"Leonidas Philippidis and the Beginnings of the History of Religions as an Academic Discipline in Greece“, in: Horst Junginger (ed.), The Study of Religion under the Impact of Fascism

LEONIDAS PHILIPPIDIS AND THE BEGINNINGS OF THE HISTORY OF RELIGIONS AS AN ACADEMIC

DISCIPLINE IN GREECE

Vasilios N. Makrides

It will be perhaps of no surprise that the history of religions is a dis­cipline with a relatively recent history in Greek academia. Like many other countries in the European periphery, Greece’s progress in this domain remained under the formative influence of the developments that took place in West European countries including Germany. The specific question here is what Greece may have to do with the study of religions under the impact of National Socialist and Fascist ide­ologies in Europe. To anticipate my conclusions, I will mention two fundamental points.

First, the institutionalization of the history of religions within the Divinity School of the University of Athens, an Orthodox denomina­tional school, owes much to Leonidas Philippidis (1898-1973).^ Among other things, Philippidis had been studying history of religions at the University of Leipzig since the winter term of 1926/27 and had obtained his doctorate there under the supervision of Hans Haas in 1929. His stay in Germany coincided with a critical period in which National Socialism was gaining strong footholds within German society, including academia, even before coming to power in 1933. This fact poses naturally questions as to what extent Philippidis might have been influenced by the developments of this discipline in Germany and if there was a potential transfer of related ideas to Greece.

‘ Biographical and other information on Philippidis aré taken from the autobiog­raphy of Leonidas I. Philippidis, Avtoßioypa(piK0v crq ieimixa (1898-1963) Kai jtvev- liaTiKTi npoacpopá (1913-1963) (Athens: G.D. Kypraios, 1963), and from the volume Eiq AewviSav Ico. <Pi^iKní5r]v taKtiKÓv Kadr\yr]Tf\v trig lam piag tcov Opr¡aKevixáT(ov ev Tt] OeoXoyiKij Zxo^n Tlaveniavqßiov Adrivcóv. Tiiitjtikóv aípiépco/ia emzpoKiíg ek p.aOr¡Táv Tov em Tr¡ ¡leTaiá^ei zov eig onóxifiov KaOrijriTriv. Ojj.iXovv m Kei/xeva (Athens 1970). See also Anastasios Yannoulatos, “AecovíSac; I®. í>iA,i7CTcí6'nq, o 8KiaTn|j,(ov, o áv0po)7co(;,” EKiaT7]ßoviK:q Enerripíg rrjg OeoXoyiicrig Tlaveniormiíov Adrjvóv21 (1974), pp. la' - ve'; Aristeidis Panotís, “OiA-17cti:í6ti<;, Aecoviöa^,” 0pr]aKevT:iKr¡ Kai HdiKT¡ EyKVKXojtaiSeía 11 (1967), pp. 1093-1096.

Second, Philippidis was elected as a fully tenured professor of the history of religions at the above Divinity School in 1939. At that time Greece was under the control of the military regime of loannis Metaxas (1936-1941), a dictatorship with strong fascist inclinations. In addition, from 1930 until 1939 Philippidis held various political and ecclesiasti­cal posts, including a leading one in the Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs. In other words, his long service included four years of the Metaxas regime. Philippidis’ involvement with politics and its potential interferences with his own academic pursuits and career pose again the question as to whether the institutionalization of the history of religions as an academic discipline in Greece was influenced by the political climate of the period and, if so, to what extent.

Prior to Philippidis, the study of religions from a historical perspec­tive was practiced in the Greek context in a fragmentary way and was almost exclusively situated within the Orthodox theological domain. After all, this remains the main context for the scholarly study of religions until today, although interdisciplinary research on religions is increasingly conducted by many scholars coming from outside the theological domain. This highlights the issue of the separation between Orthodox theology and the scholarly study of religions in Greece, a topic not previously studied. Given this situation, it is not surprising that Philippidis came originally from the Orthodox theological domain. He initially studied Orthodox theology in Athens (1915-1919) where he obtained a doctorate in theology in 1923 with a thesis address­ing Greek ecclesiastical history. Considering the extensive and strong intellectual and cultural relations between Greece and Germany at the time, it is not coincidental that until the Second World War most Greek theologians favored almost exclusively Germany as the place for their postgraduate studies. The same is true for Philippidis, who went to Leipzig for further studies and enrolled in the faculty of phi­losophy His major subject and area of specialization was the history of religions, while his minor subjects were philosophy and pedagogy. In Leipzig, Philippidis followed other courses as well, such as in Old Testament studies, in which he successfully passed the examinations for the Hebraicum. His main mentor in Leipzig was Hans Haas, who had been professor there since 1915. He was an eminent representative of a philologically-oriented history of religions^ and supervised Philippidis’

2 8 4 VASILIOS N. MAKRIDES

On Haas in the context of the development o f the history o f religions in Leipzig, see the exhaustive study by Kurt Rudolph, Die Religionsgeschichte an der Leipziger Universität

dissertation on the “golden rule” in the context of the history of reli­gions.^ In December 1929 Philippidis was awarded the title of Doctor philosophiae. Philippidis also attended the lectures of Joachim Wach, whose reputation in the scholarly study of religions at the international level later increased significantly. Supported by Haas, Wach taught in Leipzig from 1924 onwards as a Privatdozent and later as an associate professor of religious studies until 1935.^ In addition, Philippidis listened to the lectures of many other scholars in Leipzig and participated in their seminars (theologians: Alt, Balia, Achelis, Rendtorff, Fiebig; phi­lologists; Bethe, Körte, Gulkowitsch; philosophers: Driesch, Dittrich, Wirth; pedagogues: Volkelt, Litt, Klemm, Frenzel, Schneider, Lipsius). In this way, he profited in many scholarly areas, in addition to his main specialization in the history of religions.

Upon his return to Greece, Philippidis continued his research and writing activities and submitted his Habilitation in 1934 on the Vedânta- theory about sorrow and redemption.^ He taught as a Privatdozent at the Divinity School of the University of Athens from 1934 until 1939 and subsequenüy as a professor of the history of religions until his retirement in 1968. He also taught the same subject at the Arsakeios Teacher’s Training CoUege since 1937. Generally, Philippidis’ important contribution to this field is that he supported and developed a histori- cal-philological approach to religions. This departed from the earlier approaches to religions in Greece, which were mostly favored by theo­logians with philosophical interests. This was the case with professor Nikolaos Louvaris of the same department of theology, who initially began teaching this subject in 1932. Philippidis was a very energetic person and a prolific author. He touched upon a variety of topics and left a strong legacy among his numerous students, as well as in his academic, ecclesiastical and socio-political environment. His scholarly contributions were acknowledged by the international academic com­munity, especially when he was awarded an honorary doctorate by the faculty of theology of the University of Marburg in 1960 in the wake of

LEONIDAS PHILIPPIDIS AND THE HISTORY OF RELIGIONS 2 8 5

und die Entwicklung der Religionsudssenschqß (Sitzungsberichte der Sächsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig, Philologisch-historische Klasse, Bd. 107, Heft 1) (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1962), pp. 123-133.

