Repertorio bibliografico Adamantius 17

Transcript

3. Repertorio bibliografico
3.1. Pubblicazioni recenti su
Origene e la tradizione alessandrina
a cura di
Lorenzo Perrone
con la collaborazione di
Roberto Alciati (Torino), Marie-Odile Boulnois (Paris),
Francesca Calabi (Pavia), Alberto Camplani (Roma),
Mariachiara Giorda (Torino), Attila Jakab (Budapest), Stefano Tampellini (Bologna),
Andrea Villani (Göttingen), Claudio Zamagni (Lausanne)
[Indice: 0. Bibliografie, repertori e rassegne; profili di studiosi; 1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere generale;
2. Ellenismo e cultura alessandrina; 3. Giudaismo ellenistico; 4. LXX; 5. Aristobulo; 6. Lettera di Aristea; 7.
Filone Alessandrino (1. Bibliografie, rassegne, repertori; 2. Edizioni e traduzioni; 3. Miscellanee e raccolte; 4.
Studi); 8. Pseudo-Filone; 9. Flavio Giuseppe (1. Bibliografie, rassegne, repertori; 2. Edizioni e traduzioni; 3.
Miscellanee e raccolte; 4. Studi); 10. Cristianesimo alessandrino ed ambiente egiziano (1. Il contesto
religioso egiziano; 2. Il periodo delle origini; 3. Gnosticismo, ermetismo e manicheismo; 4. La chiesa
alessandrina: istituzioni, dottrine, riti, personaggi e episodi storici; 5. Il monachesimo); 11. Clemente
Alessandrino; 12. Origene (1. Bibliografie, rassegne, repertori; 2. Edizioni e traduzioni; 3. Miscellanee e
raccolte; 4. Studi); 13. L’origenismo e la fortuna di Origene; 14. Dionigi Alessandrino; 15. Pierio di
Alessandria; 16. Pietro di Alessandria; 17. Alessandro di Alessandria; 18. Ario; 19. Eusebio di Cesarea; 20.
Atanasio; 21. I Padri Cappadoci (1. Basilio di Cesarea; 2. Gregorio di Nazianzo; 3. Gregorio di Nissa); 22.
Ambrogio di Milano; 23. Didimo il Cieco; 24. Evagrio; 25. Rufino di Aquileia; 26. Teofilo di Alessandria; 27.
Sinesio di Cirene; 28. Gerolamo; 29. Agostino; 30. Isidoro di Pelusio; 31. Cirillo Alessandrino; 32. Nonno di
Panopoli; 33. Pseudo-Dionigi Areopagita; 34. Cosma Indicopleuste; 35. Giovanni Filopono; 36. Massimo il
Confessore]*.
0. Bibliografie, repertori e rassegne; profili di studiosi
ALCIATI R., Quarant’anni di studi cassianei (1968-2008), Rivista di storia del cristianesimo 7 (2010) 229-248.
[1. Owen Chadwick, 1968: «a seminal book». 2. Philip Rousseau, 1978-2008: l’holy man, il contesto
gallico e le fonti egiziane. 3. Adalbert de Vogüé, Columba Stewart e Mark Sheridan, 1961-2007: la
storiografia benedettina. 4. Augustine Casiday, 2001-2008: teologia vs storia. 5. Conrad Leyser,
Steven Driver e Gaëlle Jeanmart, 1994-2007: la retorica ascetica. 6. Richard Goodrich, 2007: i
Realien. 7. Alcuni problemi. – Abstract: «A turning point in the research history about Cassian is
undoubtedly the years 2007-2008. The publication of two books by R. Goodrich and A. Casiday
close a forty years of studies about this pivotal figure of the history of ancient monasticism. From
Chadwick’s seminal book published in 1968, to the more recent Rousseau’s, Leyser’s and
Benedictine’s (from A. de Vogüé to M. Sheridan) researches, aim of this essay is to show some
different historiographical tendencies between history and theology» (p. 247)].
* Per le abbreviazioni si fa in genere riferimento a: Theologische Realenzyklopädie. Abkürzungsverzeichnis. 2. über. u. erw.
Aufl., zusammengestellt von S.M. SCHWERTNER, de Gruyter, Berlin-New York 1994. I titoli di opere collettive o di
raccolte vengono riportati per esteso nella sezione 1., o in relazione agli autori cui più direttamente si riferiscono e in questo
caso sono facilmente ricavabili dal contesto immediato. Si riportano le rubriche anche quando mancano le relative
indicazioni bibliografiche per illustrare l’articolazione tendenziale del repertorio nel suo complesso. Autosegnalazioni e
ogni altra forma di aiuto sono benvenute. Ringraziamo Eberhard Bons (Faculté de Théologie Catholique, Université Marc
Bloch, Strasbourg) per la collaborazione prestata alla redazione di questo numero [NdR].
364
REPERTORIO BIBLIOGRAFICO
BROADHEAD E.K., Jewish Ways of Following Jesus. Redrawing the Religious Map of Antiquity → 1. Miscellanee
e studi di carattere generale
[Ch. 1. A history of research: 1. Beginnings, 6-7. 2. Ferdinand Christian Baur, 7-11; 3. Support for
Baur’s position, 11-15 (3.1. Albert Schwegler, 12-13; 3.2. Karl Köstlin, Adolf Hilgenfeld, 13-14; 3.3. Oscar
Cullmann, 14; 3.4. Hans-Joachim Schoeps, 14-15); 4. Reactions to Baur’s position, 16-20 (4.1.
Gotthard Victor Lechler, 16; 4.2. Albrecht Ritschl, 16-17; 4.3. Adolf von Harnack, 18; 4.4. Adolf
Schlatter, 19; 4.5. Jean Daniélou, 19-20); 5. A sample of recent scholarship on Jewish Christianity,
20-25; 6. Critical bias and critical balance, 25-26; 7. Overview and analysis, 26-27].
Cristianesimo nella storia. Index 1980-2009. Articles, Notes, Reviews, Abstracts, Topics, ed. by A. CADILI,
Centro Editoriale Dehoniano, Bologna 2010, pp. 353.
[G. ALBERIGO, Premessa al primo numero, 5-6; G. RUGGIERI, Trent’anni dopo, 7. 1. Articoli e note, 943. 2. Opere recensite, 44-116. 3. Abstracts degli articoli e delle note, 117-337. 4. Argomenti, 338-353. – Il
repertorio per il trentennale della rivista ignora inspiegabilmente il precedente volume di indici
curato, in maniera esemplare, da Daniele Menozzi: Cristianesimo nella storia. Indici generali, I
(1980)-XII (1991), Edizioni Dehoniane Bologna, Bologna 1993, pp. 178. La ricchezza di quello
strumento, se si esclude adesso l’apporto degli abstracts in inglese, rimane insuperata, come appare
dal suo indice: Presentazione, 3. D. MENOZZI, Cristianesimo nella storia (1980-1991), 5-24. Indici
generali I (1980)-XII (1991): 1. Articoli, 25-31. Note, 31-32. 3. Principali temi degli articoli e delle note,
32-35. 4. Recensioni, 35-51. 5. Recensori, 52-53. 6. Nomi, 53-152; 7. Fonti: 7.1. Antico Testamento, 152-158;
7.2. Nuovo Testamento, 158-168; 7.3. Concili e sinodi, 168-170; 7.4. Magistero pontificio e atti delle
Congregazioni, 170-171; 7.5. Diritto canonico, 171-172; 7.6. Opere anonime, 172-175; 7.7. Manoscritti,
175-178. Ignorare la propria storia, quando si fornisce uno strumento come gli indici generali,
programmaticamente destinato a ricostruirla, è quantomeno paradossale... (L.P.)].
Friedrich Loofs in Halle, hrsg. von J. U LRICH (Arbeiten zur Kirchengeschichte, 114), De Gruyter, Berlin –
New York 2010, pp. X+349.
[Vorwort, V-VII. H.C. BRENNECKE, Friedrich Loofs. Ein protestantischer Dogmengeschichtler, 1-20.
E. MÜHLENBERG, Friedrich Loofs und die Dogmengeschichte, 21-37. U. HEIL, Friedrich Loofs und die
Realencyklopädie für protestantische Theologie und Kirche, 39-61. C.-D. OSTHÖVENER, Historismus und
Tradition. Zur Gelehrtenfreundschaft zwischen Friedrich Loofs und Adolf von Harnack, 63-119.
W. FLÜGEL, Friedrich Loofs, Jubilar, Jubiläum und Jubiläumsforscher, 121-144. C. MUTH, Der Geist der
Zeiten und das Evangelium der Reformation. Friedrich Loofs’ Beitrag zur protestantischen
Erinnerungskultur, 145-184. H. GOLTZ, Der Ararat kam zu Loofs. Dokumente und Reflexionen, 185-234.
H.R. GAZER, Friedrich Loofs und das notwendige Liebeswerk, 235-247. J. ULRICH, Friedrich Loofs als
Prediger, 249-294. M. BARTHELS†, Soziale Sorge von Mensch zu Mensch. Friedrich Loofs und die
Armenpflege in Halle in wilhelminischer Zeit, 295-343. Autorenverzeichnis, 345-346. Zeitgenossen von
Friedrich Loofs, 347-349].
‘In Search of Truth’: Augustine, Manichaeism and other Gnosticim. Studies for Johannes van Oort at Sixty →
1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere generale
[Bibliography Johannes van Oort, XI-XXXV (Editorial responsibilities, Memberships, Publications
2010-1982, Doctoral dissertations)].
LOUBET M.–PRALON D., Préface et bibliographie de Gilles Dorival, in EUKARPA (→ 1. Miscellanee e studi di
carattere generale), 7-19.
[La bibliografia comprende 180 titoli, fra lavori pubblicati e in corso di stampa. Essa è distribuita in:
Ouvrages (1-17); Collaboration à des ouvrages (18-21); Articles (22-148); À paraître (149-179); DVD
(180)].
POIRIER P.-H., Quelques perspectives récentes sur l’Évangile selon Thomas, LTP 66 (2010) 599-615.
365
ADAMANTIUS 17 (2011)
Studi su Michele Pellegrino nel ventennale della morte, a cura di C. MAZZUCCO (Università degli Studi di
Torino. Pubblicazioni del Dipartimento di Filologia Linguistica e Tradizione Classica «Augusto Rostagni»,
29), Pàtron Editore, Bologna 2010, pp. 191.
[Presentazione, 7-8. L.F. PIZZOLATO, Michele Pellegrino e Giuseppe Lazzati tra impegno culturale e
sollecitudine ecclesiale, 9-35. E. CORSINI, Michele Pellegrino e la letteratura cristiana antica, 37-42.
E. GALLICET, Pellegrino e la critica testuale, 43-51. G. CRACCO, Su alcune inedite conferenze patristiche
di Pellegrino, 53-61. A. PAROLA, Inediti giovanili di Pellegrino, 63-74. F. TRISOGLIO, Michele Pellegrino
dinanzi a sant’Ambrogio, 75-83. E. BONA, Pellegrino e la traduzione, 85-98. C. MAZZUCCO, Pellegrino
recensore, 99-124. C. MAZZUCCO, I Padri della Chiesa negli scritti pastorali di Michele Pellegrino, 125-182.
Indice dei nomi antichi e medioevali, 183-185; Indice dei nomi moderni, 187-191].
VILLADSEN H., Nordisk Patristik 2005-2008 [Nordic Patristic Literature 2005-2008], Meddelanden från
Collegium Patristicum Lundense 25 (2010) 19-47.
Von Arius zum Athanasianum. Studien zur Edition der «Athanasius Werke» → 20. Atanasio
Von Homer bis Landino. Beiträge zur Antike und Spätantike sowie zu deren Rezeptions- und
Wirkungsgeschichte. Festgabe für Antonie Wlosok zum 80. Geburtstag (→ 1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere
generale)
[Verzeichnis der Schriften von Antonie Wlosok, 489-509].
ADLER W., The Chronographiae of Julius Africanus and its Jewish Antecedents → 3. Giudaismo ellenistico
BARBÀRA M.A., L’esegesi del Cantico dei cantici 4,13-14 nella letteratura patristica greca del IV e V secolo, in Il
simbolismo degli elementi della natura nell’immaginario cristiano. Atti dell’Accademia Peloritana dei
Pericolanti. Classe di Lettere, Filosofia e Belle Arti, Supplemento (vol. 85 – 2009), a cura di M.A. BARBÀRA,
Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane, Napoli 2010, 157-171.
BASTIT-KALINOWSKA A. – COSTA J., L’interprétation d’Isaïe 6,3 et son usage liturgique dans le judaïsme et le
christianisme anciens, RHE 105 (2010) 577-631.
[Introduction générale. L’interprétation d’Is 6,3 et la question de la qedusha dans le corpus
rabbinique ancien (1er -9e s.): Aspects liturgiques; Aspects midrashiques; Aspects mystiques.
L’interprétation d’Is 6,3 et la question du sanctus dans le corpus chrétien ancien (1er-8e s.): Insertion
liturgique; L’interprétation théologique de la vision d’Isaïe; Le trisagion mystique et la littérature des
visions; Conclusion. Conclusion générale: Aspects liturgiques; Aspects exégétiques; Aspects
mystiques. – Summary: «This article focuses on liturgical practices and the mystical exegesis of
Isaiah 6:3, both in the mainly rabbinic Jewish corpus, as well as in the former Christian corpus. The
Kedushah together with the Sanctus have an uncertain and difficult to determine origin, and it is
far from clear whether the former is the direct source of the latter. On the question of the
relationship between heavenly liturgy and earthly liturgy, Christian sources would be rather close
to the Qumran texts and, to a lesser extent, the mystical literature of Hekhalot. Among the
Fathers, liturgy and exegesis are characterized by a strong interaction or an amalgamation, in
contrast to the rabbinic corpus, where the interpretation of Is 6:3 is practically never connected
with the ritual of the Kedushah in a synagogue. The rabbinic concept of divine body and the
Christian incarnation are both associated with Is 6:3» (p. 631)].
BOULNOIS M.-O., Le Christ mange-t-il comme les anges? Traces d’exégèse juives dans la christologie docète, in
EUKARPA, 305-322.
[Les anges mangent-ils réellement ou font-ils semblant?: Le «pain des anges» (Ps 77, 25); Les anges
de Mambré ont-ils vraiment mangé? L’incarnation est-elle comparable à la théophanie de
Mambré?: L’exégèse typologique; Argument anti-docète: le Christ a mangé; Argument docète: le
Christ a mangé en apparence. Réfutation de cet argument docète: Tertullien, Adamantius,
366
Augustin, Eutherios. Conclusion. – «L’importance accordée par des auteurs chrétiens comme
Ignace d’Antioche, Origène ou Cyrille de Jérusalem au fait que le Christ a vraiment mangé
s’explique par leur volonté de défendre la réalité de sa corporéité contre les courants docètes qui
professaient que la chair du Christ était illusoire ou d’origine astrale. Or, d’après de nombreux
auteurs (Éphrem, Théodore de Mopsueste, Théodoret, Augustin et Eutherios), mais aussi selon le
témoignage direct du manichéen Faustus, cette position docète s’appuyait sur l’assimilation de
l’incarnation aux manifestations angéliques, singulièrement à la théophanie de Mambré. Puisque
l’exégèse majoritaire, d’origine juive, considérait que les anges avaient fait semblant de manger, ce
précédent pouvait être invoqué pour prouver que le Christ avait lui aussi fait semblant, étant
donné que les apparitions vétérotestamentaires étaient considérées comme des préfigurations de
l’incarnation, et que le Verbe préexistant était l’un des trois visiteurs d’Abraham» (p. 321)].
BROADHEAD E.K., Jewish Ways of Following Jesus. Redrawing the Religious Map of Antiquity (WUNT, 266),
Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2010, pp. XIX+440.
[Prologue, IX-X. Introduction, 1-3. Part One. Parameters for a quest for Jewish Christianity: Ch. 1. A
history of research, 6-27; Ch. 2. Toward a definition of Jewish Christianity, 28-58; Ch. 3. Strategies in
a quest for Jewish Christianity, 59-60. Part Two. Points of origin: Ch. 4. Jesus the Jew, 62-79; Ch. 5.
The earliest communities of Jesus’ followers, 80-127; Ch. 6. The earliest Christian writings, 128-160.
Part Three. Patristic representations of Jewish Christianity: Ch. 7. Nazarenes, 163-187; Ch. 8.
Ebionites, 188-212; Ch. 9. Elkesaites, Cerinthians, Symmachians, 213-234; Ch. 10. Judaizers, 235-242;
Ch. 11. Retrospective patristic representation of Jewish Christianity, 243-251. Part Four. Other
evidence for Jewish Christianity: Ch. 12. Texts ascribed to Jewish Christians, 254-283; Ch. 13.
Rabbinic evidence for Jewish Christianity, 284-300; Ch. 14. Archaeological evidence for Jewish
Christianity, 301-351. Part Five. The significance of Jewish Christianity for contemporary
Scholarship: Ch. 15. The ‘Parting of the ways’ and the history of primitive Christianity, 354-374; Ch.
16. Conclusions, 375-391. Epilogue, 393. List of figures, 395-397; Bibliography, 399-410; Ancient texts
index, 411-429; Author index, 431-433; Subjects, 435-440].
The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity, edited by L.P. GERSON, I-II, Cambridge University
Press, Cambrige 2010, pp. XVI+581, VI+583-1284 (=The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity).
[Vol. I: List of contributors, IX-XI; List of maps, XIII-XVI. L.P. GERSON, General Introduction, 110. I. Philosophy in the later Roman Empire: Introduction to Part I, 11-12; 1. E. DEPALMA DIGESER,
The late Roman Empire from the Antonines to Constantine, 13-24; 2. G. BETEGH, The transmission of
ancient wisdom: texts, doxographies, libraries, 25-38; 3. C. LÉVY, Cicero and the New Academy, 39-62; 4.
H. TARRANT, Platonism and the New Academy, 63-99; 5. R. FOWLER, The Second Sophistic, 100-114; 6.
M. EDWARDS, Numenius of Apamea, 115-125; 7. B. INWOOD, Stoicism, 126-139; 8. R.W. SHARPLES,
Peripatetics, 140-160; 9. J.E. FINAMORE–S. ILES JOHNSTON, The Chaldaean Oracles, 161-173; 10.
E. MOORE–J.D. TURNER, Gnosticism, 174-196; 11. J. FEKE–A. JONES, Ptolemy, 197-209; 12.
R.J. HANKINSON, Galen, 210-231. Part II. The first encounter of Judaism and Christianity with
ancient Greek philosophy: Introduction to Part II, 233-234; 13. D. WINSTON, Philo of Alexandria, 235257; 14. D. MINNS, Justin Martyr, 258-269; 15. C. OSBORNE, Clement of Alexandria, 270-282; 16.
E. PRINZIVALLI, Origen, 283-297. Part III. Plotinus and the new Platonism: Introduction to Part III,
299-300; 17. Plotinus, 301-324; 18. A. SMITH, Porphyry and his school, 325-357; 19. J. DILLON, Iamblichus
of Chalcis and his school, 358-374. Part IV: Philosophy in the age of Constantine: Introduction to Part
IV, 375; 20. E. DEPALMA DIGESER, Philosophy in a Christian empire: from the great persecution to
Theodosius I, 376-396; 21. I. KUPREEVA, Themistius, 397-416; 22. A. BERNARD, The Alexandrian School.
Theon of Alexandria and Hypatia, 417-436; 23. H. SCHIBLI, Hierocles of Alexandria, 437-456. Part V. The
second encounter of Christianity with ancient Greek philosophy: Introduction to Part V, 457-458;
24. L. AYRES–A. RADDE-G ALLWITZ, Basil of Caesarea, 459-470; 25. A. MEREDITH, Gregory of Nyssa, 471-
367
481; 26. J.A. MCGUCKIN, Gregory of Nazianzus, 482-497; 27. G. REYDAMS-SCHILS, Calcidius, 498-508;
28. B. MOTTA, Nemesius of Emesa, 509-519; 29. J. BREGMAN, Synesius of Cyrene, 520-537; 30.
S.A. COOPER, Marius Victorinus, 538-551; 31. G. CATAPANO, Augustine, 552-581. Vol. II: VI. Late
Platonism: Introduction to Part VI, 583-584; 32. E. DEPALMA DIGESER, From Constantine to
Justinian, 585-607; 33. A. LONGO, Plutarch of Athens, 608-615; 34. A. LONGO, Syrianus, 616-629; 35.
C. STEEL, Proclus, 630-653; 36. D. BLANK, Ammonius Hermeiou and his school, 654-666; 37. G. VAN RIEL,
Damascius, 667-696; 38. J. OPSOMER, Olympiodorus, 697-710; 39. H. BALTUSSEN, Simplicius of Cilicia,
711-732; 40. K. VERRYCKEN, John Philoponus, 733-755; 41. F.A.J. DE HAAS, Priscian of Lydia and PseudoSimplicius on the soul, 756-763. VII. The third encounter of Christianity with ancient Greek
philosophy: Introduction to Part VII, 765-766; 42. E. PERL, Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, 767-787;
43. J. MAGEE, Boethius, 788-812; 44. D. BRADSHAW, Maximus the Confessor, 813-828; 45. W. HANKEY –
L.P. GERSON, John Scotus Eriugena, 829-840. VIII. Philosophy in transition: Introduction to Part
VIII, 841-842; 46. K. IERODIAKONOU –G. ZOGRAFIDIS, Early Byzantine philosophy, 843-868; 47.
C. D’ANCONA, The origins of Islamic philosophy, 869-893; 48. S. GERSH, Ancient philosophy becomes
medieval philosophy, 894-914. Appendix: List of works of ancient authors, 915-965; List of
abbreviations, 966-982; Bibliography, 983-1182. Index locorum, 1183-1248; General index, 1249-1284].
CARNEVALE L., Giobbe dall’antichità al medioevo. Testi, tradizioni, immagini (Quaderni di «Vetera
Christianorum», 33), Bari 2010, pp. 224.
[Introduzione, 7-9. I. Il libro di Giobbe, 11-33. II. Alle origini di un topos. La tradizione giudaica, 35-54.
III. Riletture di Giobbe. La tradizione cristiana antica, 55-113. IV. Altre storie di Giobbe. La tradizione
araba, 115-130. V. Giobbe vecchio e nuovo. La tradizione medievale, 131-154. VI. Giobbe tra culto e
liturgia, 155-165. Conclusioni, 167-173. Tavole, 175-184. Bibliografia, 185-208. Indici, 209-224].
David et Jonathan. Histoire d’un mythe, sous la direction de R. COURTRAY (Le point théologique, 64),
Beauchesne, Paris 2010, pp. 396.
[R. COURTRAY, Introduction, 7-11. Première Partie. Le texte biblique: I. Le récit biblique de David
et Jonathan, 15-21; II. PH. LEFEBVRE, Jonathan et David. Portrait du Messie en jeunes hommes (Les récits
bibliques des Livres de Samuel), 23-79. Deuxième Partie. Lectures anciennes: III. R. COURTRAY, David
et Jonathan dans les Histoires juives, 83-89; IV. D. VIGNE, L’amitié de David et Jonathan chez deux Pères
grecs: Grégoire le Thaumaturge et Jean Chrysostome, 91-105; V. R. COURTRAY, David et Jonathan dans la
littérature latine chrétienne, 107-133; VI. D. FARHI, David et Jonathan dans la tradition juive, 135-146;
VII. N. SALLIOT, David et Jonathan dans les débats théologiques du siècle des réformes, 147-151; VIII.
R. COURTRAY, David et Jonathan dans les commentaires bibliques des XVIe-XVIIIe siècles ou l’exaltation
de l’amitié, 153-166. Troisième Partie. L’héritage culturel: IX. R. COURTRAY, Liminaire: David et
Jonathan au Moyen Âge, Le Mistére du Viel Testament, 169-174; X. M. TIRADO, David et Jonathan de
la Renaissance aux Lumières: du mythe à la polémique, 175-221; XI. A.-M. LEFEBVRE, David et Jonathan
dans la littérature des XIXe et XXe siècles: du dévoilement au détournement, 223-255; XII. R. BURNET,
David et Jonathan dans la peinture: un unique tableau de Rembrandt?, 257-267; XIII. R. LEGRAND –
T. PSYCHOYOU, De la sublimation en musique: David et Jonathan selon Charpentier et Handel, 269302; XIV. R. COURTRAY – G. LUCAS, David et Jonathan en musique au XXe siècle, 303-311; XV.
M. ÉLOY, David et Jonathan à l’écran, 313-335. Quatrième Partie: Relectures contemporaines: XVI.
R. COURTRAY, David et Jonathan dans les débats exégétiques contemporains, 339-368; XVII. C. BÉRAUD
– B. COULMONT, Usages contemporains et identités homosexuelles, 369-385. R. COURTRAY, Conclusion,
387-392].
C., Cristo e Logos. Il calcedonismo del VI secolo in Oriente (SEAug, 118), Institutum Patristicum
Augustinianum, Roma 2010, pp. 451.
DELL’OSSO
368
[M. SIMONETTI, Prefazione, 5-9. Sigle e abbreviazioni, 11-13. Introduzione, 15-19. Cap. I.
Calcedonismo e neocalcedonismo: storia e critica, 21: 1. J. Lebon, 22-23; 2. C. Moeller, 24-26; 3.
M. Richard, 26-28; 4. S. Helmer, 28-31; 5. J. Meyendorff, 31-33; 6. P.T.R. Gray, 33-35; 7. A. Grillmeier,
35-39; 8. K.-H. Uthemann, 39-42; 9. Gli studi in Italia, 42-45; 10. Manuali di cristologia, 46-50; 11.
Critica e attualità dei concetti di calcedonismo e neocalcedonismo, 50-53. Cap. II. Teologi
calcedonesi preconciliari, 55: 1. Nefalio, 58-70; 2. Giovanni di Scitopoli, 70-88; 3. Giovanni di Cesarea,
88-111; 4. Leonzio di Bisanzio, 111-156; 5. La Proparaskeuhv di Teodoro di Rhaitu, 156-166; 6. Gli
Acemeti e le lettere a Pietro Fullone, 167-176; 7. I monaci sciti, 176-210; 9. Innocenzo di Maronea,
210-215; 10. Eracliano di Calcedonia, 215-223; 11. Efrem di Antiochia, 224-240; 12. Eustazio monaco,
241-255. Cap. III. Giustiniano teologo e il concilio costantinopolitano II, 257-290. Cap. IV. Teologi
calcedonesi postconciliari, 291: 1.L’editto dell’anno 571 di Giustino II, 294-297; 2. Eutichio di
Costantinopoli, 297-311; 3. Giovanni IV di Gerusalemme, 311-316; 4. Anastasio I di Antiochia, 317-334;
5. Eulogio di Alessandria, 335-348; 6. Leonzio di Gerusalemme, 348-373; 7. La Solutio di Panfilo teologo,
373-394; 8. Il trattato De sectis, 394-408. Conclusioni, 409-413. Bibliografia, 415-425. Tabella:
imperatori, papi e patriarchi del VI secolo, 427. Indici: Indice analitico, 431-435; Indice dei nomi
degli autori antichi, 437-441; Indice dei nomi degli autori moderni, 443-446; Indice generale, 447451].
The Discursive Fight over Religious Texts in Antiquity, edited by A.-C. JACOBSEN (Religion and Normativity,
1), Aarhus University Press, Aarhus 2009, pp. 207 (=The Discursive Fight over Religious Texts in Antiquity).
[Preface, 7. A.-C. JACOBSEN, Introduction, 9-19. Part I. The discursive fight over religious texts in
antiquity – theoretical perspectives: A. KLOSTERGAARD PETERSEN, Constraining semiotic riverrun.
Different gradations and understandigs of canonicity and authoritative writings, 22-41; J. HYLDAHL,
Normativity and the dymanic of mutual authorisation. The relationship between ‘canonical’ and ‘noncanonical’ writings, 42-52; K. POLLMANN, Normativity, ideology, and reception in pagan and Christian
antiquity: some observations, 53-61; J. ENGBERG, ‘That is believed without good reason which is believed
without knowledge of its origin’. Tertullian on the provenance of Early Christian Writings in debate
with heretics, 62-84; G. LØNSTRUP, Normativity and memory in the making: The seven hills of the ‘old’
and ‘new’ Rome, 85-107. Part II. The discursive fight over biblical and post-biblical texts:
E. KRAGELUND HOLT, Communication of authority. The ‘prophet’ in the book of Jeremiah, 110-118;
R. FALKENBERG, The salvation system in the Sophia of Jesus Christ. An example of textual reuse, 119-132;
J. ULRICH, Justin and Trypho in the contest over Moses and the prophets, 133-142; A.-C. JACOBSEN,
Normative structures in Origen’s biblical exegesis, 143-156; B. VANDEN AUWEELE, The Song of Songs as
normative text, 157-167; N.A. PETERSEN, The New Testament Canon and Athanasius of Alexandria’s
39th Festal Letter, 168-177; J. HART, The Influence of Islam on the development of Mandaean literature,
178-191; C. CVETKOVIC, Unum and Unus spiritus: The normative impact of Augustine’s interpretation
of 1 Cor 6:17 on Bernard and William, 192-204. About the authors, 205-207].
DONINI P., Commentary and Tradition. Aristotelianism, Platonism, and Post-Hellenic Philosophy, edited by
M. BONAZZI (Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca et Byzantina. Quellen und Studien, 4), De Gruyter,
Berlin 2011, pp. 466.
[M. BONAZZI–R.W. SHARPLESS, Introduction, 7-12. Aristotle and the Aristotelian Tradition: Il libro
Lambda della Metafisica e la nascita della filosofia prima, 17-35; Mimesis tragique et apprentissage de la
phronesis, 37-51; Cause, volontarietà e decisione in Aristotele, Rhet. I 10-15 (unpublished), 53-83;
Aristotele, De motu animalium 701a7, 85-86; Alessandro di Afrodisia e i metodi dell’esegesi filosofica, 87106; L’objet de la Métaphysique selon Alexandre d’Aphrodise, 107-123; Qeiva duvnami" in Alessandro di
Afrodisia, 125-138; Alexander’s De fato, Problems of Coherence, 139-154; Doti naturali, abitudini e
carattere nel De fato di Alessandro, 155-167; (with P. ACCATTINO) Alessandro di Afrodisia De an. 90, 23
sqq., a proposito del nou’" quvraqen, 169-171; Senarco, Alessandro e Simplicio su movimenti e grandezze
369
semplici nel De coelo, 173-177; La giustizia nel medioplatonismo, in Aspasio e in Apuleio, 179-193.
