Evagrius Ponticus—his very name evokes strangeness and obscurity. But since the beginning of the twentieth century, few nearly-forgotten ancient Christian writers have been as irreversibly rescued from oblivion as the fourth-century Evagrius of Pontus. There is a little something for everybody in him: enough testimonial evidence to construct a decent biography; close association with ecclesiastical greats of his era such as Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nazianzus, Melania the Elder, Rufinus, and the monastic pioneers of the deserts in Egypt, in particular the two Macarii and the Tall Brothers; a literary corpus whose subjects range from introductions to the ascetic life to speculative treatises that map the mind's long journey to God and probe the deep mysteries of the cosmos, human nature, Christ, and the Trinity; a literary corpus mostly in the recondite genre of kephalaia (chapters) that is only partially extant in its original Greek, but more fully in Syriac, Armenian, Coptic, Latin, Arabic, Ethiopic, Georgian, and Sogdian translations; a controversial legacy as a so-called “Origenist” that eventually led to his condemnation by an ecumenical council; and finally, a variegated reception by Christians in different ecclesial communities, from antiquity until the present day. Given these riches, studies of Evagrius now abound, a significant portion of his corpus has been translated into English and other modern languages, and there is even a superb online “Guide to Evagrius Ponticus” (http://evagriusponticus.net/) which includes an exhaustive bibliography of the aforementioned studies and translations regularly updated by one of the volume's editors, Joel Kalvesmaki.

Evagrius resists easy categorization. A good portion of scholarship on Evagrius since the early twentieth century has been preoccupied with his “core identity”—that central principle that integrates his seemingly divergent concerns. Some scholars see Evagrius as primarily a speculative theologian who daringly pushed “Origenism” to the limit and breached the boundaries of orthodoxy; others identify him principally as a monk who channeled and systematized the very best of the spiritual traditions of the fourth-century desert fathers. But Evagrius is really both—and far more. In the introduction, which nicely outlines this dichotomy in Evagrian studies, the editors express their hope that their volume shifts the focus away from such polarizing discussions of Evagrius “toward a richer appreciation of the influence, despite his condemnation and misinterpretation, of Evagrius the Christian thinker” (3).

One could divide up the volume into two parts à la the title: studies of Evagrius himself and of his legacy. There are six in the first part. B. Daley investigates the Cappadocians' theological influence on Evagrius. The evidence for concrete borrowings is meager, and the similarities are very general; I think the differences Daley identified are more illuminating. K. Corrigan explores Evagrius's claim that thoughts can “cut,” explicating the idea by reference to ancient philosophical writings; one wonders if Evagrius could have possibly had such a detailed knowledge of the texts adduced by Corrigan, but his reconstruction is highly suggestive. L. Dysinger persuasively demonstrates how Evagrius conceived biblical interpretation and the discernment of thoughts as two interrelated disciplines for spiritual advancement through a section-by-section study of Letter 25. R. Young unpacks Evagrius's theory of letters as works of ascetic discipline in which he conveyed friendship, provided spiritual guidance, revealed his own struggles, and tested out ideas, and thereby she sheds light on a very understudied part of Evagrius's corpus. The next two essays seek to understand Evagrius himself by an analysis of his reception. In what is perhaps the most provocative essay in the volume, B. Stefaniw argues that the controversy roused by Evagrius in his own day and later, particularly his condemnation in 553, might be better explained as a response to his claims of authority, which rivaled those of the bishops, rather than as a targeting of his “Origenism.” While her depiction of Evagrius's own sense of authority might be too absolute and unnuanced, Stefaniw's study makes a significant contribution to our understanding of Evagrius as a teacher—perhaps the best way forward out of the polarized views of Evagrius in prior scholarship. J. Konstantinovsky attempts to elucidate Evagrius by reference to Maximus the Confessor on the subject of self-realization through praxis and contemplation; I found this methodologically problematic as Maximus is treated as a virtual replica of Evagrius. Even still, she demonstrates the deep affinities between the two.

The remaining six studies explore Evagrius's legacy. D. Michelson fascinatingly demonstrates that the reception of Evagrius was not monolithic in the sixth-century Syriac world, showing how Philoxenus of Mabbug deployed the Evagrian system of asceticism and contemplation against the sort of theological speculation often associated with “Origenists” like Evagrius. C. Stewart provides an informative survey of the reception of Evagrius's writings in the Latin and Syriac traditions, identifying the different times and circumstances of the translations into these languages as the most salient factor for the contrasting ways in which his writings were received in these traditions. J. Kalvesmaki argues that Evagrius created and popularized the genre of kephalaia (chapters) in the Byzantine world and charts its usage from the fourth to the fifteenth centuries, thereby showing that Evagrius exercised influence in terms of not only his ideas but also literary technique. The final three studies investigate little-studied aspects of the reception of Evagrius: D. Krausmüller in late sixth- and seventh-century Byzantium, particularly in the ongoing debates between Origenists and anti-Origenists as evidenced in the writings of Pamphilus and Leontius of Jerusalem and Maximus (though this essay seems more about these later figures than Evagrius himself); A. Watson in the Church of the East in Persia and Central Asia; and G. Collins in late Byzantine monasticism. In the last two cases, the reception is primarily a matter of Evagrian terminology and his schema of spiritual advancement; excepting a few explicit mentions of Evagrius, one wonders if in these cases there was much direct influence through engagement with the writings of Evagrius himself and not just indirect influence through a tradition in which Evagrius was ubiquitous. Collins helpfully stresses that the Byzantine monastic tradition was actually a synthesis of Evagrian and Macarian perspectives.

From each of these twelve essays, I benefitted in some way; collectively, they cover an astounding range of Evagrian material. There is no real clunker in the set. On the whole, then, this volume succeeds admirably in its goal of deepening our appreciation of Evagrius and his influence as a Christian thinker.