This panel offers a multidisciplinary reappraisal of Emperor Julian’s Contra Galilaeos, a seminal fragmentary text in the 4th-century clash between pagan and Christian thought. Combining Neoplatonic philosophy, Syriac tradition of Greek works, and Patristic Studies, the session investigates five interrelated dimensions: (1) Composition and Structure (M. Schramm). Composed during Julian’s Persian campaign, the treatise deliberately targeted key Christian doctrines while integrating philosophical critiques. Although the original Greek is lost, its arguments survive primarily through Cyril of Alexandria’s Contra Iulianum and newly identified Syriac fragments. These sources reveal Julian’s structured refutation strategy. (2) Neoplatonic Foundations (M.C. De Vita). Julian’s critique is grounded in his Iamblichean worldview: Orations 8 and 11 outline a divine hierarchy with Helios as mediator, rejecting Christian monotheism. Orations 7-9 champion allegorical myth interpretation and Hellenic tradition, condemning Christians and Cynics for distorting ancient wisdom. Julian links Christianity’s cultural appropriation to imperial instability. (3) Biblical Exegesis and Interpretation of Christian Doctrines (G. Buzási; G. Nardiello). 3a) In Contra Galilaeos Julian insists on a literal interpretation of the Bible to show that without the Hellenic heritage as a key to interpretation, Christian scripture would lose much of its appeal. At the same time, he surreptitiously appropriates central doctrines of the Church. 3b) Julian’s polemic reflects not only Neoplatonic reasoning but also a calculated familiarity with the Bible. The present communication focuses on Paul of Tarsus as presented in Julian’s Contra Galilaeos (4) Syriac tradition (A. S. Sembiante). The newly identified Syriac fragments of the Contra Galilaeos, preserved in catenae and polemical anthologies, provide critical insights into the text’s transmission. Syriac authors adapted and reframed Julian’s arguments, particularly in theological debates over Christian orthodoxy and pagan intellectual heritage. The panel concludes with a discussion of Contra Galilaeos’ enduring legacy in the transitional period between late antiquity and Byzantine culture.
Composed during Julian’s Persian campaign, the treatise deliberately targeted key Christian doctrines while integrating philosophical critiques. Although the original Greek is lost, its arguments survive primarily through Cyril of Alexandria’s Contra Iulianum and newly identified Syriac fragments. These sources reveal Julian’s structured refutation strategy.
Julian’s critique is grounded in his Iamblichean worldview: Orations 8 and 11 outline a divine hierarchy with Helios as mediator, rejecting Christian monotheism. Orations 7-9 champion allegorical myth interpretation and Hellenic tradition, condemning Christians and Cynics for distorting ancient wisdom. Julian links Christianity’s cultural appropriation to imperial instability.
In Contra Galilaeos Julian insists on a literal interpretation of the Bible to show that without the Hellenic heritage as a key to interpretation, Christian scripture would lose much of its appeal. At the same time, he surreptitiously appropriates central doctrines of the Church.
Julian’s polemic reflects not only Neoplatonic reasoning but also a calculated familiarity with the Bible. The present communication focuses on Paul of Tarsus as presented in Julian’s Contra Galilaeos.
The newly identified Syriac fragments of the Contra Galilaeos, preserved in catenae and polemical anthologies, provide critical insights into the text’s transmission. Syriac authors adapted and reframed Julian’s arguments, particularly in theological debates over Christian orthodoxy and pagan intellectual heritage.