The Corpus, and the Author Who Is Only a Name

Four treatises and ten letters survive under the name of Dionysius the Areopagite, the Athenian mentioned in Acts as having been converted by Paul's preaching at the Areopagus. The writings themselves reinforce the claim: they address a Timothy, refer to a Paul as the writer's teacher, and mention witnessing the eclipse at the crucifixion.

If the ascription were true these would be apostolic documents, and for a thousand years they were treated very nearly as such. That authority is the reason the corpus shaped medieval theology as thoroughly as it did: to disagree with Dionysius was to disagree with a disciple of Paul. In the Latin West the works acquired a second layer of prestige when they were confused with the patron saint of France, and Eriugena translated them at the Frankish court.

Doubts appeared with Renaissance philology, Valla and Erasmus among the doubters, and the case is now closed. The writings quote and paraphrase the Neoplatonist Proclus, who died in 485; they presuppose liturgical practices of the late fifth century; and they were first cited in a controversy of 532. The author is therefore writing around 500, probably in Syria, and used a pseudonym in the accepted manner of the period. Who he was has never been established, and the many identifications proposed have all failed. The atlas holds him under the name he chose, since it is the only one anyone has.