Leonidas J. Philippidis, Die ‘Goldene RegeV religionsgeschichtlich untersucht, Inaugural- Dissertation zur Erlangung der Doktorwürde der Hohen Philosophischen Fakultät der Universität Leipzig (Leipzig: Adolf Klein, 1929).

See Rudolph, Die Relißonsgeschichte an der Leipziger Universität, pp. 137-149. L.L Philippidis, H nepi OXiy/scog Kai Xwpmoeax; decopia rrig Beödvza vqg öoYßocriKrig

rov IvSiKOv Bpaxp.aviaiJ.ov (Athens: Pyrsos, 1934).

a proposal by professor Friedrich Heiler. This took place in the context of the 10th International Congress for the History of Religions.®

Aside from his successful academic career, Philippidis obtained early enough important posts outside academia. Before going to Germany he had served as director of the Metropolitan Office for the Metropolitan of Smyrna Chrysostomos (1919-1921) and later as director of the Patriarchal Office for the Patriarch of Alexandria Photios (1923-1925). In addition, from July 1930 up to December 1939 he served as the Director of the Department of Ecclesiastical/Religious Affairs at the Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs. It is worth mentioning that Philippidis held this office during the ecclesiastical crisis of 1938 regarding the election of the new archbishop of Athens and of all Greece. (The election of Archbishop Damaskinos was annulled by the Council of State, which paved the way for the election of Archbishop Chrysanthos, supported by Metaxas himself^) Philippidis also served as the Royal Commissioner to the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece. At the same time, he was a member of several boards of ecclesiastical and state organizations. This shows his active involvement in church and political affairs of the day under various governments and minis­ters. During this period, Philippidis dealt with a variety of issues and legislation, ranging from the administration of the church to religious education and inter-Christian relations. It is in this period (September 1938) that the notorious law 1363 originates; it quite specifically regu­lated the status of the non-Orthodox minorities within Greek territory and is still valid today, despite criticism and reactions.^ Philippidis was highly honored in 1937 and 1939 by King George II for his long career and services to the Greek state and the Orthodox Church. However, he gave up these various posts when he became professor in 1939. From then on he devoted himself primarily to teaching and scholarly research.

2 8 6 VASILIOS N. MAKRIDES

® For details see Eiç Aecovïôav Ico. *PiXi7iní5r]v, pp. 233-265. On this crisis, see Yiorgos Karayiannis, EKKÁ.T]GÍa Kai Kpàroç 1833-1997. lazo-

piKT\ emGKÓn-qcrn tcov axéaeáv rovç (Athens: To Pontiki, 1997), pp. 51-57. See also Gunnar Hering, “Aspekte der Kulturpolitik des Metaxas-Regimes 1936-1940),” in Reinhard Lauer, Peter Schreiner, eds., Die Kultur Griechenlands in Mittelalter und Neuzeit (Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Philologisch-histori­sche Klasse, dritte Folge, Nr. 212) (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1996), pp.285-321, here pp. 300-302.

See Nicos G. Alivizatos, “The Constitutional Treatment o f Religious Minorities in Greece,” in René-Jean Dupuy, ed.. Mélanges en Vhonneur de Meólas Valticos: droit et justice (Paris: Pedone, 1999), pp. 629-642, here p. 639.

,

To understand Philippidis’ overall career and scholarly output, it is vital to keep in mind that he remained throughout his life a believer and an Orthodox theologian. This did not leave his research in the history of religions unaffected because he always put the study of non- Christian religions in the service of Orthodox theology and Church. In this way, he dissociated himself from the tradition of Leipzig and specifically from his teachers, Hans Haas and Joachim Wach, who clearly attempted in various ways to distance the history of religions from theological studies.® In fact, Haas supported the harmonious and complementary relationship between theology and the study of religions, but he did not use the latter in apologetic terms in favor of Christian­ity Wach, on the other hand, emphasized the divergence of the two disciplines in a more systematic way, as it is evident in his important study Religionswissenschafi. Prolegomena zu seiner wissenschaflstheoretischen Grundlegung (Leipzig 1924).

Philippidis was aware of these ideas and cited, for example, Wach’s above-mentioned study, but he followed a different path, more adapted to the Greek Orthodox situation. His main ideas concerning the relationship between the study of religions/comparative religion and Orthodox theology were exposed on various occasions during the 1930s. Given the fact that such a topic was basically absent from the Greek Orthodox milieu until then, his contribution was instrumental in that it offered a first acquaintance with this discipline within Greek academia and an explanation of its relations to Orthodox theology. In his inau­gural lecture of 1935 as a Privatdozent on the history of reKgions as a scholarly discipline, Philippidis first offered a historical overview of this area of study from antiquity up to the contemporary period, referring particularly to its institutional establishment since the 19th century in Western E u ro p e .H e made also a brief reference to the background of this discipline in Greece." Further, he tried to outiine the basic cur­rents within this broad field of research, especially in their relation to Christian theology, and criticized the unprofessional approach and the lack of depth of some scholars. Finally, he attempted to articulate the

LEONIDAS PHILIPPIDIS AND THE HISTORY OF RELIGIONS 2 8 7

® See Rudolph, Die Reli^onsgeschichte an der Leipziger Universität, pp. 129-130 and pp. 144—148.

L.L Philippidis, H laxopia tcov 0pT]aKevfidrcov cog eniarruirj (Athens: Pyrsos, 1935), pp. 8-18.

“ Ibid., pp. 18-20.‘2 Ibid., pp. 20-24.

character of this new discipline, which - in his view - consisted of a combination of history, philosophy and Christian theology. He under­lined the advantages of its teaching in the Greek Orthodox context, and in the end he considered its future development from the perspec­tive of Orthodox theology. In his opinion, the history of religions aims to demonstrate that Christianity is in all respects the superior religion and that it has clear supernatural origins. The new discipline would then certainly contribute to the strengthening of the Christian faith and the verification of the Christian truth. The historical study of religions was thus clearly situated in the service of Orthodox theology and apologetics.^^

Philippidis expounded his ideas on a “theologically-oriented history of religions” more systematically and at length in a book entitled The History o f Religions in Itself and Within Christian Theology. His ample use of the relevant foreign literature in this book clearly shows that he was familiar with the situation in this field on an international level. He began with a short account of a Christian theology directed and adjusted to the study of religions, explained the historical develop­ment of the discipline, considered the most recent trends, and — most importantly - dealt with its relationship to Christian theology.*^ In this context he emphasized again the importance of this discipline for demonstrating the uniqueness of Christianity among reKgions and its concomitant and unquestionable superiority to these others. He also placed particular emphasis on the development of a history of religions sui generis, specifically destined for the Orthodox Christian milieu. To this end, he drew on the Church Fathers and other Christian writers, whose dealing with non-Christian religions could ojSer insights for the future development of this discipline. All in all, the use of the history of religions for clear Christian purposes and priorities repeated itself This fundamental perspective can be observed in Philippidis’ writings during the same period, which dealt with non-Christian religions from a comparative perspective.^® The same is true of his later writings as well: for example, when he enthusiastically supported the theory of Wilhelm

2 8 8 VASILIOS N. MAKRIDES

" Ibid., pp. 24^35.L.L Philippidis, H lazop ia rcov Op^oKevuctKüv KaO’ savti^v Kai ev xr] XpiatiaviKTi

0eoA.OYia (Athens: Pyrsos, 1938).Ibid., pp. 124-180.See for example L.J. Philippidis, Das Liebesprinzip im Buddhismus und im Christentum

(Athen: Pyrsos, 1938), esp. pp. 26-29.