Platonism and Post-Hellenic Philosophy: The History of the Concept of Eclecticism, 197-209; Testi e
commenti, manuali e insegnamento: la forma sistematica e i metodi della filosofia in età postellenistica,
211-281; Medioplatonismo e filosofi medioplatonici. Una raccolta di studi, 283-296; Le fonti
medioplatoniche di Seneca: Antioco, la conoscenza e le idee, 297-313; Plutarco, Ammonio e l’Academia,
315-326; Science and Metaphysics: Platonism, Aristotelianism, and Stoicism in Plutarch’s On the Face in
the Moon, 327-339; I fondamenti della fisica e la teoria delle cause in Plutarco, 341-357; Platone e Aristotele
nella tradizione pitagorica secondo Plutarco, 359-373; L’eredità accademica e i fondamenti del platonismo
in Plutarco, 375-402; Il De genio Socratis di Plutarco: i limiti del dogmatismo e quelli dello “scetticismo”
(unpublished), 403-422; La connaissance de dieu et la hiérarchie divine chez Albinos, 423-436; Sokrates
und sein Dämon im Platonismus des 1. und 2. Jahrhunderts n.Chr., 437-452. A Bibliography of Pierluigi
Donini’s Works, 453-458. Index, 459-466].
DULAEY M., Les larmes dans les premiers siècles chrétiens: Ambroise et l’Occident latin → 22. Ambrogio
Epifanio di Salamina. Panarion, Libro primo, a cura di G. PINI, con un saggio di G. ARAGIONE, Revisione
delle note e della bibliografia a cura di B. CANGEMI TROLLA (Letteratura Cristiana Antica. Nuova serie,
21), Morcelliana, Brescia 2010, pp. 982.
[G. ARAGIONE, Una «storia» universale dell’eresia. Il Panarion di Epifanio: 1. Epifanio e il suo tempo,
5-19; 2. Le opere, 19-26; 3. Il Panarion, 26-61; Bibliografia, 62-92. G. PINI, Note del traduttore, 93-95.
Panarion, Libro primo, a cura di G. PINI, 97: Tomo primo, 101-243; Tomo secondo, 245-631; Tomo
terzo, 633-979. Sommario, 981-982].
L’esegeta romanziere. Gerolamo, le Vite di Ilarione, Paolo e Malco e gli inizi dell’agiografia monastica → 28.
Gerolamo
EUKARPA, Eu[karpa. Études sur la Bible et ses exégètes, réunies par M. LOUBET et D. PRALON en hommage à
Gilles Dorival, Éditions du Cerf, Paris 2011, pp. 401 (= EUKARPA).
[M. LOUBET et D. PRALON, Préface et bibliographie de Gilles Dorival, 7-19. I. Les textes bibliques:
La Septante: C.-B. AMPHOUX – A. SÉRANDOUR, La date de la forme courte de Jérémie, 25-35; I. ASSANDHÔTE –J. MOATTI-FINE, «Moi, je serai comme une de tes esclaves!» (Rt 2, 13). Paidiske dans la Bible
grecque: esclave et concubine, esclave et mère porteuse, 37-44; M. AUSSEDAT, Versions et traduction du texte
biblique dans les chaînes exégétiques grecques du livre de Jérémie, 45-54; F. BOUET-DE-QUATREBARBES, La
variante lovgo"-novm o" dans les psaumes de la Septante, 55-65; M. CASEVITZ, Sur les comparaisons dans les
Odes de la Septante, 67-72; N. DE LANGE, From Eros to Pneuma. On the Greek Translation of the Song
of Songs, 73-83; C. DOGNIEZ, Les habits de la vengeance divine dans la Septante, 85-96; M. HARL, Le
statut incertain du chant de la vigne (Isaïe 5, 1-7) chez Origène et dans les listes anciennes de cantiques
bibliques, 97-106; K. HAUSPIE, Les verbes de «crainte» et leurs compléments dans la Septante d’Ézéchiel,
107-113; J. JOOSTEN, Le Dieu IAÔ et le tréfonds araméen des Septante, 115-124; D. MANGIN, L’envers
d’une traduction. Note à propos de Job 27, 2 et 23, 13, 125-134. – Bibles orientales: B. BARC, De la pierre à
la brique ou la métamorphose de l’Écriture, 137-146; M. BAUKS, Coq, ibis, autruche. De la sagesse
(manquante) de l’être humain et de l’animal dans le livre de Job (Job 39, 13-18 et Job 38, 36), 147-157;
C. JULLIEN, Dans le royaume de Nemrod. Autour d’interprétations de Gn 10, 10-12, 159-172; E. TOV, The
Aramaic, Syriac, and Latin Translations of Hebrew Scripture vis-à-vis the Masoretic Text, 173-185. II.
Les traditions parallèles à la Bible: Histoire et historiographie: M.-F. BASLEZ, Écrire l’histoire dans le
judaïsme hellénisé et le premier christianisme: les galeries de figures ancestrales, 191-204; K. BERTHELOT, Les
Cananéens dans les Antiquités Juives de Flavius Josèphe, 205-214; D. BRIQUEL, Un reflet inattendu de la
Septante: le récit de la création etrusque de la Souda, 215-224; C.G. CONTICELLO, Le projet d’un
répertoire des traductions des textes chrétiens du latin au grec (IIIe-XVe s.): quelques exemples, 225-233;
S.C. MIMOUNI, Les traditions sur la famille de Jésus, 235-249; O. MUNNICH, Le regard de Justin sur
370
l’hellénisme: Apologie I, 18, 251-264; G.G. STROUMSA, Barbares ou hérétiques? Juifs et arabes dans la
conscience byzantine (IVe-VIIIe s., 265-277. – Exégèses patristiques et juives: J.-M. AUWERS, Le thiase
des chrétiens ou la revanche de Dionysos?, 281-287; J. PARAMELLE –G. BADY, Le début inédit du prologue de
la Synopse attribuée à Jean Chrysostome, 289-293; G.F. BARONE, La Synopse de la Sainte Écriture du Ps.
Chrysostome transmise par le Barberinianus gr. 317, 295-303; M.-O. BOULNOIS, Le Christ mange-t-il
comme les anges? Traces d’exégèse juives dans la christologie docète, 305-322; R. BRÄNDLE, Franz Overbeck
und Oscar Cullmann zu Christentum und Kultur, 323-330; J.-M. CHOURAQUI, Amour du prochain et
sainteté. Lectures juives de Lévitique 19, 331-340; É. JUNOD, Les mots d’Eusèbe de Césarée pour désigner les
livres du Nouveau Testament et ceux qui n’en font pas partie, 341-353; A. LE BOULLUEC, Regards antiques
sur Adam au Golgotha, 355-363; L. PERRONE, Approximations origéniennes. Notes pour une enquête
lexicale, 365-372; B. POUDERON, Le salut en dehors de l’Église chez Justin, 373-384; A. SCHENKER, L’apport
durable des Hexaples d’Origène. Bilan de la Lettre à Africanus, bilan aujourd’hui, 385-394. Ont
collaboré à cet hommage, 395-398; Tabula gratulatoria, 398. Table des matières, 399-401].
GAVRILYUK P.L., Harnack’s Hellenized Christianity or Florovsky’s «Sacred Hellenism»: Questioning Two
Metanarratives of Early Christian Engagement with Late Antique Culture, SVTQ 54 (2010) 325-344.
[«A complex historical panorama that emerges from my overview of Christian engagements with
late antique culture – as exemplified by Apologists, catechists, martyrs, monks, emperors,
architects, and church artists – supports neither Harnack’s corruption thesis, nor Florovsky’s
exaltation of “sacred Hellenism”. What we have instead is a wide spectrum of cultural responses to
Christianity, ranging from a confused assimilation of pagan elements to a profound transformation
of objects and persons in light of the Gospel» (pp. 343-344)].
HADOT P., Études de patristique et d’histoire des concepts (L’âne d’or), Les Belles Lettres, Paris 2010, pp.
IX+406.
[Avertissement, IX. I. Perspectives générales: 1. Article «Patristique», 3-25; 2. Patristique latine, 27-36;
3. Article «Littérature latine chrétienne», 37-52; 4. De lectis non lecta componere (Marius Victorinus,
Adversus Arium II 7) – Raisonnement théologique et raisonnement juridique, 53-63. II. Cours de
l’École Pratique des Hautes Études: 5. Comptes rendus des conférences données à l’École Pratique
des Hautes Études de 1964 à 1980, 67-167. III. Rapports entre Grecs et Latins: 6. L’entretien
d’Origène avec Héraclide et le commentaire de Saint Ambroise sur l’Évangile de Saint Luc, 171-198
(con H.-Ch. Puech); 7. Une source de l’Apologia David d’Ambroise: les commentaires de Didyme
et d’Origène sur le psaume 50, 199-223; 8. Citations de Porphyre chez Augustin, 225-272; 9. La
présentation du Platonisme par Augustin, 273-281; 10. L’image de la Trinité dans l’âme chez
Victorinus, 283-317; 11. Quelques thèmes fondamentaux des Confessions de saint Augustin, 319-321;
12. Un fragment du commentaire perdu de Boèce sur les Catégories d’Aristote dans le Codex
Bernensis 363, 323-343. IV. Histoire des concepts: 13. Typus, Stoïcisme et monarchianisme au IVe siècle
d’après Candide l’Arien et Marius Victorinus, 347-359; 14. Cancellatus respectus. L’usage du chiasme
en logique, 361-366; 15. La notion d’infini chez saint Augustin, 367-383; 16. De Tertullien à Boèce.
Développement de la notion de personne dans les controverses théologiques, 385-397. Indices:
Index des noms anciens et médievaux, 399-402; 2. Index des noms modernes, 403-404. –
L’«Avertissement» informa che al momento di andare in stampa «nous apprenons avec douleur la
disparition de Pierre Hadot, mort le 25 avril 2010»].
The Holy Spirit in the Fathers of the Church. The Proceedings of the Seventh International Patristic
Conference, Maynooth, 2008, ed. by D.V. TWOMEY and J.E. RUTHERFORD, Four Courts Press, Dublin
2010, pp. 203 (=The Holy Spirit in the Fathers of the Church).
[D.V. TWOMEY – J.E. RUTHERFORD, Editors’ Preface, 9-10. B. LEHAY, ‘Hiding behind the works’: the
Holy Spirit in the trinitarian rhythm of human fulfilment in the theology of Irenaeus, 11-31.
J.E. RUTHERFORD, The Alexandrian Spirit: Clement and Origen in context, 32-56. L. AYRES, The Holy
371
Spirit as the ‘Undiminished Giver’: Didymus the Blind’s De spiritu sancto and the development of
Nicene pneumatology, 57-72. J. DAY, Cyril of Jerusalem on the Holy Spirit, 73-85. T. O’LAUGHLIN, St
Augustine’s view of the place of the Holy Spirit in the formation of the gospels, 86-95. F.G. CLANCY, The
Holy Spirit, the Trinity and the Eucharist in St Fulgentius of Ruspe’s Ad Monimum, book 2, 96-126.
S. SEPPÄLÄ, The Holy Spirit in Isaac of Nineveh and East Syrian Mysticism, 127-150.
A. ANGELOPOULOS, The Holy Spirit in the ecclesiology of Photius of Constantinople, 151-163.
G. COLLINS, Three modern ‘fathers’ on the filioque: good, bad or indifferent?, 164-185. P. MULLINS, The
Holy Spirit and the Marian typology of St Ambrose at Vatican II, 185-200].
‘In Search of Truth’: Augustine, Manichaeism and other Gnosticim. Studies for Johannes van Oort at Sixty,
edited by J.A. VAN DEN BERG, A. KOTZÉ, T. NICKLAS & M. SCOPELLO (NHMS, 74), Brill, Leiden – Boston
2011, pp. XXXV+706, ill. (=‘In Search of Truth’: Augustine, Manichaeism and other Gnosticim).
[Preface, IX-X; Bibliography Johannes van Oort, XI-XXXV; List of contributors, XXXIII-XXXV.
Part One. Studies in Augustine: Confessions, Sermons, Letters and De haeresibus; Augustine on Grace
and Pluralism; Augustinian ‘Gnosis’: 1. A. KOTZÉ, Protreptic, Paraenetic and Augustine’s Confessions,
3-23; 2. T. FUHRER, Allegorical Reading and Writing in Augustine’s Confessions, 25-45; J. LÖSSL,
Augustine’s Confessions as a Consolation of Philosophy, 47-73; 4. A. DUPONT, Augustine’s Sermones 29
and 29A on Ps. 117,1 (118,1): Two Early Carthaginian Sermones ad Populum on the Meaning of
Confessio during the Vigil of Pentecost?, 75-95; 5. V. HUNINK, ‘Practicing What He Had Taught’:
Augustine’s Sermons on Cyprian, 97-108; 6. S. MRATSCHEK, Die ungeschriebenen Briefe des Augustinus
von Hippo, 109-122; 7. G. ACKERMANS, Einige rechtliche und theologische Fragen zu den Abeloitae in
Augustins De haeresibus, 123-138; 8. D. MÜLLER, Der augustinische Häresienbegriff als Grundlage für die
Ketzerverfolgung im Mittelalter, 139-154; 9. M. POORTHUIS, Judaism, Augustine and Pope Benedict XVI
on the Plurality of Opinions, 155-172; 10. M. SMALBRUGGE, Le fils prodigue vu par Augustin: un pas vers
l’exclusivisme de la grâce, 173-188; 11. P.H. FICK, Traces of Augustinian ‘Gnosis’ in Julianus Pomerius’ De
Vita Contemplativa, 189-198. Part Two. Studies in Manichaeism: Origins and Myth; Doctrines and
Cult; Diffusion and Art: 12. E. SMAGINA, The Manichaean Cosmogonical Myth as a ‘Re-Written Bible’,
201-216; 13. S.N.C. LIEU & J.S. SHELDON, Simplicius on Manichaean Cosmogony, 217-228; 14.
N.A. PEDERSEN, The Veil and Revelation of the Father of Greatness, 229-234; 15. M. FRANZMANN, The
Treasure of the Manichaean Spiritual Life, 235-243; 16. I. GARDNER, Manichaean Ritual Practice at
Ancient Kellis: A New Understanding of the Meaning and Function of the so-called Prayer of the
Emanations, 245-262; 17. T. MGALOBLISHVILI & S.H. RAPP JR., Manichaeism in Late Antique
Georgia?, 263-290; 18. E.C.D. HUNTER, Syriac Sources and Manichaeism: A Four Hundred Year
Trajectory, 291-300; 19. J. EBERT, The ‘Five Elements’ in Manichaeab Art, 301-314; 20. Z. GULÁCSI, The
Central Asian Roots of a Chinese Manichaean Silk Painting in the Collection of the Yamato Bunkakan,
Nara, Japan, 315-337; 21. T. MORIYASU, The Discovery of Manichaean Paintings in Japan and their
Historical Background, 339-360. Part Three. Studies in Manichaeism and Augustine: Doctrines;
Polemics & Debates with Manichaean Contemporaries: 22. J. KEVIN COYLE†, Jesus, Mani, and
Augustine, 363-376; 23. C. GIUFFRÈ SCIBONA, The Doctrine of the Soul in Manichaeism and Augustine,
377-418; 24. G. MIKKELSEN, Augustine and His Sources: The ‘Devil’s Snares and Birdlime’ in the Mouths
of Manichaeans in East and West, 419-425; 25. B. BENNETT, Globus horribilis: The Role of the Bolos in
Manichaean Eschatology and Its Polemical Transformation in Augustine anti-Manichaean Writings,
427-440; 26. A.E.J. GROTE, Optimi viri sanctissimique: Augustins Konzept einer Synthese von Askese und
Pastoral in De moribus 1,65-80. Eine Replik auf manichäische Polemik, 441-461; 27. J.D. BEDUHN, Did
Augustine Win His Debate with Fortunatus?, 463-479; 28. A. HOFFMANN, Secundinus in der Diskussion
mit Augustinus über das malum: Beobachtungen zu den augustinischen Quellen der Epistula Secundini,
481-517; 29. G. SFAMENI GASPARRO, The Disputation with Felix: Themes and Modalities of Augustine’s
Polemic, 519-544. Part Four: Studies in ‘Other Gnosticism’: Gnosticism and ‘Apocryphal’ Texts;
372
Sources of (Ps.) Hippolytus’ Refutatio; The Gospel of Judas; Modern Yesidi Gnosticism: 30.
T. NICKLAS, ‘Apokryph gewordene Schriften’? Gedanken zum Apokryphenbegriff bei großkirchlichen
Autoren und in einigen ‘gnostischen’ Texten, 549-565; 31. C. SCHOLTEN, Quellen regen an: Beobachtungen
zum ‘gnostischen Sondergut’ der Refutatio omnium haeresium, 567-591; 32. M. SCOPELLO, Motifs et
expressions mystiques dans l’Évangile de Judas, 593-609; 33. G. ROUWHORST, The Gospel of Judas and
Early Christian Eucharist, 611-625; 34. A. DECONICK, After the Gospel of Judas: Reassessing What We
Have Known to be true about Cain and Judas, 627-661; E. SPÄT, The Song of the Commoner: The
Gnostic Call in Yezidi Oral Tradition, 663-683. Index of names, 685-706].
Logos der Vernunft – Logos des Glaubens, herausgegeben von F.R. PROSTMEIER und H.E. LONA
(Millennium-Studien zu Kultur und Geschichte des ersten Jahrtausends n. Chr., 31), De Gruyter, Berlin
– New York 2010, pp. VIII+338 (= Logos der Vernunft – Logos des Glaubens).
[Einleitung, 1-4. P. VON MÖLLENDORF, Lovgo" a[pisto". Der Logos als Helfer und Gegenspieler bei
Lukian, 5-24. H.E. LONA, Wahrer Logos – Logos der Wahrheit. Der Umgang des Kelsos mit der Bibel, 2552. J. ULRICH, Widersprüchlichkeit und Kohärenz. Beobachtungen zu einem Argument der Polemik und
Apologetik im zweiten Jahrhundert, 53-75. T.J. BAUER, Einen missglückten Auftritt retten. 2 Kor. 10,10f.
und die rhetorische Kultur der frühen Kaiserzeit, 77-108. T.M. BÖHM, Ptolemäische Gnosis bei Hegel?
Anmerkungen zur Interpretation des Johannesprologs durch Amelius, 109-128. J. LÖSSL, Zwischen
Christologie und Rhetorik. Zum Ausdruck «Kraft des Wortes» (lovgou duvnami") in Tatians Rede an die
Griechen, 129-147. T. LECHNER, Süße Lust des Logos. Die Vorrede zum Protreptikos des Clemens von
Alexandrien und die prolaliai der zweiten Sophistik, 149-205. F.R. PROSTMEIER, Der Logos im Paradies.
Theophilos von Antiochia und der Diskurs über eine zutreffende theologische Sprache, 207-228. U. HEIL,
Menschenliebe im Superlativ. Zur Rezeption der christlichen Lehre von der Feindesliebe bei Athenagoras,
229-252. C. SCHUBERT, Ein stummer Gott? Beobachtungen zur Vorstellung von Reden und Schweigen im
Octavius des Minucius Felix, 253-286. T. GEORGES, Die Philosophen in Tertullians Apologeticum. Ihre
Bedeutung für den Epilog und das gesamte Werk, 287-300. J. TLOKA, Der Lovg o" und die lovg oi. Die
Bedeutung der Rhetorik für die Konstituierung der christlichen Elite in der Spätantike, 301-321.
H.C. BRENNECKE, Homoismus und Logostheologie, 323-338].
MARGUERAT D. – JUNOD É., Qui a fondé le christianisme?, Labor et Fides – Bayard, Genève – Paris 2010,
pp. 120.
[Préface, 7-10. 1. Jésus de Nazareth ou Paul de Tarse?, 11-36. 2. La première histoire du
christianisme, 37-60. 3. L’opinion des premiers païens, 61-85. 4. L’étonnante réponse d’Eusèbe de
Césarée, 87-114. Épilogue, 115-118. Table des matières, 119-120].
MATUSOVA E., Allegorical Interpretation of the Pentateuch in Alexandria: Inscribing Aristobulus and Philo in a
Wider Literary Context, The Studia Philonica Annual 22 (2010) 1-51.
[1. The synagogue origin thesis: 1.1. The evidence from Qumran and from the New Testament; 1.2.
The school of wisdom thesis; 1.3. The other allegories: the evidence from Philo. 2. Stoic influence:
2.1. Objections from content; 2.2. Objections from form and method; 2.3. Historical objection. 3.
The Greek tradition of allegorical exegesis: a new perspective: 3.1. The Derveni Papyrus; 3.2.
Allegorical interpretation of hieroi logoi in development: 3.2.1. The Jewish contribution: Aristobulus,
3.2.2. The Egyptian element enhanced. 4. Philo’s contexts legitimizing allegorical approach to the
LXX. 5. Philo’s further step for the development of the genre. 6. Conclusion. – «The inclination to
allegory, broadly understood, cannot, by itself, indicate to which exegetical culture the author
belongs. The tendencies in some way to allegorize a text were present in Jewish communities. It is
possible and even probable, that this played a certain part in the appearance of Philo’s great
undertaking. However, every community in exploring these intuitions develops itw own principles
of commentary; that is how a method comes into being. In the absence of other historical and
literary data, we must study the method, its tradition, sphere and area of application. In the case of
373
Philo’s allegorical method, we must conclude that his allegorical commentary on the LXX arose
within the context of a general Greek Hellenistic approach to barbarian texts, which expected
allegorical interpretation of barbarian iJeroi; lovgoi. All iJeroi; lovgoi were usually interpreted
‘physically’, and this was what made Aristobulus and Philo include the ‘physical’ interpretation in
their commentaries as an essential element. In Philo’s commentary it is present on two levels: 1)
rudimentary remnants of crude astronomical allegories of the LXX mentioned by Philo, and his
own elaborate astronomical interpretations, 2) Philo’s own understanding of the notion of allegory
in terms of physiologein and physiologia. Philo justified the change to an ethical allegorical
interpretation, which was not typical of commentaries on Holy Discourses (and not present in the
fragments of Aristobulus), by reference to the tradition of interpreting Pythagorean symbols» (pp.
50-51)].
MONACI CASTAGNO A., L’agiografia cristiana antica. Testi, contesti, pubblico (Letteratura Cristiana Antica,
23), Morcelliana, Brescia 2010, pp. 498.
[Introduzione, 5-14. Cap. I: 1. Morire per la Legge, 15-18; 2. «Versare il sangue per molti», 19-20; 3.
Morire per Cristo, 20-23; 4. La morte del filosofo, 23-25; 5. Giudaismo? Cristianesimo? Ellenismo?, 2528. Cap. II: 1. Testimoni, martiri, confessori: la formazione di un lessico specializzato, 29-35; 2. Atti e
Passioni dei martiri: una breve panoramica, 35-46; 3. Il problema dell’«autenticità», 47-57; 4. Autori e
pubblico e ragioni del raccontare, 57-70; 5. Storia ecclesiastica e martirio: Eusebio di Cesarea, 70-78;
6. Un linguaggio comune: le parole dei martiri, 79-91. Cap. III: 1. La critica epicurea degli uomini
divini: la Vita di Demonatte, 93-109; 2. La critica cristiana dell’«uomo divino»: il Contro Ierocle di
Eusebio di Cesarea, 109-122. Cap. IV: 1. Il IV secolo: mutamenti istituzionali e sviluppo del culto dei
santi, 123-129; 2. La Vita di Antonio di Atanasio vescovo di Alessandria, 130-150; 3. Discorso
agiografico e trasformazione delle élites: gli elogi funebri di Gregorio di Nazianzo, 150-158; 4. Un
ritratto di una famiglia di santi: la Vita di Macrina di Gregorio di Nissa, 158-167; 5. Predicazione e
celebrazione dei martiri, 167-171. Cap. V: 1. Gerolamo agiografo, 173-195; 2. Paolino di Nola: «un muto
Bellerofonte», 195-206; 3. Sulpicio Severo avvocato di Martino, 206-222; 4. Il Peristephanon di
Prudenzio, 222-231. Cap. VI: 1. Storie di monaci egiziani: Pacomio, il «monaco perfetto», 233-241; 2.
Raccolte di vite monastiche: Storia dei monaci in Egitto, 241-251; 3. Melania senior e Melania junior:
due patrizie romane a Gerusalemme, 251-261; 4. Un elogio del monachesimo siriaco: la Storia
religiosa di Teodoreto di Cirro, 261-272; 5. Il monachesimo palestinese: Cirillo di Scitopoli, un giovane
monaco al servizio dell’istituzione, 272-282; 6. Il Prato di Giovanni Mosco, 283-287; 7. Miracoli e
santuari, 287-294. Cap. VII. 1. Ecclesia martyrum, conventicula traditorum: le Passioni donatiste, 295300; 2. Controllo ecclesiastico e propaganda religiosa: i Libelli miraculorum, 300-304; 3. La Vita di
Agostino di Possidio tra biografia e autobiografia, 304-309; 4. La Storia della persecuzione vandalica in
Africa: martiri «romani» e persecutori «barbari», 309-313; 5. La Vita di Fulgenzio di Ruspe: «Africanae
Ecclesiae doctor praedestinatus», 313-319. Cap. VIII: 1. La Vita di Ambrogio di Paolino da Milano: un
vescovo carismatico, 321-331; 2. Ennodio di Pavia e la Vita di Epifanio: due vescovi al passo con i
tempi, 331-339; 3. Gregorio Magno e I miracoli dei padri italiani, 339-358. Cap. IX: 1. Un gruppo
affiatato: i vescovi-monaci di Lérins, 359-376; 2. La Vita di Germano di Auxerre di Costanzo di Lione,
376-381; 3. La Vita di Cesario di Arles secondo i vescovi, 381-389; 4. Le Vite dei Padri del Giura, 389-395;
5. Una santa regina nella Gallia merovingia: Radegonda secondo Venanzio Fortunato, 395-405; 6.
Gregorio di Tours: «Virtù di santi e stragi di popoli», 405-427. Fonti, 429-439. Bibliografia, 441-468.
Indice dei nomi antichi, 469-477; Indice dei nomi moderni, 479-484; Indice tematico, 485-493].
NIEHOFF M., Jewish Exegesis and Homeric Scholarship in Alexandria, Cambridge UP, Cambridge 2011, pp.
XII+222.
[1. Setting the stage, 1-16. Part I. Early Jewish responses to Homeric scholarship: 2. A conservative
reaction to critical scholarship in the Letter of Aristeas, 19-37; 3. Questions and answers in Aristotelian
374
style: Demetrius’ anonymous colleagues, 38-57; 4. Aristobulus’ questions and answers as a tool for
philosophical instruction, 58-74. Part II. Critical Homeric scholarship in the fragments of Philo’s
anonymous colleagues: 5. Comparative mythology, 77-94; Ch. 6. Historical perspectives on
Scripture, 95-111; 7. Traces of text criticism among Alexandrian Jews, 112-129. Part III. The inversion
of Homeric scholarship by Philo: 8. Literal methods of Homeric scholarship in Philo’s Allegorical
Commentary, 133-151; 9. Philo’s Questions and Answers as a manual of instruction, 152-168; 10. Philo’s
Exposition of the Law at a significant distance from Alexandrian scholarship, 169-185. Epilogue, 186187. References, 188-207. Index of Greek terms, 208; Index of sources, 209-213; Index of modern
authors, 214; General index, 215-222].
NIETO IBAÑEZ J.M., Cristianismo y profecías de Apolo. Los oráculos paganos en la Patrística grieca (siglos II-V),
Editorial Trotta, Madrid 2010, pp. 221.
[E. SUÁREZ DE LA TORRE, Prólogo, 9-11. Abreviaturas más frecuentes, 13-15. Introducción, 17-22. I.
Mántica pagana y profecía cristiana, 23-33. II. Los protagonistas de la polémica. La mántica pagana
en la patrística griega, 35-57. III. Apolo y sus oráculos en la literatura cristiana, 59-149. Conclusiones,
151-156. Conclusiones, 151-156. Antología, 157-185. Bibliografía, 187-203. Tabla cronológica, 205. Índice
de nombres propios, 207-212. Índice de pasajes citados, 213-221].
NNEKA UZUKWU G., The Church Fathers’ Interpretations and Modern Exegesis of Gal 3,28c: A Comparative
Analysis, ASEs 27/2 (2010) 109-131.
[I. Introduction. II. Gal 3,28c in the context of baptism. III. Gal 3,28c in the context of human
sexuality. IV. Gal 3,28c in the context of creation. V. Gal 3,28c in the context of equality in Christ.
VI. Reusing the Church Fathers’ interpretation of Gal 3,28c to address present day concern on
gender. VII. Conclusion. – Riferimenti a Clemente Alessandrino, Origene, Basilio di Cesarea,
Gregorio di Nazianzo, Gregorio di Nissa, Gerolamo, Agostino].
Omelie sul Vangelo di Luca. Lettura origeniana, a cura di M. MARITANO e E. DAL COVOLO → 12. Origene
(3. Miscellanee e raccolte)
Patristique et œcuménisme. Thèmes, contextes, personnages, Colloque international sous le patronage de Mgr.
Teodosie, Archevêque de Tomis, Constanţța (Roumanie) 17-20 octobre 2008, sous la direction de
C. BADILITA (Pontus Euxinus), Beauchesne – Galaxia Gutenberg, Paris – Târgu Lăpuş 2010, pp. XII+370
(= Patristique et œcuménisme).
[C. BADILITA, Introduction: Pour un œcuménisme patristico-pragmatique, VII-XII. A. LOUTH,
Patristic Scholarship and Ecumenism, 1-15. D. GONNET, La portée œcuménique de Sources Chrétiennes,
17-32. L. PERRONE, «Abramo, padre di tutti i credenti»: Louis Massignon e l’ecumenismo della preghiera,
33-71. M. CRUCERU, Augustine and Ecumenism. A Short Presentation of the Augustinian View on other
Christian Groups, 73-109. M. STAVROU, La pneumatologie de Nicéphore Blemmydès (XIIIe siècle): une
synthèse originale de la doctrine des Pères grecs, 111-146. L. TURCESCU, Devotion versus Theology? Some
Mariological Issues of Interest to Patristicians and Ecumenists, 147-158. Y. DE ANDIA, Regards croisés sur la
Sagesse, 159-191. A. DI BERARDINO, Il dogma della Immacolata Concezione e la tradizione cristiana, 193220. H. CONGOURDEAU, Des Pères latins à Byzance à la fin de l’empire, 221-236. C. BADILITA, Gratia
Dei et libertas nostri arbitrii: Jean Cassien ou la revanche de l’ortho-doxie, 237-262. D. ZORDAN,
Passioni patristiche e discernimento confessionale: John Henry Newman e Louis Bouyer, 263-282.
M. ALEXANDRE, Yves Congar: œcuménisme et patristique, 283-339. O. LOSSKY, Élisabeth Behr-Sigel, un
engagement œcuménique à l’école des Pères, 341-364. Les auteurs, 365-367].
PERDUE L.G., Mantic Sages in the Ancient Near East, Israel, Judaism, and the Dead Sea Scrolls, in Prophecy
after the Prophets. The Contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls to the Understanding of Biblical and Extra-Biblical
Prophecy, edited by K. DE TROYER and A. LANGE, with the assistance of L.L. SCHULTE (Contributions to
Biblical Exegesis and Theology, 52), Peeters, Leuven – Paris – Walpole/MA 2009, 133-189.
