Didymus the Blind – the Master of the Alexandrian School (Source Review) 

The aim of this article is to present a review of the late antique sources showing that Didymus the Blind was a master of the Christian Alexandrian school and to examine them in the context of research on the phenomenon of this school. The author analyses three basic sources with information on the place and role of Didymus in the Alexandrian didaskaleion, i.e. Historia Ecclesiastica by Rufinus of Aquileia (XI 7), Historia Ecclesiastica by Sozomen (III 15), and Christianike Historia by Philip of Side.
The author polemicises with the interpretation of the key source of Rufinus of Aquileia proposed by R. Layton, with which she contrasts her own interpretation founded on the research current of the socalled Alexandrian school. Referring to the history of research on the Alexandrian didaskaleion, the author considers whether and to what extent the designation of Didymus as scholae ecclesiasticae doctor (contained in the writings of Rufinus of Aquileia) might refer to the fact that Didymus operated his own, comparatively independent exegetical school, which as a result of the character of Didymus’ ideas could only be perceived as a continuation of the Alexandrian school led earlier by Clement and Origen.

The aim of this article is to present a review of the late antique sources showing that Didymus the Blind was a master of the Christian Alexandrian school and to examine them in the context of research on the phenomenon of this school. The author analyses three basic sources with information on the place and role of Didymus in the Alexandrian didaskaleion, i.e. Historia Ecclesiastica by Rufinus of Aquileia (XI 7), Historia Ecclesiastica by Sozomen (III 15), and Christianike Historia by Philip of Side.
The author polemicises with the interpretation of the key source of Rufinus of Aquileia proposed by R. Layton, with which she contrasts her own interpretation founded on the research current of the socalled Alexandrian school. Referring to the history of research on the Alexandrian didaskaleion, the author considers whether and to what extent the designation of Didymus as scholae ecclesiasticae doctor (contained in the writings of Rufinus of Aquileia) might refer to the fact that Didymus operated his own, comparatively independent exegetical school, which as a result of the character of Didymus’ ideas could only be perceived as a continuation of the Alexandrian school led earlier by Clement and Origen.