Schmidt about primordial monotheism and revelation {Urmonothdsmus/ Urqffmbarun^, which had a clear Christian background and concomi­tant objectives. All these attest to the fact that Philippidis remained primarily and pre-eminently an Orthodox Christian theologian and that he always saw his scholarly research in the context of Orthodox theology and in the service of the Orthodox Church.

As expected, such a position was quite normal within the fairly conservative socio-political and religious milieu of Greece during that period. Its openness towards non-Orthodox others was usually con­nected with a re-affirmation of its own Orthodox identity and superior­ity. One remaining question pertains to the potential relations between Philippidis’ career and ideas and the ideology of the aforementioned military regime of loannis Metaxas (1871-1941). The latter was an army officer and dictator,^^ who between 1936 and 1941 had imposed a regime similar in many ways to other European dictatorships of the period, during which the state became increasingly important. Metaxas had close contacts with Germany and spent four years (1899-1903) studying in the War Academy [Kriegsakademie) of Berlin.*® After an adventurous career as a high army officer, Metaxas gained power as prime minister in 1936 through the support of King George II and rapidly proclaimed a state of emergency on 4 August. He suspended parliament, abolished the freedom of the press and introduced secret poHce surveillance, censorship and measures against dissidents. Though not fascist, the Metaxas regime soon enough endorsed many of the attributes of the authoritarian regimes of the period. These included order, discipline, indoctrination, propaganda measures, anti-commu­nism, clear hierarchical structures, glorification of youth, theories of

LEONIDAS PHILIPPIDIS AND THE HISTORY OF RELIGIONS 2 8 9

See L.I. Philippidis, “t R Wilhelm Schmidt, S.VD. (1868-1954). IlpcoTTi ÄTiOKa- Ktti a(pexr|piaK6(; |j,ovo0eiLöiu.6 . E0voA,oyiicii 0pT]OKeioX,oyiKii eitißeßaicoaii;

x <; nepi xoijtcov BißX,iKii(; aXriOeiaQ,” OeoXoyia 26 (1955), pp. 310-327; idem. Das Unwiderlegliche der Forschungsergebnisse des verewigten Prof Dr. Rev. P. Wilhelm Schmidt (Athen 1968).

On his personality see Gunnar Hering, “Rache am Vaterland? Anmerkungen zur Persönlichkeit des loannis Metaxas,” in idem. Nostos. Gesammelte Schiften zur süd­osteuropäischen Geschichte, ed. by Maria A. Stassinopoulou (Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang, 1995), pp. 131-148.

See Pana)dotisJ. Vatikiotis, Popular Autocracy in Greece 1936-41: A Political Biography of Generalloannis Metaxas (London: Frank Cass, 1998), pp. 39-48; Joachim G. Joachim, loannis Metaxas: The Formative Years 1871-1922 (Peleus 5) (Mannheim - Möhnesee: Bibliopolis, 2000), pp. 28-43.

See Hering, ‘Aspekte der Kulturpolitik des Metaxas-Regimes,” passim.

natural selection and segregation of minorities based on the principle of a pure national identity.^' Members of his organization, the E0viicr| Opyavcaari N8oA,aia(; (National Youth Organization),^^ modeled after the fascist youth organizations in Italy, Spain and Portugal, had to be true Hellenes, not Jews or members of other minorities. In October 1939 this organization numbered about 750,000 members. Yet the Metaxas regime (usually referred to as the “4th of August Regime”) was in some ways less repressive than other dictatorships of the period. This is evident, for example, by its more tolerant policies towards Jews and the fact that it did not proclaim a belligerent ethic.^^ Its ideal was the creation of a “Third Hellenic Civilization,” which would incorporate and synthesize elements of the first two civilizations, namely that of ancient Greece and that of Byzantium; particularly, the creativity of the former and the religiosity and the strong state administration of the latter. Metaxas also lessened the linguistic schism in Greece, which had polarized the country in the past. He thus promoted the use of a demotic Greek over the antiquated language.^^ He also encouraged a mythology of the nation-state as the highest and absolute value with an analogous symbolism, while he embarked on a long-term program of public works to improve the country’s infrastructure. Among titles given to Metaxas were “First Peasant,” “Great Governor,” “First Worker,” “First Warrior,” “National Father,” and “Leader.” Things changed however in October 1940 when Italy turned to Greece after occupying Albania. Metaxas rebuffed the ultimatum set by Italy, and subsequentiy the Greek army successfully resisted the invasion of fascist forces. Metaxas did not live to see the further course of warfare, because he died unexpectedly in January 1941. ® Despite being a dictator, his resistance to Italian fas-

2 9 0 VASILIOS N. MAKRIDES

On the character o f the Metaxas regime, see Susanne-Sophia Spiliotis, “Die Metaxas-Diktatur in Griechenland 1936-1941 - ein faschistoides Regime?,” in Erwin Oberländer, ed., Autoritäre Re^me in Ostmittel- und Südosteuropa 1919—1944 (Paderborn; Schöningh, 2001), pp. 403-430.

See Maria Alexopoulou, “Die ‘nationale Jugendorganisation’ des Metaxas-Regimes (1936-1941): Instrument der ‘Umwandlung’ Griechenlands,” Bulletinßr Faschismus- und Weltkriegsforschung 17 (2001), pp. 36-65.

2 See Nikolaos Papanastasiou, Die Metaxas-Diktatur und das nationalsozialistische Deutsch­land (1936-1941) (diss. phiL, Augsburg 2000), pp. 54-57.

2 Hering, “Aspekte der Kulturpolitik des Metaxas-Regimes,” p. 290. For details see Chrysanthi Avlami, “H %piicrri Trji; laxopia^ ano Tcug GecopTiTiKoiOi; Ttji; 4’’« A m o v a m v ,” 'luTcop 2 (1990), pp. 121-149.