375
[I. Introduction. II. The mantic sage in Mesopotamia. III. Ugaritic texts and Mesopotamian
wisdom literature. IV. Mantic sages in the Hebrew Bible and Early Jewish literature. V. Josephus
and the Essenes. VI. Mantic wisdom in Dead Sea Scrolls. VII. Wisdom texts at Qumran:
introduction. VIII. Conclusion. – «We began with the thesis of von Rad that apocalyptic
developed out of wisdom that had failed to sustain its world view grounded in retribution and the
later correction of Mueller... that apocalyptic grew out of mantic wisdom and prophecy and was
influenced by ancient Near Eastern texts and practices. These views need some modifications in
my judgment. Von Rad’s argument is negated by the fact that Wisdom, in all of its variety,
canonical and non-canonical, Israelite and ancient Near Eastern, comes together at Qumran and
other communities of Early Judaism, and primitive Christianity. (...) Mueller is wrong to suggest
that mantic wisdom was the only sapiential tradition that led to the development of apocalyptic»
(pp. 188-189)].
ROBERTO U., From Hellenistic to Christian Universal History. Julius Africanus and the Atthidographers on the
Origins of Athens, ZAC 14 (2010) 525-538.
[Zusammenfassung: «Die Chronographiae des Julius Africanus stehen am Übergang von der Antike
zur Spätantike. Als Anhänger des christlichen Glaubens und Begründer der christlichen
Universalgeschichte bleibt Africanus zugleich der Tradition der hellenistischen Gelehrsamkeit
verbunden. Infolgedessen wird die christliche Idee der Einheit der Menschheit in den
Chronographiae durch den Rückgriff auf die hellenistische Kultur verstärkt. Dies zeigt sich
besonders deutlich an der Verknüpfung der als synchron angesehenen Ereignisse des Exodus von
Israel unter Mose und der Flut zur Zeit von Ogygos in Attika (F34). Interessant ist, wie Africanus
die Autochtonie und kulturelle Eigenständigkeit Athens ablehnt. Die Polemik gegen eine
idealisierende Beschreibung der Urgeschichte Athens ist eine wichtige Etappe im Wandel von
einer klassisch-hellenistischen zu einer christlichen Universalgeschichte» (p. 539)].
ROUKEMA R., Patristic Interpretation of Micah: Micah Read as a Book about Christ, in Die Septuaginta –
Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 702-719.
[1. Early Christian commentaries on the Twelve Prophets. 2. Patristic Interpretations of Micah 1:1-5.
3. Christological interpretation of Micah as a whole. 4. Background of the Christological
interpretation of Micah. – «We conclude that in the early Christian perspective, the allegorical,
Christianizing interpretation of this prophet was not arbitrary, but was based on a well-reasoned
hermeneutics – although the Fathers differed widely on the extent to which this sort of
interpretation had to be applied. As scholars, however, we can at best establish that, for
understandable reasons, in these ways the Septuagint version of Micah was appropriated by the
early Christians – which, of course, is true for the books of all prophets in general» (pp. 718-719)].
Salvation according to the Fathers of the Church. The Proceedings of the Sixth International Patristic
Conference, Maynooth / Belfast, 2005, edited by D.V. TWOMEY SVD and D. KRAUSMÜLLER, Four Courts
Press, Dublin 2010, pp. 188 (= Salvation according to the Fathers of the Church).
[Introduction, 9-12. D.V. TWOMEY, Seeing Salvation: Contemporary and Patristic Perspectives, 13-32.
J.A. MCGUCKIN, Soter Theos: The Patristic and Byzantine Reappropriation of an Antique Idea, 33-44.
M. NEAMŢȚU, The Life of the Cross in St Athanasius, 45-59. S. PARVIS, “Like Some Crown of Victory”: The
Soteriology of Marcellus of Ancyra, 60-69. F.G. CLANCY SJ, Christ the Scented Apple and the Fragrance of
the World Redemption: A Theme in St Ambrose’s Commentary on Psalm 118, 70-92. M. DOWLING,
Incarnation and Salvation in Leontius of Byzantium, 93-107. C. KAVANAGH, The Development of the
Sacred Symbol in Relation to Christology in the Thought of St Maximus the Confessor, 108-122.
T. O’LAUGHLIN, Salvation and the Liturgy: Some Examples from Early Christian Ireland, 123-142.
D. KRAUSMÜLLER, Do we Need to Be Stupid in Order to Be Saved? Barlaam of Calabria and Gregory
Palamas on Knowledge and Ignorance, 143-152. J. LÖSSL, Palamite Soteriology in Augustinian Dress?
Observations on Prochoros Kydones’ Writings and Translations of Some Works of Augustine, 153-164.
376
D. WOODS, The Cross in the Public Square: The Column-mounted Cross c. AD 450-750, 165-180.
H. RICHARDSON, The Cross Triumphant: Irish High Crosses, 181-182. Index, 183-188].
SCOGNAMIGLIO R., «Dio mio, Dio mio, perché mi hai abbandonato?» (Sal 21,2). Esegesi patristica in area
alessandrina, Nicolaus 37 (2010) 205-224.
[Premessa. Origene: i misteri della magna vox: Sel in Ps. 21; CMtS 135. Eusebio di Cesarea:
abbandonato solo il corpo di Gesù: dem. ev. X, 8; com. in ps 21. Didimo il Cieco: il Salvatore nella
polvere di morte: PsT 21. Considerazioni conclusive].
Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse → 4. LXX
SFAMENI GASPARRO G., Dio unico, pluralità e monarchia divina. Esperienze religiose e teologie nel mondo
tardo-antico (Scienze e storia delle religioni, 12), Morcelliana, Brescia 2010, pp. 280.
[Introduzione, 5-30. Sigle, 31-33. Cap. I. Scienza caldea e Dio unico in Filone di Alessandria. Una
risposta giudaica alla teologia cosmica ellenistica, 35-77. Cap. II. Orfeo «giudaico». Il Testamento di
Orfeo tra cosmosofia e monoteismo, 79-107. Cap. III. Dio unico e «monarchia» divina. Polemica e
dialogo tra pagani e cristiani (II-IV secolo d.C.), 109-129. Cap. IV. Monoteismo pagano nella
Antichità tardiva? Una questione di tipologia storico-religiosa, 131-162. Cap. V. Gli Oracoli caldaici e
l’attuale dibattito sul «monoteismo pagano». Sull’uso e abuso di una categoria storico-religiosa, 163178. Cap. VI. Dio unico e unità del divino. Teologie tardo-antiche fra «esclusione» e «inclusione»,
179-211. Bibliografia, 213-270. Indice dei nomi, 271-274; Indice delle materie, 275-277; Sommario, 279280].
STEFANIW B., Mind, Text, and Commentary. Noetic Exegesis in Origen of Alexandria, Didymus the Blind, and
Evagrius Ponticus (Early Christianity in the Context of Antiquity, 6), Peter Lang, Frankfurt am Main 2010,
pp. 417.
[Ch. 1. Studying exegesis, Interpreting interpretaion, 9-57. Ch. 2. What: What manner of thing was
the text believed to be?, 59-147. Ch. 3. Why: Under what conditions was noetic exegesis considered
necessary?, 149-219. Ch. 4. How: The performance, embodiment, and acquisition of noetic skill, 221297. Ch. 5. Where: The social and institutional context of noetic exegesis, 299-364. Ch. 6. Noetic
exegesis, 365-386. Bibliography, 387-413; Note on translations, 413; Acknowledgments, 415-416; About
the author, 417. – «Noetic exegesis can preliminarily be defined as exegesis which is concerned with
perceiving the noetic content of an authoritative text by means of noetic comprehension of the
higher significance of the text and with a view to rehabilitating and cultivating the interpreter’s
noῦ". Thus the topic of this investigation could be stated as the identification and analysis of the
interpretive assumptions of noetic exegesis conceived of not as a technique but as a manifestation
of the concerns and preoccupations of a particular interpretive community» (pp. 12-13)].
La Storia Ecclesiastica di Eusebio: alle origini della storiografia cristiana, a cura di L. PERRONE e A. VILLANI,
Adamantius 16 (2010) 6-124.
[L. PERRONE, Introduzione, 6-11. F. CALABI, La ‘missione’ di storico per Flavio Giuseppe, 12-21.
M. WALLRAFF, Le origini della storia universale cristiana: da Taziano a Giulio Africano, 22-33. O. ANDREI,
I Chronici Canones di Eusebio di Cesarea. Una rivoluzione cronografica, 34-51. M. AMERISE, Eusebio fra
storiografia e teologia politica: l’imperatore cristiano dalla Storia Ecclesiastica agli scritti costantiniani, 5262. V. NERI, Romani, Greci, Barbari: identità etniche ed universalismi nell’opera di Eusebio di Cesarea, 6387. A. MARTIN, Les continuateurs grecs d’Eusèbe de Césarée: le cas de Théodoret, 88-100. F. RUGGIERO, Un
cronachista minore a cavallo tra IV e V secolo: appunti sulla figura letteraria di Sulpicio Severo, 101-108. A.
BERNASCONI, I codici Bononienses Graeci 3643-3644 della Praeparatio e della Demonstratio Evangelica
di Eusebio, 109-119. E. PRINZIVALLI, Conclusioni, 120-124].
Studia Patristica. Papers presented at the Fifteenth International Conference on Patristic Studies held in
Oxford 2007, Vol. XLIV: I. Archaeologica, Arts, Iconographica. II. Tools. III. Historica; IV. Biblica; V.
377
Theologica, Philosophica, Ethica, edited by J. BAUN, A. CAMERON, M. EDWARDS and M. VINZENT, Leuven
– Paris – Walpole/MA 2010, pp. XVIII+553 (= Studia Patristica XLIV).
[J.A. FRANCIS, Biblical not Scriptural: Perspectives on Early Christian Art from Contemporary Classical
Scholarship, 3-8; P. WIDDICOMBE, The Drunkenness of Noah and the Patristic Legacy in Text and Art, 914; L.M. JEFFERSON, Superstition and the Signification of the Image of Christ Performing Miracles in
Early Christian Art, 15-20; R. BORGOGNONI, No Animals in the New Paradise? The ‘Hall of Philia’
from Antioch and the Patristic Exegesis of Isaiah’s ‘Peaceable Kingdom’, 21-26; A. KARAHAN, The Issue of
pericwvrhsi" in Byzantine Holy Images, 27-34; I.M. BUGÁR, Images of Jews and Christians in the
Seventh Century: The Narratio de Imagine in Beryto and its Context, 35-40; V. BARANOV, The
Doctrine of the Icon-Eucharist for the Byzantine Iconoclasts, 41-46. II. Tools: M. GEORGE – K. BRACHT,
Mneme Database Church History: A Presentation, 49-54. III. Historica: J. RIST, Das Orakel des Apollon
in Daphne und das Christentum, 57-62; T. HEYNE, Were Second-Century Christians ‘Preoccupied’ with
Physical Healing and the Asclepian Cult?, 63-70; D.P. QUINN, Roman Household Deities in the Latin
Christian Writers: Tertullian, Arnobius, and Lactantius, 71-76; C. SOTINEL, Ancient Christianity and
the Techniques of Information, 77-84; D. W OODS, The Deathbed Conversion of Galerius Maximianus
to Religious Tolerance: Fact or Fraud?, 85-90; M.M. KAZAKOV, Letters of Western Bishops to the Emperor
Theodosius I and Relations between Eastern and Western Churches at the End of the Fourth Century, 91104; D.L. RIGGS, Apologetic Performance and Saint Stephen as Civic Patron in Late Roman Africa, 105110; V. MESSANA, Aspetti istituzionali e riferimenti normativi in Salviano di Marsiglia, 111-118;
S. COSTANZA, Fonti patristiche sulla Sicilia nella valutazione degli studiosi contemporanei, 119-124;
G. GREATREX, The Fall of Macedonius Reconsidered, 125-129. IV. Biblica: B. GAIN, Le respect dû au Livre
des Écritures: Quelques témoignages patristiques, 133-138; E. SCHERBENSKE, The Vulgate Primum
Quaeritur, Codex Fuldensis and the Hermeneutical Role of Early Christian Introductory Materials, 139144; J. VERHEYDEN, Before Embarking on an Adventure: Some Preliminary Remarks on Writing the
NTP Commentary on the Gospel of Mark, 145-156; E. RUARO, Flying with Fleshy Wings: Ps.-Basil’s
Demonology in the Exegesis of Isaiah 2:20, 157-162; P.M. BLOWERS, Making Ends Meet: Variable Uses of
the Psalm Title Unto the End (eij" to; tevlo") in Greek Patristic Commentators on the Psalter, 163-175;
H. REULING, Rabbinic Responses to Christian Appropriation of the Hebrew Bible: The Case of Psalm
22:1 (MT), 177-182; C.B. TKACZ, Esther as a Type of Christ and the Jewish Celebration of Purim, 183-187;
H. HUNT, Sexuality and Penitence in Syriac Commentaries on Luke’s Sinful Woman, 189-194;
S. MORRIS, Blood and Holy Communion: Late Antique Use of Luke 8:42-8, 195-199; M. EDWARDS,
Orthodox Corruption? John 1:18, 201-205; H. DAYTON, On the Use of Luke 10:38-42 – Jesus in the
House of Mary and Martha – for Instruction in Contemplative Prayer in the Patristic Tradition, 207212; J. YATES, The Use of Rom. 2:14-5 in the Christian Latin Tradition ca. 365-ca. 411 – Augustine
Excepted, 213-225; M. RIZZI, Romans 13 in Early Christian Exegesis, 227-234; J.L. KOVACS, A Letter
‘Weighty and Powerful’: The Importance of 1Corinthians in the Early Church, 235-247; R. ROUKEMA,
Paul’s Admonitions on Idol Offerings (1Cor. 8 and 10) in Patristic Interpretation, 249-258; I. RAMELLI,
In Illud: Tunc et ipse Filius... Gregory of Nyssa’s Exegesis, its Derivations from Origen, and Early
Patristic Interpretations Related to Origen’s, 259-274; D.A. KUREK-CHOMYCZ, Scenting the Aroma of
Christ: 2Cor. 2:15-6 in Origen’s Interpretation, 275-279; B. STEFANIW, Exegetical Curricula in Origen,
Didymus, and Evagrius: Pedagogical Agenda and the Case for Neoplatonist Influence, 281-294. V.
Theologica, Philosophica, Ethica: M.-O. BOULNOIS, ‘Dieu jaloux’: Embarras et controverses autour d’un
nom divin dans la littérature patristique, 297-313; K. KLOOS, Christ the Revealer: Patristic Views of the
Mediation of Christ in the Old Testament, 315-320; C. STEWART, Monastic Attitudes toward Philosophy
and Philosophers, 321-327; J. NIMMO SMITH, From Gorgias to Gregory of Nazianzus – a Platonic
Formula Revisited, 329-334; F. YOUNG, Creation and Human Being: The Forging of a Distinct
Christian Discourse, 335-348; J. KONSTANTINOVSKY, Soul and Body in Early Christian Thought: A
378
Unified Duality?, 349-354; S. FROST, How the Early Christians Discovered the Soul, 355-359; R. SORABJI,
Greco-Roman Origins of the Idea of Moral Conscience, 361-383; V. HUŠEK, Human Freedom According to
the Earliest Latin Commentaries on Paul’s Letters, 385-390; R. W ILLIAMS, ‘Tempted as we are’:
Christology and the Analysis of the Passions, 391-404; K. UHALDE, The Sinful Subject: Doing Penance in
Rome, 405-414; H. STANDER, The Church Fathers on Pity, 415-420; K. SCHLAPBACH, Spectaculum
naturae as ‘Theatrical’ Experience: New Uses of an Old Comparison, 421-426; C. HARRISON,
Transformative Listening: Constructing the Hearer in Early Christianity, 427-432; G.D. DUNN, The
Functions of Mary in the Christmas Homilies of Augustine of Hippo, 433-446; A. ATANASSOVA,
Theological and Cultic Components of Mariology in the Context of Ephesus, 447-460; E. GIANNARELLI,
Body, Clothing and Female Identity, 461-469; V. NOVEMBRI, Philosophia and Christian Culture: An
Antidote for Female Weakness in Jerome’s Letters, 471-485; L.M. PELTOMAA, Roles and Functions of Mary
in the Hymnography of Romanos Melodos, 487-498; F. DI MARCO, Undressed: The Naked Female Body as
a Sign of Holiness in Apocryphal and Hagiographical Literature, 499-508; S.J. SHOEMAKER, Asceticism in
the Early Dormition Narratives, 509-513; N. TSIRONIS, Desire, Longing and Fear in the Narrative of
Middle- Byzantine Homiletics, 515-520; P. GEMEINHARDT, Holiness and Education in Late Antique
Hagiography, 521-526; P. ASHWIN-SIEJKOWSKI, Porphyry’s Sententiae an Ethical/Spiritual Guidebook to
the Neoplatonic Life, 527-531; B. NEIL, Blessed are the Rich: Leo the Great and the Roman Poor, 533-547;
B. MATZ, Alleviating Economic Injustice in Gregory of Nyssa’s Contra usurarios, 549-553].
Oxford 2007, Vol. XLV: VI. Ascetica. VII. Liturgica. VIII. Orientalia; IX. Critica et Philologica; X. The First
Two Centuries, edited by J. BAUN, A. CAMERON, M. EDWARDS and M. VINZENT, Leuven – Paris –
Walpole/MA 2010, pp. XVIII+451 (= Studia Patristica XLV).
[VI. Ascetica: L. BARBU, ‘Charisma’ vs. ‘Institution’? The Ascetics and the Church, 3-8; R. FINN, Early
Christian Asceticism and Almsgiving: Origen’s Ascetic Beginnings, 9-20; D.F. BUMAZHNOV, Some
Further Observations Concerning the Early History of the Term MONACOS (Monk), 21-26; G. GOULD,
The Collection of Apophthegmata Patrum in Palladii Lausiaca 20 (PL 74, 377-82), 27-34;
P. RÖNNEGÅRD, The Use of Scripture in Apophthegmata Patrum in Light of the Ergasia Pattern, 3542; K. UPSON-SAIA, Gender and Narrative Performance in Early Christian Cross-Dressing Saints’ Lives,
43-48; M. SÁGHY, Amator castitatis: Pope Damasus and the Politics of Asceticism, 49-54; A.E.J. GROTE,
No scriptorium in the Monastery of Carthage? Observations on Writing and Manual Labour in
Augustine’s De opere monachorum, 55-60; P. BARATA DIAS, The Libellus De Regularibus
Obseruantiis (Bib. Vat. Reginensis lat. 17, ff. 146r-154v): New Perspectives Concerning the Permanence of
the Regula Mixta Monastic System after the Carolingian Age, 61-68. VII. Liturgica: J.G. MUELLER,
Jewish Roots of Ancient Episcopal Election, 71-76; R. JENSEN, ‘With Pomp, Apparatus, Novelty, and
Avarice’: Alternative Baptismal Practices in Roman Africa, 77-84; L.H. W ESTRA, How Did Symbolum
Come to Mean ‘Creed’?, 85-92; C.A. BOBERTZ, Ritual Eucharist Within Narrative: A Comparison of
Didache 9-10 with Mark 6:31-44, 8:1-9, 93-100; P. LEE, The Eucharist and Reservation in Early
Centuries, 101-103; M. ZHELTOV, The Sanctus and the First Epiclesis in the Anaphoras of the Egyptian
Type, 105-114; J.J. ARMSTRONG, The Paschal Controversy and the Emergence of the Fourfold Gospel
Canon, 115-124; R. ZANOTTO, Liturgia ariana: tracce nei monumenti e mosaici di Ravenna, 125-131;
O. SHCHURYK, The Christological Position of Acacius of Melitene in the Context of the Council of
Ephesus 431, 131-138; H. AMIRAV, Political and Social Networks in the Council of Chalcedon: The
Imperial Commission, 139-146; T. GRAUMANN, Towards the Reception of the Council of Ephesus (431):
Public Sentiment and Early Theological Responses, 147-162; R. VILLEGAS MARÍN, Lucidus on
Predestination: The Damnation of Augustine’s Predestinationism in the Synods of Arles (473) and Lyons
(474), 163-168; P.T.R. GRAY, Disappearing Acts: The Greek Acts of Constantinople II, 169-174;
A.E. SIECIENSKI, Avoiding the Sin of Ham: Dealing with Errors in the Works of the Fathers, 175-180.
379
VIII. Orientalia: S.P. BROCK, Dramatic Narrative Poems on Biblical Topics in Syriac, 183-196;
M.P. PENN, Piety and the Pumice Stone: Erasure in Syriac Manuscripts, 197-202; C. PASQUET,
L’homme, lien de l’univers, dans la tradition syro-orientale, 203-210; G.W. BOWERSOCK, Helena’s
Bridle, Ethiopian Christianity, and Syriac Apocalyptic, 211-220; T. KREMER, Gute und böse Tiere im
Genesiskommentar Ephräms des Syrers, 221-228; J.W. DRIJVERS, The Emperor Jovian as New
Constantine in the Syriac Julian Romance, 229-234; C. LANGE, ‘From that Moment Rome, even like
the Church, was Rent in Twain’. Syriac Chronographers on the End of the Western Empire, 235-244;
N. KAVVADAS, On the Relations between the Eschatological Doctrine of Isaac of Nineveh and Theodore of
Mospuestia, 245-250; L. KHOPERIA, One Georgian Witness and the Literary Heritage of John Xiphilinos,
251-256; T. TSERADZE, Georgian Manuscripts of Kelliotic Type, 257-262; P. BRUNS, Wer war Paul der
Perser?, 263-268. IX. Critica et Philologica: H.A.G. HOUGHTON, ‘Flattening’ in Latin Biblical
Citations, 271-276; J. REYNARD, Le Mystère des lettres grecques: Un inédit à paraître aux Sources
Chrétiennes, 277-282. X. The First Two Centuries: E. MULLER, A Distinctive Feature of Early Roman
Angelomorphic Christology, 285-290; C. DOWNER, The Nature of the Resurrection Scenes in M581, the
Martyrdom of St Pteleme, and Other Early Christian Hagiographic Texts, 291-296; T. KHOMYCH, The
Motif of Gathering in Didache 14 Reconsidered, 297-302; D.C. ROBINSON, The Problem of diyuciva in
the Shepherd of Hermas, 303-308; K.F. MORRISON, How to Feed on Empty Images: The Shepherd of
Hermas and the Witch of Endor, 309-324; D. O’BRIEN, Entering the Kingdom with Difficulty: The Selfsufficient Life as the Quest for Wealthy Believers in the Shepherd of Hermas and Clement of Alexandria’s
Quis Dives Salvetur and Paedagogus, 325-330; T. HEGEDUS, Midrash in the Letter of Barnabas, 331-336;
C.E. HILL, Serapion of Antioch, the Gospel of Peter, and a Four Gospel Canon, 337-342; H. RHEE,
Wealth and the Wealthy in the Acts of Peter, 343-348; J. LEAL, Nota Martyrologica: el sueño de
Dinócrates en la Passio Perpetuae y las fuentes de la Passio Fabii Vexilliferi, 349-354; D. MINNS, The
Text of Justin’s Apologies, 355-361; J.A. ADAIR, The Power and Will of God: Justin’s Christological
Confession, 361-366; M.J. SVIGEL, The Center of Ignatius of Antioch’s Catholic Christianity, 367-372;
D.M. REIS, Surveillance, Interrogation, and Discipline: Inside Ignatius’ Panopticon, 373-378;
F. BERGAMELLI, ‘Lasciatemi ricevere la pura luce! Là giunto, sarò uomo’ (Romani 6.2). Lineamenti
essenziali di antropologia ignaziana, 379-384; T. MCCONNELL, Ignatius of Antioch: Death Wish or Last
Request of a Condemned Man?, 385-390; P. HARTOG, Polycarp’s Martyrdom ‘According to the Gospel’ and
Paul’s Philippians, 391-396; A. BRIGGMAN, Dating Irenaeus’ Acquisition of Theophilus’ Correspondence
To Autolycus: A Pneumatological Perspective, 397-402; C.T. BOUNDS, Competing Doctrines of
Perfection: The Primary Issue in Irenaeus’ Refutation of Gnosticism, 403-408; J. LÖSSL, Hermeneutics
and Doctrine of God in Tatian’s Ad Graecos, 409-412; L. PERENDY, The Outline of Systematic
Theology in the Ad Autolycum of Theophilus of Antioch, 413-418; D. R ANKIN, Athenagoras, Philosopher
and First Principles, 419-; D.J. BINGHAM, Scripture as Apology in Athenagoras of Athens, 425-432;
R. KYDD, Polemics and the Gifts of the Spirit in Tertullian, Irenaeus, and the Excerpts from Theodotus,
433-438; R. AASGAARD, The Gospel for Early Christian Children: A Re-assessment of the Infancy Gospel of
Thomas, 439-444; M. STAROWIEYSKI, La figure de Judas dans la littérature apocryphe, 445-451].
Oxford 2007, Vol. XLVI: XI. Tertullian to Tyconius. XII. Egypt before Nicaea. XIII. Athanasius and his
Opponents, edited by J. BAUN, A. CAMERON, M. EDWARDS and M. VINZENT, Leuven – Paris –
Walpole/MA 2010, pp. XVI+358 (= Studia Patristica XLVI).
[XI. Tertullian to Tyconius: A.D. TER BRUGGE, Between Adam and Aeneas: Tertullian on Rejection
and Appropriation of Roman Culture, 3-8; R.D. TOMSICK, Structure and Exegesis in Tertullian’s Ad
Uxorem and De exhortatione Castitatis, 9-16; M.C. STEENBERG, Sinful Nature as Second Nature in
Tertullian of Carthage, 17-20; E. DEPALMA DIGESER, Methodius and Porphyry, 21-26; O.G. GORDON, Is
De mortibus persecutorum an Orphan Indeed?, 27-32; A.C. MAYER, Cyprian’s Notion of Unity – an
380
Ecumenical Aim?, 33-38; G. KENDEFFY, Lactantius on the Function of the Two Ways, 39-44; S. FREUND,
Laktanz und die Johannesoffenbarung, 45-52; A.P. JOHNSON, Rethinking the Authenticity of Porphyry,
Contra Christianos, fr. 1, 53-58; S. MORLET, La Démonstration évangélique d’Eusèbe de Césarée
contient-elle des fragments du Contra Christianos de Porphyre? À propos du frg. 73 Harnack, 59-64;
R.P.H. GREEN, Constantine as Patron of Christian Latin Poetry, 65-76; K. SESSA, Exceptionality and
Invention: Silvester and the Late Antique ‘Papacy’ at Rome, 77-94; D.H. WILLIAMS, New Light on
Hilary of Poitiers’ In Matthaeum, 95-98; D. BERTRAND, L’argumentation hilarienne dans les Livres 4-7
du De Trinitate, 99-104; M. EDWARDS, Marius Victorinus and the Homoousion, 105-118;
L. KARFÍKOVÁ, Time According to Marius Victorinus, Adversus Arium IV 15, 119-124; J. VOELKER,
Marius Victorinus’ Latin Witness of Filioque, 125-130; J. PAPSDORF, Filastrius of Brescia’s Diversarum
Hereseon Liber: A Study in Patristic Mediocrity, 131-136; F. BRASCHI, A Comprehensive Reading of
Ambrose’s Explanatio psalmorum XII, 137-142; F.G. CLANCY, Repairing the Torn Garments of our
Nature: Redemption in St Ambrose’s Expositio evangelii secundum Lucam, 143-148; A.R. CHRISTMAN,
Biblical Exegesis and Virgil’s Aeneid in Ambrose of Milan’s Expositio Psalmi CXVIII, 149-154; J.M. VERCRUYSSE, Tyconius a-t-il lu Origène?, 155-160; P. BRIGHT, Scripture, the Loom of the Spirit:
Genre and Species in the Book of Rules of Tyconius of Carthage, 161-166. XII. Egypt before Nicaea:
H.F. HÄGG, Deification in Clement of Alexandria with a Special Reference to his Use of Theaetetus
176B, 169-174; A. DINAN, Ai[nigma and aijnivttomai in the Works of Clement of Alexandria, 175-180;
J. PLÁTOVÁ, Bemerkungen zu den Hypotyposen-Fragmenten des Clemens Alexandrinus, 181-188;
S.W.J. KEOUGH, Eschatology Worthy of God: The Goodness of God and the Groaning of Creation in
Origen’s De Principiis, 189-194; J.J. ALVIAR, A Second Look at Origen’s Notion of ‘Rationality’, 195-200;
D.G. ROBERTSON, Origen on Inner and Outer Logos, 201-206; H. MARX-W OLF, Third-Century
Daimonologies and the Via Universalis: Origen, Porphyry and Iamblichus on daimones and Other
Angels, 207-216; A. TZVETKOVA-GLASER, Polemics against Judaeo-Christian Practices in Origen’s
Homilies, 217-222; A.E. JOHNSON, In the Name of Jesus: Consequences of Preaching in Origen’s Homilies
on Joshua, 223-228; M. AUSSEDAT, La récriture des Homélies sur Jérémie d’Origène dans la tradition
caténique, 229-234; K. SHUVE, Entering the Story: Origen’s ‘Dramatic’ Approach to Scripture in the
Homilies on Jeremiah, 235-240; J.S. O’LEARY, Platonic Dissolution of History in Origen’s Commentary
on John X 5-34, 241-246; S. SPANGLER, Christology as the Basis of Metaphysics in Origen’s Commentary
on John, 247-252; S. DRAKE, Images of Jewishness in Origen’s Letter to Africanus, 253-266; M. BELDA,
La oración continua en el tratado Peri; εὐχῆς de Orígenes, 267-272. XIII. Athanasius and his
Opponents: T.G. WEINANDY, Athanasius’ Letter to Marcellinus: A Soteriological Praying of the
Psalms, 275-280; A. TEAL, Athanasius and Apollinarius: Who Was the Chicken and Who Was the Egg?,
281-288; D.M. GWYNN, Eusebius of Nicomedia: A ‘Court Bishop’ for Constantine?, 289-294; K. NOAKES,
Cyril of Jerusalem and the Spectrum of Renunciation, 295-300; A. GELSTON, Cyril of Jerusalem’s
Eucharistic Prayer: The Argument from Silence, 301-306; M. DELCOGLIANO, The Significance of George
of Laodicea in the Fourth-Century Trinitarian Debates, 307-312; T.D. BARNES, Notes on the Letter of
Eusebius to Constantia (CPG 3503), 313-318; M.B. SIMMONS, Universalism in the Demonstratio
evangelica of Eusebius of Caesarea, 319-324; T. HEYNE, The Devious Eusebius? An Evaluation of the
Ecclesiastical History and Its Critics, 325-332; S. TODA, The Syriac Version of Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical
History Revisited, 333-338; H.A. DRAKE, Playing With Words: Is There a Corpus in the Vita
Constantini?, 339-346; C. SHEPARDSON, Burying Babylas: Meletius of Antioch and the Shape of Christian
Orthodoxy, 347-352; E. FERGUSON, Baptism in the Messalian Controversy, 353-358].
