88. For the suggested dependence of Stephen on Ps.-Dionysius see, e.g., Marsh (1927) 210–13, 233–46; Guillaumont (1961a) 1486f., (1962) 327 with n. 89; Golitzin (1994) 343; Hombergen (2001) 362f.; Perczel (2008 [repr. 2009]) 33, 40 n. 51. For a challenge to the extent of that dependence and the suggestion of certain interpolations of Dionysian material within Stephen’s text see, e.g., Frothingham (1886) 81–83; Hausherr (1933) 192–94, 198f.; Arthur (2001).
89. Pinggéra (2002) 96–155.
90. So also Perczel (2001) 279.
91. See Stephen bar Sudaili, Book of the Holy Hierotheos 1.12. But cf. ibid. 1.10, with Arthur (2001) 370f.
92. See the famous exposition of hierarchy at Ps.-Dionysius, Celestial Hierarchy 3, with Louth (2007) 170f. on his hierarchies’ mediation of illumination “not of being.” Cf. idem (1989) 106.
93. See Arthur (2001) 371, (2008) 18f.
94. The literature on Ps.-Dionysius is now vast. On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy see, e.g., Louth (1989) esp. 52–77; Golitzin (1994) esp. 119–232.
95. See esp. Ps.-Dionysius, Ecclesiastical Hierarchy 5.1 [Heil 104].
96. See Ps.-Dionysius, Ecclesiastical Hierarchy 5.3.
97. For a description of the clerical triad see ibid. 5.4–7; for the laical triad ibid. 6.1–3.
98. Ibid. 6.1.3 [Heil 116]. For the elevation of monks above the baptized see also the account of the monastic tonsure at Ps.-Dionysius, Ecclesiastical Hierarchy 6.3.2–5. On the Areopagite’s theology of the monastic life contained here and in Letters 8 see in detail Roques (1961).
99. See esp. Hathaway (1969) 64–66, 86–104, on the letter to Demophilus. Cf. also Roques (1961) 296–305.
100. Ps.-Dionysius, Letters 8.1 [Ritter 175–77]. Cf. Ecclesiastical Hierarchy 5.7 [Heil 109]; Letters 8.2–3 [Ritter 180f.]; with Louth (1989) 65–67.
101. Ps.-Dionysius, Ecclesiastical Hierarchy 3 [Heil 79].
102. Ps.-Dionysius, Ecclesiastical Hierarchy 3 [Heil 79].
103. Ps.-Dionysius, Ecclesiastical Hierarchy 3.1 [Heil 82].
104. Ps.-Dionysius, Ecclesiastical Hierarchy 3.12 [Heil 93].
105. Ps.-Dionysius, Ecclesiastical Hierarchy 3.13 [Heil 93]. For Dionysius on the eucharist see the discussion of Golitzin (1994) 194–203.
106. The problem is discussed ibid. 208–14.
107. See the discussion in Louth (1989) 104–9, (2007) 154–73 (quotation at 166).
108. For the episcopal perspective see also Rorem (1989); also Golitzin (1994) 168–77.
109. Fiori (2011) esp. 33f. Cf. Clark (1992), e.g., 247 (on Evagrius).
110. Fiori (2011) 34–38 (using the Syriac text). On Ps.-Dionysius’s departure from Origen on this point see also Golitzin (1994) 283; and for his reframing of Evagrian thought ibid. 322–48, esp. 340f., 346–48 (on the placement of Evagrius’s asceticism within an ecclesial context).
111. For this tension between Stephen and Ps.-Dionysius, between the mystical and the liturgical, see also Arthur (2008) 129–36; cf. also Perczel (2008 [repr. 2009]) 33, who regards Stephen’s treatise as “a radical rethinking of the CD [Corpus Dionysiacum] in terms of Origenistic theology” (but who does not refer to the distinct sacramental imbalance between the two).
112. See Golitzin (1994) 349–92 (demonstrating also the importance of Ephrem, the Book of Steps, and Ps.-Macarius as predecessors to the Areopagite’s sacramental thought).
113. For Sergius’s Syriac translation and its potential importance to reconstructions of Ps.-Dionysius’s original text see Perczel (2000b) and (2008 [repr. 2009]) esp. 32f.
