in Cinq
etudes sur le XIe siècle byzantine, Paris, Éditions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, 1977, p. 207, n.
30.
21
A. P. Kazhdan and Ann Wharton Epstein, op. cit., p. 122.
22
Paul Lemerle, <<Le gouvernement des philosophes>>, p. 210.
23
A. P. Kazhdan and Ann Wharton Epstein, op. cit., p. 122.
24
Paul Lemerle, <<Le gouvernement des philosophes>>, p. 210.
25
Deno John Geanakoplos, op. cit., p. 403.
26
A. P. Kazhdan and Ann Wharton Epstein, op. cit., p. 123.

9
scholars, however, believe that there was at this time no formal faculty of philosophy and
consider the term << chief of the philosophers >> (Hypatos ton philosophon) to be rather a
honorary title. There were, of course, always individual professors teaching privately who were
paid by their students or sometime by the government”27. The meaning of the title “consul of
philosophers” should be understood by reference to the meanings of the term “philosophy” in the
11 th century Byzantium. The phrase had a wide significance, involving all educational matters,
except for law and practical ones28. During the 11th century in Constantinople there were several
superior schools within the monasteries29, a half of dozen of such institutions being identified.
The school of St. Peter Monastery was the most famous, but it is difficult to say exactly how it
functioned. It is not clear whether it was a higher education institution with four departments,
like the school organized by Caesar Bardas and renewed by Constantine VII. Paul Lemerle
claimed that the school in the 9th century and early next one did not survive until the time of
Constantine IX and legal education organization headed by a nomophylax was a novelty.
According to Paul Lemerle, the title of Hypatos „consacre l’intérêt porté par Monomaque à un
certain savoir et à l’homme qui semblait le mieux l’incarner, mais qui n’implique nullement
l’appartenance à une institution, et dont le contenu réel paraît des plus vagues” 30.
Constantine IX’s educational innovations mainly aimed at preparing the state’s
bureaucratic elite in all areas of government31. During his time, higher education was,
theoretically, open to all, but in practice it addressed to a small number of people. Despite the
intellectual emulation of the 11 th century, progress in knowledge was rather quantitative than
qualitative. Although the desire to gain knowledge often blurred the creative impulse32, during
this century there was accentuated the issue of classical heritage’s reconciliation with Christian
teaching33. In early 11th century the encyclopedic tendencies of the previous period extended and

27
Deno John Geanakoplos, op. cit., p. 403.
28
Paul Lemerle, <<Le gouvernement des philosophes>>, p. 224.
29
Ibidem, p. 227-235.
30
Ibidem, p. 242-243.
31
A. P. Kazhdan and Ann Wharton Epstein, op. cit., p. 127.
32
Paul Lemerle, <<Le gouvernement des philosophes>>, p. 246.
33
For example, Psellos’ student and successor, John Italos had become so fond of the wisdom of the Hellenes
that he had fallen in heresy (Donald M. Nicol, Church and society in the last centuries of Byzantium, Cambridge
University Press, 1979, p. 50).

10
amplified, but this direction spent its recourses in its last period, announcing the dominance of
the patriarchal school of the next century34.
The university reformed by Constantine IX maintained the same form until 1204, and the
offices of nomophylax and hypatos lasted until the end of Empire35. According to the scholar
princess Ana Comnena, her father Alexios I constantly encouraged higher education, but made
no changes in its organization. During the Comnenos time there increased the number of
churchmen in the university, and under Manuel I the titles of consul of philosophers and
nomophylax were regularly granted to deacons at Hagia Sofia, but the Church did not affect the
structure and content of university studies. During the 12th century there manifested a new model
of intellectual, interested in all fields of knowledge. For example, Michael Italikos was one of the
most popular instructors in Constantinople during the second quarter of the 12 th century, equally
interested in theology, rhetoric, philosophy, mathematics and medicine36.
After 1204 there was a temporary interruption of higher education, but Emperor John III
Doukas Vatatzes restored a superior school at Nicaea. This initiative was easy to be understood,
considering that most of the intellectual elite took refuge in the new capital of Asia Minor37. This
institution gained a great reputation under the leadership of scholar Nicephor Blemmydes, who
activated there between 1238 and 1248 and had as students the future men of culture Gheorghios
Pachymeres and Gheorghios Akropolites.
After 1261 Emperor Michael VIII restored the traditional higher education institutions, but
„it is not certain that one can speak of restoration of the imperial university”, although it is sure
that „a school of higher education soon functioned” and was led by George Akropolites38. The
study in this school was based on Aristotle’s philosophy, Euclid's geometry and Nicomach’s
arithmetic. However, the Politics of Aristotle was of little importance for the Byzantines
compared to Western world, where it became an influential element in writings about human
society and the ideal state39. Under Andronikos II the higher education in Constantinople took

34
Paul Lemerle, <<Le gouvernement des philosophes>>, p. 248.
35
John Italikos was appointed hypatos of philosophers under the Dukas dynasty (A. P. Kazhdan and Ann
Wharton Epstein, op. cit., p. 127).
36
Ibidem, p. 128.
37
Edmund Fryde, The early palaeologan Renaissance (1261 - c. 1360), Brill, 2000, p. 73.
38
Ibidem, p. 87. Here also taught Gregoire of Cyprus, future patriarch of Constantinople, encyclopedic
personality and Aristotelian thinker. Another personality in the culture of Constantinople was Gheorghios
Pachymeres, a mathematician, philosopher and historian (p. 87-88).
39
Ibidem, p. 105.