Oxford 2007, Vol. XLVII: XIV. Cappadocian Writers. XV. The Second Half of the Fourth Century (Greek
Writers), edited by J. BAUN, A. CAMERON, M. EDWARDS and M. VINZENT, Leuven – Paris – Walpole/MA
2010, pp. XVI+313 (= Studia Patristica XLVII).
381
[XIV. Cappadocian Writers: A. MEREDITH, Divine Incomprehensibility in Gregory of Nyssa and
Augustine, 3-8; J. LEEMANS, Reading Acts 6-7 in the Early Church: Gregory of Nyssa’s First and Second
Homilies on Stephen the Protomartyr, 9-20; A. RADDE-G ALLWITZ, Epinoia and Initial Concepts: Reassessing Gregory of Nyssa’s Defense of Basil, 21-26; C. KÖCKERT, The Concept of Seed in Christian
Cosmology: Gregory of Nyssa, Apologia in Hexaemeron, 27-32; N.D. HOWARD, Familial Askêsis in the
Vita Macrinae, 33-38; M. LAIRD, Gregory of Nyssa and Divinization: A Reconsideration, 39-44;
S. LEUENBERGER-WENGER, Ethics and Christian Identity in Gregory of Nyssa, 45-50; G. MASPERO,
Remarks on Eros in Plato and Gregory of Nyssa, 51-56; I. RAMELLI, Aijwvnio" and Aijwvn in Origen and
Gregory of Nyssa, 57-62; T. HAIKKA, Gregory of Nyssa’s Canticum behind the Akathistos Hymn?, 63-70;
M. CASSIN, Réfuter sans lasser le lecteur: Pratique de la réfutation dans le Contre Eunome de Grégoire de
Nysse, 71-76; M. LA MATINA, Analytic Philosophy of Language and the Revelation of Person. Some
Remarks on Gregory of Nyssa and Maximus Confessor, 77-84; A.G. KEIDEL, Basil of Caesarea and Free
Will, 85-90; D. SARISKY, The End of Interpretation in Basil of Caesarea’s De spiritu sancto, 91-96;
M. MIRA IBORRA, About the Structure of De Spiritu sancto by Basil of Caesarea, 97-104;
S. TSUCHIHASHI, Homotimia and synarithmêsis in Basil of Caesarea’s De Spiritu sancto, 105-110;
C. MORESCHINI, Tritheism in Basil and Gregory of Nazianzus, 111-116; J. MAXWELL, The Attitudes of
Basil and Gregory of Nazianzus toward Uneducated Christians, 117-122; S. ABRAMS REBILLARD, The
Autobiographical Prosopopoeia of Gregory of Nazianzus, 123-128; T. BRAUCH, Gregory of Nazianzus’
Letters 24 and 38 and Themistius of Constantinople, 129-134; V.E.F. HARRISON, The Logos Cries Out
from the Virgin’s Womb: Gregory of Nazianzus, Oration 45.13, 135-140; P. BOUTENEFF, Whatever That
Was! Paradise According to Gregory of Nazianzus, 141-146; B.E. DALEY, Who is the Real Bishop of
Constantinople? A Reconsideration of Gregory of Nazianzus’ Will, 147-152. XV. The Second Half of the
Fourth Century: M. WEST, Jesus Speaks to/in Us: A Connection of Theme between Serapion of Thmuis’
Against the Manichees and Sacramentary, 155-160; Y.R. KIM, Bad Bishops Corrupt Good Emperors:
Ecclesiastical Authority and the Rhetoric of Heresy in the Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis, 161-166;
P.D. STEIGER, Peter and Paul in the Commentaries of Didymus the Blind, 167-172; B. BENNETT, The
Person Speaking: Prosopopoeia as an Exegetical Device in Didymus the Blind’s Interpretation of
Romans 7, 173-178; A. LOUTH, Evagrius on Anger, 179-186; M. TOBON, The Health of the Soul: Ἀπάθεια
in Evagrius Ponticus, 187-201; A.D. RICH, Discerning Evagrius Ponticus Discerning: Diavkrisi" in the
Works of Evagrius, 203-208; L. DYSINGER, Exegesis and Spiritual Guidance in Evagrius Ponticus, 209222; A. CASIDAY, Universal Restoration in Evagrius Ponticus’ Great Letter, 223-228; E. MOUTSOULAS,
La personne du Christ dans l’histoire selon Saint Jean Chrysostome, 229-236; D. RYLAARSDAM, On Earth
as if in Heaven: John Chrysostom on Christ, Priest, and the Making of Angels, 237-242; C. BOSINIS, What
does Paganism Mean for a Church Father? An Inquiry into the Use of the Term eijdwlolatreiva in the
Rhetoric of John Chrysostom, 243-248; C. CRÉPEY, Le vrai sens de la littéralité de l’exégèse dans les
Homélies sur la Genèse de Jean Chrysostome: Illustration à partir de l’exégèse de Gn 1:1, 249-254;
C.L. DE WET, John Chrysostom on Envy, 255-260; L. NEUREITER, Health and Healing as Recurrent
Topics in John Chrysostom’s Correspondence with Olympias, 267-272; U. VOLP, ‘The Unclean Spirit Has
Assaulted You from the Very Beginning’: John Chrysostom and Suicide, 272-286; E. BONFIGLIO, Notes on
the Manuscript Tradition of Anianus Celedensis’ Translation of John Chrysostom’s Homiliae in
Matthaeum (CPG 4424), 287-294; L. BLACKBURN, ‘Let the Men be Ashamed’: Public Insults, Angry
Words, and Figures of Shame in Chrysostom’s Homilies on Acts, 295-300; W. STEVENSON, John
Chrysostom, Maruthas and Christian Evangelism in Sasanian Iran, 301-306; T. KAÇAR, The Election of
Nectarius of Tarsus: Imperial Ideology, Patronage and Philia, 307-313].
Oxford 2007, Vol. XLVIII: From the Fifth Century: XVI. Greek Writers. XVII. Latin Writers. XVIII.
382
Nachleben, edited by J. BAUN, A. CAMERON, M. EDWARDS and M. VINZENT, Leuven-Paris-Walpole/MA
2010, pp. XVI+442 (= Studia Patristica XLVIII).
[XVI. Greek Writers: S. WESSEL, Human Action and the Passion in Nemesios of Emesa, 3-14;
A. WESTERGREN, ‘Fellow-lovers of God’: Participation in the Desire for God in Theodoret’s Historia
Philotheos, 15-20; P. PARVIS, Theodoret’s Bias: The Aim of the Historia Ecclesiastica, 21-26; B.A. SMITH,
Theodoret and the Aesthetics of Ascetics, 27-32; A. TEAL, How Authentic is the Antiochene Construction of
Athanasius and His Theology in Nestorius and Theodoret?, 33-40; D. Z AGANAS, Deux fragments inédits
de l’In Isaiam de Cyrille d’Alexandrie, 41-46; G.K. HILLIS, New Birth through the Second Adam: The Holy
Spirit and the Miraculous Conception in Cyril of Alexandria, 47-52; D. KEATING, Christology in Cyril
and Leo: Unnoticed Parallels and Ironies, 53-58; G. KALANTZIS, Single Subjectivity and the Prosopic
Union in Cyril of Alexandria and Theodore of Mopsuestia, 44-49; G.C. BERTHOLD, Aspects of the Will in
Maximus the Confessor, 65-70; K. MILKOV, Renunciation According to Maximus the Confessor, 71-76;
A. LOUTH, St Maximos’ Doctrine of the logoi of Creation, 77-84; T.T. TOLLEFSEN, Causality and
Movement in St. Maximus’ Ambiguum 7, 85-94; V. CVETKOVIC, St. Maximus on Pavqo" and Kivnhsi"
in Ambiguum 7, 95-104; V. CVETKOVIC, On the Identity of ajllovtrio" and His Definition in
Ambiguum 7 of St Maximus, 105-110; A. GUIU, Christology and Philosophical Culture in Maximus the
Confessor’s Ambiguum 41, 111-116; L. CHVÁTAL, Maxime le Confesseur et la tradition philosophique: À
propos d’une définition de la kinêsis, 117-122; T. CATTOI, The Symphonic Church: Chalcedonian Themes
in Maximos the Confessor’s Liturgical Theology, 123-130; P. BLAUDEAU, Le documentum symmachien
consacré à Polychronius de Jérusalem: Enseignements géo-ecclésiologiques d’un faux romain, 131-136; D.I. VIEZURE, Philoxenus of Mabbug and the Controversies over the ‘Theopaschite’ Trisagion, 137-146;
K. PINGGÉRA, Der Leib Christi und das eucharistische Brot. Philoxenus of Mabbog zu Joh. 6:51, 147-152;
S.L. GRAHAM, ‘I Have Bested You, Solomon’: Justinian and the Old Testament, 153-158; H.R. JOHNSÉN,
Training for Solitude: John Climacus and the Art of Making a Ladder, 159-164; B. MÜLLER, Nautische
Metaphern bei Gregor dem Grossen, 165-170; R.A. ARTHUR, The Dating of the Dionysian Corpus, 171176; M. HARRINGTON, What Are the ‘Hypothetical Logoi’ of Dionysian Mystical Theology?, 177-182;
A. OJELL, The Most Evident Idea in Theology? Gregory of Nyssa and Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita on the
Theological Significance of Incarnation, 183-188; Y. DE ANDIA, Moïse et Paul, modèles de l’expérience
mystique chez Grégoire de Nysse et Denys l’Aréopagite, 189-204; J. VAN ROSSUM, Holy Communion as
‘Symbol’ in Pseudo-Dionysius and Theophanes of Nicaea, 205-210; D. NEHWEISER, Ambivalence in
Dionysius the Areopagite: The Limitation of a Liturgical Reading, 211-216; C. HOVORUN, Controversies
on Energies and Wills in Christ: Between Politics and Theology, 217-220; R. PRICE, Monotheletism: A
Heresy or a Form of Words?, 221-232; K. BEZARASHVILI, Michael Psellos: The Interpreter of the Style of
Gregory the Theologian and the New Aspects of the Concepts of Rhetorical Theories, 233-240;
N. BAMFORD, Gregory Palamas’ Energetic Approach to Person: Existential and Ontological Implications,
241-246; R. WHITE, The Mystery of the Cross in the Theology of St Gregory Palamas, 247-252; J. GETCHA,
Christology and Pneumatology in Symeon of Thessalonica’ Commentary on Baptism, 253-258; K. WARE,
Prayer According to St Symeon of Thessalonica, 259-264. XVII. Latin Writers: G. GILLETTE, The
Alignment of Anger and Friendship in Cassian’s Conference 16, 267-272; G. DE NIE, ‘Let All Perceive
What Mysteries Miracles May Teach Our Souls’: Poetry and Sacrament in Sedulius’ Paschale Carmen,
273-288; T.S. FERGUSON, Sidonius Apollinaris and the Muses: Reception of an Epic Tradition in the
Poems and Letters, 289-294; J. GRZYWACZEWSKI, The Passage from Romanitas to Christianitas
According to Sidonius Apollinaris († c. 486), 295-302; C.O. TOMMASI MORESCHINI, Roman and
Christian History in Dracontius’ De Laudibus Dei, 303-308; A. FERREIRO, Profuturus of Braga, Pope
Vigilius and Priscillian, 309-314; O. EHLEN, Venantius Fortunatus und das Heilige Kreuz: Das
Figurengedicht Carmen II 4, 315-320; H. SCERRI, Gregory the Great Deposes a Disobedient Bishop, 321326; P. MAYMÓ I CAPDEVILA, Gregory the Great and the Religious Otherness: Pagans in a Christian Italy,
383
327-332; G.E. DEMACOPOULOS, Gregory the Great and the Appeal to Petrine Authority, 333-346. XVIII.
Nachleben: Y. VELIKOV, Claudius of Turin and the Veneration of Images after the Libri Carolini, 349-355;
P. BALCÁREK, Some Remarks on the Response to Iconoclasm in the Old Slavonic Vita Constantini, 355360; E. HASTINGS, Augustine of Hippo and William of Saint-Thierry on the Relation between the Holy
Spirit’s Personal Identity (Rom. 5:5) and His Sovereign Freedom ad extra, 361-366; W. RANKIN, ‘Mo
fyguratif spechis than gramerians moun gesse’: Wycliffite Transformations of Augustine’s Semiotics, 367-372;
G. SEKULOVSKI, The Social Aspects of Fourteenth-Century Hesychasm, 373-378; G. PANI, Patristic
Commentaries on Pauline Epistles from 1455 to 1517, 379-384; M. GHEORGHE, A Patristic Figure in Early
Romanian Literature: Neagoe Basarab and His Teachings to His Son Theodosie, 385-390; S. BROOKS,
English and Dutch Polemical Use of Patristics and the Question of via media Reformed Protestantism, c.
1580-1615, 391-396; N. KAZARIAN, The Use of the Church Fathers by Jeremiah II Tranos in His
Examination of Free Will, 397-402; E.A. CLARK, Happiness in Hell, Virtue in the Middle State: The
Church Fathers and Some Nineteenth-Century Debates, 403-418; C. KANNENGIESSER, Divine Trinity
in Interreligious Debate: Ancient Foundations and Current Issues, 419-430; C.D. ROBERTSON, Augustine
and Vatican II: A Broadening Conception of the Church?, 431-436; T. MCCONNELL, The Presbyterian
Church’s Liturgical Use of Patristic Metaphors for the Trinity, 437-442].
Oxford 2007, Vol. XLIX: St. Augustine and his Opponents, edited by J. BAUN, A. CAMERON, M. EDWARDS
and M. VINZENT, Leuven – Paris – Walpole/MA 2010, pp. XVI+429 (= Studia Patristica XLIX).
[XIX. St. Augustine and his Opponents: P. NUGENT, Patristics and Pedagogy: Jerome and Augustine, 38. M. SMALBRUGGE, Beauty and Grace in Augustine, 9-14. M.W. TKACZ, Augustine, the Timaeus and the
Cosmogonical Fallacy, 15-20. T. NISULA, Continuities and Discrepancies in Augustine’s View on
Concupiscence and Baptism (410-430), 21-26. J.C. DAVIES, Signs of the Fall: Exilic Vision in Augustine,
27-32. L. DURAN, Augustine on Begotten but Coeternal – Theological Rationale for the Athanasian Creed,
33-38. J. MERDINGER, Conversations and Peregrinations of Augustine with his Closest Friends, 39-44.
C. MCCANN, Physician of the Soul: Augustine and Spiritual Mentoring, 45-50. P. VAN GEEST, Sensory
Perceptions as a Mandatory Requirement for the via negativa towards God. The Skilful Paradox of
Augustine as Mystagogue, 51-58. M.-A. VANNIER, Light and Illumination in Augustine: Revisiting an Old
Theme, 59-64. V. GROSSI, Sul ruolo metodologico del vocabolario nella lettura della teologia agostiniana
della grazia (397-428), 65-72. J.P. HOSKINS, Acts 4:32 in Augustine’s Ecclesiology, 73-78. C. BUENACASA
PÉREZ, Augustine on Donatism: Converting a Schism into an Heresy, 79-84. J.P. BURNS, The Holiness of
the Church in North African Theology, 85-100. R. TOPPING, Christ as disciplina dei in Augustine’s Early
Educational Thought, 101-106. P. BURNELL, Justice and War in and before Augustine, 107-110.
S. DAGEMARK, Medical Art: Some Remarks on Its Limitations and Verification in Augustine, 111-118.
P.F. BEATRICE, Augustine’s Longing for Holiness and the Problem of Monastic Illitteracy, 119-134.
M.B. PRANGER, Frozen Time: The Problem of Perseverance, 135-146. J.P. KENNEY, Pagan Monotheism
and Augustine’s Early Works, 147-160. S.B. GRIFFITH, The Figure of Adam in the Sermons of Augustine, 161168. S.P. ROSENBERG, Orality, Textuality, and the Memory of the Congregation in Augustine’s Sermons,
169-174. G.D. DUNN, Poverty as a Social Issue in Augustine’s Homilies, 175-180. A. DUPONT, The
Position of Gentiles and Pagans and Their Relation to Grace in Augustine’s Sermones ad populum, 181196. D. ELM VON DER OSTEN, Perpetual Felicity: Sermons of Augustine on Female Martyrdom (s. 280-282
auct. [Erfurt 1]), 203-210. E. MARTIN, Physical Infirmity, Spiritual Strength: Augustine’s Female Martyrs,
211-216. K.B. STEINHAUSER, Virgil, Cicero and the rusticanus: Augustine’s Contra Academicos III 15.3435, 217-222. T. UHLE, Truth and Dialectics in Augustine’s Soliloquies, 223-228. N. KAMIMURA,
Augustine’s Scriptural Exegesis in De Genesi ad litteram liber unus inperfectus, 229-234. F. COCCHINI,
Note sulla Inchoata Expositio ad Romanos di Agostino, 235-240. J. BRACHTENDORF, The Human
Condition as a Unifying Theme of the Confessions, 241-252. T. TOOM, Augustine Becoming Articulate:
384
Confessions 1.8.13, 253-258. R. HAFLIDSON, The Demands of Service: The Turn to Scriptural Exegesis in
Book XI of Augustine’s Confessions, 259-264. M.L. CARREKER, Divine Simplicity in the De Trinitate of
St. Augustine, 265-270. W. ELGERSMA HELLEMAN, ‘Christ, the Wisdom of God’. The Logic of Attribution
in Augustine’s De Trinitate 5-7, 271-278. W.A. HANNAM, The Structure and Purpose of Book VIII of
Augustine’s De Trinitate, 279-286. K. DEMURA, The Heart as Frame to Reach the Word: Augustine, De
Trinitate XV 11.20, 287-293. J. REXER, Die Ostertheologie des Augustinus nach den Briefen Ad
inquisitiones Ianuarii, 293-300. H. MÜLLER, Movements of a Putrefying Carcass: On Augustine’s Use of
‘Arians’ in Tractatus in evangelium Iohannis, 301-306. A. SOLER MERENCIANO, New Perspectives on
St Augustine and Priscillianism, 307-312. L. DALMON, La correspondance antipélagienne de l’Afrique avec
Rome: Présentation d’un dossier de l’Épistolaire augustinien (416-8), 313-318. B. ALEXANDERSON, Le
commentaire sur les Psaumes de Julien d’Éclane et le texte du Psautier, 319-324. G. BONNER, A Last Apology
for Pelagianism?, 325-328. D. WEBER, Beobachtungen zu Augustinus’ Locutiones in Heptateuchum, 329334. M. RIBREAU, ‘Quos uulgo moriones uocant’ (Contra Iulianum III 4,10): Le traitement des
moriones (débiles) dans les œuvres antipélagiennes d’Augustin, 335-340. P. ROSE, Textual Cohesion in
Augustine’s De cura pro mortuis gerenda, 341-346. G.A. BEVAN, Augustine and the Western Dimension
of the Nestorian Controversy, 347-352. A.Y. HWANG, A Reinterpretation of Prosper of Aquitaine’s
Theological Development, 353-368. A. CASIDAY, Prosper the Controversialist, 369-380. R. WEAVER,
Prosper’s Theologically Legacy and Its Limits, 381-395. A.Y. HWANG, The Authorship of the Ps.-Augustinian
Hypomnesticon, Part II, 395-400].
La trasmissione delle parole di Gesù nei primi tre secoli, a cura di M. PESCE e M. RESCIO (Antico e Nuovo
Testamento, 8), Morcelliana, Brescia 2011, pp. 271 (= La trasmissione delle parole di Gesù nei primi tre secoli).
[M. PESCE, Prefazione, 5-7. M. PESCE, Lo studio storico della trasmissione delle parole di Gesù, 9-31.
A. DESTRO, Strategie delle «parole» e profili di leaders. Un punto di vista antropologico sulle parole di Gesù,
33-54. P. ARZT-GRABNER, La ricezione delle parole di Gesù nelle lettere private cristiane, 55-69. L. WALT,
«Rendete a tutti ciò che è dovuto» (Rm 13,7). Paolo, Gesù e il tributo a Cesare, 71-94. C. GIANOTTO,
Vangelo secondo Tommaso, log. 42. Verifica di una nuova proposta di interpretazione, 95-99.
M. GROSSO, Trasmissione e ricezione della parabola del pescatore (Vangelo secondo Tommaso 8,1-3), 101117. M. RESCIO, I doppi detti sulla lampada e la misura. La composizione di Mc 4,21-25, 119-142.
D. TRIPALDI, «Apocalisse sinottica» e Apocalisse di Giovanni. Verso un confronto, 143-169. E. DE LUCA,
Misericordia e giudizio nell’Epistola di Giacomo (Gc 2,13). La trasmissione di un gruppo di parole di Gesù,
171-189. C. MAZZUCCO, I detti sui bambini e il Regno, 191-217. A. CACCIARI, La trasmissione delle parole
di Gesù in Giustino. Osservazioni sulla ricerca recente, 219-231. E. STORI, Liber Graduum III,3; XV,4:
pronti per la fine. Un agraphon della tradizione siriaca, 233-247. M. MYLLIKOSKI, L’enigma del cosiddetto
frammento del Fayûm (P. Vindob. G 2325), 249-260. Indice degli autori moderni, 261-267].
Von Homer bis Landino. Beiträge zur Antike und Spätantike sowie zu deren Rezeptions- und
Wirkungsgeschichte. Festgabe für Antonie Wlosok zum 80. Geburtstag, herausgegeben von B.R. SUCHLA,
Pro BUSINESS, Berlin 2011, pp. 514 (=Von Homer bis Landino).
[B.R. SUCHLA, Vorwort, 7-8. S.E. BUCKWALTER, Die Augustin-Rezeption Martin Bucers –
Forschungsperspektiven, 9-36. A. DIHLE, Ein Vorurteil und seine Widerlegung, 37-52. T. FUHRER,
Allegorisches Lesen und Schreiben in Augustins Confessiones, 53-84. P. GEMEINHARDT, Sancta
Simplicitas? Bildung als Thema der spätantiken lateinischen Hagiographie, 85-113. K. GRESCHAT, Finale
im Garten einer villa. Beobachtungen zu den letzten Kapiteln der Vita Hilarionis des Hieronymus, 115132. W.D. LEBEK, Das Datum des ersten Clemensbriefes, 133-206. E. MÜHLENBERG, Der kanonische Brief
Gregors von Nyssa und sein Ort im Bußwesen der Alten Kirche, 207-242. H.-G. NESSELRATH, Libanios
und die Mönche, 243-267. L. PERRONE, Zur Edition von Perì euchês des Origenes: Rückblick und
385
Ausblick, 269-318. P. PODOLAK, Flores delibare Platonicos. Per la ricezione di Dionigi l’Areopagita in
Marsilio Ficino, 319-354. K. POLLMANN, Virtue, Vice, and History in Ammianus Marcellinus’
Obituaries on the Emperor Julian and Valentinian I, 355-384. A.M. RITTER, Bemerkungen zum
Wachstum des Christentums sowie zu den christlichen Einstellungen im Gegenüber zum Imperium
Romanum in vorkonstantinischer Zeit, 385-402. H. STRUTWOLF, Hypostase und Ousia in Contra
Eunomium des Basilius von Caesarea – Zur homöousianischen Herleitung der neunizänischen Theologie,
403-434. M. WIFSTRAND SCHIEBE, Virgilius de uno deo aperte loquitur. Eklogendeutung und
Laktanzanlehnung bei Hugo de Folieto (12. Jahrhundert), 435-464. C. ZINTZEN, Bemerkungen zu
Cristoforo Landino, De vera nobilitate, 465-487. Verzeichnis der Schriften von Antonie Wlosok, 489509. Autorenverzeichnis, 511-514].
W ALLRAFF M., The Beginnings of Christian Universal History. From Tatian to Julius Africanus, ZAC 14
(2010) 540-555.
[1. Tatian the Syrian. 2. Theophilus of Antioch. Clement of Alexandria. 4. Julius Africanus. –
Zusammenfassung: «(...) Oft wird angenommen, dass Geschichtskonzepte im frühen Christentum
in enger Beziehung zur Eschatologie stehen, Chronographie und Chiliasmus miteinenader
verbunden sind. Eine genaue Analyse der Texte zeigt jedoch, dass eine solche Verbindung
entweder nicht bewiesen weden kann oder dass sogar – ganz im Gegenteil – einige Autoren kein
Interesse an Eschatologie hatten. Obwohl Arithmetik und genaue historische Berechnungen eine
grosse Rolle spielen und obwohl der Rahmen der Geschichte in einigen Fällen durchaus als
chiliastisch bezeichnet werden kann (in dem Sinn, dass für die Geschichte der Menschheit eine
Gesamt dauer von 6000+1000 Jahren angenommen wurde), gab es wenig Interesse an einer
genauen Berechnung des Endes der Zeit. Außerdem wird die Beziehung zwischen Historiographie
und Apologetik diskutiert. Es steht außer Frage, dass die Ursprünge der literarischen Gattung
Universalgeschichte in der apologetischen Tradition frühchristlicher Theologie liegen. Im Falle von
Tatian und Theophil (bis zum gewissen Grad auch bei Klemens) sind die chronologischen
Traktate in größere Werke eingebettet, die einen kritischen Dialog mit zeitgenössischer paganer
Philosophie zum Ziel haben. Der Altersbeweis spielt dabei eine zentrale Rolle, im besonderen die
chronologische Beziehung zwischen Moses und Homer. Während dieser Gedanke zum
Verständnis von Tatian und Theophil weitgehend ausreicht, zeigen spätere Autoren eine
Emanzipation der literarischen Gattung Chronographie von den apologetischen Wurzeln. Bis zum
gewissen Grad bei Klemens, aber ganz sicher bei Julius Africanus treten diese Wurzeln in den
Hintergrund» (p. 555). NdR: versione inglese dell’articolo originariamente pubblicato sulla nostra
rivista col titolo Le origini della storia universale cristiana: da Taziano a Giulio Africano (Adamantius
16, 2010, 22-33)].
W ATTS E.J., Riot in Alexandria. Tradition and Group Dynamics in Late Antique Pagan and Christian
Communities (The Joan Palevsky Imprint in Classical Literature, 46), University of California Press,
Berkeley–Los Angeles–London 2010, pp. XV+290.
[1. The anatomy of a riot, 1-22. Part One. Historical discourse in intellectual communities: 2.
Personal legacy and scholastic discourse, 29-52 (Internal historical discourse and its transmission:
the example of Eunapius, 33-45; Defending communal historical discourse: Porphyry’s Life of
Plotinus, 45-52); 3. Past, present, and future in Late Neoplatonic historical discourse, 53-88 (The Life
of Isidore and its sources, 54-60; Eating, drinking, and learning Neoplatonic history, 60-62; Oral
tradition and scholastic identity in the Alexandrian schools of the 480s, 62-65; Paralius’ beating with
its scholastic context, 65-71; Fifth-century Christian violence in Neoplatonic communal memory, 7178; Teaching ethics after the riot, 78-88). Part Two. The past within and outside late antique
monasteries, 91-93: 4. History and the shape of monastic communities, 95-122 (The Koinonia, 99107; The Historia monachorum and visitors’ exposure to ascetic oral traditions, 107-114; Social
relations and the power of the master: Barsanuphius and John, 114-122); 5. Anti-Chalcedonian
386
ascetics and their student associates, 123-154 (The limits of ascetic influence, 124-130; Finding the
ascetic and intellectual balance, 130-138; The ascetic and sophistic mélange of Zacharias
Scholasticus, 138-142; A student riot and its commemoration: The «Life of Paralius», 142-154). Part
Three. Defining the Alexandrian Bishop, 155-161: 6. Creating the legend of the Alexandrian bishop,
163-189 (Mechanisms of episcopal power, 165-171; Athanasius and the politics of self-definition, 172175; Athanasius’ restoration and redefinition, 175-182; The Athanasian historical legacy, 182-189); 7.
Theophilus and Cyril: the Alexandrian bishop triumphant, 190-215 (Theophilus and the historical
character of Athanasius, 191-205; The legacy of Theophilus, 205-215); 8. Peter Mongus struggles
with the past, 216-253 (Chalcedon and the redefinition of the Alexandrian bishop, 217-229; Peter
Mongus and resistance in an age of compromise, 229-234; Peter Mongus and the beating of
Paralius, 234-243; A riot’s aftermath, 243-253). Conclusion, 254-264. Appendix 1: Dating the riot, 263264; Appendix 2: How much should we trust Zacharias Scholasticus, 265-268. Bibliography, 269-284.
Index, 285-290].
2. Ellenismo e cultura alessandrina
BERNARD A., The Alexandrian School. Theon of Alexandria and Hypatia, in The Cambridge History of
Philosophy in Late Antiquity, 417-436.
[1. Hypatia of Alexandria: Life and attributed works. Thought: 1. Was she a Platonist?; 2. Synesius’
testimony on Hypatia’s traching; 3. Hypatia’s plausible ‘Ptolemism’. Theon of Alexandria: Life and
works; Thought. 3. Pappus of Alexandria: Life and works; Thought. 4. Some open questions about
Ptolemy’s heritage in the fourth century CE. – «Let us summarize the pcture emerging from the
previous, schematic presentation of Hypatia’s, Theon’s and Pappus’ works and thought. First, it
should be clear that any such picture is necessarily speculative, due to the lack of completely
reliable information. In such a situation, the best one can do is to propose a plausible story, which is
ultimately improvable but reasonably in line with the available evidence. From such a perspective,
we saw that viewing these figures as inheritors of Ptolemy’s philosophy provides a reasonable
account of many aspects of either the testimony concerning Hypatia or the particularities of the
extant work of Theon and Pappus. In particular, it squares with the simple and remarkable fact
that the three of them spent a considerable amount of time studying Ptolemy’s Almagest and
commenting on it» (p. 435)].
NIEHOFF M., Jewish Exegesis and Homeric Scholarship in Alexandria
generale
→ 1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere
ROBERTO U., From Hellenistic to Christian Universal History. Julius Africanus and the Atthidographers on the
Origins of Athens → 1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere generale
SCHIBLI H., Hierocles of Alexandria, in The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity, 437-456.
[1. Life and writings. 2. Thought: A) The One; B) The Demiurge; C) The created order; D)
Mankind and philosophy; E) Divine likeness; F) Providence and fate; G) Hierocles’ influence].
Communities → 1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere generale
3. Giudaismo ellenistico
ADLER W., The Chronographiae of Julius Africanus and its Jewish Antecedents, ZAC 14 (2010) 496-524.