114. Ps.-Zachariah of Mytilene, Chronicle 9.19 [Brooks vol. 2, 136]. See also Perczel (2008 [repr. 2009]) 33f., on the connections between Sergius’s translation and Stephen bar Sudaili, The Book of the Holy Hierotheos 3.
115. See Sergius of Resh‛aina, On the Spiritual Life 116–17 [ed. Sherwood (1961) 148f.; trans. Perczel (2008 [repr. 2009]) 31]. See also Sherwood (1952b). For the Evagrian influence upon Sergius’s thought in this prologue see Guillaumont (1962) 226 with n. 101.
116. See Perczel (2008 [repr. 2009]) 31.
117. See Theodore of Scythopolis, Libellus on the Errors of Origen [PG 86, 231B–236B]. For discussion of Theodore see Diekamp (1899) 125–29; Guillaumont (1962) 151 n. 91; Flusin (1983) 20f.
118. For John’s career and dates see Perrone (1980) 245f.; Flusin (1983) 17–29; Rorem and Lamoreaux (1998) 23–45. Binns (1994) 141f., 247f., places him after Theodore; but see Hombergen (2001) 365 n. 528.
119. Rorem and Lamoreaux (1998) 62–65.
120. PG 4, 548A–B; with Rorem and Lamoreaux (1998) 257, 276.
121. PG 4, 544C; with Rorem and Lamoreaux (1998) 256, 276. Note also the injunction against false ascetics (“Lampetians or Messalians or Adelphians or, to repeat, Marcionists”) at PG 4, 169D, with Golitizin (1994) 357; Rorem and Lamoreaux (1998) 179.
122. Cf., e.g., the critique at PG 4, 172C–176C, 545C; and the positive assessments ibid. 76D–77A, 337D, 549B. For comment see Rorem and Lamoreaux (1998) 39, 44, 56f., and esp. 89–97; also Flusin (1983) 25–28; Perrone (2001) 250f.
123. Hombergen (2001) 366f.
124. See also the apparent correspondences between John’s critique of Evagrius and the anathemas of 553, with the comments of Flusin (1983) 27–29; Rorem and Lamoreaux (1998) 90f.
125. See Flusin (1983) 201–4. It should be noted that Cyril twice uses the Dionysian word hierarchia but not in a Dionysian sense; see Cyril of Scythopolis, Life of Sabas 11 [Schwartz 95] and Life of Cyriacus 3 [Schwartz 224].
126. On stylites in general see Delehaye (1923); Harvey (1988); Sansterre (1989); Frankfurter (1990); Kaplan (2001).
127. Binggeli (2009) 421f.
128. For analysis of the text see the magisterial treatment of Lane Fox (1997); also Hesse (2001); Kaplan (2001); Vivian (2003); Déroche and Lesieur (2010) 283–90.
129. Imperial patronage and friendship: Life of Daniel the Stylite 35, 38, 42, 44, 48, 49, 50 (calling the emperor Leo “inseparable” [achōristos] from Daniel), 51, 54–57, 68. Foreign diplomats: ibid. 51. Political prophecies: ibid. 53, 56, 65, 68, 85, 91. On the quite extraordinarily uncritical attitude of Daniel’s hagiographer toward successive emperors, in particular on the question of doctrine, see Lane Fox (1997) 205–8. On Daniel’s role as prophet and political validator ibid. 222–24.
130. Life of Daniel the Stylite 43 [Delehaye 39–41]. For Gennadius’s deference to the saint see also Life of Daniel the Stylite 58.
131. For these tensions see esp. ibid. 19.
132. Ibid. 70–73.
133. Ibid. 83. It should be noted that I make no claim as to the truth of these vignettes; on which see the comments of Lane Fox (1997) esp. 200f.
134. For an exception see Life of Daniel the Stylite 96. For the saint at the center of the liturgy see also ibid. 58, with Binggeli (2009) 434f.
135. On Symeon and his Life (ca. 600) see van den Ven (1962) vol. 1, 11*–191*; Déroche (1996).
136. Justin II: Life of Symeon the Younger 203, 206–11. It is notable that the author excludes from his narrative the patronage of the emperor Maurice, referred to in Evagrius Scholasticus, Ecclesiastical