25 See Hering, “Aspekte der Kulturpolitik des Metaxas-Regimes,” pp. 296-299.26 For various evaluations o f the Metaxas period, see Heinz A. Richter, Griechenland

zwischen Revolution und Konterrevolution (1936-1946) (Frankfurt a.M.: Europäische Verlags-

cism improved his posthumous reputation in a way. It also showed that, despite his pro-fascist inclinations, Metaxas was not ready to sacrifice Greek national interests and priorities.^^ The same is evident from the overall German-Greek political relations at the time. Although close and multifaceted, they never led to an identification of the Metaxas regime with the political ambitions of the Nazis.^^ On the other hand, Metaxas had developed a quite positive relationship with the British and their interests in South Eastern Europe.^®

It is interesting to note here that, on the ideological level, the “Third Hellenic Civilization” and “The New State” ° proclaimed by Metaxas were connected not only by a revival of the Hellenic tradition, but also by a new and very positive appreciation of religious phenomena and specifically of Orthodoxy. Although Metaxas himself may have under­gone a period of agnosticism and even atheism, he later appeared to be a believer, albeit in his own way. * He exhibited in many instances the image of a pious and religious person and supported the view that Orthodoxy was a cornerstone of Greece and specifically of his own politico-ideological system. The latter intended to create a new morality beyond selfish individualism, but never went so far as to create a new

LEONIDAS PHILIPPIDIS AND THE HISTORY OF RELIGIONS 2 9 1

anstalt, 1973), pp. 54-116; Jon V Kofas, Authoritarianism in Greece: The Metaxas Regime (East European Monographs 133) (Boulder/New York: Columbia University Press, 1983), pp. 42-97; Susanne-Sophia Spiliotis, Transterritorialität und nationale Abgrenzung. Konstitutionsprozesse der griechischen Gesellschaft und Ansätze ihrer faschistoiden Transformation, 1 9 2 2 /2é -1 9 4 1 (München: R. Oldenbourg, 1998), pp. 123-209; Vatikiotis, Popular Auto­cracy, pp. 153-195. See also various articles in Robin Higham and Thanos Veremis, eds.. Aspects of Greece 1936-40: The Metaxas Dictatorship (Athens: Eliamep - Vryonis Center, 1993); Hagen Fleischer and Nicos Svoronos, eds., UpaKTiKá A ' AisOvovg Ivveôp iov Ex>YXPovr]ç lazopíag. HEXXàÔa 1936-1944: AiKzam pia - KazoxA -A vzíozacn] (Athens: Moifotiko Institouto ATE, 1989, 2nd ed. 1990); Hagen Fleischer, ed., HEXXáóa ’3 6 - ’49. Anó ZT] AiKzazopia azov Ejj.(pvXio. Toßsg Kai avvéxeieg (Athens: Kastaniotis, 2003).

See Spyros Linardatos, H e^cozepiKTi koXizikt] zr g 4 Avyoiiazov (Athens: Diá­logos, 1975); idem, O Icoávvrjg Meza^ág Kai oi MeyaXeg Avvaßeig 1936-40 (Athens: Proskinio, 1993).

See Emmanouil Zacharioudakis, Die deutsch-griechischen Beziehungen 1933-1941. Interessengegensätze an der Peripherie Europas (Husum: Matthiesen, 2001); Annivas VeUiadis, Meza^ág - XizXsp. EXXrjvoyepnaviKeg axéaeig <7zri ßeza^iKi] öiKzazopia 1936-1941 (Athens: Enalios, 2003); Papanastasiou, I)ie Metaxas-Diktatur, passim.

See John S. Koliopoulos, Greece and the British Connection 1935-1941 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977); Ilias Iliopoulos, Metaxas als Realist. Griechische Eindämmungsstrategie und britisches Appeasement’ (München: Hieronymus, 2001).

On the homonymous review, see Georgios Kokkinos, H (pamÇovaa lôeoXoyia azrjv EXXáSa. H nspínzcoari zov nepioSiKov ‘Néov K pázog’ (1937-194 1) (Athens: Papazisis, n.d.).

Vatikiotis, Popular Autocracy, p. 205.

292 VASILIOS N. MAKRIDES

See Constantine Sarandis, “The Ideology and Character of the Metaxas Regime,” in Robin Higham and Thanos Veremis, eds.. Aspects o f Greece 1936-40: The Metaxas Dic­tatorship (Athens: Eliamep - Vryonis Center, 1993), pp. 147-177, here pp. 159-160.

Cited in V a t i k i o t i s , p . 187.See Kofas, Authoritarianism in Greece, p. 86.

religion. It is however obvious, that, though highly regarded, religion was placed on a scale of priorities in which the state and the nation came first.^ It was clearly a case of the political instrumentalization of religion in order to achieve various goals.

Positive references to religion abound in Metaxas’ texts. To cite just one example, on 19 October 1939 he gave a speech to parents and teachers on the significance of the family. He pointed out that the majority of Greeks were Orthodox and that the Church emphasized the sacraments of marriage and baptism, thus presenting the family as the basic unit of Greek society. He also criticized the separation between church and state in the West and the social marginalisation of the church by virtue of its exclusion from the education system. The Greek situation, however, was for Metaxas quite different.

Here in Greece, Church and Nation constitute one whole. The Greek Nation and the Greek church share the same history since the rise of Christianity. Thus the State in Greece never dared seek anti-religious aims: even the parliament of 1927, when and where there was such an inclination, did not dare undermine the special position of the Ortho­dox Church. So that one of the conditions that gave rise to the 4th of August Regime was the period of irréligion preceding it. But now Family, Nation and Church are the new pillars of the Greek society, nation and the state. State and Church work each in its own way towards the same national goals.^^

Given the fact that the state acquired a central role in all aspects of Greek life during this regime. Orthodoxy had to play a leading role by supporting the state-directed ideology of national cohesion and soli­darity. Educators thus had no right to remain neutral and indifferent vis-à-vis religion or to claim that rehgion is of no interest whatsoever. On the contrary, they were obliged to indoctrinate young people by instilling in them the sound principles of religiosity.^^ The connection between Orthodoxy and important events in Greek history was also especially emphasized. The catalytic role of religion and specifically of Orthodox Christianity in the new social order is also apparent in many cases during the Metaxas regime: for example, within the context of

the construction and ideological underpinnings^^ of the National Youth Organization, which was once referred to by Metaxas as a “Christian organization.” ®

The enhanced role of religion should also be understood in the con­text of the anti-communist struggle during the interwar period. Greek communism gained at that time significant ground in Greek society. In the elections of January 1936 the Communist Party acquired 15 out of 300 seats in Parliament. This was an alarming signal for the opposing political forces because the impact of communist ideology was becoming stronger among the population.^^ In fact, the Metaxas regime was instituted following a period of social uprising and unrest and appeared to bring order and discipline in a tormented country. In this respect, anticommunism became a cardinal feature of this period and permeated all sectors of Greek society. This explains the numer­ous repressive measures taken by Metaxas against the communists,^^ in which a leading role was undertaken by his deputy minister for pubhc security, Konstantinos Maniadakis.^® The same was true with regard to religion and the Orthodox Church. Greek communists and other anti-religious intellectuals criticized religion in general as a serious impediment to the realization of their ideals and to socio-economic progress,^® and this triggered in turn a religiously-motivated anticom­munist critique in various Orthodox circles, which was also supported by the Metaxas regime.