[Africanus and Palestinian Judaism. Chronography and biblical exegesis in Second Temple
Judaism. Africanus and the «remaining Hebrew histories». Comparative chronology and the dating
of Moses. Africanus and Jewish apocalyptic chronology. – Zusammenfassung: «In der Forschung
ist die Meinung verbreitet, dass Julius Africanus in seinen Chronographiae einfach geläufige Topoi
der jüdischen (und christlichen) Tradition zu einer vollständigen Chronik ausgeweitet hat. Verf.
analysiert die Art und Weise, wie Julius Africanus ältere jüdische Quellen und Traditionen
387
benutzt hat, und berücksichtigt dabei die verschiedenen Bereiche des benutzten
Quellenmaterials: mündliche Überlieferung palästinischer Provenienz, biblische Exegese,
Historiographie, apokryphe Literatur (besonders das Jubiläenbuch und das äthiopische
Henochbuch), Apologetik und apokalyptische Endzeitspekulation. Es zeigt sich, dass Julius
Africanus dieses facettenreiche Quellenmaterial an die Erfordernisse der hellenistischen
Universalchronik angepasst und so aus dem von ihm benutzten Material etwas ganz
Eigenständiges geschaffen hat» (p. 524)].
BASLEZ M.-F., Écrire l’histoire dans le judaïsme hellénisé et le premier christianisme: les galeries de figures
ancestrales, in EUKARPA, 191-204.
[Un modèle de l’historiographie sacerdotale. Construire une continuité et une légitimité. Des héros
culturels pour la Diaspora: Moïse présent et absent. Du héros national au «prophète persécuté»: les
galeries chrétiennes. – «L’étude d’un procédé d’écriture particulier et propre à la tradition
historiographique du judaïsme récent s’avère en définitive probante. Elle montre que
l’interprétation des figures bibliques n’a jamais cessé de se diversifier, que la sélection et
l’interprétation sont toujours significatives d’un certain contexte et d’un certain milieu. Les galeries
de grandes figures ancestrales attestent une réflexion sur l’histoire qui fonde un positionnement
politique, une théologie du salut et, finalement, une anthropologie du croyant» (p. 204)].
CLARK T., Jewish Education in the Hellenistic Period and the Old Testament, SVTQ 54 (2010) 281-301.
GRUEN E.S., Judaism and Hellenism, in The Oxford Handbook of Hellenic Studies, ed. by G. BOYS-STONES,
B. GRAZIOSI and P. VASUNIA, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2009, 129-139.
[«That Greeks viewed Judaism through their own prism and that Jews reversed the process with
Hellenism may cause no surprise. What deserves stress, however, is the comfort that each had in
concocting or constructing a connection with the other. As Greeks cast Moses in the mould of
Hellenic lawgivers or colonizers and interpreted Jewish teachings in the light of Greek philosophy,
so Jews claimed biblical authority for Platonic precepts and had the sages of Jerusalem spout Greek
political theory. ‘Hebraism’ and ‘Hellenism’ did not constitute adversarial positions or competing
systems, but malleable concepts shaped by Greeks and Jews to give expression to their own
identity in a world of overlapping cultures» (p. 137). – Il volume include ancora un articolo su “The
Greek Heritage in Islam”, ma non contempla alcun contributo su “Cristianesimo ed Ellenismo”!
(L.P.)].
Wider Literary Context → Miscellanee e studi di carattere generale
NIEHOFF M., Jewish Exegesis and Homeric Scholarship in Alexandria
generale
→ 1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere
PASSONI DELL’ACQUA A., Translating as a Means of Interpreting: The Septuaginta and Translation in
Ptolemaic Egypt → 4. LXX
4. LXX
La Bible d’Alexandrie: Deuxième Livre d’Esdras 11.2, Trad. du texte grec de la Septante, Introduction et
notes par T. JANZ, Les Éditions du Cerf, Paris 2010, pp. 346.
[Avant-propos, 7-8. Notices: Bibliographie, 9-22; Sigles et abréviations, 22-24; Abréviations des livres
bibliques, 24-25; Système de transcriptions, 25. Introduction: I. Titre, contenu et composition de 2
Esdras, 27-59; II. Le texte de 2 Esdras, 59-83; III. La langue de 2 Esdras, 83-150; IV. Le traducteur de 2
Esdras, 150-164; V. La réception de 2 Esdras, 164-177. Note sur la traduction française, 177-178.
Traduction et annotation, 180-339. Index des mots grecs, 341-344].
Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 2. Internationale Fachtagung veranstaltet von Septuaginta
Deutsch (LXX.D), Wuppertal 23. – 27. 7. 2008, hrsg. von W. KRAUS und M. KARRER unter Mitarbeit von
388
M. MEISER (WUNT, 252), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2010, pp. XI+750 (= Die Septuaginta – Texte,
Theologien, Einflüsse).
[W. KRAUS–M. KARRER –M. MEISER, Vorwort, V-VI. Allgemeines und Geschichte: E. TOV,
Reflections on the Septuagint with Special Attention Paid to the Post-Pentateuchal Translations, 3-22;
A. SCHENKER, Was führte zur Übersetzung der Tora ins Griechische? Dtn 4, 2-8 und Platon (Brief
VII,326a-b), 23-35; G. DORIVAL, New Light about the Origin of the Septuagint?, 36-47; A. LANGE,
Textual Standardization in Egyptian Judaism and in the Letter of Aristeas, 48-71; A. VAN DER KOOIJ,
The Old Greek of Isaiah and Other Prophecies Published in Ptolemaic Egypt, 72-84; J. ENGELS, Syrien,
Phönikien und Judäa in den Geographika Strabos von Amaseia (Strab. Geog. 16,2,1-46), 85-98.
Textgeschichte: S. KREUZER, Übersetzung – Revision – Überlieferung. Probleme und Aufgaben in den
Geschichtsbüchern, 101-116; R.J.V. HIEBERT, Establishing the Textual History of Greek 4 Maccabees, 117139; M. KARRER –M. SIGISMUND –U. SCHMID, Textgeschichtliche Beobachtungen zu den Zusätzen in den
Septuaginta-Psalmen, 140-161; M.N. VAN DER MEER, The Question of the Literary Dependence of the
Greek Isaiah upon the Greek Psalter Revisited, 162-200; P.J. GENTRY, Issues in the Text-History of LXX
Ecclesiastes, 201-222; H.-J. FABRY, «Der Herr macht meine Schritte sicher» (Hab 3, 19 Barb.) – Die Versio
Barberini, eine liturgische Sondertradition von Hab 3?, 223-237; G.J. STEYN, Two New Testament
Papyri on the Quotations in Hebrews and Their Possible Value in the Reconstruction of LXX Texts, 238255; M. MEISER, Hieronymus als Textkritiker, 256-271; C. BOYD-TAYLOR, Echoes of the Septuagint in
Byzantine Judaism, 272-288; M. SIGISMUND, Anmerkungen zu alttestamentlichen Zitaten in der
gotischen neutestamentlichen Bibelüberlieferung, 289-310. Lexikographie und Übersetzungstechnik:
T. MURAOKA, The Logico-Semantic Analysis of the Genitive Relationship in the LXX Greek (Gen 1-25),
313-321; A. PASSONI DELL’ACQUA, Translating as a Means of Interpreting: The Septuaginta and
Translation in Ptolemaic Egypt, 322-339; C. KUGELMEIER, Voces biblicae oder voces communes? Zum
Sprachgebrauch der Septuaginta im Lichte neuerer Papyrusforschungen, 340-356; H. AUSLOOS –
B. LEMMELIJN, Content-Related Criteria in Characterizing the LXX Translation Technique, 357-376;
J. JOOSTEN, Al tiqré as a Hermeneutical Device and the Septuagint, 377-390; J.-H. KIM, Die Wiedergabe
von db( mit dou’lo" oder pai’" in der Septuaginta der Samuel- und Königebücher, 391-403; E. BONS,
Seltene Wörter in der Septuaginta des Amosbuches (Am 3,5.15): ijxeuhthv", scavzomai, qerinov",
perivptero", 404-415; P.-M. BOGAERT, Baal au féminin dans la Septante, 416-434; K. HAUSPIE, Hebrew
Transliterations in the Septuagint Version of Ezekiel elucidated: in the Search of the Sources of Theodoret
of Cyrrhus, 435-444. Theologie und Religionsgeschichte: M. RÖSEL, Tempel und Tempellosigkeit. Der
Umgang mit dem Heiligtum in der Pentateuch-LXX, 447-461; H. UTZSCHNEIDER, Die LXX als
«Erzählerin». Beobachtungen an der LXX-Fassung der Geburts- und Kindheitsgeschichte des Mose (Ex 2, 110), 463-477; N. FERNÁNDEZ MARCOS, Jephtha’s Daughter in the Old Greek (Judges 11:29-40), 478-488;
P. HUGO, Abner der Königsmacher versus David den gesalbten König (2Sam 3,21.39). Die
Charakterisierung Abners und Davids als Merkmale der literarischen Abweichung zwischen dem
Massoretischen Text und der Septuaginta, 489-505; B. EGO, Mordechais Verweigerung der Proskynese vor
Haman im Kontext der religiösen Vorstellungswelt des Estherbuches, 506-522; A. PIETERSMA, A
Commentary on Psalm 15 in Greek: Text-Production and Text-Reception, 523-542; M. CIMOSA–
G. BONNEY, Angels, Demons and the Devil in the Book of Job (LXX), 543-561; W. LOADER, Proverbs
«Strange Woman»: Image and Reality in LXX Proverbs and Ben Sira, Hebrew and Greek, 562-575;
C. DOGNIEZ, La nécromancie dans la LXX d’Isaïe, 576-589; J. COOK, Interpreting the Septuagint –
Exegesis, Theology and/or Religionsgeschichte?, 590-606; T. MCLAY, Why Not a Theology of the
Septuagint?, 607-620. Wirkungsgeschichte: J. LEONHARDT-BALZER, Philo und die Septuaginta, 623637; M. MÜLLER, Josephus und die Septuaginta, 638-654; C. BREYTENBACH, JesLXX 53,6.12 als Interpretatio
Graeca und die urchristlichen Hingabeformeln, 655-670; J. DOCHORN, Das Testament Hiobs als
exegetischer Text. Ein Beitrag zur Rezeptionsgeschichte der Hiob-Septuaginta, 671-688; J.-M. AUWERS,
Les désignations des bien-aimés dans le Cantique des cantiques et leur traduction dans les langues modernes,
389
689-701; R. ROUKEMA, Patristic Interpretation of Micah: Micah Read as a Book about Christ, 702-719.
Internetseiten, 720. Stellenregister, 720-732; Moderne Autoren, 733-742; Sach- und Personenregister,
743-748; Wortregister griechisch, 749; Wortregister hebräisch, 750].
ALBRECHT F., Codex Ephraemi Syri rescriptus. Neue Lesarten zum Septuagintatext des Koheletbuches, ZAW
122 (2010) 272-279.
[Abstract: «Codex Ephraemi Syri rescriptus is an important, but due to its dilapidated condition
rather neglected, textual witness of the Septuagint. This article dwells on the damage pattern of
the manuscript and identifies the application of the so-called Giobert Tincture as its cause.
However, modern fluorescence photography allows new collations of the manuscript despite its
heavy damage. As for Ecclesiastes, there are 14 new or improved readings, compared with
Tischendorf’s edition of 1845» (p. 279)].
AMPHOUX C.-B. – SÉRANDOUR A., La date de la forme courte de Jérémie, in EUKARPA, 25-35.
[Les datations envisagées de Jérémie. Arguments pour une datation basse de la forme courte.
Chronologie royale et calendrier sacerdotal. Conclusion. – «Jérémie est l’un des livres de la Bible
juive dont la version grecque dite de la Septante (LXX) suit un modèle hébreu distinct du texte
massorétique (TM); et il est désormais largement admis que la LXX traduit une forme courte du
livre antérieure à la forme longue (TM), qui en serait une révision réalisée à l’époque asmonéenne,
soit vers – 140. Or, le livre raconte sa propre mise par écrit et distingue deux rédactions successives,
en les datant du règne de Joakim (608-600). Mais ces indications comportent une difficulté
majeure: une large partie du livre rapporte des événements qui ont lieu après les dates données, au
temps du roi Sédécias (597-586), si bien que la rédaction finale leur est nécessairement postérieure.
Et il reste à déterminer s’il s’agit d’une troisième rédaction – et dans ce cas, pourquoi n’est-elle pas
signalée? – ou s’il faut lire autrement les dates données. Aussi, après le rappel des dates
actuellement proposées, nous examinerons une nouvelle hypothèse de datation du livre, plus
proche du terminus ad quem que constituent la traduction en grec, située vers – 150, et la révision
en hébreu, légèrement postérieure» (pp. 25-26)].
ASSAN-D HÔTE I.–MOATTI-FINE J., «Moi, je serai comme une de tes esclaves!» (Rt 2, 13). Paidiske dans la Bible
grecque: esclave et concubine, esclave et mère porteuse, in EUKARPA, 37-44.
[Paidiske: un sens connoté dans la LXX, entre jeune esclave et concubine. De la jeune esclave à la
mère porteuse. – «Dans le champ lexical de la servitude à l’intérieur de la Bible grecque, le terme
de paidiske a retenu notre attention en raison du caractère insolite de ses emplois dans le livre de
Ruth. L’étude de ce mot dans des scènes similaires d’autres livre de la LXX permet de cerner la
spécificité de son sens et les implications remarquables de son emploi pour l’interprétation du livre
de Ruth: paidiske y définit le statut de l’héroïne du récit» (p. 37)].
AUSLOOS H.–LEMMELIJN B., Content-Related Criteria in Characterizing the LXX Translation Technique, in
Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 357-376.
[Introduction. I. Measuring literalism and freedom. II. Two methodological approaches. III. A third
way? Content-related criteria. Conclusion. – «A well-founded assessment with regard to the
characterisation of the translations of the LXX will also be able to function as a substantiated
criterion in the evaluation of individual text-critical variants of the LXX text. In this way, the study
of the Greek rendering of the Hebrew hapax legomena in the LXX translation, as an excellent
illustration of the relevance of the third way’s content-related criteria for the characterisation of
the LXX, is useful not only to the characterisation of the various Greek translations but also to the
textual criticism of the Hebrew text» (p. 376)].
AUSSEDAT M., Versions et traduction du texte biblique dans les chaînes exégétiques grecques du livre de Jérémie, in
EUKARPA, 45-54.
[Recours au texte hébreu. Recours aux versions grecques. La traduction du texte biblique. – «Ainsi
les deux chaînes sur Jérémie diffèrent non seulement dans leur utilisation du texte hébreu et des
390
réviseurs, mais aussi dans la perception qu’elles donnent des versions du texte biblique: dans la
chaîne à auteurs multiples, c’est tantôt la Septante qui est le texte de référence, comme en
témoigne l’emploi de ejk divdwmi par Victor, suggérant qu’il s’agit de “rendre” d’une autre manière le
texte grec, tantôt le texte hébreu qui est l’Écriture exacte pour Eusèbe de Césarée; dans la chaîne à
deux auteurs, le texte hébreu est toujours le texte de référence et la traduction n’est pas vue
comme une transmission précise mais comme une interprétation, ainsi que le montre l’emploi de
eJrmhneuvw. Les deux chaînes sur Jérémie, à travers les exégètes qu’elles citent, n’apportent donc pas
le même éclairage sur les versions et la traduction du texte biblique» (pp. 53-54)].
AUWERS J.-M., Les désignations des bien-aimés dans le Cantique des cantiques et leur traduction dans les langues
modernes, in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 689-701.
[1. Les désignations des bien-aimés dans le TM. 2. Les désignations des bien-aimés dans la LXX.
Conclusion. – «Pour traduire les mots de la LXX, il y a plusieurs dispositions méthodologiques. La
discussion autour de la traduction de ajdelfidov" montre à l’œuvre deux d’entre elles. L’option de la
LXX.Deutsch illustre, sur ce point précis, la tendance à traduire les mots de la LXX en fonction du
substrat hébreu tel qu’on le comprend aujourd’hui. L’option de NETS et de BA consiste à traduire
un mot de la LXX en fonction de la documentation en langue grecque. Dans le cas de la
traduction de ajdelfidov", les deux options sont définitivement irréconciliables» (pp. 700-701)].
BARC B., De la pierre à la brique ou la métamorphose de l’Écriture, in EUKARPA, 137-146.
[Metouchélah ou Mathusalem? La date de la fin du Déluge. L’arche du Déluge et l’arche
d’alliance. 374 jours ou 364? Être ou non contemporain d’Adam. D’échos en échos. Bibliographie. –
«La période antédiluvienne dure 1656 ans dans la Bible hébraïque et 2242 dans la Septante, un
ajout de 586 ans qui a été interprété comme une harmonisation de la chronologie originelle jugée
trop courte par comparaison avec les traditions babyloniennes ou égyptiennes et particuliérement
avec la chronologien de l’égyptien Manéthon. Sans exclure cette hypothèse, on montrera que les
modifications apportées par la Septante s’inscrivent aussi dans un plan plus général de
réinterprétation des Écritures hébraïques dont le but est d’adapter leur message à la situation de la
communauté judéenne d’Égypte pour qui est réalisée cette traduction. Dans ce but on analysera
un ensemble de corrections qui orientent vers une lecture nouvelle et cohérente lorsqu’elles sont
associées entre elles par le biais de l’analogie verbale» (p. 137)].
BOGAERT P.-M., Baal au féminin dans la Septante, in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 416-434.
[I. Ἡ Baval. Pourquoi le féminin? II. Disparition du phénomène et conservation dans Jérémie.
Conclusions. Appendice. – «The feminine article before Baal is a linguistic feature attested in the
early Greek translation of the Bible and not only in Jeremiah, where auspicious factors allowed its
entire conservation. Later revisors and editors of the Septuagint, already before Lucian, excluded
it. This feature was spread in the Hellenistic Judaism (Ascensio Isaiae). The explanation of Dillmann
(1888), a “qerey/ketîb” hJ aijscuvnh / hJ Baval, is appealing, but does not solve all the difficulties. The
femininum deteriorativum, a pejorative feminine, attested in Semitic languages, is accepted here in
this case. It explains also the feminine davmali" for the calves of Jeroboam and the feminine Baalzebub (a fly goddess) in IV Reg 1, 2-16» (p. 429)].
BONS E., La version grecque du Psaume 23 (22). Observations sur le texte de départ de l’exégèse patristique, Revue
des Sciences Religieuses 83 (2009) 325-335.
[I. Deux témoins anciens du Psaume 23. II. Le texte grec du Psaume 23 représente-t-il des écarts
par rapport au texte hébreu? III. Dans quelle mesure les versions du Psaume 23 influencent-elles
les interprétations patristiques? IV. Le profil spécifique de la version grecque du Psaume 23. –
«L’objectif des réflexions précédentes était de présenter le texte biblique qui est à la base des
interprétations patristiques du Psaume 23: la version grecque selon les Septante. Comme nous
l’avons vu, celle-ci présente quelques écarts frappants par rapport à la tradition textuelle qui se
reflète dans le Texte Massorétique. Il n’est donc pas étonnant que l’interprétation de ce dernier
391
diverge largement des exégèses que les Pères ont élaborées au fil des siècles en s’appuyant sur le
texte grec du Psaume. Mutatis mutandis, le texte latin du Psaume ne s’éloigne guère de la LXX.
C’est-à-dire que Jérôme s’en est tenu grosso modo, dans son Psalterium iuxta Hebraeos, aux traditions
textuelles propres à la LXX» (p. 335)].
–, Parlare di Dio in greco: traduzione, inculturazione, revisioni teologiche nella versione dei LXX, Ricerche
Storico Bibliche 22/1-2 (2010) 113-124.
[I. Introduzione. II. Tradizione e innovazione: cinque tesi sul linguaggio teologico e sulle concezioni
teologiche dei LXX: 1. I LXX traducono fedelmente la maggioranza degli antropomorfismi e dei
motivi affini; 2. Rinunciando a una traduzione letterale di una serie di antropomorfismi, i LXX
sottolineano la trascendenza del Dio di Israele; 3. Senza giungere a un’affermazione monoteista
inequivocabile, i LXX mettono in rilievo l’incomparabilità del Dio d’Israele; 4. I LXX presentano il
Dio di Israele con una serie di attributi sconosciuti nella Bibbia ebraica; 5. I LXX operano correzioni
minori allo scopo di veicolare idee teologiche particolari. III. Conclusione. – «Nel loro insieme i libri
profetici (eccetto Geremia), nonché il Salterio dei LXX, sono traduzioni abbastanza letterali della
rispettiva Vorlage ebraica. Però, a livello strettamente teologico, si notano le più diverse innovazioni e
revisioni. Le une sembrano piuttosto puntuali e isolate, mentre le altre sono osservabili in parecchi
testi o libri, senza parlare delle ripercussioni che avranno nella letteratura chiamata
“intertestamentaria” e nel Nuovo Testamento. Comunque, gli studi sui LXX condotti nei tre
decenni scorsi non possono che mostrare che si conoscono senza dubbio certi elementi importanti
della teologia dei LXX mentre tanti altri restano ancora ignoti» (p. 124)].
–, Il Salmo 37 nella versione dei Settanta (Sal 36LXX), RivBib 58 (2010) 423-438.
[Introduzione. Osservazioni generali sulla tecnica di traduzione. Osservazioni sul vocabolario e sullo
stile. Osservazioni sugli accenti teologici tipici del testo greco. Conclusione. – Summary: «The aim of
this article is to analyze the Greek version of Psalm 37 and its specific linguistic, stylistic and
theological features. A study of the translation technique leads to the conclusion that the
translators renders his Hebrew Vorlage rather literally. However, a closer inspection of some
divergences reveals that the translator introduces some ideas that were probably absent from his
source text, e.g. in the characterization of the wicked and the righteous and their respective
destinies. Furthermore, the Greek translation shows some features that can be observed elsewhere
in the Psalter, e.g. diverging renderings of the vocabulary of refuge serving to describe God. Finally,
the speaker’s intimate relationship with God is underlined by some rare expressions (e.g. vv. 5a.7a)
that stress the dialogical character of the speaker’s hope» (p. 438)].
–, Seltene Wörter in der Septuaginta des Amosbuches (Am 3,5.15): ijxeuhthv", scavzomai, qerinov", perivptero", in
[1. Einleitung. 2. Das Vokabular von Am 3,5LXX. 3. Das Vokabular von Am 3,15aLXX. 4. Abschließende
Überlegungen. – «Die LXX des Amosbuches verwendet stellenweise ein Vokabular, das in der
LXX äußerst selten vorkommt oder gar keine Parallelen hat. Sofern die Vorlage der LXX nicht vom
Konsonantentext abweicht, die der MT überliefert, muss man feststellen, dass die hebräischen
Äquivalente der vier zitierten griechischen Lexeme keineswegs ungewöhnlich sind. Dieser Befund
ist nur so zu interpretieren, dass der Übersetzer seine Äquivalente überhaupt nicht ‘mechanisch’
einsetzte» (p. 414)].
BOUET-DE-QUATREBARBES F., La variante lovgo"-novmo" dans les psaumes de la Septante, in EUKARPA, 55-65.
[Ps 129, 5. Ps 118, 57. Ps 118, 142. Ps 118, 105. Bibliographie. – «La relative fréquence du couple de
variantes lovgo"-novmo" dans les Psaumes de la LXX (et dans le reste de l’Ancien Testament qu’il
faudrait étudier) peut s’expliquer a priori dans tous les cas par le caractère interchangeable de ces
deux mots à cause de leur proximité phonique et métrique ainsi que la similitude de leur déclinaison.
Toutefois on ne saurait réduire l’existence de ces variantes à une innocente interversion. De fait il
apparaît que dans un cas (Ps 118, 57) des motifs poétiques ont pu être en jeu (le choix du terme novmo"
aurait été influencée par la présence du mot deux versets plus haut), et que dans d’autres cas des
392
raisons sémantiques ont pu jouer (Ps 118, 105 et 142), même si on remarque parfois chez certains Pères
des glissements de sens assez faciles entre les mots “parole” et “Loi”» (p. 61)].
BOYD-TAYLOR C., Echoes of the Septuagint in Byzantine Judaism, in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien,
Einflüsse, 272-288.
[Christian sources. Rabbinic sources. Textual evidence. The Greek Bible in Byzantine Judaism.
Conclusions. – «Judging by the epigraphic evidence, Greek had ceased to be the official language
of the Byzantine synagogue by the early sixth century. In its place a Hebrew liturgy had been
established which included Hebrew scriptural reading accompanied by a translation in Aramaic or
Greek. If at this time Aquila’s version emerged as the preferred Greek version, it was not because
the Septuagint had been rejected, but because the role of the Greek text within the liturgy had
changed: it now functioned as an ancillary text to the Hebrew» (p. 288)].
BREYTENBACH C., JesLXX 53,6.12 als Interpretatio Graeca und die urchristlichen Hingabeformeln, in Die
Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 655-670.
[1. Einführung. 2. Überblick über den Text. 3. JesLXX 53,4-6. 10-12. 4. JesLXX 53,6.12 und die
Hingabeformel. – «Bei JesLXX rechnet man mit einem Übersetzer aus der zweiten Hälfte des 2. Jh.
v.Chr., der das ganze Buch in Ägypten übersetzte. Aber was übersetzte er? Alfred Zillessen
versuchte noch 1905 in der ZAW eine von dem masoretischen Text abweichende, hinter der LXX
liegende hebräische Vorlage zu erstellen. Es ist aber anzunehmen, dass Jes LXX die Übersetzung
eines dem MT nahe und 1QJesa noch näher stehenden hebräischen Textes ist, und dass die
Differenzen zur hebräischen Überlieferung anders zu erklären sind» (p. 655)].
BRIQUEL D., Un reflet inattendu de la Septante: le récit de la création etrusque de la Souda, in EUKARPA, 215224.
[«... Le lexique byzantin rapporte une doctrine qui, à la différence de la théorie des siècles exposée
dans l’ouvrage de Censorinus, nous transporte loin de l’Étrurie. Au moins le récit qui est fait des six
premiers millénaires qui auraient été attribués à la vie de l’humanité n’est qu’une reprise du récit
de la création dans le premier chapitre de la Genèse. Cette doctrine présentée comme étrusque s’est
bornée à remplacer les six premiers jours du récit biblique par des millénaires, selon une
équivalence classique entre un jour de Dieu et un millénaire de l’homme» (p. 215)].
CASEVITZ M., Sur les comparaisons dans les Odes de la Septante, in EUKARPA, 67-72.
[«Le recueil des Odes ( Ὠidaiv) que transmet la Septante forme un ensemble particulier dont l’unité
peut poser problème. Les prières qu’on y trouve ont divers titres: w/jdhv (I, II, X), “chant”, proseuchv
(III, IV, V, VI, VII, IX, XI, XII, XIII), “prière”, u{m no" (VIII, XIV), “action de grâce célébrant la
divinité”, sans que les deux premiers titres différencient nettement des genres, sans non plus que
chaque prière titrée comme une autre s’en rapproche clairement par la forme; les odes sont issues
soit de l’Ancien Testament (I-VIII et X-XI) soit du Nouveau Testament (IX, XIII) soit encore
d’une autre source (XII, XIV). Il nous paraît donc que seul l’examen du contenu, plus
spécialement du style, peut permettre de classer les odes dans une catégorie spécifique, étant bien
entendu que leur caractère poétique est une particularité unificatrice. Parmi les éléments
stylistiques, les figures ont grande importance et parmi elles, les comparaisons nous paraissent très
révélatrices» (p. 67)].
CIMOSA M.–BONNEY G., Angels, Demons and the Devil in the Book of Job (LXX), in Die Septuaginta – Texte,
Theologien, Einflüsse, 543-561.
[Introduction. I. The texts referring to angels in the Septuagint version. II. The texts referring to
demons in the Septuagint version. III. The texts referring to the Devil in the Septuagint version.
Some conclusions. – «In the Hebrew text we see the existence of good celestial beings, the angels,
and bad ones, the demons. The figure of Satan in the first chapter is also an angel. On the other
hand, the Greek translation of the Book of Job may be viewed as part of a process towards a clear
even if modest and limited view of a dualistic demonology. Yet the comparison with other works of
393
the Tolemaic and Seleucid period such as the first book of Enoch, The Testament of the Twelve
Patriarchs, The Book of Jubilees, the demonology in Job appears rather bland and underdeveloped»
(p. 559)].
COOK J., Interpreting the Septuagint – Exegesis, Theology and/or Religionsgeschichte?, in Die Septuaginta –
[1. Introduction. 2. Methodological issues. 3. Towards exegetical, theological and/or Religionsgeschichtliche
Interpretation. 4. The comparison of the LXX of Proverbs. 5. Conclusions. – «I have deliberately focused
on a single translated unit, the LXX of Proverbs. I must concede that not all the translated units in the
LXX will present such interesting material as this one. Nevertheless, I would argue that it is possible to
formulate a theology of this book and also of the other Septuagintal books. However, in order to realise
this, specific methodological approaches should be followed strictly. Firstly, the Old Greek text should be
the subject of such reflection. Even though the reception of the LXX presents indispensable
perspectives as to how later generations understood the LXX, this matter should be dealt with
separately. Secondly, the diversity in the Septuagintal translations should be honoured and therefore one
should expect many theologies, or exegetical perspectives for that matter» (p. 605)].
From Eros to Pneuma. On the Greek Translation of the Song of Songs, in EUKARPA, 73-83.
[«When the translator did his work the Hebrew Song may not have been very ancient or well
known, and it was looked down on by some as mere pornography or popular song. His own view
was that it was a repository of precious secrets relating to the sacred calling and destiny of the
people of Israel. He was someone with a fine knowledge both of Hebrew and of Greek, and he was
working within a school or trend in translations that favoured the word-for-word way over the more
elegant but approximate one. He struggled to embody in his translation the secrets that he felt
were locked up in the Hebrew. We have no idea who he was, nor the sect of Judaism he belonged
to: he gives very little away. Was he an early Jewish Christian? We cannot tell, but the fact that his
translation came to be accepted into the Christian Church, and indeed later on as one of the key
christological texts (thanks to the work of inspired exegetes like Origen and Gregory of Nyssa), may
show that at least he did not belong to a circle that was unknown or inimical to Christians» (p. 83)].
DE LANGE N.,
DOCHORN J., Das Testament Hiobs als exegetischer Text. Ein Beitrag zur Rezeptionsgeschichte der HiobSeptuaginta, in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 671-688.
[1. Einleitung. 2. Die Erzählungen des Test Hiob und ihre exegetische Grundlage. 3. Das
Testament Hiobs als exegetischer Text. – «Wie der vorhergehende Überblick gezeigt hat, beruht
das narrative Material des Test Hiob im Wesentlichen auf exegetischen Beobachtungen an der
Hiob-Septuaginta. Das Test Hiob kann damit als Produkt einer erzählerischen Umsetzung
exegetischer Arbeit betrachtet werden; es ist ein narrativ-exegetischer Text. Eine ganz ähnliche
Substruktur ließ sich für die Apc Mos zeigen; ihr kann hier gewissermaßen ein Seitenstück
zugewiesen werden» (p. 687)].
DOGNIEZ C., La nécromancie dans la LXX d’Isaïe, in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 576-589.
[Introduction. Définition de la nécromancie. Les passages dans la Bible où cette thématique
apparaît. Le lexique de la nécromancie. Confrontation du traducteur d’Isaïe à cette thématique.
