The Council of Florence: A Historiographic Analysis of Mark Eugenicus and John VIII Palaeologus

Abstract

The study of religious history is rife with conflicting accounts and arguments based on the personal viewpoints of historians. Preconceived notions feed into the narrative of many many historical religious events. This paper investigates the historical biases surrounding the Council of Florence which took place from 1439-1439. This meeting of the Eastern and Western churches to attempt to reunite the two churches ultimately failed. However, the way historians analyze the Council, and interpret the personalities involved tells a different story about the current state of religious history in the scholastic world. Through analyzing the Catholic historian Joseph Gill's The Council of Florence and Personalities of the Council of Florence, as well as Eastern Historians Deno Geanakoplos and Constantine Tsirpanlis, this paper aims to illustrate that these previous historians have allowed religious agendas and biases to influence their analysis of the events that took place. Reviewing two specific figures from the Greek side of the council, Emperor John VIII Palaeologus and Mark Eugenikus, Metropolitan of Ephesus, we can see that the historians interpret the historical sources to meet their own ends, and that further review of the Council is still needed in order to find a truly objective history.