Quite apart from this, it is also known that the Metaxas regime con­trolled academic life: it helped some of its sympathizers to be elected in professorial chairs, and these scholars later supported the regime

LEONIDAS PHILIPPIDIS AND THE HISTORY OF RELIGIONS 2 9 3

For details see Eleni Machaira, H veoXaia zrjg 4' A vyo va m v (löTopiKO Apxeio EA,A.riviKiiq NeoA-aiaq, 13) (Athens: Geniki Grammateia Neas Genias, 1987), pp. 50-65.

Sarandis, “The Id eo lo^ and Character o f the Metaxas Regime,” p. 160.See Kofas, Authoritarianism in Greece, pp. 31-52; Papanastasiou, Die Metaxas-Diktatur,

pp. 30-31.See Kofas, Authoritarianism in Greece, pp. 129-145 and Haris Vlavianos, “The

Metaxas Dictatorship: The Greek Communist Party Under Siege,” in Robin Higham and Thanos Veremis, eds.. Aspects of Greece 1936-40: The Metaxas Dictatorship (Athens: Eliamep - Vryonis Center, 1993), pp. 193-225.

See the book entitled 0 Ko/j.fiovviuß6g c t t t j v EXXdSa, published by the EdviKrj E zaip ia (Athens 1937) with a congratulatory preface by K. Maniadakis (p. 3f.).

^ See Zoi Spanakou, “H Kpixiicn ttn; GprioKeia axo ocaiaA,iaT:iK6 Kai iiap^iatiKo TOTto tot) |J.eaoTcoA,e|a,ot),” Ta EKnaidevziKo. 41-42 (1996), pp. 158-176.

ideologically.^* Philippidis’ election as a fully tenured professor of the history of religions in 1939 should be viewed within this general context. The Divinity School of the University of Athens was strengthened with new positions during this period, a development probably not unre­lated to the long-term goals of the Metaxas regime. In the same year as Philippidis, another theologian was elected professor in the chair of practical theology, Panayiotis N. Trembelas (1886-1977).^^ He was a founding member of the brotherhood, a semi-monastic religious movement, which had initiated an important revival in Greek religious life and whose power and influence were steadily increasing. Trembelas had already been well known for his apologetic works against various anti-Christian currents including Marxism and communism. Seen from this perspective, his election was certainly not at odds with the general ideological campaign of the Metaxas regime, which was sympathetic to religion and did not support the division between religion, modernity and science (e.g., by eliminating the Darwinian theory of evolution from school curricula).“ After all, the movement and its affiliated organizations tried to keep good relations with the Metaxas regime and supported the changes it induced.

During the same year, 1939, Alexandros Tsirindanis (1903-1977) was elected professor of mercantile law at the Law School of the University of Athens. Tsirindanis had founded, in 1937, the “Christian Union of Scientists,” which had clear apologetic purposes in favor of Christianity and against its various ideological and political enemies. Since October 1937 his organization had published the scholarly and literary review AKTweg (Sun Rays), which targeted the anti-Christian views of the period and intended to show the compatibility between Christianity, science and the modern world. Tsirindanis later became well known as the initiator of the Aiaicripv^ig Trjg Xpiaziaviiajg Evcooecog Emarri/iovcov (Manifesto of the Christian Union of Scientists), published in 1946.

2 9 4 VASILIOS N. MAKRIDES

V

See Spiliotis, Transterritonalität, pp. 182-186; Papanastasiou, Die Metaxas-Diktatur, p. 45f.On Trembelas’ personality and writings, see Evangelos D. Theodorou, “riavayi-

©XTic; N. Tpejj-TieXac; (Eno'DSai, TixA-oi, 6paGiq, örifiOöieviiaTa),” E k ig x th io v ik t ] E neTV jpig trig OeoXoyiKTiq Uavemcirrißiov Adr]va)v 17 (1971), - %d'.

See Hering, “Aspekte der Kulturpolitik des Metaxas-Regimes”, 306-307. See also the book by Dimitrios I. Magkriotis, published by the “National Youth Organization,” on the harmonious relations between faith and science {Uiarig Kai eKiax^jir], Athens: EON, 1940), in which the author extols in the preface the religious objectives o f the Metaxas re^me and draws, among other things, on the apologetic material provided by Zoi publications including Trembelas’ works.

This controversial text intended to reveal the tragic consequences of atheism and the immense potential of Christianity. Tsirindanis’ orga­nization had collaborated closely with the ^oz movement since 1937. It is certainly characteristic that most of these actions took place during the Metaxas regime, likely occurring because they fitted its ideological background and goals.^^

What is perhaps more interesting in the case of Philippidis, is that he was well acquainted with professor Nikolaos I. Louvaris (1887-1961), who, as mentioned above, supported institutionalizing the history of religions at the Divinity School. Louvaris had also been educated at the University of Leipzig (1911-1914) and kept close relations with academic circles in Germany, especially with the pedagogue Eduard Spranger (1882-1963). He was an admirer of the German spirit and of idealism and developed an acute interest in the philosophy and the psychology of religion as well as in relations between art, literature and religion.'* He was the first to teach related courses at the Divin­ity School, but his perspective on religions was not purely historical. Therefore, he was in favor of creating an independent chair of the history of religions. Louvaris was a very influential intellectual and left his imprint on his era, and his legacy was kept alive by his numerous admirers and students. Louvaris was also a close friend and collabo­rator of Metaxas and acted as his advisor in issues of education and religious affairs. During 1935-1936 he had served as General Secretary in the Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs and from 14 March to 4 August 1936 as Minister. Louvaris brought Metaxas into contact with the pedagogical ideas of Eduard Spranger, with whom he had a true and long friendship. He was certainly involved in the honorary doctorate that was awarded to Spranger by the University of Athens at that time.“® Spranger himself reported on the close relations between Louvaris and the political world of his country and considered Metaxas

LEONIDAS PHILIPPIDIS AND THE HISTORY OF RJELIGIONS 2 9 5

See Vasilios N. Makrides, “Orthodoxy in the Service o f Anticommunism: The Religious Organization Zoé during the Greek Civil War,” in: Philip Carabott and Thanasis D. Sfikas, eds., The Greek Civil War: Essays on a Conflict of Exceptionalism and Silences (London: Ashgate, 2004), pp. 159-174.

