International congress of byzantine studies belgrade, 22 27 august 2016

Valerijs Makarevičs
Daugavpils, Latvia; 
[e-mail] 
The Comparative Analysis of Ideas About an Ideal Person 
Represented in the Works of Plato and Grigory Nissky
For many centuries the philosophers addressed the issue of an ideal person solving it in 
correspondence with the spiritual needs of the time. On the example of the works by Plato and 
Grigory Nissky we will consider the changes of these views during the millenniums starting with the 
ancient times and finishing with the epoch of the developed Byzantine Empire. For Plato a person’s 
way to the ideal depends on their deeds and primogenitors. A person’s life experience may only 

---

213
correct the result of the experience of the previous generations either for the better or the worse; 
the result of the life experience affects the personality development of the subsequent generations. 
Grigory Nissky considers that a body and a soul are born at the same time; it means that the soul 
has an imprint of the life experience of the previous generations. According to Grigory Nissky, every 
person can approach the ideal already in his life time.
According to Plato who lived in the times of polyteism, only the elite layers of the society are 
capable for self-perfection. Grigory Nissky who lived in the monoteistic state considered that any 
person can achieve the ideal.
Yan Zaripov
Russian State University for the Humanities, Moscow, Russian Federation,
[e-mail]
Plato’s Theory of Tripartite Soul in Speech to Alexios I Komnenos 
by Theophylact of Ochrid
In speech to Alexios I Komnenos Theophylact of Ochrid praises emperor’s military, diplomatic, 
missionary and administrative feats inspired by his courage (ἀνδρεία), temperance (σωφροσύνη) 
and prudence (φρόνησις). Although Theophylact devotes the most part of the panegyric to 
celebrating emperor’s courage, in this very part he simultaneously pays Alexios the compliment of 
his mildness (πραότης), namely his ability to forgive barbarians their insolence and to have mercy 
upon rebels. Furthermore, at the very beginning of glorification of deeds of ἀνδρεία Theophylact 
emphasizes that his addressee has elected reason as a king while spirit was appointed by him to 
serve as the reason’s bodyguard (βασιλέα δὲ τὸν λόγον χειροτονήσας, τὸν θυμὸν αὐτῷ δορυφόρον 
ὑπέθηκας). I argue that Theophylact’s approval of such mental hierarchy evolved throughout the 
oration has its origin in Plato’s theory of tripartite soul developed in Respublica. 
According to Plato the spirited (θυμοειδές) part of the soul assists rational (λογιστικόν) in 
restraining the appetitive (ἐπιθυμητικόν) and shows its courage (ἀνδρεία) in guarding the whole person 
from external enemies (442a–b). However, spirit is tamed by reason in the manner of a shepherd calling 
back a dog even if it is rightly anger at being wronged (440c–d). The example of such self-control is given 
by Theophylact in his description of emperor’s response to barbarian ambassadors’ forgery disclosed by 
him. After rebuking embassy’s guile Alexios still refrained from revenge because the adversaries had 
admitted their guilt. Theophylact is amazed by his lord’s temperance since another in Alexios’ place 
would not have ceased from vengeance until he had satiated wrathful spirit’s beast with Scythian blood 
(Ἄλλος… οὐ πρότερον τῆς δίκης ἐπαύσατο πρὶν αἵμασι Σκυθικοῖς εὐωχῆσαι τοῦ θυμοῦ τὸ θηρίον). Such 
image of unfair rage bears a strong resemblance to Plato’s allegory of zoomorphic soul which implies that 
satiating beast is equal to choosing injustice manifested in internal discord (588e–589a).
Apart from being resistant to fits of excessive anger Alexios is praised for insusceptibility to base 
pleasures. Theophylact mentions Alexios’ temperance as a fact of common knowledge emphasizing 
the austerity of his life as well as devotion to his spouse. Besides, Theophilact’s bodyguard metaphor 
seems to be a positive conversion of Plato’s statement that a tyrant avoiding law and reason cohabits 
with certain slavish, mere mercenary, pleasures (ὁ τύραννος φυγὼν νόμον τε καὶ λόγον, δούλαις 
τισὶ δορυφόροις ἡδοναῖς συνοικεῖ 587c). 

---

214
However, the most striking affinity with Plato’s theory of soul has the passage in which Theoph-
ylact approves of prudence’s supremacy over courage in Alexios’ decision-making. While prudence 
takes part in military affairs along with courage, in administering the affairs of the state it exerts its 
power alone. Similarly, Plato considering spirited part of a soul as an ally of rational does not intend 
that supreme power is somehow divided between them because only the latter is aware of what is 
beneficial for each of three parts and for the whole soul (442c). Moreover, bringing the virtues of dif-
ferent parts of soul into correspondence with particular activities Theophylact follows Plato’s analogy 
according to which both city and soul obtain justice if each part of soul/ class of city performs its own 
task (τὰ ἑαυτοῦ πράττειν) (441d–e). Theophylact’s use of this analogy is peculiarly apt since it enables 
to embody the ideal of fair ruling over both a soul and a state in a sole figure of the emperor.