ት Tergwame Greek · Coptic · Ethiopic · Syriac · Armenian · Georgian · Latin

Georgian · Other ·

ARMAZI Texts: Proclus Diadochus, Institutio theologica georgice

Procl. · titus

BothSourceEnglish
JSON Dossier
machine-draft · no human review 1 passages · 177 words

Work dossier · summary and historical context

Summary

The Old Georgian translation of Proclus’ Institutio theologica is a rare witness to the reception of Neoplatonic metaphysics in the Christian East, transmitted via a Greek Vorlage. The text survives in a single manuscript, likely copied at Gelati or Iviron monastery, reflecting Athonite and Georgian monastic networks of the 11th–12th centuries. The translation is attributed to Ioane Petritsi (11th–12th c.), but the manuscript itself is later; dating rests on palaeographic and colophon evidence. Petritsi’s translation and commentary were foundational for Georgian philosophical theology, influencing later writers such as Arsen of Iqalto and the Gelati school. The Georgian text occasionally paraphrases or abbreviates the Greek original.

This translation is a rare example of Neoplatonic metaphysics being directly adapted into a Christian theological framework in the Caucasus. It demonstrates the depth of Georgian engagement with Byzantine philosophy and the influence of Proclus on later Georgian thinkers. The work is crucial for understanding the transmission of Greek philosophical texts through Georgian monastic networks.

Historical context

The translation was produced in the context of the Georgian monastic and intellectual revival centered on the Gelati Academy and the Iviron monastery on Mount Athos during the 11th–12th centuries. Ioane Petritsi, a Georgian philosopher and translator, is credited with rendering Proclus’ Elements of Theology into Georgian, likely from a Greek Vorlage. The work reflects the integration of Neoplatonic thought into Christian theology, a hallmark of the Gelati school. The single surviving manuscript, copied later, is the only direct witness to this translation. The text circulated among Georgian scholars who engaged with Byzantine philosophy, influencing figures like Arsen of Iqalto. The translation’s survival underscores the role of Georgian monasteries as bridges between Greek and Eastern Christian intellectual traditions.

Apparatus · what the pipeline recorded

Annotation and terms

6 commentary units 2 term1 structure1 background1 caution1 reception 0 derived notes 2 open questions 1 narrative
What the kinds mean

Pipeline notes

  • limitThe English is a machine draft produced passage by passage from the transcribed Coptic; no human has verified it. The commentary is model-written and cites only keys the pipeline could resolve.
  • registerRegister: other in Old Georgian; the English keeps the liturgical formulae and the vocatives rather than normalising them.
  • structurePassages: 1 narrative.
  • sourceSource edition: titus — TITUS Project: no parts may be republished without prior permission

Term index

CopticRenderingCountFirst
no glossary terms recorded
petrici-petri:1 · narrativehigh
Source
თავი 1 ერთისა და სიმრავლისათჳს* ყოველი სიმრავლე ეზიარების რაჲთავე ერთსა. ხოლო თუჰ̌ არ ეზიარების, არცა ყოველი ერთ იყოს, არცა თითოეული მრავალთაჲ, რომელთაგან სიმრავლე, არამედ იყოს თითოეულიცა მათი მრავალ, და ესე ვიდრე უსაზღვროობამდე, და თითოეულთა ამათ უსაზღვროობათაჲ იყოს კუალად სიმრავლე უსაზღვროჲ. არცა ერთსა არ თანმზიარებელი, არცა თჳსისა საყოვლოჲსადმი და არცა თჳს შორის თითოეულისადმი, ვინაჲ ყოვლად ყოვლითურთ იყოს უსაზღვრო. რამეთუ თითოეული, რომელიცა შეიპყრა, ანუ ერთი იყოს ანუ არა ერთი; და თუ არა ერთი, ანუ მრავალ ანუ არა რაჲ. ხოლო თუ და თითოეული არა რაჲ, და არა რაჲთგან არა რაჲ. და კუალად უკუეთუ თითოეული მრავალ იყოს, უსაზღვროობით უსაზღვრო თითოეული. არამედ ესე შეუძლებელ. რამეთუ არ ეგების რაჲვე მყოფთაჲ უსაზღვროობით უსაზღვროჲ (რამეთუ უსაზღვროობასა არა რაჲ უფროჲს არს, ხოლო ყოვლობასა შორის თითოეულისა უფრო) და არცა არარაობისგან რაჲ შესაძლებელ არს წარმოდგენად. ვინაჲ ყოველი სიმრავლე ეზიარების რაჲთავე ერთსა.
English
Chapter 1: On the One and the Many Every multitude participates in some one. But if it does not participate, neither would the whole be one, nor would each of the many, from which the multitude is composed, be one; rather, each of them would be many, and this ad infinitum, and each of these infinities would again be an infinite multitude. It would participate in no one, neither with respect to its own totality nor with respect to each individual among themselves, whence it would be altogether infinite. For each thing that is grasped is either one or not one; and if not one, it is either many or nothing. But if each is nothing, then from nothing comes nothing. And again, if each is many, each is infinite by infinity. But this is impossible. For nothing that exists is infinite by infinity (since nothing is beyond infinity, but there is more in the totality of each), nor is it possible for anything to come into being from non-being. Hence every multitude participates in some one.
Citation. Tergwame, “ARMAZI Texts: Proclus Diadochus, Institutio theologica georgice”, petrici-petri:1, machine-draft, 2026. https://naxiai.com/christian/works/petrici-petri#s1
Colophon. Source: titus · licence: TITUS Project: no parts may be republished without prior permission · model: deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor · provider: Relace · cost: $0.0012 · generated 2026-11-15.