On Louvaris’ personality and his writings, see Dimitris Stathopoulos, ed., N. I. ÄovßapiQ o Ano5riiirivqg, o Mvavrig, o EKOKtriq. Aftepcojia xijnqq Kai iivqßT](; anó (píXovg, avvadéXcpovg, ¡naOriTég, erra 20 xpóvia anó rrjv CKÖrnj-ia rov (1961-1981) (Athens: Chatzinikolis, 1981). See also Markos A. Siotis, “Ao-üßapi«;, NiKÓA,ao<;,” Opr¡aKewiKq Kai HdiKq EyKVKXonaideia 8 (1966), pp. 352-357; Dimitrios Tsakonas, l5eaXiap.óg Kai Map^iaß0g gtt]v EXXáda (Athens: Kaktos, 1988), pp. 169-172.

See Spiliotis, Transterritorialität, p. 153, p. 155, and p. 266.

a highly educated individual with a rich library of German books.^^ In a letter to Louvaris (November 28, 1936) Spranger also mentioned a card in which he had expressed his thanks to Prime Minister Metaxas."^ In general, German-Greek contacts at cultural and scholarly levels were very close during the Metaxas regime and included a variety of bilateral initiatives and activities.^®

Bearing these points in mind, it is not difficult to imagine that this general climate would suit Philippidis as a young theologian with a German educational background. Philippidis always maintained close relations with the German academic world, and his voluminous corre­spondence attests to this.^° In addition, he always felt indebted towards Germany and what it had offered him, as expressed in the obituary he wrote for his mentor Hans Haas.^* Given this overall situation, we can understand Philippidis’ role in the Metaxas period in two ways.

First, the formal institutionalization of the history of religions at the University of Athens through Philippidis’ election in 1939 can be interpreted as an attempt to place emphasis on the historical study of religions from a comparative perspective in order to show religions’ valuable contributions to mankind. To study religions from a scholarly point of view could represent them as repositories of faith, tradition, customs and the idiosyncrasies of a people, resulting in an enormous cultural impact. In the end, this could show that religions have played a positive role in human history and that the ideological critique of them was unfounded and biased. On the other hand, the historical study of religions did not aim to question the superiority and truth claimed by Orthodox Christianity, but rather to uphold them. This was of paramount importance in the Greek case, in which the position of Orthodoxy remained unchallenged. It is also not coincidental that dur­ing the Metaxas period the negative attitude of the regimes in Germany and in Italy towards Christianity was criticized as potentially leading

2 9 6 VASILIOS N. MAKRIDES

See Eduard Spranger, “Gedenken an Nikolaos Louvaris,” Universitas 17 (1962), pp. 457-468, here p. 459.

Eduard Spranger, Briefe 1901-1963, ed. by H.W. Bähr {— E. Spranger, Gesammelte Schriften, VII) (Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 1978), p. 172.

For a good overview, see Papanastasiou, Die Metaxas-Diktatur, pp. 89-107. See also Johannes Irmscher, “Academic Links Between Berhn University and Fascist Greece,” Journal o f the Hellenic Diaspora 13 (1986), pp. 71-90.

See Ei<; AecoviSav Ico. OiXmmSr^v, passim.In the EKKXrioiaoTiKÖv B'qßa (Athens), 15 October 1934 (and separately: Athens

1934).

to their demise. Thus, the creation of a chair for PhiHppidis can be understood within the overall climate of the period. It was prompted by the need to fight the anti-religious campaigns of communist and other intellectuals by showing the value of religions from an Orthodox Christian point of view. The positive role ascribed to religions is evident in Philippidis’ publications during the Metaxas period, as in his two public speeches at the Literary Society “Parnassos” (in 1935 and 1936 respectively) on the relations between religion, life and death. These were published separately in 1938. Rehgions were presented as intrinsically related to all forms of individual and social life and as supporting belief in the immortality of the soul, which found its foremost articulation in Christianity in the light of Divine Revelation.^^

Second, a basic ideological element promoted by the Metaxas regime was the particular connection between Hellenism and Orthodox Chris­tianity and its relevance to the future survival and glorification of the Greek nation. Despite the fact that this regime showed a great predilec­tion for the cult of antiquity, the revival of Greek antiquity did not lead to neo-Pagan movements, as in Germany and Italy, but allowed space for the integration of the Orthodox Christian tradition. The “Third Hellenic Civilization” was not meant to increase Greece’s territory (as the irredentist “Great Idea” in earlier periods), but to revive and syn­thesize the ideals of Ancient Greece and Byzantium, simply because these two previous periods were not considered to be as perfect and as promising as the third one. Considering that Hellenism and Orthodox Christianity had historically experienced various phases of tension and conflict, the ideal of a Helleno-Christian synthesis was a common topic of state ideology, promoted systematically in various forms since the 19th century. In the Metaxas period this was connected with a demonstration of Greece’s cultural superiority as well as of its calling and quasi-messianic role in universal history. The “Greek miracle” was thus considered to be the product of both Hellenism and Orthodox Christianity in the context of Divine Providence and its worldwide advancement as a unique privilege of modern Greeks. Seen from this perspective, the scholarly study of religions could contribute signifi­cantly to this ideological aim by showing the valuable role that religions (ancient Greek and Orthodox Christian) have always played in Greek

LEONIDAS PHILIPPIDIS AND THE HISTORY OF RELIGIONS 2 9 7

See L.L Philippidis, 0pi]aK£ia Kai l cori (Athens: Pyrsos, 1938); idem, 0pr]aKeia Kai Qdvarog (Athens: Pyrsos, 1938).

L.L Philippidis, EÀ,Xàç m oxevovaa (Athens: Pyrsos, 1937). See Big AemviÖav 1(0. 0iXiKmÖT]v, p. 134.

“ Machaira, H veokaia xrjg 4 Avyovaxov, p. 52.L.L Philippidis, Q sia Tlpovoia Kai M oipa ev tjj OptjaKeia xcov apxaiw v EÀ,Xr\vcov

(Athens: Pyrsos, 1939).

•history Philippidis seems to have shared such views in his publications during the Metaxas period. In his text Believing Greece (1937),^ based on his panegyric at the Literary Society “Parnassos” on the anniversary of the Greek War of Independence (March 25, 1821), he extolled the role of the Orthodox faith and traditional Greek piety in the survival and victories of the Greek nation since antiquity His statements thus set the agenda for the future success and glorification of the Greeks.Religiosity was viewed as a perennial characteristic of the Greek people and the source of their historical survival. Philippidis also interpreted the “Greek path” as having been predetermined by a special calling and mission for the whole worid, which had to be realized some time in the future, not through the use of force, but through the worldwide dissemination of the Greek spirit. It is worth mentioning that Philippidis sent several copies of this speech to Metaxas. The latter responded on 7 May 1937 thanking him and claiming that Philippidis’ ideas were in complete congruence with those of his regime.^^ In addition, Philippidis delivered many speeches that portrayed Greek involvement and victories during the Second World War (e.g., on 15 January 1941) as supported by God and the Virgin Mary.^ Finally, in his inaugural address as a fully tenured professor in 1939, Philippidis talked about divine providence and fate in ancient Greek religion, thus presenting again emphatically ithe enormous, multi-faceted and valuable role that religion has always played in the history of the Greek people.^®

In this paper I have tried to present the beginnings of the history of religions as an academic discipline in Greece within the socio-politi­cal context of the period by relying on published sources and other related information. Undoubtedly, archival material can shed more light on still unknown aspects of these developments and on the actors involved in them. Yet, based on the above presentation, we can argue that the beginnings of the history of religions in Greece coincided with the emergence of a fascist-like regime, which enabled this disci- phne to develop within a specific frame à la grecque. The ideology and political preferences of the period undoubtedly had an impact on the institutionahzation of the history of religions within Greek academia.