11
the form of a well organized institution. The emperor patronized culture and encouraged higher
education, which intensified cultivation of ancient Greek literature and science. Teachers were
state employees and received a salary from the great logotheti, and benefited from various
contributions from students’ parents. Based on available information, one can not say in which
building were the courses held and whether all departments were concentrated in one place40.
The last and one of the most profound reforms of higher education in Constantinople was
initiated by Manuel II Palaeologos. He gathered all the faculties in a single building in the
monastery of St. John the Baptist. This institution was known as Katholicon Mouseion41. It was
led by one of the four general judges, and among famous teachers there were also scholars like
Manuel Chrysoloras, John Arghyropulos or Michael Apostolis, many of whom went to West
where they became teachers for humanists42. The study was based on liberal arts, which formed
the basis of all philosophical studies, reanimated with the revival of Platonism.

At the end of these considerations one can say that higher education in Constantinople took
on an institutional form that can be characterized rather by the name of “higher school” than
“university”. Within it, the main areas of study were philosophy, law, and medicine. It seems that
during the history of this school there were periods when studies were interrupted or the activity
severely diminished, as in the 8 th or early 9 th century, but periodically revived, so that the
impression of continuity was maintained until the end of the Empire. During the existence of this
institutional form of higher education many changes took place in the content of matters and
educational goals. Thus, classical heritage and interest for the formation of a bureaucratic elite in
Justinian's time gave way, along with iconoclasm and ruralization of Empire, to several
educational models from Christian spirituality and the lack of interest for administrative staff’s
training. There followed a gradual recovery of ancient culture in the institutional framework
provided by the initiatives of Emperor Theophilus and Caesar Bardas. This movement reached

40
Ibidem, p. 91-102.
41
Name translated by Filelfo, who had studied here, as Universitas litterarum et scientiarum, publicus
discendi ludus (University of letters and sciences, public school for education).
42
The Greek doctors of southern Italy were in contact with Byzantine culture, in general, with medical
science in particular (Robert Browning, Greek Influence on the Salerno School of Medicine, in Byzantium and
Europe, Delphi, 1985, p. 191-192).

12
its point in the second half of the 9 th century and early the next one, when there appeared an
encyclopedic intellectual model of training. Expansion of the Byzantine Empire in the
Macedonian period also led to a reorganization of higher education as to produce well-trained
personnel for administration. Constantine IX’s reforms led to the foundation of some higher
education structures that lasted, with few changes, until 1204. The entire period of the 9 th to 12 th
centuries was dominated by the interest in ancient authors, who were compiled and taught in
schools, and in educational ideal of encyclopedic training. However, one can speak about a
fundamental change of attitude towards the classical culture in this long period. Thus, there was
a transition from gathering and transcribing of classical corpora in the 9 th – 10 th centuries to a
process of assimilation and reflection in the 11 th one. Within the academic training area, this
transition took place from assimilation of information out of a pure intellectual curiosity in
Photios and Constantine VII’s time to an effort of comprehension in the time of Michael Psellos.
After the conquest of the imperial capital by Western knights of the fourth crusade, the forms of
university life revived at Nicaea and were restored in Constantinople after 1261. During the last
century of Byzantium, higher education turned to scholarly erudition, and the state was no longer
interested in or able to control it as closely as before. There was also a series of similarities and
differences between this final period of development of academic education and the previous
ones. Thus, during the first Byzantine Renaissance in the 9th – 10 th centuries there appeared a
scholarly variant of a cursive script into the copying of literary manuscripts, which was an
extremely important technical innovation for the cultural dissemination in the Palaeologan
Renaissance in the 13th – 14 th centuries 43. The main difference between scholars of the first and
second Renaissance was that the first ones only copied parts of old ancient works, leaving more
to lose, while those after 1261 were much more careful with what had survived from the classical
literary inheritance and created better editions than those in the past44. As a conclusion, the
history of higher education in Constantinople was marked by continuity and rupture, and, thus, it
should be taken, for the whole Byzantine history, as a permanent phenomenon rather than an
institution with a continuous existence.

43
Edmund Fryde, op. cit., p. 19-25.
44
Ibidem, p. 34.

13