Emprunt au grec ou à l’hébreu? Conclusion. – «1) Le traducteur d’Isaïe n’est nullement influencé
dans sa traduction par le lexique utilisé dans le Pentateuque grec pour dire la nécromancie. 2) Le
traducteur d’Isaïe connaît bien le livre d’Isaïe et, conformément à sa pratique familière de
l’emprunt à d’autres passages scripturaires présentant des thématiques identiques, pour traduire le
premier passage où il est question de nécromancie, en Is 8,19, il est influencé par l’hébreu d’Is 29,4
qui parle de “la voix qui viendra comme un spectre de la terre”. 3) Anticipant sur ce qui est dit en Is
29,4, le traducteur introduit en Is 8,19 la périphrase “ceux dont la voix vient de la terre”, puis
reprend cette traduction stéréotypée partout où il est question de nécromancie, en Is 19,3 mais aussi
en Is 29,4 dont l’hébreu est la source. 4) Enfin, en utilisant comme traduction stéréotypée cette
394
définition explicite et ironique des nécromants, “ceux dont la voix vient de la terre”, le traducteur
grec d’Isaïe, nous semble-t-il, dénonce davantage encore que dans le TM l’illusion de cette
mantique» (p. 589)].
– Les habits de la vengeance divine dans la Septante, in EUKARPA, 85-96.
[Les données lexicales. Les formes particulières de la vengeance divine dans la Septante.
Conclusion. – «Nous avons vu que les traducteurs grecs des différents livres bibliques ont
généralement refusé d’utiliser le lexique de la langue grecque classique tivsi", timwriva, poinhv ou
τιμωρεῖν pour traduire la racine hébraïque Mqn, spécifique de la notion de vengeance. Ils ont
principalement eu recours à des termes comme ejk divkhsi", ἐκδικεῖν, qui inscrivent l’exercice de ce
droit dans un cadre quasi juridique, ou à des expressions comme ajntapodidovnai avec le substantif
ajntapovdosi" ou aj ntapovdoma qui mettent l’accent sur la légitimité du châtiment, conçu comme une
rétribution en termes d’opération comptable. Par ailleurs dès le Pentateuque, en grec, à la
vengeance divine comme privilège personnel vient se substituer le “jour de la juste vengeance”
divine, par anticipation de ce temps de jugement qui apparaît dans le TM seulement avec les
prophètes» (p. 95)].
DORIVAL G., New Light about the Origin of the Septuagint?, in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse,
36-47.
[Explanations. Difficulties and objections. New data? Conclusion. Literature. – «The papyri of
Herakleopolis are a new support to J. Mélèze’s proposal. To my knowledge, there are no new data in
favour of the other explanations, neither the cultural one nor the Jews’ needs. That does not mean
that the issue of the origin of the Septuagint is settled conclusively» (pp. 44-445)].
EGO B., Mordechais Verweigerung der Proskynese vor Haman im Kontext der religiösen Vorstellungswelt des
Estherbuches, in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 506-522.
[I. Einführung: Zum Forschungsstand – “Theologie” in den Zusätzen zum Esterbuch. II.
Mordechais Verweigerung der Proskynese – Ein Blick auf den Text. III. Traditionsgeschichtliche
Aspekte des Motivs. IV. Mordechais Verweigerung der Proskynese im Kontext der religiösen
Vorstellungswelt der Zusätze zu Ester. – «Wenn man die einzelnen literarischen und
traditionsgeschichtlichen Aspekte zusammenträgt, die ich in meinen bisherigen Ausführungen
herausstellen konnte, so lässt sich abschließend Folgendes feststellen: Mordechais Gesetzestreue
kann vor diesem traditionskritischen Hintergrund ganz präzise im Sinne einer Kritik am
hellenistischen Herrscherkult aufgefasst werden. Damit fügt sich dieses Element nahtlos in das
Gesamtbild der Esterzusätze ein» (p. 521)].
ENGELS J., Syrien, Phönikien und Judäa in den Geographika Strabos von Amaseia (Strab. Geog. 16,2,1-46), in
[I. Die Quellenlage zur Erforschung geographischer Kontexte der LXX und einige
Forschungsdesiderate. II. Syrien, Phönikien und Judäa in den Geographika Strabos von Amaseia. –
«Dieser Beitrag befasst sich mit den geographischen Kontexten der LXX. Sie bilden ein
Forschungsfeld, dessen Ergebnisse unmittelbar der weiteren kommentierenden Arbeit an der LXX
und größeren kulturwissenschaftlichen Untersuchungen dieses Textkorpus nützlich sein können.
Denn zu einigen Problemen der historischen Geographie der LXX besteht noch eine
Forschungslücke» (p. 85)].
FABRY H.-J., «Der Herr macht meine Schritte sicher» (Hab 3, 19 Barb.) – Die Versio Barberini, eine liturgische
Sondertradition von Hab 3?, in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 223-237.
[1. Die textliche Basis. 2. Die Versio Barberini. 3. Beziehungen zu den antiken Texttraditionen. 4.
Ausgewählte Varianten der Barb. und ihre theologischen Spezifika. 5. Zusammenfassung der
Beobachtungen und das Wagnis einer These. – «Ausgehend von einer Analyse einiger
paradigmatischer Verse der Barb. wurde deutlich, dass ihre Sprache unabhängig von ihrer
Einordnung in den Dunstkreis des Symmachus einige Fakten an die Oberfläche bringt, die zwar
alle interessant sind und theologische Schwerpunkte markieren, aber allem Anschein nach sich
395
(noch) nicht in eine bestimmte Richtung bündeln lassen. Aus diesem Grund müsste die Analyse
auf ganz Hab 3 ausgedehnt werden» (p. 236)].
FERNÁNDEZ MARCOS N., The first Spanish Translation of the Septuagint?, EstB 68 (2010) 419-428.
[Abstract: «Guillermo Jünemann Beckschäfer translated in the twenties of the past century a text
of LXX. But it cannot be called a Septuagint translation because : a) the order of books is different,
and Ezra and Nehemiah are translated from Hebrew or Vulgate, not from Septuagint; b)
Jünemann does not say nor can be deduced which edition or Greek text follows his translation, and
c) the version is so literal that in many occasions it is unintelligible. Therefore, the new translation
published by the CSIC and Ediciones Sígueme since 2008 is the first scientific translation of the
Septuagint into Spanish» (p. 419)].
–, Jephtha’s Daughter in the Old Greek (Judges 11:29-40), in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 478488.
[1. A scandalous text. 2. The reconstruction of the Old Greek. 3. Commenting the Old Greek. 4.
The evocative power of imitatio. 5. Rewritten Bible and Targum. 6. Conclusions. – «All we can say
is that the translation was done in all probability in the 2nd century BCE, probably at the time of
the Seleucid persecution... It was to present our heroine as a martyr, willing to die because of her
father’s vow which made him victorious over the Ammonites, and which would fit into the
nationalistic atmosphere of the Maccabean war. In the MT, the execution of the sacrifice could
remain open or ambiguous (“who did with her according to the vow he had made”). In the Greek
version, however, it is explicitly affirmed: kai; ejpetevlesen Ἰefqave th;n eujch;n αὐτοῦ, h}n eu[xato. This
is the literal sense understood by the Greek commentators of the Septuagint as attested by
Theodoret’s text» (p. 487)].
GENTRY P.J., Issues in the Text-History of LXX Ecclesiastes, in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse,
201-222.
[Inner Greek corruption. Correction towards the Hebrew text. Inner Greek corruption or
corruption in Vorlage? – Abstract: «Discussion of the methodology and principles of Septuagint
Text Criticism and of the uses of the apparatuses of the Göttingen Editions based on preparation
of the forthcoming critical edition of Ecclesiastes and issues in the text history of LXX Ecclesiastes»
(p. 222)].
HAUSPIE K., Hebrew Transliterations in the Septuagint Version of Ezekiel elucidated: in the Search of the
Sources of Theodoret of Cyrrhus, in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 435-444.
[Object and methodology. Common nouns. Proper nouns. Sources. Acquaintance with /
Knowledge of Hebrew. Conclusion. – «Theodoret’s treatment of the sources with regard to Hebrew
transliterations seems very different from book to book. In his Commentary to Ezekiel his first source
was Origen and the hexaplaric material, in his Commentary to Jeremiah the hexaplaric material is
not mentioned as a source at all! The information recorded in the Onomastica is to be considered a
source for Theodoret in his Ezekiel commentary until the contrary is proven. He largely benefits
from his own language, the Syriac, to have access to the Hebrew language. Theodoret hardly refers
to other works in which he also treats one of these words» (p. 444)].
– Les verbes de «crainte» et leurs compléments dans la Septante d’Ézéchiel, 107-113.
[Le verbe ptoevomai. Le verbe fobevomai. Cas spécifique: Ez 3,9 mh; fobhqῇ" ajpÆ aujtῶn mhde; ptohqῇ"
ajpo; proswvpou aujtῶn. Conclusion. Bibliographie. – «On peut conclure que les cas du verbe
fobevomai avec la préposition ajp ov au lieu de l’accusatif ne sont pas d’un usage fréquent dans la
Septante, et que l’objet de fobevomai se met plutôt à l’accusatif, même quand il y a Nm dans le texte
massorétique. L’emploi de fobevomai avec ajpov dans la Septante d’Ézéchiel rejoint cette conclusion.
(...) Le verbe ptoevomai est employé absolument dans la plupart des cas, quelques fois avec une
préposition qui est toujours un décalque de l’hébreu, à l’exception de 1M 7,30» (p. 112)].
396
HIEBERT R.J.V., Establishing the Textual History of Greek 4 Maccabees, in Die Septuaginta – Texte,
Theologien, Einflüsse, 117-139.
[Introduction. Variants in 4 Maccabees 5. Types of variants. Conclusion. – «In this article, I have
sought to demonstrate the process by which the textual history of Greek 4 Maccabees is being
worked out and its original text is being reconstructed. This involves the identification of
manuscript groups based on the analysis of the collation data, and the evaluation of both the
external and internal evidence. The picture that emerges from this research is that the textual
history of the book features identifiable manuscript groups and that part of this history involves
recensional activity» (p. 138)].
HUGO P., Abner der Königsmacher versus David den gesalbten König (2Sam 3,21.39). Die Charakterisierung
Abners und Davids als Merkmale der literarischen Abweichung zwischen dem Massoretischen Text und der
Septuaginta, in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 489-505.
[1. Wesentliche Textunterschiede zwischen dem massoretischen Text und der Septuaginta. 2.
Abner und der Bund David (V. 21). 3. David, der gesalbte König (V. 39a). 4. Ergebnis und
Schlussbemerkung. – «Wenn ich hier die vorläufige Hypothese der Ursprünglichkeit der
hebräischen Vorlage der LXX formuliere, möchte ich vor allem dafür plädieren, die Diskussion
offen zu halten, solange nicht alle Textabschnitte und erzählerischen Einheiten erforscht worden
sind. Mit anderen Worten: Es scheint mir methodologisch notwendig, das textliche Zeugnis der
griechischen Übersetzung nicht für sekundär zu erklären, ohne es mit einer vollständigen und
ausführlichen Untersuchung belegt zu haben» (pp. 504-505)].
JOOSTEN J., Al tiqré as a Hermeneutical Device and the Septuagint, in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien,
Einflüsse, 377-390.
[Introduction: traditional exegesis in the Septuagint. Al tiqré readings in Rabbinic tradition. Leo
Prijs. Criticism of Prijs’ approach. Alternative explanations of the alleged al tiqré readings in the
LXX. Al tiqré and double translations. Conclusions. – «None of the evidence we have evaluated
permits to argue that something like the al tiqré method was known to the Septuagint translators.
Although many Greek renderings are materially similar to al tiqré readings, the Septuagint does not
have any reading attesting the typically secondary nature inherent to al tiqré readings. Although it
is difficult to prove that the translators did not know the al tiqré technique, nothing indicates that
they did» (p. 388)].
– Le Dieu IAÔ et le tréfonds araméen des Septante, in EUKARPA, 115-124.
[Attestations du nom divin Iaô dans le monde gréco-romain. Le nom divin Iaô et la divinité adorée
par les Juifs d’Éléphantine. L’origine du trigramme YHW/YHH. Iaô et la Septante. Conclusions.
Bibliographie. – «Le processus interdisant progressivement toute prononciation du nom de Dieu a
masqué, semble-t-il, une différence majeure entre le judaïsme de langue grecque dans la diaspora
égyptienne. En Palestine, la prononciation du nom divin se fondait sur le tétragramme, tandis
qu’en Égypte le nom était connu sous forme d’un trigramme. La divergence trouve son origine dans
l’histoire et révèle l’enracinement différent des deux groupes. Il est très probable, quoique difficile
à prouver dans l’état actuel de nos connaissances, que le milieu dont émane la Septante s’inscrivait
pleinement dans le judaisme égyptien en ce qui concerne l’écriture et la prononciation du nom
divin. Le nom Iaô fait partie de l’héritage “araméen” du judaisme égyptien de l’époque
hellénistique» (pp. 122-123)].
KARRER M. – SIGISMUND M. – SCHMID U., Textgeschichtliche Beobachtungen zu den Zusätzen in den
Septuaginta-Psalmen, in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 140-161.
[1. Einführung. 2. Die vor allem koptisch und oberägyptisch belegten Zusätze. 3. Der Zusatz in
LXX zu Ps 13,3 Z. 3-10 und die Markierungen der Haupthandschriften bei Röm 3,10-18. 4. Das
paulinische Zitationsverfahren in Röm 3, 10-18. 5. Bedenken gegen die Abhängigkeit von LXX Ps 13,
3 Z. 3-10 von Röm 3,10-18. 6. Kurz- und Langtext von LXX Ps 13,3 in der Septuagintaüberlieferung
von Ps 13.7. Die Zufügung in LXX Ps 95,10. 8. Ergebnis. – «Rahlf’s Verfahren, den Langtext in LXX
397
Ps 13 nicht in den Apparat zu verweisen, obwohl er sich vom Ausgangstext (Old Greek) entfernt,
sondern ihn wegen des Gewichts der Zeugen in eckigen Klammern im Haupttext zu belassen,
wird dieser Rezeptionsgeschichte gerecht. Das Verfahren ist modellhaft für vergleichbare Stellen
mit wirkungsgeschichtlich zentralen Varianten» (p. 161)].
KIM J.-H., Die Wiedergabe von db( mit δοῦλος oder παῖς in der Septuaginta der Samuel- und Königebücher,
in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 391-403.
[I. Das Problem der unterschiedlichen Wiedergabe. II. Zur Textgeschichte der Samuel– und
Königebücher. III. Die Wiedergabe von db( in der rurspünglichen Septuaginta. IV. Die
Wiedergabe von db( in der Kaige-Rezension. V. Ergebnis. – «Während... die ursprüngliche
Septuaginta παῖς und δοῦλος als Ausdruck der Zugehörigkeit bzw. als höflich-demütige
Selbstbezeichnung verwendete, war für die Kaige-Rezension wichtig, in welchem sozialen Status
der jeweilige db( stand» (p. 403)].
KREUZER S., Übersetzung – Revision – Überlieferung. Probleme und Aufgaben in den Geschichtsbüchern, in Die
[Einleitung. 1. Zum Buch Josua. 2. Zum Buch Richter. 3. Zum Buch Ruth. 4. Die Bücher der
Königtümer. 5. Zum Verhältnis von 1Esdras und 2Esdras. – «Das Besondere an der Aufgabe, die
Septuaginta zu übersetzen ist, dass sie ihrerseits bereits eine Übersetzung ist. Damit stellt sich nicht
nur die Aufgabe, den Text für das eigene Übersetzen zu verstehen, sondern auch darauf zu
achten, wie die Septuagintaübersetzer ihrerseits mit ihrer Vorlage umgegangen sind, wie sie
ihrerseits den Text interpretierten und in welcher Weise die Übersetzung ihre Auslegung zur
Vollendung brachte» (p. 101)].
KUGELMEIER C., Voces biblicae oder voces communes? Zum Sprachgebrauch der Septuaginta im Lichte
neuerer Papyrusforschungen, in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 340-356.
[Katargevw. Ἀντιλήπτωρ. Qeiovth". – «Im Folgenden sollen ein paar Beobachtungen zur Frage
beigesteuert werden, inwieweit das Griechische der Septuaginta einen ‘Idiolekt’ darstellt, eine
eigene, durch ihre unter dem Einfluß der semitischen Bibelsprache neugeprägten
Begriffsbildungen von ihrer die gewöhnliche koinhv sprechenden Umwelt abgeschlossene
Sprachform, oder ob es nicht doch zu viele Anknüpfungspunkte an das Griechische der
alexandrinischen Umgebung gibt, als daß man nicht bei einer so weitreichenden Annahme
Vorsicht walten lassen müsse» (p. 342)].
LANGE A., Textual Standardization in Egyptian Judaism and in the Letter of Aristeas
Aristea
→ 6. Lettera di
LEONHARDT-BALZER J., Philo und die Septuaginta → 7. Filone Alessandrino (4. Studi)
LOADER W., Proverbs «Strange Woman»: Image and Reality in LXX Proverbs and Ben Sira, Hebrew and Greek,
[«This paper considers the enigmatic figure of the Strange Woman in Proverbs, her appearance
and role, with particular attention to what happens to her in the Septuagint translation and then
in Ben Sira and in the grandson’s Greek translation» (p. 562)].
MANGIN D., L’envers d’une traduction. Note à propos de Job 27, 2 et 23, 13, 125-134.
[Le problème posé par la traduction de GJob 27,2a. L’expression dia; tiv me ou{tw" e[krina" en Job
10,2b. L’expression eij de; kai; aujto;" e[krinen ou{tw" en Job 23, 13a. La traduction de mî yeshîbhennû en
9, 12a, 11, 10b et 23, 13a. Un autre emploi marqué d’ ἀντειπεῖν (9, 3e). Conclusion. Bibliographie. –
«Lorsque le traducteur traduit un mot hébreu assez général, ou susceptible de significations
différentes, par une locution particulière qui dénote son intervention, cette locution particulière
est un emploi marqué qui relève de la langue propre au traducteur. La variété des traductions d’un
même mot hébreu manifeste son désir de précision – le procès étant alors nommé sous l’un ou
l’autre de ses aspects» (p. 132)].
398
MCLAY T., Why Not a Theology of the Septuagint?, in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 607-620.
[Defining theology. Theology and the creation and transmission of the Scriptures. Theology and
the translation of the Scriptures into Greek. Writing a theology of the Septuagint. – «The aim of
this paper has been to provide the foundation for writing a theology of the Septuagint based on
the same principles and methodology as Old and New Testament scholars. Not only would such a
theology make a sense within the wider scholarly guild, it would also be less technical and more
accessible to a wider audience. This would be helpful for both the Jewish and Christian faith
communities for understanding the ideas about God, humanity, and creation that would have
existed just before and at the beginning of the Common Era» (pp. 619-620)].
MEISER M., Hieronymus als Textkritiker → 28. Gerolamo
MÜLLER M., Josephus und die Septuaginta → 9. Flavio Giuseppe (4. Studi)
MURAOKA T., The Logico-Semantic Analysis of the Genitive Relationship in the LXX Greek (Gen 1-25), in Die
[LXX Greek and Hellenistic Greek. – «As was stated at the outset, the present study is nothing but
an exploratory one, so that even a study of the whole book of Genesis, let alone of the entire
Septuagint, is more than likely to bring to light new categories of the genitive or require a
reformulation of the categories identified here. Even so, it is rather surprising that, after centuries
of intensive philological study of the classical languages, some of the phenomena discussed here
should have been left unnoticed. And those aspects and usages are not unique to the Septuagint
Greek nor do they represent rare oddities» (p. 321)].
PASSONI DELL’ACQUA A., La traduzione della Scrittura in greco: processo esegetico ed ermeneutica credente nel
giudaismo alessandrino, Ricerche Storico Bibliche 22/1-2 (2010) 125-134.
[Introduzione. La novità di una traduzione scritta in greco. L’idea di tradurre la Scrittura. Il
rapporto con il testo ebraico di base. Conclusioni. – «La polarità fra processo esegetico ed
ermeneutica credente appare... intrinseca anche al fenomeno di traduzione della Bibbia, e
soprattutto alla decisione innovativa della prima versione biblica scritta della storia» (p. 134)].
–, Translating as a Means of Interpreting: The Septuaginta and Translation in Ptolemaic Egypt, in Die
[Interpreters in Ptolemaic Egypt. Judaism and translations of the Scriptures. Attitudes to
translation in the Greek world: The new Hellenistic attitude and lexical innovations. Hellenistic
Judaism as a lexical avant-garde in the semantic field of translating. The Septuagint and the other
Greek translations. Greek Prologue to Sirach: experiences and reflections of a translator. The Letter
of Aristeas: translation as a form of tradition. The lexis of translation. The translation as a copy.
Conclusions: Ptolemaic Egypt as the cradle of translations. – «Ptolemaic Egypt made the ideal
cradle and provided the perfect precedents for undertaking the translation of the Septuagint, the
political and juridical worth of which in establishing a style of life for the Greek-speaking Jews
meant it could plausibly have attracted the attention of the Ptolemaic government. If the
translation of the Tôrâ was understood by the Ptolemies only as the translation of a legislative
corpus, thus, as having a civic and judicial value, as a novmo" politikov", the operation would have
been coherent with the practice of translating the legislative corpora, in which the competencies of
the Museum’s scholars, as the translators are presented in the Letter of Aristeas, could have been
involved» (pp. 338-339)].
PIETERSMA A., A Commentary on Psalm 15 in Greek: Text-Production and Text-Reception, in Die
[I. Synopsis. II. Psalm 15 as a Whole. III. Text and commentary. IV. Specific bibliography].
RÖSEL M., Tempel und Tempellosigkeit. Der Umgang mit dem Heiligtum in der Pentateuch-LXX, in Die
399
[1. Proseuche und Synagoge? 2. Genesis. 3. Exodus. 4. Leviticus. 5. Numeri. 6. Deuteronomium. 7.
Schluss. – «Zusammenfassend lässt sich also sagen, dass die Aussagen der einzelnen Bücher des
griechischen Pentateuch zum Tempel und seinem Kult in überraschenderweise konvergieren. Der
Tempel erhält seine besondere, unvergleichliche Würde daher, dass in ihm Gott erscheint und
sein Name angerufen wird. Die konkrete Ausstattung des Tempels und seines Kultus erscheint
demgegenüber als weniger bedeutsam. Nicht das Opfern, sondern die Namensanrufung scheint
im Zentum zu stehen; das ist im tempellosen Alexandria sehr verständliche Pointierung» (p. 461).
SCHENKER A., Was führte zur Übersetzung der Tora ins Griechische? Dtn 4, 2-8 und Platon (Brief VII,326a-b),
[1. Warum die Frage nochmals aufgeworfen zu werden verdient. 2. Erklärt die Tora selbst ihre
Übertragung ins Griechische? 3. Eine Brücke zwischen Mose und Platon. 4. Weisheit der Tora und
Philosophie der Polis. 5. Drei Bestätigungen: Weisheit in Gesetzgebung, Sprache, Interpretation. –
«Zusammengefasst lässt sich nach alledem festhalten, dass Dtn 4, 2-8 im Lichte der damaligen
griechischen Philosophie als eine Äußerung jüdischer Philosophie über die beste und weiseste
Gesetzgebung unter allen Völkern der Erde interpretiert werden konnte und damit einem
zentralen Anliegen der platonischen und aristotelischen Philosophie entsprach. Ein Text wie
Platons VII. Brief erwies sich in solcher Perspektive als eng mit Dtn 4, 6-8 verwandt. Eine derartige
Verwandschaft musste bei Kennern und Bewunderern Platos und der Tora förmlich nach einem
Dialog zwischen beiden Philosophen und damit nach der jüdischen Übertragung der Tora ins
Griechische rufen. Denn kündigte die Deuteronomiumstelle nicht durch den Mund Moses
prophetisch an, dass eines Tages die Völker der Welt die Gesetzgebung Gottes für Israel als die
weiseste und gerechteste preisen würden?» (p. 34)].
– L’apport durable des Hexaples d’Origène. Bilan de la Lettre à Africanus, bilan aujourd’hui → 12. Origene
(4. Studi)
SIGISMUND M., Anmerkungen zu alttestamentlichen Zitaten in der gotischen neutestamentlichen
Bibelüberlieferung, in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 289-310.
[1. Grundsätzliche Anmerkungen zur gotischen Bibelüberlieferung. 2. Die Verwendung von
Zitatmarkierungen in den gotischen Manuskripten. 3. Exemplarische Analyse. Zwischenfazit. 4.
Zusammenfassung. – «Die Auszeichnung der alttestamentlichen Zitate in den
neutestamentlichen Manuskripten der gotischen Tradition belegt deutlich das Interesse der
gotischen Handschriftennutzer am Alten Testament. Entsprechende Hinweise innerhalb der
patristischen Literatur finden sich daher durch die handschriftliche Überreste bestätigt. Auch die
Zitate selbst deuten auf ein reges Interesse am alttestamentlichen Text, da sich zuweilen Lesarten
ausmachen lassen, die sich nach gegenwärtigem Wissensstand nicht aus dem Variantenspektrum
des griechischen Neuen Testaments, wohl aber aus der Überlieferung des Alten Testaments,
genauerhin der Septuaginta, erklären lassen» (p. 308)].
STEYN G.J., Two New Testament Papyri on the Quotations in Hebrews and Their Possible Value in the
Reconstruction of LXX Texts, in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 238-255.
[1. P. Oxy LXVI and the citation from Ps 44:7-8 LXX in Heb 1:8-9. 2. P. Vindob. G 42417 and
Hebrews’ commentary on Ps 8:5-7 in Heb 2:9-10. – «It has been argued that the NT manuscripts
(particularly the papyri) that contain quotations, ought to be constantly included during the
collation and evaluation of textual variants when investigating the text of the LXX. The mere
listing of the reading of a particular NT eclectic text in the critical apparatus of LXX editions is not
sufficient. These NT manuscripts – such as the two papyri discussed in this contribution – form
part of the pool of textual witnesses that ought to be considered during the process of
reconstructing a LXX text» (p. 255)].
TOV E., Reflections on the Septuagint with Special Attention Paid to the Post-Pentateuchal Translations, in
400
[I. Introduction. II. The post-Pentateuchal versions. – «In sum, within our analysis of the question
“What is the LXX?” we focused on the post-Pentateuchal books. We discussed the Jewish nature
of the translation, the place of origin of the individual translation units, the nature of the
translation enterprise, the heterogeneity of Greek Scripture, and the possibility of a gradual
development of the collection of translations. External data about the LXX are scanty, and an
internal analysis does not lead us very far. In my view, the research of the post-Pentateuchal books
is too much influenced by that of the Torah and the Epistle of Aristeas that does not refer to the
post-Pentateuchal books. The collection of Greek translations is very diverse, and each book was
created by a different individual although some of them rendered more than one book. We should
not think of the translation as an organized project, but probably more in terms of individual
translations carried out without planning in Palestine and also in Egypt. Much coincidence was
involved in the creation of the archetype of Jewish-Greek Scripture» (p. 22)].
UTZSCHNEIDER H., Die LXX als «Erzählerin». Beobachtungen an der LXX-Fassung der Geburts- und
Kindheitsgeschichte des Mose (Ex 2, 1-10), in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 463-477.
[1. Erzählen und Übersetzen. 2. Die LXX-Version der Geburtserzählung des Mose (Ex 2,1-10). 3.
Zusammenfassung. – «Auf allen vier narrativen Ebenen, auf denen wir die griechische Fassung
der Geburts- und Kindheitserzählung des Mose betrachtet haben – der text-syntaktischen Ebene,
der Ebene der Figuren, der auf den Plot bezogenen sowie der intertextuellen Ebene – hat sich
diese Erzählung als eine Größe erwiesen, die der hebräischen Vorlage verpflichtet ist und dabei
gleichwohl das Handwerkszeug des Erzählens, auch das spezifisch griechische, eigenständig
einzusetzen weiß und dabei auch eine eigenständige Erzählhaltung einnimmt» (p. 475)].
KOOIJ A., The Old Greek of Isaiah and Other Prophecies Published in Ptolemaic Egypt, in Die
[«In conclusion, then, it can be said that LXX Isaiah as a publication of ancient prophecies does
not represent an isolated phenomenon in Ptolemaic Egypt. On the contrary, there is important
evidence of the same type of literature stemming from native Egyptian priestly circles, in the same
period of time. Of course, it is reasonable to assume that the interest in the contemporary
application of ancient prophecies as reflected in LXX Isaiah is due to the Judean background of
the scholars responsible for this version. However, it is important to realize that the publication of
this type of literature was also part of the culture of native Egyptian circles of the time, the more so
since this could imply the publication of such a text in a Greek version. One could even argue that
the idea of producing a Greek version of the book of Isaiah was stimulated not only by the cultural
context of Ptolemaic Egypt, but also specifically by the phenomenon of the publication of ancient
oracles, in native Egyptian circles, by way of a Greek translation» (p. 83)].
VAN DER
MEER M.N., The Question of the Literary Dependence of the Greek Isaiah upon the Greek Psalter
Revisited, in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 162-200.
[1. Introduction. 2. Discussion. 3. General conclusions. – «The arguments adduced by Seeligmann
and others for literary dependency of the Greek Isaiah upon the Greek Psalter do not withstand
close scrutiny. By contrast, there is more reason to believe that the Greek Psalter borrowed from the
Greek Isaiah. (...) Therefore, there is no reason to change the commonly accepted date of 140 BCE
for the Greek Isaiah, nor is there compelling reason to postulate an earlier date for the Greek
Psalter. In the absence of any evidence that points to a liturgical use of the Psalter in early
Ptolemaic Egypt, there is once more reason to challenge the old idea first coined by Thackeray that
the Septuagint’s Sitz im Leben was the synagogue. Bible translations in Antiquity were probably
more a matter of politics than a matter of piety» (p. 200)].
VAN DER
5. Aristobulo
401
NIEHOFF M., Jewish Exegesis and Homeric Scholarship in Alexandria → 1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere
generale
[4. Aristobulus’ questions and answers as a tool for philosophical instruction: God’s descent as an
Aristotelian paradox; God’s limbs read as Aristotelian metaphors; The creation of the world in
Aristotelian garb (pp. 58-74)].
6. Lettera di Aristea
LANGE A., Textual Standardization in Egyptian Judaism and in the Letter of Aristeas, in Die Septuaginta –
[1. Textual plurality in Egyptian Judaism. 2. Textual recensions in Egyptian Judaism: Papyrus
Fouad Inv. 266b and 266c. 3. The Letter of Aristeas and Textual Standardization in Egyptian
Judaism. 4. Conclusions. – «My observations show that the Letter of Aristeas has an apologetic
interest in the OG text of the Pentateuch and argues also against the revisions of the OG text of
the Pentateuch in his own time» (p. 71)].