¥2 9 8 VASILIOS N. MAKRIDES

i'

■i

Furthermore, Philippidis reworked some of the values promoted by the Metaxas regime in a scholarly manner in the context of a Greek history of religions, particularly insofar as they were compatible with Orthodox doctrines and orientations. This is not to say that Philippidis was completely identified with the Metaxas regime or that he adopted its ideological support as his prime objective. It simply means that Philippidis’ early academic career and ideas in the history of religions were part of this general intellectual and socio-political context and that the development of this discipline in Greece was accordingly influenced to some extent. This is not surprising, given the fact that the Metaxas regime was viewed positively by many Orthodox prelates as well as by various Orthodox circles at the time. In this respect, the Greek case, despite its idiosyncrasies, presents some analogies to the study of religions in Western Europe under the impact of National Socialist and Fascist regimes.

LEONIDAS PHILIPPIDIS AND THE HISTORY OF RELIGIONS 2 9 9

3 0 0 VASILIOS N. MAKRIDES

Alexopoulou, Maria. “Die ‘nationale Jugendorganisation’ des M etaxas-Regimes (1936-1941): Instrument der ‘Umwandlung’ Griechenlands.” Bulletin ß r Faschismus- und Weltknegsfirschung 17 (2001), pp. 36-65.

Alivizatos, Nicos C. “The Constitutional Treatment o f Religious Minorities in Greece.” In René-Jean Dupuy, ed., Mélanges en l’honneur de Nicolas Valticos: droit et justice. Paris: Pedone, 1999, pp. 629-642.

Avlami, Chrysanthi. “H xpiÎ^Tl "Tili laxopiaç aTtô toi^ç GecopîiTiKOVç xtiç 4''« AxjyoïjaTOt)” [The Use o f History by the Theoreticians of the 4th August Regime]. 'laxoip 2 (1990), pp. 121-149.

Eiq ÁEcovíSav Ico. ^iXinKÍ5r]v xaKUKÓv Ka6r\YT]xr]v xr\ç laxopiaç xcov OpriaKevßäxcov ev XT] OeoXoyiK^ ExoXij xov FlavemaxTuiiov AOrjvcav. Tiht\xikÓv acpiépmfia emxpoitriq eK iia6r\xóv xov em xr] p.exaxá^ei xov etg op.0xtp.ov KadrjynT'qv. OpiXovv xa xeipeva [A Honorary Publication Dedicated to Leonidas lo. Philippidis, Ordinary Professor of the History of Religions at the Divinity School o f the University of Athens, for Becoming an Emeritus Professor, edited by a Committee o f his Students. The Texts Speak for Themselves]. Athens 1970.

Fleischer, Hagen and Svoronos, Nicos, eds. UpaKXiKá A 'ÂieOvovçIvveöp iov Ivyxpovr]ç loxopiaç H EXXàôa 1936-1944: ÂiKxaxopia - Kaxoxrj - Avxiaxacyrj [Proceedings of the First International Congress o f M odem History. Greece 1936-1944: Dicta­torship - Occupation - Resistance]. Athens: Morfotiko Institouto ATE, 1989, 2nd ed., 1990.

Fleischer, Hagen, ed. H EXXàôa ’3 6 - ’49. Akó xvf AiKxaxopia axov EpcpvXio. Topéç Kai avvéxeieç [Greece 1936-1949. From Dictatorship to Civil War. Ruptures and Continuities]. Athens: Kastaniotis, 2003.

Hering, Gunnar. “Rache am Vaterland? Anmerkungen zur Persönlichkeit des loannis Metaxas.” In idem. Nostos. Gesammelte Schriften zur südosteuropäischen Geschichte, ed. by Maria A. Stassinopoulou, Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang, 1995, pp. 131-148.

-------. “Aspekte der Kulturpolitik des Metaxas-Regimes (1936-1940).” In ReinhardLauer and Peter Schreiner, eds. Die Kultur Griechenlands in Mittelalter und Neuzeit (Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Philologisch-histo­rische Klasse, Dritte Folge, Nr. 212), Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1996, pp. 285-321.

Higham, Robin and Thanos Veremis, eds. Aspects of Greece 1936-40: The Metaxas Dic­tatorship. Athens: Eliamep - Vryonis Center, 1993.

Iliopoulos, Ilias. Metaxas als Realist Griechische Eindämmungsstrategie und britisches Appease­ment.’ IsAnnchen: TÄieronymns, 2QQI.

Irmscher, Johannes. “Academic Links Between Berlin University and Fascist Greece.” Journal of the Hellenic Diaspora 13 (1986), pp. 71-90.

Joachim , Joachim G. loannis Metaxas: The Formative Years 1 8 7 1 -1 9 2 2 (Peleus 5). Mannheim - Möhnesee: Bibliopolis, 2000.

Karayiannis, Yiorgos. ExKXrjaía Kai Kpáxog 1833-1997. IcrxopiKq emaKonrjcrri xcov axéaeáv xovç [Church and State 1833-1997. A Historical Review of Their Rela­tions]. Athens: To Pontiki, 1997.

Kofas, Jon V Authoritarianism in Greece: The Metaxas Regime (East European Monographs 133). Boulder/New York: Columbia University Press, 1983.

Kokkinos, Georgios. H cpaai^ovaa lôeoXoyia axrjvEXXáSa HnepÍKXOxrr] xov nepioôiKOv ‘Néov Kpáxog’ (1937-1941) [The Fascistoid Ideology in Greece. The Case of the

Journal ‘Neon Kratos’ (1937—1941)]. Athens: Papazisis, n.d.Koliopoulos, John S. Greece and the British Connection 1935-1941. Oxford: Oxford Uni­

versity Press, 1977.

- I

Linardatos, Spyros. H e^mepiicq noXniKTj Trjg A vyovarov p?he Foreign Policy of the 4th August Regime]. Athens: Diálogos, 1975.

-------. O Icoávvriq Mexa^ág Kai oi MeyáXeg Avvájxeig 1936-40 [loannis Metaxas andthe Great Powers 1936-1940]. Athens: Proskinio, 1993.