MORE J., Kingship Ideology: A Neglected Element in Aristeas’ Charter Myth for Alexandrian Judaism, in
Septuagint and Reception. Essays Prepared for the Association for the Study of the Septuagint in South Africa,
edited by J. COOK (Supplements to the Vetus Testamentum, 127), Brill, Leiden – Boston 2009, 299-319.
MÜLLER M., Josephus und die Septuaginta → 9. Flavio Giuseppe (4. Studi)
generale
[2. A conservative reaction to critical scholarship in the Letter of Aristeas: Canonizing the Greek
Bible translation; The curse of interpolators; The ideology of the Letter of Aristeas (pp. 19-37)].
PASSONI DELL’ACQUA A., Translating as a Means of Interpreting: The Septuaginta and Translation in
Ptolemaic Egypt → 4. LXX
TOV E., Reflections on the Septuagint with Special Attention Paid to the Post-Pentateuchal Translations → 4.
LXX
7. Filone Alessandrino
1. Bibliografie, rassegne, repertori
2. Edizioni e traduzioni
3. Miscellanee e raccolte
4. Studi
ALEKNIENÉ T., L’«extase mystique» dans la tradition platonicienne: Philon d’Alexandrie et Plotin, The Studia
Philonica Annual 22 (2010) 53-82.
[I. Philon d’Alexandrie et Plotin: quelques remarques sur l’histoire de la recherche. II. e[kstasi"
dans l’œuvre de Plotin. III. e[kstasi" dans les écrits de Philon. IV. La discussion à propos de la
notion d’«extase» chez Philon et Plotin au cours du XXe siècle. V. Classement des espèces de la folie
(maniva) divine dans le Phèdre platonicien. VI. De la folie poétique du Phèdre à la notion de l’extase
prophétique dans l’œuvre de Philon. VII. L’exégèse des verbes ayant la signification «extatique»
dans les écrits de Philon. VIII. Philon d’Alexandrie et Plotin: les principaux points du contact. –
«... Nous pouvons conclure qu’il est fort probable que Plotin, quand il mentionne e[kstasi" dans le
texte du Tr. 9 (VI, 9), fait référence à un tel emploi de ce mot, qui apparaît et est développé dans
l’œuvre de Philon, mais non pas avant lui. (...) Quant à la possibilité d’un rapport historique entre
les œuvres de deux auteurs, je pense que ces deux mondes n’étaient pas si impénétrables comme
ils le sont dans les têtes de la plupart des historiens éclairés du XXe siècle. Je crois que, au contraire,
il est tout à fait probable que Plotin ait pu connaître l’œuvre de Philon pendant son long séjour à
Alexandrie» (pp. 81-82)].
402
BOESENBERG D., Philo’s Descriptions of Jewish Sabbath Practice, The Studia Philonica Annual 22 (2010) 143163.
[The texts. Philo’s regular pattern in his Sabbath descriptions. Deviations from this pattern.
Structural deviation. Pagan comments regarding the Sabbath. Philo’s implicit responses to pagan
accusations. Philo’s explicit response to pagan charges in historical context. The Hypothetica and
De vita contemplativa. – «One of the challenges of studying Philo’s immense body of work is the
categorization of his corpus. Scholars generally agree on which works belong to his three extensive
commentary series, the Quaestiones et solutiones in Genesim et in Exodum, the Allegorical
Commentary, and the ‘Exposition of the Law’. More challenging are the texts which do not fit into
any of these series, such as the Hypothetica and De vita contemplativa. Both of these texts have
been labeled ‘apologetic’, meaning that they function to defend the Jews against their accusers.
This paper will test the appropriateness of this label through a comparison of the descriptions of
the Sabbath in these two texts in the context of Philo’s Sabbath descriptions elsewhere in his
corpus. This analysis will demonstrate that the Sabbath description in the Hypothetica gives clear
indications of its apologetic function, while the Sabbath description in De vita contemplativa
should raise doubts regarding the appropriateness of describing this text as apologetic» (p. 143)].
COVER M., Reconceptualizing Conquest: Colonial Narratives and Philo’s Roman Accuser in the Hypothetica,
The Studia Philonica Annual 22 (2010) 183-207.
[Introduction. 1. Roman accusations: the conquest of Canaan in Greco-Roman historiography. 2.
Colonial narratives: Philo’s Hypothetica and Livy’s Ab urbe condita. 3. Roman audience:
reconstructing Philo’s preconceptions of the imperial court: 3.1. The Legatio ad Gaium and In
Flaccum; 3.2. The Acta Alexandrinorum. The end of the Embassy. – «Eusebius invites us to ask who
Philo’s accusers were, what accusations they made, and how these accusations shaped the content
and rhetoric of Philo’s response. This essay will venture to answer these questions by situating
Philo’s Hypothetica within the imperial Roman context. In particular, I will defend the thesis that
the Hypothetica was composed by Philo in preparation for the Jewish embassy to the emperor
Gaius, which Philo led in 39/40 C.E. in the wake of the political persecution of the Alexandrian
Jews under the Roman prefect of Egypt Avillius Flaccus» (p. 184)].
DINAN A., Another Citation of Philo in Clement of Alexandria’s Protrepticus (10,93,1-2)
Alessandrino
→ 11. Clemente
KONSTAN D., Of Two Minds: Philo On Cultivation, The Studia Philonica Annual 22 (2010) 131-138.
[Farmer vs. worker of the land. Herdsman vs. tender of sheep. Horseman vs. rider. The art of
making distinctions. – «In this paper, I argue that Philo’s engagement with the theme of doubling
in De agricultura, inspired by his close exegesis of passages in Genesis and elsewhere to which he
applied the Platonic method of diairesis or division, led him to a new conception of the dual nature
of the human mind beyond anything that Plato or other classical Greek philosophers had
suggested. I begin by tracing Philo’s application of the method of division, then note his reservation
about taking it to excess (in this respect he is in accord with Stoic thinkers of the Roman period),
and finally indicate the novel nature of the conclusions that he reaches» (p. 131)].
LEONHARDT-BALZER J., Philo und die Septuaginta, in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 623-637.
[1. Einleitung. 2. Philos Septuagintazitate außerhalb des Pentateuchs. 3. Philo und die Septuaginta.
– «Für Philo ist die Autorität der Mosetora unantastbar, aber Mose teilt seine Autorität über
prophetische Inspiration mit den Schriften seiner Nachfolger wie auch mit der Übersetzung ins
Griechische» (p. 637)].
LIVESEY N.E., Paul, the Philonic Jew (Philippians 3,5-21), ASEs 27/2 (2010) 35-54.
[Abstract: «Paul is very often constructed as a Christian. This construct is not only anachronistic,
because Christianity does not begin until sometime considerably later than Paul, but also false
because Paul never claims to be anything other than a Jew. In Phil 3,5-21 Paul devalues his own
403
Jewish identity in favour of one based in the Anointed, and it is often in reference to this selfanalysis that students of Paul make the assumption that he left Judaism and became Christian. Yet
in his articulation of his new and more highly prized identity with the Anointed, at that point
where he seems most likely to have stepped from Judaism into Christianity, Paul’s language reveals
an abundance of parallels to the well-known Greco-Roman motif of self-mastery common to the
writings of his Jewish contemporary Philo»].
MAZZANTI A.M., Fra superstizione ed empietà: la definizione intermedia di eujsevbeia in Filone di
Alessandria, Adamantius 16 (2010) 193-205.
[Il significato di eujsevbeia: identificazione univoca e definizione relazionale. Deisidaimoniva ed
eujsevbeia. Ἀσέβεια. Elementi conclusivi. – «Uno stesso lessico in ambiti culturali differenziati
esprime cognizioni semantiche non coincidenti che riflettono la rilevante gamma di distinzioni
inerenti a visioni teologiche ed antropologiche con esiti conseguenti sul rapporto fra l’umano e il
divino. A fronte della prospettiva unitaria emergente dai testi filoniani, l’indagine su terminologie
analoghe volta a più ampio raggio seppure limitata a sondaggi, individua fratture e problematicità
significative: la distonia fra l’ammissione formale dell’esistenza di Alterità stabilite per tradizione e
l’esito di divergenti indagini intellettuali, il dilemma sul significato e sulle modalità dell’interazione
cultuale, la mancanza di corrispondenza nei comportamenti rivolti al divino e all’umano. La medietà
di εὐσέβεια configura l’esigenza di una stabilità, in equilibrio rispetto ad un processo che può
comportare non solo antitesi concettuali ed esistenziali, ma deformazioni esperienziali per
accrescimento» (pp. 204-205)].
generale
[Part III. The inversion of Homeric scholarship by Philo: 8. Literal methods of Homeric scholarship
in Philo’s Allegorical Commentary, 133-151; 9. Philo’s Questions and Answers as a manual of instruction,
152-168; 10. Philo’s Exposition of the Law at a significant distance from Alexandrian scholarship, 169185.185].
ROYSE J.R., Some Observations on the Biblical Text in Philo’s De agricultura, The Studia Philonica Annual
22 (2010) 111-129.
[«One must always keep in mind that Philo is reading and writing Greek without accents,
breathings, or punctuation marks. Of course, he also does not have quotation marks at his disposal,
and so their placement by editors must be carefully checked. Philo basically uses the LXX, but
omits words that seem superfluous (e.g., oJ a[nqrwpo" at Deut 20:5b-7) or irrelevant to his discussion
(e.g., kai; ejmequvsqh at Gen 9:21), adds words for clarification of grammar (e.g., ei\nai at Gen 9:20),
rewrites constructions (e.g. divdwsi to didovnto" at Deut 8:18), and shifts to preferred grammatical
forms (e.g. from genhqhvtw to genevsqw in Gen 1.3 and elsewhere)» (pp. 128-129)].
RUNIA D.T., The Structure of Philo’s Allegorical Treatise De agricultura, The Studia Philonica Annual 22
(2010) 87-109.
[1. Introduction. 2. The Allegorical Commentary as running commentary. 3. Exegetical methods. 4.
The primacy of the biblical text. 5. Rhetoric, purple prose and exhortation. 6. The structure of the
treatise unpacked: Philo of Alexandria, De agricultura (On cultivation). Exegetical structure of the
treatise. 7. Comments on the treatise’s structure. 8. Some consequences for a commentary].
SFAMENI GASPARRO G., Dio unico, pluralità e monarchia divina. Esperienze religiose e teologie nel mondo
tardo-antico → 1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere generale
[Cap. I. Scienza caldea e Dio unico in Filone di Alessandria. Una risposta giudaica alla teologia
cosmica ellenistica, 35-77].
404
STERLING G.E., Philo’s De agricultura. Introduction, The Studia Philonica Annual 22 (2010) 83-85.
–, The Hypothetica. Introduction, The Studia Philonica Annual 22 (2010) 139-142.
VELA H., Philo and the Logic of History, The Studia Philonica Annual 22 (2010) 165-182.
[Introduction. 1. Reassessing the logic of apologetics; Exclusive and inclusive disjunctions. 2.
Dilemmatic argumentation. 3. Dilemmatic argumentation and the Hypothetica. Conclusion. – «This
paper has attempted to illuminate and clarify certain aspects of the purpose and strategy of the
fragmentary text known as the Hypothetica. Specifically, I reexamined Sterling’s thesis in light of
further study of Stoic disjunctions and recent advances in the field of Stoic logic. I concur with
Sterling that Philo appealed to Stoic logic, although in a slightly different manner. Rather than
inclusive disjunctions, I propose that Philo set up exclusive disjunctions in order to create
dilemmatic arguments (that is, the non-indemontrable syllogism). This strategy countered
conflicting reports about the Jews and trapped his audience in a positive understanding of
Judaean history and culture» (p. 182)].
WINSTON D., Philo of Alexandria, in The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity, 235-257.
[Introduction. Life and works. Exegetical technique. Central themes of Philo’s thought. Theory of
creation. Freedom and determinism. The soul and its passions. Mysticism. Philo and the Church
Fathers. – «In short, to see Philo primarily as an exegete of Scripture tout court is quite misleading.
He is a thoroughly Hellenized Jew who has clearly been intellectually seduced by Platonic
philosophy, but who nevertheless remained steadfastly loyal to his Jewish faith and therefore felt
compelled to bend every effort to the task of reconciling the two opposing passsions that energized
his spiritual existence» (pp. 235-236)].
8. Pseudo-Filone
9. Flavio Giuseppe
4. Studi
BERTHELOT K., Les Cananéens dans les Antiquités Juives de Flavius Josèphe, in EUKARPA, 205-214.
[La liste des populations cananéennes (Genèse 10, 15-19) en A.J. I.138-139 et la malédiction de
Canaan (Genèse 9, 20-27) en A.J. I.141-142. L’exploration du pays de Canaan (Nombres 13) en A.J.
III.303-305. Le partage des terres entre les tribus (Josué 19, 24-39) en A.J. V.85-89. Les Cananéens
soumis à la corvée par Salomon (1 Rois 9, 19-21) en A.J. VIII.160-162. Conclusion. – «Dans les livres
des Antiquités juives qui font référence à ces épisodes ou ces commandements bibliques, Flavius
Josèphe paraphrase le plus souvent le récit biblique sans introduire de modifications majeures –
ainsi, il ne cherche guère à atténuer ni même à justifier la mise en pratique du herem (anathème)
contre Jéricho et ses habitants. Cependant, quelques modifications significatives sont introduites
de temps à autre. Je me limiterai ici à quelques exemples qui ont pour point commun d’évoquer le
cas des descendants de Canaan installés en Syrie-Phénicie, dont la Bible, elle, ne nous dit presque
rien» (p. 205)].
CALABI F., La ‘missione’ di storico per Flavio Giuseppe, Adamantius 16 (2010) 12-21.
[«Vi è nell’opera di Flavio Giuseppe un continuo intreccio tra lavoro dello storico e dello storiografo,
un incontro tra pratica e teoria della scrittura storica, tra registrazione degli avvenimenti e
teorizzazione. Tale confluenza di piani è particolarmente evidente nel Contro Apione che – in
alcuni punti – dichiaratamente si pone quale opera storiografica e teorizza il modo di esporre una
narrazione storica, ma ricompare frequentemente anche nelle altre opere. Emerge la
405
preoccupazione costante di trasferire teorie, modi del narrare, strumenti interpretativi in un campo
in cui questi strumenti non si sono ancora esplicati, di riportare categorie storiche greche a racconti
biblici, di ‘tradurre’ in un linguaggio ‘oggettivo’, piano, finalizzato alla chiarezza e alla comprensione,
i difficili eventi che hanno minato la fiducia del popolo ebraico nella possibilità stessa di poter
sopravvivere. Parallelamente, emerge nell’esplicito la volontà di ristabilire la verità degli
avvenimenti, di smascherare quegli storici – o sedicenti storici – che hanno fornito un’immagine
falsa di ciò che è accaduto, che hanno espresso livore e astio anziché oggettività ed equilibrio, che
hanno celato avvenimenti, nascosto realtà. Tali critiche emergono nell’Autobiografia e nella Guerra e
sono rivolte contro autori ebrei che hanno raccontato falsamente la guerra» (p. 21)].
CASTELLI E., Un falso letterario sotto il nome di Flavio Giuseppe. Ricerche sulla tradizione del PERI TOU
PANTOS e sulla produzione letteraria cristiana a Roma nei primi decenni del III secolo (JAC.E. Kleine Reihe,
7), Aschendorff, Münster 2010, pp. VIII+144.
–, Un insospettato caso di pseudepigrafia nel terzo secolo: l’attribuzione del Peri; tou’ pantov" a Flavio
Giuseppe, ZAC 14 (2010) 306-327.
[Introduzione. I. L’autore della Refutatio. II. Il De universo. III. L’attribuzione a Flavio Giuseppe. IV.
Il libro IX della Refutatio e Flavio Giuseppe. V. L’uso di Flavio Giuseppe per la composizione del De
universo. VI. Porfirio lettore di Flavio Giuseppe e del De universo. VII. La circolazione del De
universo sotto il nome di Flavio Giuseppe: un nuovo caso di pseudepigrafia. VIII. Riflessioni sulla
pseudepigrafia del De universo. IX. Tra Testimonium Flavianum e De universo: una proposta
d’interpretazione. X. Considerazioni su una notizia di Eusebio. – Abstract: «This paper deals with
the attribution of the Peri; tou’ pantov" (De universo) to Flavius Josephus. Three sources are
considered in order to address the issue of its attribution to the historian: i) Refutatio IX 18-30; ii) a
fragment in the Excerpta Constantiniana; iii) a notice by Porphyry in De abstinentia IV 11. An
examination of the Refutatio demonstrates that the author was well acquainted with Flavius
Josephus taking the notice at Bellum Iudaicum II 119-166 about the Essenes, Pharisees, and
Sadducees. Is it possible that the author of the Refutatio also used Flavius Josephus when he wrote
the De universo? The examination of the Excerpta Constantiniana allows identifying a passage from
the Contra Apionem, regarding the antiquity of the Jewish tradition that was re-used in the De
universo. Porphyry’s De abstinentia IV 11 mentions the Essenes and has been connected with the
Contra Apionem in earlier research, even though there is no mention of the Essenes in that work
nor can the title “to the Greeks” refer to it. Instead, this notice can be connected with the De
universo which was already circulating under the name of Flavius Josephus. This work, in fact, was
addressed “to the Greeks”, it was divided into two books, and it probably dealt with the Essenes. It
appears that in writing the De universo the author made use of certain passages from Flavius
Josephus in that part of the work concerned with Judaism. The attribution of this writing to the
Jewish historian is thereby explained. The author of the Refutatio was the schismatic rival of the
Roman bishop Callistus (217-222). Because of this schismatic activity, his works were prudently
circulated under the names of other authors. The Refutatio was attributed to Origen, the De
universo, on the other hand, was attributed to Flavius Josephus on the basis of the fact that this
work had been written with some excerpts from his writings» (p. 327)].
GIANOTTI G.F., Varietà del mondo e uniformità della storiografia in Flavio Giuseppe, in Poikilia. Variazioni
sul tema, a cura di E. BERARDI, F.L. LISI, D. MICALELLA (Scaffale del Nuovo Millennio, 99), Bonanno
Editore, Acireale-Roma 2009, 297-343.
MÜLLER M., Josephus und die Septuaginta, in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 638-654.
[1. Einleitung. 2. Aristeas’ Ziel. 3. Aristeas’ Bericht in Josephus’ Wiedergabe. 4. Änderungen im
Sprachgebrauch bezüglich des Übersetzungsprojekts in Josephus’ Wiedergabe des Aristeas. 5.
Autorisation der Übersetzung. 6. Ergebnis. 7. Zur Frage von Josephus’ Benutzung der Septuaginta.
– «Auf die Frage von Josephus’ Benutzung vorliegender Übersetzungen der heiligen Bücher der
Juden ist die Antwort nicht einfach die, dass die Septuaginta selbstverständlich seine Hauptquelle
406
gewesen sei. Das ist ganz offenbar nicht der Fall gewesen. Andererseits hat er... mit seinem Hinweis
zur Legitimierung des Übersetzungsprojektes durch den Hohepriester am Anfang der Antiquitates
(1,5), in gewissen Maße sein Unternehmen als ein Seitenstück zur Septuaginta verstanden. Sein
Vorhaben scheint jedoch eine Alternative darzubieten» (p. 651)].
PERDUE L.G., Mantic Sages in the Ancient Near East, Israel, Judaism, and the Dead Sea Scrolls, in Prophecy
after the Prophets. The Contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls to the Understanding of Biblical and Extra-Biblical
Prophecy → 1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere generale
WIATER N., Reading the Jewish War. Narrative Technique and Historical Interpretation in Josephus’s Bellum
Judaicum, Materiali e discussioni per l’analisi dei testi classici 64 (2010) 145-185.
[Introduction. 1. Inversed roles: war and stasis in the Bellum Judaicum. 2. The bottom of the
narrative: stasis, famine and teknofagiva. 3. Masada: re-reading the war? 4. Conclusion. – «Exploring
the narrative structure of the Bellum Judaicum reveals the contribution of narrative devices to
Josephus’s interpretation of the past. Josephus guides the reader’s interpretation of the historical
events by inviting them to perceive interrelations between events on different levels of the
narrative. The full meaning of one event emerges only when it is read alongside another» (p. 181)].
10. Cristianesimo alessandrino ed ambiente egiziano
1. Il contesto religioso egiziano
NAETHER F., Die Sortes Astrampsychi. Problemlösungsstrategien durch Orakel im römischen Ägypten
(Orientalische Religionen in der Antike. Ägypten, Israel, Alter Orient, 3), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2010,
pp. XVIII+491.
[Vorwort, VII-IX. Ziel und Anlage der Arbeit, 1-3. Kap. 1. Begriffe, Methoden, Kontexte, 5-61. Kap.
2. Die Sortes Astrampsychi, 62-278. Kap. 3. Die Sortes Sangallenses, 279-298. Kap. 4. Die Sortes
Sanctorum, 299-310. Kap. 5. Sortes im Zeitenlauf, 311-358. Kap. 6. Ticket-Orakel und Sortes
Astrampsychi, 359-410. Kap. 7. Orakelverbote, 411-426. Ergebnisse, 427-431. Literaturverzeichnis, 433475. Textstellenregister, 477-488; Sachregister, 489-491].
2. Il periodo delle origini
[Ch. 5. The earliest communities of Jesus’ followers: 5. Alexandria, 115-120].
CHAPA J., The Fortunes and Misfortunes of the Gospel of John in Egypt, VigChr 64 (2010) 327-352.
[1. Literary evidence for the Gospel of John in the Early Church in Egypt. 2. Papyrological
evidence. 3. Evidence for doctrinal trends? – Abstract: «The numerous manuscripts of John among
the earliest Christian papyri have given rise to discussion and speculation. It has been suggested,
on the grounds of an alleged preference for the Fourth Gospel among gnostics, that the high
number of papyri of John compared to other gospels would favour Walter Bauer’s thesis of the
‘heterodox’ character of early Christian Egypt. The obscurity which veils the origins of the early
Egyptian Church allows for conjectures of this kind. However, recent studies on the reception of
the Fourth Gospel in the early Church and newly published papyri show that the abundance of
early manuscripts of John is not necessarily indicative of the gnostic nature of early Christianity in
Egypt. This paper attemps to shed additional light on the issue by comparing early papyri of John
with other pieces of Christian evidence» (p. 327)].
3. Gnosticismo, ermetismo e manicheismo
delle note e della bibliografia a cura di B. CANGEMI TROLLA → 1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere generale
BÖHM T.M., Ptolemäische Gnosis bei Hegel? Anmerkungen zur Interpretation des Johannesprologs durch
Amelius, in Logos der Vernunft – Logos des Glaubens, 109-128.
407
[1. Einleitung. 2. Die Interpretation des Johannesprologs durch Hegel. 3. Amelius und der
Johannesprolog: 3.1. Text und Übersetzung; 3.2. Die Deutung des Johannesprologs durch Amelius.
4. Ergebnisse: Hegel und Amelius. – «Obwohl Hegel später zumindest in seinen Vorlesungen über die
Geschichte der Philosophie über A. Neander mit den Ansätzen etwa der Valentinianer und
Ptolemäer vertraut war, spielte dies in der Frankfurter Zeit keine Rolle. Die Ptolemäer bleiben
deshalb – falls Hegel den Amelius-Text gelesen und verwendet hat – unerkannt» (p. 124)].
COLPE C., Einleitung in die Schriften aus Nag Hammadi, Aschendorff Verlag, Münster 2011, pp. 368.
[Vorwort, 19-24. Danksagung, 24. I. Kap. Forschungs-, insbesondere editionsgeschichtlicher
Rückblick, 25-64. A. Ein vor, neben und in der Gnosis erfahrbares geistiges Sein: erlesene
Denkweisen, Weltbilder, Begriffsgötter: II. Kap. «Maximen und Reflexionen» –
Kulturübergreifend, 65-76; III. Kap. Erkenntnis durch Visionen – Weltenergreifend, 77-85. B.
Christlich- und pagan-synkretistische Texte, mit gnostischen Zuspitzungen einzelner Autoren und
Passagen: IV. Nichtkanonische Schriften neutestamentlichen Typs, 87-104; V. Kap.
Eigengewichtige Lehren «Zwischen den Schulen», 105-128. C. Durchgängig und eindeutig
gnostische Schriften als Lehrkodifikationen und in Sammlungen aus Schulen: Exkurs I. Ein um
Barbelo gruppiertes Basissystem, 129-135; VI. Kap. Lehrkodifikationen der Valentinianer, 137-181;
VII. Kap. Lehrkodifikationen der Sethianer, 183-207; Exkurs II. Der Prophet von nebenan, 209-217.
D. Durchgängig und eindeutig gnostische Schriften mit diskreten Optionen für eine heilvolle
Kulturreligion: VIII. Kap. Orientierung gen «Osten», 219-266; IX. Kap. Orientierung gen «Westen»,
267-282. E. Christliche, jüdische und pagane Mitvoraussetzungen für die Entstehung, Erhaltung
und Beedigung einer Gnosis: X. Kap. Christianisierung vorgegebener Verhältnisse, 283-292; XI.
Kap. «Nahezu-Positionen: halbkirchlich, semijüdisch, fast heidnisch?, 293-323. Schluss: XII. Kap.
Zusammenfassungen, 325-363. Bibelstellenregister, 365-368. – Nella «Danksagung», il curatore Achim
Budde ricorda le circostanze dell’opera postuma (Carsten Colpe è morto a Berlino il 24 novembre
2009)].
FALKENBERG R., The salvation system in the Sophia of Jesus Christ. An example of textual reuse, in The
Discursive Fight over Religious Texts in Antiquity, 119-132.
[Introduction. The pantheon of the heavenly world. The immortal man and the soteriological
implications. Cosmogonic time. Anthropogonic time. Present time. Conclusion. Bibliography. – «To
understand the concise salvation system in SJC, we need to establish the structure of the divine
hierarchy from the upper heavenly regions down to the created cosmos, since two of the gods in
the heavenly realm are closely connected to the soteriology of the lower cosmos. First, the exact
number of gods in the pantheon will be determined, since the two versions of SJC disagree on that.
Second, a god called the immortal Man shows a special soteriological function which needs to be
clarified. Third, humankind’s salvation history will be described through a three-stage chronology
from cosmogonic time until the time of the revelation dialogue. Finally, a specific biblical
background will be suggested as inspiration for the salvation system in SJC» (p. 119)].
FUNK W.-F – PAINCHAUD L. – THOMASSEN E., L’Interprétation de la Gnose (NH XI, 1) (Bibliothèque
Copte de Nag Hammadi – Section «Textes», 34), Les Presses de l’Université Laval-Peeters, Québec–
Louvain–Paris–Walpole/MA 2010, pp. XVI+186.
GARCÍA BAZÁN J.B., La tiniebla y el seno del Padre: gnósticos y Clemente de Alejandría en Dionisio Areopagita
→ 33. Pseudo-Dionigi Areopagita
JENOTT L. – PAGELS E., Antony’s Letters and Nag Hammadi Codex I: Sources of Religious Conflict in FourthCentury Egypt → 10. Cristianesimo alessandrino ed ambiente egiziano
KHOSROYEV A., Further Remarks on the Term ‘Gnostic’, Hyperboreus 15 (2009) 101-109 (in russo).
408
[Abstract: «The paper collects and analyses main evidence on the use of the word gnwstikov" in the
2nd-4th century philosophy, both pagan (Celsus, Plotinus, Porphyrius) and Christian heresiological
(Irenaeus, Clemens, Hippolytus, Tertullianus, Epiphanius). Originally Plato uses gnwstikov" as an
adjective (Polit. 258 E; gnwstikh; ejpisthvmh). In the second half of the 2nd century, followers of one
of the early Christian opposition movements use the word as a self-epithet (e.g. Adv. haer. I. 11. 5:
γνωστικῶν gnwstikwvteroi). Later the gnwstikov" is substantivated, most likely under the influence
of the Pauline Epistles (e.g. 1 Cor 2. 14-16). Starting from Irenaeus, the word refers to any Christian
dualistic heretic» (p. 109)].
KING K.L., Toward a Discussion of the Category “Gnosis / Gnosticism”: The Case of the Epistle of Peter to Philip,
in Jesus in apokryphen Evangelienüberlieferungen, hrsg. von J. FREY u. J. SCHRÖTER, unter Mitarbeit von
J. SPAETH (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, 254), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen
2010, 445-465.
[The Epistle of Peter to Philip. Gnosticism. Reading EpPetPhil in the history of Early Christian
theology. Conclusions. – «What significance, then, does the apocryphal literature have for a
theological history of Early Christianity? A work like EpPetPhil has the potential to let readers
perceive anew both the views that have been dominant and those that have remained less
prominent in Christian theology and practice. It is entirely possible that reading the tradition
without the boundaries of orthodoxy already firmly in place will lead to a reinvigorated
understanding of tradition’s complexity and richness, and with it a renewed capacity for
theological history to offer resources for critical contemporary theologizing» (p. 465)].
LÉTOURNEAU P., The Dialogue of the Savior as a Witness to the Late Valentinian Tradition, VigChr 65
(2011) 74-98.
[I. Valentinian Gnostic criteria. II. The Dialogue of the Savior and Valentinian Gnosis. – «The
Dialogue of the Savior is an intriguing document amalgamating sayings of the Lord, cosmological
fragments and other materials from different origins. A close analysis of its major ideas shows a
Valentinian origin, as M. Krause once suspected. Addressing first the issue of finding valid criteria
for the identification of Valentinian documents, the article then seeks to establish the Valentinian
character of the Dialogue of the Savior by comparing it to patristic and Nag Hammadi sources.
Some discrepancies between this version of Valentinianism and the patristic accounts are best
explained as doctrinal accomodations toward the emerging orthodoxy» (p. 74)].
MÉTROPE J.-C., L’ontologie et la cosmogonie du système de Basilide (Alexandrie, IIe siècle après Jésus-Christ),
dans Pensée grecque et sagesse d’Orient. Hommage à Michel Tardieu. Sous la direction de M.A. AMIRMOEZZI, J.-D. DUBOIS, C. JULLIEN et F. JULLIEN (Bibliothèque de l’École des Hautes Études. Sciences
Religieuses, 142), Brepols, Turnhout 2010, 385-397.
MOORE E.– TURNER J.D., Gnosticism, in The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity , 174-196.
[Introduction. Sethian Gnosticism. Christian Gnosticism: Basilides; Valentinus and his school; The
system of Ptolemy; Other forms of Gnostic thought; Conclusion. – «... The Gnostic sources here
surveyed manifest contributions from Greek philosophy, especially Platonism, at their very core.
Their picture of the world and its origins often derive from an interpretation of the protology of the
biblical book of Genesis in the light of the distinction between an ideal, exemplary realm of eternal
stable being and its more or less deficient earthly and changeable copy» (p. 194)].