Machaira, Eleni. H veoXaia vqg 4’' A vyovoxov [The Youth of the 4th August Regime] (iGxopiKo Apxeto EXXTiviKiiq N8oA,aia<;, 13). Athens: Geniki Grammateia Neas Genias, 1987.

Magkriotis, Dimitrios L Tliaxig Kai £Kiaxr\iir¡ [Faith and Science]. Athens: EON, 1940.

Makrides, Vasilios N. “Orthodoxy in the Service of Anticommunism: The Religious Organization Zoé during the Greek Givi! War.” In Ph. Carabott and Th. D. Sfikas, eds. The Greek Civil War: Essays on a Conflict of Exceptionalism and Silences. London: Ashgate, 2004, pp. 159-174.

Panotis, Aristeidis. “OiXiicTiiSiii;, AecovíSaq” [Philippidis, Leonidas]. 0pr]OK£vxiKr} Kai HBiKq EyKVKÄOTcaiSsia 11 (1967), pp. 1093-1096.

Papanastasiou, Nikolaos, Die Metaxas-Diktatur und das nationalsozialistische Deutschland 1936-1941, diss. phil. Augsburg 2000.

Philippidis, Leonidas, J. Die ‘Goldene Regel’ religionsgeschichtlich untersucht, Inaugural- Dissertation zur Erlangung der Doktorwürde der Hohen Philosophischen Fakultät der Universität Leipzig. Leipzig: Adolf Klein, 1929.

------- . H nepi ÖXiy/ecog Kai Xvxpóascog decopia xrjg Be5ávxa xrjg 5oy¡xaxiKr¡g xov IvSikovBpaxßavioiiov [The Vedanta-Theory of Brahmanism About Sorrow and Redemp­tion]. Athens: Pyrsos, 1934.

-------. H laxopia xav Opr¡aKeviiáxcov og emoxruvr] [The History o f Religions as aScholarly Discipline]. Athens: Pyrsos, 1935.

-------. EXXág Kiaxevovoa [Believing Greece]. Athens: Pyrsos, 1937.-------. H laxopia xcov 0pr]aK£Vfiáxo}v Kad’ eavxr\v Kai ev xr] XpiaxiaviKX] OeoXoyia

[The History o f Religions in Itself and Within Christian Theology]. Athens: Pyrsos, 1938.

-------. Das Liebesprinzip im Buddhismus und im Christentum. Athen: Pyrsos, 1938.-------. ©prjaKeia Kai l oyf] [Religion and Life]. Athens: Pyrsos, 1938;-------. 0pr]aKeia Kai Oavaxog [Religion and Death]. Athens: Pyrsos, 1938.-------. Oeia npóvo ia Kai M oipa ev xr¡ 9pr]aKeia xa>v apxcácov EXXr]vcov [Divine Provi­

dence and Fate in the Religion of the Ancient Greeks]. Athen: Pyrsos, 1939.------- . AvxoßioypacpiKov aj]jieicoiia (1898-1963) Kai Ttvev/iaxiKq Kpoacpopá (1913-1963)

[Autobiographical Note (1898-1963) and Intellectual Contribution (1913-1963)]. Athens: G.D. Kypraios, 1963.

------- . Das Unwiderlegliche der Forschungsergebnisse des verewigten Prof Dr. Rev. P WilhelmSchmidt. Athen 1968.

Richter, Heinz A. Griechenland zwischen Revolution und Konterrevolution (1936-1946). Frank­furt a.M.: Europäische Verlagsanstalt, 1973.

Rudolph, Kurt. lÁe Religionsgeschichte an der Ldpziger Universität und die Entwicklung der Religionswissenschafi (Sitzungsberichte der Sächsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig, Philologisch-historische Klasse, Bd. 107, Heft 1). BerUn: Akademie- Verlag, 1962.

Sarandis, Constantine. “The Ideology and Character o f the Metaxas Regime.” In R. Higham and Th. Veremis, eds., Aspects of Greece 1936-40: The Metaxas Dictatorship. Athens: Eliamep - Vryonis Center, 1993, pp. 147-177.

Siotis, Markos A. “AoijßapK;, NiKÓA,ao<;” [Louvaris, Nikolaos]. &pr]aKevxiKr¡ Kai HOikt] EyKVKXonaiSeia 8 (1966), pp. 352-357.

Spanakou, Zoi. “H Kpixucii xr|(; GpriGKeiaq axo aooiaXiaxiKO Kai jiap^iaxiKO x-óno x o d |j.eG07t;0A,é|J.0D” [The Critique of Religion in the Socialist and Marxist Press of the Interwar Period]. Ta EKKaidevxiKá 41-42 (1996), pp. 158-176.

LEONIDAS PHILIPPIDIS AND THE HISTORY OF RELIGIONS 3 0 1

Spiliotis, Susanne-Sophia. “Die Metaxas-Diktatur in Griechenland 1936-1941 - ein faschistoides Regime?.” In Erwin Oberländer, ed., Autoritäre Regime in Ostmittel- und Südosteuropa 1919-1944. Paderborn: Schöningh, 2001, pp. 403-430.

Spranger, Eduard. “Gedenken an Nikolaos Louvaris.” Universitas 17 (1962), pp. 457-468.

Tsakonas, Dimitrios. WeaXiofiög Kai Map^iufiog azrjv EXXdöa [Idealism and Marxism in Greece]. Athens: Kaktos, 1988.

Vatikiotis, Panayiotis J. Popular Autocracy in Greece 1936-41. A Political Biography of General loannis Metaxas. London: Frank Cass, 1998.

Velliadis, Annivas. M eta^dg - XizXep. EXXr]voY£pßaviK£g azeaeig arrj iiexa^iKT] diKxa- TO pia 1936-1941 [Metaxas - Hitler. Greek-German Relations During the Metaxas Dictatorship 1936-1941]. Athens: Enalios, 2003.

Vlavianos, Haris. “The Metaxas Dictatorship: The Greek Communist Party Under Siege.” In R. Higham and Th. Veremis, tds.. Aspects of Greece 1936-40: The Metaxas Dictatorship. Athens: Eliamep - Vryonis Center, 1993, pp. 193-225.

Yannoulatos, Anastasios. “Aecoviöai; Ico. OiXiTtJiiöri«;, o 8Jti0 TTi|a.cov, o ocvGpcojioq” [Leoni­das lo. Philippidis, the Scholar, the Man], EmciT:r)}xoviKr} Enexrjpig xrjg OeoXoyiKqg ExoX'qg navemaxr]iiiov Adrjvav 21 (1974), pp. la' - ve'.

Zacharioudakis, Emmanouil. Die deutsch-griechischen Beziehungen 1933-1941. Interessenge­gensätze an der Peripherie Europas. Husum: Matthiesen, 2001.

3 0 2 VASILIOS N. MAKRIDES