PASQUIER A., Eugnoste. Lettre sur le Dieu Transcendant (NH III, 3 et V, 1). Commentaire (Bibliothèque
Copte de Nag Hammadi – Section «Textes», 33), Les Presses de l’Université Laval – Peeters, Québec –
Louvain – Paris – Walpole/MA 2010, pp. XXVI+287.
RASIMUS T., Ptolemaeus and the Valentinian Exegesis of John’s Prologue, in T. RASIMUS (ed.), The Legacy of
John. Second-Century Reception of the Fourth Gospel, Brill, Leiden 2010, 145-171.
409
WURST G., Das Problem der Datierung der Sophia Jesu Christi und des Eugnostosbriefes, in Jesus in apokryphen
Evangelienüberlieferungen, hrsg. von J. FREY u. J. SCHRÖTER, unter Mitarbeit von J. SPAETH (Wissenschaftliche
Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, 254), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2010, 373-386.
[1. Zur Überlieferung der Sophia Jesu Christi und des Eugnostosbriefes. 2. Inhalt und Aussageabsicht
der Sophia Jesu Christi. 3. Das Problem der Datierung der SJC. 4. Zu einem Aspekt der Gotteslehre
des Eugnostosbriefes. 5. Fazit. – «Eug ist keineswegs als ein weitgehend nicht-christlicher,
religionsphilosophischer Text anzusprechen, sondern es handelt sich um einen Traktat, der die
theologischen Diskussionen der Zeit zwischen ca. 140 und 180 n.Chr. reflektiert – womit die
Datierung Tardieus hier von einem ganz anderen Ausgangspunkt her bestätigt wird. Eug spricht
nicht nur hinsichtlich der negativen Theologie die mittelplatonische Sprache der Apologeten des
2. Jh., wie van den Broek gezeigt hat, sondern auch logostheologisch. Für die Datierung der SJC hat
dies zur Konsequenz, daß es sich dabei keineswegs um ein Dialogevangelium der ersten Hälfte oder
der Mitte des 2. Jh. handeln kann – und somit auch nicht um das früheste Beispiel dieser Gattung
–, sondern um einen entsprechend später anzusetzenden Text» (p. 386)].
4. La chiesa alessandrina: istituzioni, dottrine, riti, personaggi e episodi storici
ISELE B., Kampf um Kirchen. Religiöse Gewalt, heiliger Raum und christliche Topographie in Alexandria und
Konstantinopel (4 Jh.) (JAC.E. Kl. R., 4), Münster 2010, pp. VI+267.
[Vorwort, III. Einleitung, 1-13. Religiöser Konflikt und städtisches Feld: Konstantinopel: I. Die junge
Stadt am Bosporus, 15-32; II. Innerstädtische Hauptkirchen: Weisheit und Friede, 33-50; III. Die
Peripherie der Stadt und das Grabmal des Kaisers, 51-79; IV. Kleine Kirchen, Konventikel:
‘Aanastasiai’, die Auferstandenen, 80-106; V. Anhang: Karte und Topographie, 107-110. Religiöser
Konflikt und heiliger Raum: Alexandria: VI. Polypolis, 113-119; VII. Strategiender Gewalt: Keine
Kirchen, 120-142; VIII. Monument stadtkirchlicher Autonomie: Theonas, 143-166; IX. (Un-)heilige
Räume: Das Kaisareion und die Kirchen der Gegner, 167-184; X. Exkurs: Kaisareion und
Bischofskirche (339-366), 185-192. Kampf um Kirchen, 193-221. Literaturverzeichnis, 223-255.
Gesamtregister, 256-267].
LUCCHESI E., D’une vie de Dioscore à une hymne en l’honneur de Dioscore, AbBoll 128 (2010) 61-65.
W EST M., Jesus Speaks to/in Us: A Connection of Theme between Serapion of Thmuis’ Against the Manichees
and Sacramentary, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 155-160.
5. Il monachesimo
ALCIATI R., Diacono e diaconia nel monachesimo egiziano: la testimonianza di Cassiano, in Diakonia,
diaconiae, diaconato. Semantica e storia nei Padri della Chiesa. XXXVIII Incontro di studiosi dell’antichità
cristiana (Roma, 7-9 maggio 2009) (SEAug, 117), Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum, Roma 2010, 165175.
–, Quarant’anni di studi cassianei (1968-2008) → 0. Bibliografie, repertori e rassegne; profili di studiosi
BADILITA C., Gratia Dei et libertas nostri arbitrii: Jean Cassien ou la revanche de l’ortho-doxie, in Patristique
et œcuménisme, 237-262.
[1. Bref rappel des faits. 2. La parole est à l’accusé. 3. Correspondances dans la tradition.
Conclusion. – «D’après ce que nous venons de voir, les prétendus “sémi-pélagiens” soutiennent
une tradition parfaitement orthodoxe et ne s’écartent en rien du droit chemin de la foi tracé par
l’Écriture. Ils sont les victimes innocentes à la fois de l’immense prestige de saint Augustin ainsi que
de plusieurs déformations de leur doctrine opérées par un certain nombre d’adversaires dont, en
410
premier lieu, Prosper d’Aquitaine. La tradition d’Orient... se reconnaît parfaitement dans les
enseignements de Cassien sur le rapport entre la grâce et le libre arbitre et n’a aucune difficulté à
reconnaître leur orthodoxie» (p. 262)].
BOLMAN E.S. – DAVIS S.J. – PIKE G., Shenoute and a Recently Discovered Tomb Chapel at the White
Monastery, JECS 18 (2010) 453-462.
[Abstract: «In 2002, the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities (SCA) discovered and
investigated a triconch funerary chapel at the White Monastery. Since 2006, this structure has
been the focus of further excavation, conservation, and analysis by an international team currently
sponsored by the yale Monastic Archaeology Project (yMAP), in collaboration with the SCA. The
funerary chapel features a subterranean tomb and evidence for an extensive program of figural
and nonfigural wall paintings. During the December 2009 campaign, conservation of the paintings
in the tomb revealed new details that connect this space with Shenoute, the famous head of the
monastery during the fourth and fifth centuries c.e. in this brief article, the authors report on these
recent discoveries». Alle pp. 463-473: Illustrations for «Shenoute and a Recently Discovered Tomb
Chapel at the White Monastery»].
BUMAZHNOV D.F., Some Further Observations Concerning the Early History of the Term MONACOS
(Monk), in Studia Patristica XLV, 21-26.
CRISTEA H.-J., Schenute von Atripe: Contra Origenistas → 13. L’origenismo e la fortuna di Origene
GIORDA M., Monachesimo e istituzioni ecclesiastiche in Egitto. Alcuni casi di interazione e integrazione
(Fondazione Bruno Kessler – Scienze religiose. Nuova serie, 22), EDB – Edizioni Dehoniane Bologna,
Bologna 2010, pp. 179.
[Premessa, 7-10. Cap. I. Monachesimo e istituzioni: cenni introduttivi, 11-25. Cap. II. La liturgia
monastica, 27-55. Cap. III. I monaci chierici, 57-73. Cap. IV. Non solo monaci chierici: le funzioni
monastiche, 75-103. Cap. V. Monaci e vescovi e monaci-vescovi, 105-116. Cap. VI. Monachesimo e
istituzioni: il caso di Shenoute e dei meliziani di Paieous, 117-142. Conclusioni, 143-145. Fonti e
bibliografia, 147-175. Indice dei nomi, 177-179].
GILLETTE G., The Alignment of Anger and Friendship in Cassian’s Conference 16, in Studia Patristica
XLVIII, 267-272.
GOEHRING J.E., Some Reflections on the Nag Hammadi Codices and the Study of Early Egyptian Monasticism,
Meddelanden från Collegium Patristicum Lundense 25 (2010) 61-70.
GRUEN W., Constructing Monastic Identities: Ethnicity in the Lives of the Anchoritic Monks, ASEs 27/2
(2010) 93-108.
[Introduction. I. Ethnic designation in Antiquity. II. Methods for understanding ancient ethnic
designations: 1. «Egyptianness» in late antique discourse; 2. The depiction of Antony. Conclusion. –
Abstract: «The late third and early fourth centuries saw the advent of anchoritic monasticism
within the Christian context. Not long thereafter, hagiographies of these ascetics started to
circulate, relating the words and deeds of these solitary monks. In addition to the miracles and
sayings attributed to these figures, the authors of these texts also include information on the
background and family history of the ascetics. One of the most persistent of these characteristics is
ethnic identity. Should we imagine that these ethnic designations are an attempt to provide
demographic information about the anchorites? Or might these ethnic identifications be offered
by the authors for theological or political reasons? This paper seeks to understand the confluence
of several markers of constructed identity within the context of ancient hagiography of anchoritic
monasticism, focusing on the associations of particular ethnicities with religious identities,
educational achievement, and socio-economic status»].
JENOTT L. – PAGELS E., Antony’s Letters and Nag Hammadi Codex I: Sources of Religious Conflict in FourthCentury Egypt, JECS 18 (2010) 557-589.
411
[Introduction. Biographies and the «domestication of charisma». The Letters of Antony and Nag
Hammadi Codex I. Conclusion. – Abstract: «Scholars have explored Athanasius’s conflict with
other Christian teachers in Egypt who practiced “open-canon” readings and exegetical discussions
on “the deeper parts of Scripture”, and who encouraged their students to seek knowledge and
heavenly visions apart from the parish clergy. Recent research has shown that many of these
groups were not only urban study circles in Alexandria but also various monastic organizations
throughout Egypt that admired the Alexandrian theological legacy associated with Origen and the
teaching of such revered spiritual guides as St. Antony. By analyzing the tractates of Nag Hammadi
Codex I as a fourth-century collection of Christian writings, and comparing its content with
themes found in the letters of Antony, we find that the fourth-century reader of this codex, far
from encountering teachings typically regarded as “gnostic” (dualism, docetism, a “worldhating
spirit”) would have found a number of themes strikingly compatible with Antony’s letters. Finally,
we discuss what appeal both collections would have had to monastic readers during the period of
religious controversy that characterizes fourth-century Christianity in Egypt»].
PERRONE L., La preghiera secondo Origene. L’impossibilità donata → 12. Origene (4. Studi)
[Cap. IX. La costruzione di un modello. Origene e il discorso cristiano sulla preghiera da Tertulliano
ad Agostino: 8. Cassiano: la trasformazione monastica del paradigma della preghiera spirituale, 595609].
RÖNNEGÅRD P., Threads and Images. The Use of Scripture in Apophthegmata Patrum (Coniectanea Biblica
New Testament Series, 44), Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake 2010, pp. XI+217.
11. Clemente Alessandrino
BURINI DE LORENZI C., Il linguaggio celebra il Logos. Sull’ Inno a Cristo Salvatore di Clemente Alessandrino,
Sandalion. Quaderni di cultura classica, cristiana e medievale 31 (2008) 105-144.
[Il linguaggio celebra il Logos: a. Inno a Cristo Salvatore. Testo e traduzione; b. I titoli “cristo/logici”.
Conclusione: un canto per il “Canto nuovo”. – «L’Inno celebra il Logos di Dio. L’autore – che non
esiterei a identificare con l’autore del Pedagogo, del Protrettico e degli Stromata – si avvale di un
linguaggio classico sapientemente coniugato con quello biblico; ciò non significa solo fusione della
sua cultura filosofica con la sua esperienza di conversione, ma vera e propria metamorfosi del
linguaggio: i vocaboli della paganità sono riferiti al Verbo di Dio; un contenuto nuovo s’innesta sul
linguaggio antico il quale diventa efficace strumento di annuncio» (p. 143)].
DAINESE D., Il Protrettico ai Greci di Clemente Alessandrino. Una proposta di contestualizzazione,
Adamantius 16 (2010) 256-285.
[1. Per introdurre: l’opera e il suo contesto: 1.1.0. Il contesto storico e sociale alessandrino; 1.1.1. Le
persecuzioni in Alessandria. 1.2.0. Struttura del Protrettico tra apologia e stile retorico: 1.2.1.
Introduzione e conclusione del Protrettico; 1.2.2. La parte centrale; 1.2.3. I due artifici di Clemente.
1.3. Il problema. 2. Martirio e filosofia: 2.1. Chiesa universale e scuola universale: 2.1.1. Una scuola
universale; 2.2.0. L’ajpovrroia. 3. Riflessioni conclusive. – «Con questo articolo ho voluto accostare la
polemica anti-pagana del Protrettico e quella anti-gnostica degli Stromati. La soluzione antignostica degli Stromati si concretizza nell’elaborazione di un’ecclesiologia dalla vocazione
“cattolica”, mentre quella anti-pagana del Protrettico, nella proposta di un cristianesimo che sia
«scuola» altrettanto “universale”» (p. 283)].
DINAN A., Ai[nigma and aijnivttomai in the Works of Clement of Alexandria, in Studia Patristica XLVI, 175-180.
– Another Citation of Philo in Clement of Alexandria’s Protrepticus (10,93,1-2), VigChr 64 (2010) 435-444.
[Abstract: «Protr. 10,93,1-2 should be added to the long list of passages in which Clement has made
use of the writings of Philo. Clement is attracted by, and in large measure appropriates, Philo’s
412
description of repentance in Virt. 181, yet he alters the Philonic text in several ways, notably by
making explicit a citation that also appears partially in Plato, Phd 114D and more fully in Horace, C.
3,25» (p. 435)].
GARCÍA BAZÁN J.B., La tiniebla y el seno del Padre: gnósticos y Clemente de Alejandría en Dionisio Areopagita
→ 33. Pseudo-Dionigi Areopagita
GROSSO M., Trasmissione e ricezione della parabola del pescatore (Vangelo secondo Tommaso 8,1-3), in La
trasmissione delle parole di Gesù nei primi tre secoli, 101-117.
[1. Introduzione. 2. La parabola del pescatore in Vang. Tom. 3. La similitudine del pesce nella retata
in Clemente Alessandrino. 4. La similitudine della rete in Ps.Macario].
HÄGG H.F., Deification in Clement of Alexandria with a Special Reference to his Use of Theaetetus 176B, in
Studia Patristica XLVI, 169-174.
ITTER A.C., Esoteric Teaching in the Stromateis of Clement of Alexandria (VigChr.S, 97), Brill, Leiden –
Boston 2009, pp. XIX+233.
[List of diagrams, XIII; Acknowledgments, XV; Abbreviations, XVII-XVIII; Abbreviations for
Clement’s works, XIX; Note on translations, XIX. Part One. Method: Chapter 1. Teaching, learning
and writing in second and third century Alexandria, 7-32; Ch. 2. The number and sequence of the
works, 33-76; Ch. 3. Logic and enigma, 79-109. Part Two. Doctrine: Ch. 4. The doctrine of anamnesis,
113-139; Ch. 5. Physiology, cosmogony and theology, 141-173; Ch. 6. The doctrine of apokatastasis, 175216. Conclusion, 217-221. Bibliography, 223-228. Subject index, 229-233].
JOURDAN, F., Le Logos de Clément soumis à la question, REAug 56 (2010) 135-172.
[I. La succession des différents aspects du Logos. II. Le double Logos du Père et l’inhabitation de
l’Esprit en l’homme: quelques hypothèses de lecture du fragment 23 des Hypotyposes. – Summary:
«Two questions, inspired by later doctrines, are sometimes put to Clement’s work, which is then
either suspected of heterodoxy or praised for its precocious orthodoxy: did the Alexandrian
distinguish two Logoi? If it were the case, would he have considered them as successive or would
he, on the contrary, have conceived an early version of the notion of eternal generation? To answer
these questions, this article proposes a new analysis of the most often quoted texts and focuses
more particularly on the 23rd fragment of the Hypotyposes transmitted by Photius. The author
examines this passages and reviews its modern interpretations. Through this analysis she tries to
transform the “questioning”, which tortures Clement’s thought, into a listening of the latter and its
witnesses. By adopting as a hermeneutic hypothesis the idea that the text cited by Photius can be
truly attributed to Clement, she invites the reader to discover a distinction between the patriko;"
lovgo", the πατρῴος lovgo", and the Holy Spirit as three different aspects of the same and unique
divine Logos. Clement could have wanted to draw such a distinction in the polemical and
theological context of his time, perhaps to react against the excesses of monarchianism or more
probably to develop a reflection on the Holy Spirit» (p. 172)].
LECHNER T., Süße Lust des Logos. Die Vorrede zum Protreptikos des Clemens von Alexandrien und die prolaliai
der zweiten Sophistik, in Logos der Vernunft – Logos des Glaubens, 149-205.
[1. Definition, Funktion und Charakter der prolaliav: 1.1. Begriff und Definition der Prolalia; 1.2.
Zur Funktion der prolalia in der Zweiten Sophistik; 1.3. Der Charakter der prolalia – stilistische und
inhaltliche Anforderungen. 2. Die prolalia des Protreptikos – Text und Übersetzung (Clem. Alex.,
Protr. 1,1-2,4). 3. Clemens Alexandrinus, Protr. 1,1-2,4 und das rhetorische Modell des Menander:
3.1. Die Analyse von Marco Rizzi; 3.2. Kritischer Kommentar und Ergänzungen zur Analyse von
Rizzi. 4. Clemens Alexandrinus, Protr. 1,1-2,3 und die prolaliaiv der Zweiten Sophistik: 4.1.
Übersicht zu den prolaliai der Zweiten Sophistik; 4.2. Zur Struktur und Komposition der Prolalien;
4.3. Die Erzählung ( dihvghsi"/mῦqo"); 4.4. Die Beschreibung (e[kfrasi"); 4.5. Überblick zu den
Themen und Motiven der Prolalien; 4.6. Die Technik der Selbstreferenz; 4.7. Intertextuelle
413
Steuerzeichen. 5. Zusammenfassung. – «Der Vergleich mit den Prolalien der Zweiten Sophistik hat
eindeutig das Ergebnis der Analyse von Rizzi bestätigt, der die Vorrede des Protreptikos zutreffend
als prolalia charakterisiert hatte. Dieses Ergebnis konnte man durchaus erwarten, da die von Rizzi
notierten Parallelen zwischen dem Protreptikos und dem rhetorischen Handbuch Menanders
bereits evident waren. Darüber hinaus hat der Vergleich gezeigt, wie perfekt Clemens die
Kulturtechniken seiner Zeit beherrscht. Seine prolalia erscheint formal und inhaltlich als ein
typisches Produkt der Zweiten Sophistik und verrät eine enge Vertrautheit mit der rhetorischen
Praxis der Stadtredner. Die Adaptation dieser innovativen rhetorischen Gattung für den Prolog
einer christlichen Missionschrift darf man durchaus als werbepsychologische Meisterleistung
einstufen» (p. 198)].
MAZZUCCO C., I detti sui bambini e il Regno, in La trasmissione delle parole di Gesù nei primi tre secoli, 191-217.
[13. Clemente Alessandrino (pp. 206-209)].
MONFRINOTTI M., Il nome di Dio e la conoscenza di Dio: Clemente di Alessandria davanti a Es 3,14,
Convivium Assisiense 12/1 (2010) 91-113.
MÜHLENBERG E., Der kanonische Brief Gregors von Nyssa und sein Ort im Bußwesen der Alten Kirche → 21.3.
Gregorio di Nissa
NIETO IBAÑEZ J.M., Cristianismo y profecías de Apolo. Los oráculos paganos en la Patrística grieca (siglos II-V)
→ 1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere generale
[II.4. Clemente de Alejandría, 38-39].
Analysis → 1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere generale
[«In his Paedagogus book 1, chapter 4, Clement like Basil underscores the equality of men and
women on the level of their spiritual committment to acquiring Christian virtue(s) or ability to live
virtuously. Additionally, he points to the equality of men and women in relation to their spiritual
status and salvation in God» (p. 127)].
O’BRIEN D., Entering the Kingdom with Difficulty: The Self-sufficient Life as the Quest for Wealthy Believers in
the Shepherd of Hermas and Clement of Alexandria’s Quis Dives Salvetur and Paedagogus, in Studia
Patristica XLV, 325-330.
OSBORNE C., Clement of Alexandria, in The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity, 270-282.
[1. Life and writings. 2. Clement as a philosopher: (i) Eclectic or selective?; (ii) Disorganized
thinking?; (iii) Knowledge and faith; (iv) Metaphysics, cosmology and soul; (v) Ethics; (vi)
Metaphilosophy. Clement’s significance. – «Clement develops a range of original and challenging
lines of thought in his attempt to secure the dependence of Christian theology on intellectually
respectable work in philosophy. One might be tempted to ask whether he is really a Platonist
philosopher dressing his ideas up with a veneer of Christian language, rather than a genuine
Christian believer, but that is probably an anachronistic way of thinking since Clement is
effectively forging an account of what it means to be a believer: what is required for salvation, what
kind of a being God is, how the second person of the Trinity relates to the first person, and what its
role is vis-à-vis revelation, morality and speculative thought» (p. 281)].
ad Agostino: 3. Clemente Alessandrino: la pietà del cristiano come il vero «gnostico», 530-545].
PLÁTOVÁ J., Bemerkungen zu den Hypotyposen-Fragmenten des Clemens Alexandrinus, in Studia Patristica
XLVI, 181-188.
RAU E., Das Geheimnis des Reiches Gottes. Die esoterische Rezeption der Lehre Jesu im geheimen
Markusevangelium, in Jesus in apokryphen Evangelienüberlieferungen, hrsg. von J. FREY u. J. SCHRÖTER, unter
414
Mitarbeit von J. SPAETH (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, 254), Mohr
Siebeck, Tübingen 2010, 187-221.
[Einleitung. Die beiden Fragmente in ihrem Kontext. Jesu Auftreten in Bethanien. “Vorlage” von
Johannes 11? Die Beziehung zum Markusevangelium. Nachfolge im Hemd auf nacktem Leib. Die
Entdeckung / Erfindung einer neuen Jesusgeschichte des Markus. Die Einweihung in die großen
Mysterien. Nicht ohne Scham, weder männlich noch weiblich. Was geschah in Jericho?
Antikarpokratianisches. Ein Nackter mit einem Nackten. Nachfolge und Tischdienst der Frauen?
Nacktheit beim Mahl? Ausblick. – «Zum Schluss sei die Frage gestellt: Hat es sich bewährt, sich
dem Als-ob der Authentizität des Briefauszugs anzuvertrauen, der Clemens von Alexandrien
zugeschrieben wird? Wem verdanken wir das literarische Profil der beiden Fragmente von GMk,
wem deren Verwurzelung im antiken Christentum? Clemens von Alexandrien? Oder einem – sei es
antiken, sei es modernen – Fälscher? Oder haben wir nicht mehr vor uns als das objektlose
Konstrukt dessen, der glaubt, es in einem ebenso schwierigen wie reizvollen Text der Antike
entdeckt zu haben?» (p. 221)].
–, Weder gefälscht noch authentisch? Überlegungen zum Status des geheimen Marlusevangelium als Quelle des
antiken Christentums, in Jesus in apokryphen Evangelienüberlieferungen, hrsg. von J. FREY u. J. SCHRÖTER,
unter Mitarbeit von J. SPAETH (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, 254), Mohr
Siebeck, Tübingen 2010, 139-186.
[Einleitung. Der Briefauszug des Clemens an Theodoros. Die Bezeugung. Die Fälschung des
Jahrhunderts. Das Siegel der Authentizität und das Autograph. Das Desiderat einer
Untersuchung von Feder, Tinte und Schrift. Zu clementinisch, um clementinisch zu sein! Die
Intention der Voss’schen Ignatiusausgabe. Ein witziges Agraphon zum Zähneknirschen. Ein
photographischer Blick auf die Notizen des Markus. The Mystery of Mar Saba. Was spricht für
eine Fälschung? Was spricht für die Authentizität? Die Aura des Verdachts und das Als-ob der
Authentizität. Auf dem Weg zum Kritiker literarischer Fälschungen. M. Bald alias Swindler.
Morton Salt Goldsmith. Homosexualität im öffentlichen Park. Resümee. – «Es ist wenig, was gegen,
und wenig, was für die Authentizität des Briefauszuges von Clemens von Alexandrien an
Theodoros auf die Waagschale gelegt werden kann, darunter nichts Spektakuläres und nichts, was
die Sache entscheidet, zumal die Gesichtspunkte der einen Seite die der anderen nicht
neutralisieren. Solange eine Untersuchung des Manuskripts im Blick auf Feder, Tinte und
Handschrift nicht möglich ist – ich fürchte für immer – und keine neuen Argumente vorgebracht
werden, empfiehlt es sich deshalb, den Text so zu interpretieren, als ob er ein antikes Dokument
aus dem Umkreis des Clemens von Alexandrien wäre. Sich diesem Als-ob der Authentizität
anzuvertrauen, ist methodologisch schwierig und der Sache nach riskant, aber selbst dann nicht
anrüchig, wenn es sich eines Tages als Irrtum erweisen sollte» (p. 186)].
RUTHERFORD J.E., The Alexandrian Spirit: Clement and Origen in context, in The Holy Spirit in the Fathers
of the Church, 32-56.
[Alexandrian Middle Platonism. Clement (pp. 39-40). Origen. Christian Platonism today. The
future of Christian platonism. Conclusion].
W ALLRAFF M., The Beginnings of Christian Universal History. From Tatian to Julius Africanus → 1.
Miscellanee e studi di carattere generale
W ATSON F., Beyond Suspicion: on the Authorship of the Mar Saba Letter and the Secret Gospel of Mark, JThS 61
(2010) 128-170.
[Abstract: «The suspicion that the ‘discoverer’ of the letter from Clement of Alexandria to
Theodore was in reality its author was raised shortly after its first publication in 1973, and has often
been reasserted in the years since Morton Smith’s death in 1991. Yet the fragments of the ‘Secret
Gospel of Mark’ are often still interpreted on the provisional assumption that the letter containing
them is genuine. This article enquires whether the long-standing suspicion of forgery – occasioned
largely by the circumstances of the text’s discovery – can be put beyond reasonable doubt. It
415
proceeds by way of a close scrutiny of the letter itself against the double background of the
undisputed writings of Clement of Alexandria on the one hand, and the published work of Morton
Smith on the other. It is argued that the letter’s internal anomalies are incompatible with
Clementine authorship, as are certain compositional techniques; and that it is the product of
interests and influences that predate its supposed discovery at the Mar Saba monastery»].
12. Origene
Origenes. Aufforderung zum Martyrium, Eingeleitet und übersetzt von M.-B. VON STRITZKY (Origenes.
Werke mit deutscher Übersetzung, 22), De Gruyter – Herder, Berlin – Freiburg i. Br. 2010, pp. pp. 131.
[Einleitung: I. Der Titel der Schrift und ihr literarisches Genus, 3-5; II. Sprache und Stil, 5-7; III.
Ablass, Abfassungszeit und -ort, 7-8; V. Die Adressaten, 9-11; V. Die Theologie des Martyriums, 1125; VI. Textüberlieferung und Editionen, 27-26; VII. Gliederung der Schrift, 27. ORIGENOUS EIS
MARTURION PROTREPTIKOS. Origenes, Aufforderung zum Martyrium: I. Ermahnungen zum
Martyrium, 30-36; II. Warnung vor Götzendienst und Glaubensverleugnung, 36-44; III. Motive für
die Standhaftigkeit während der Verfolgung, 44-60; IV. Alttestamentliche Vorbilder für das
Martyrium, 60-68; V. Notwendigkeit und Wesen des Martyriums, 68-98; VI. Die Verwerflichkeit
des Götzendienstes, 100-102; VII. Abschließende Bemerkungen, 102-111. Bibliographie, 113-119.
Register, 121-131].
Omelie sul Vangelo di Luca. Lettura origeniana, a cura di M. MARITANO e E. DAL COVOLO (Nuova
Biblioteca di Scienze Religiose, 28), LAS – Libreria Ateneo Salesiano, Roma 2011, pp. 142 (= Omelie sul
Vangelo di Luca. Lettura origeniana).
[A. MONACI CASTAGNO, Note introduttive alla predicazione di Origene sul Vangelo di Luca, 5-10.
M. SIMONETTI, Omelia I: Inizio del Vangelo di Luca, 11-16. E. DAL COVOLO, Il Magnificat di Maria,
17-26. L. LUGARESI, Omelia XIII: Gli angeli nostri compagni, il medico celeste e l’episcopo invisibile, 2752. M.I. DANIELI, Omelia XIV: Presentazione di Gesù al tempio, 53-74. D. PAZZINI, Omelia XV:
Simeone e il Nunc dimittis, 75-85. A. GRAPPONE, Omelie XVIII e XIX: Quando Gesù ebbe dodici anni...,
87-104. F. PIERI, Omelia XXXIV: La salvezza dallo straniero, 105-122. E. PRINZIVALLI, Omelia XXXIX:
Matteo nascosto dietro Luca, 123-139].
4. Studi
ALVIAR J.J., A Second Look at Origen’s Notion of ‘Rationality’, in Studia Patristica XLVI, 195-200.
AUSSEDAT M., La récriture des Homélies sur Jérémie d’Origène dans la tradition caténique, in Studia
Patristica XLVI, 229-234.
AUWERS J.-M., Le thiase des chrétiens ou la revanche de Dionysos? → 19. Eusebio di Cesarea
BARBANTI M., Origene di Alessandria e Plotino. Creature razionali-Sostanza spirituale-Materia intelligibile,
in Neoplatonismo pagano vs. Neoplatonismo cristiano. Identità e intersezioni. Atti del Convegno
internazionale Catania 25-26 settembre 2004, a cura di M. BARBANTI e C. MARTELLO (Symbolon. Studi e
testi di filosofia antica e medievale, 32), Edizioni CUECM, Catania 2006, 65-98.
–, La dimensione filosofica dell’insegnamento di Origene di Alessandria, in Studi in onore di Nicolò Mineo, II,
Siculorum Gymnasium, Catania 2009, 621-642.
BELDA M., La oración continua en el tratado Περὶ εὐχῆς de Orígenes, in Studia Patristica XLVI, 267-272.
416
[Ch. 8. Ebionites: 8.3. The classic patristic tradition (3.5. Origen, 194-195). Ch. 9. Elkesaites, Cerinthians,
Symmachians: 1. Elkesaites (1.2. Origen and Eusebius, 215)].
BURINI DE LORENZI C., Il Magnificat (Lc. 1, 46-55) nella interpretazione di Origene e di Ambrogio, Aug. 50
(2010) 83-117.
[1. Citazione e recezione del Magnificat nella tradizione cristiana preorigeniana. 2. L’interpretazione
del Magnificat in Origene e Ambrogio. – Abstract: «The present study proposes a comparison
between Origen and Ambrose with regard to Magnificat’s exegesis: Origen (HLc VIII) explains the
hymn above all to prove the manifestation of the Spirit in Mary as well as in every perfect soul but
the soul’s perfection can be realized only by practicing a virtuous life according to Mary’s example.
In his turn Ambrose’s exegesis (Exp. in Lc. 2,26-28) emphasizes Mary’s faith as model for our faith»
(p. 117)].
–, Dal Nome al Figlio. Tertulliano e Origene: un confronto esegetico, Convivium Assisiense 2 (2010) 71-89.
CARNEVALE L., Giobbe dall’antichità al medioevo (→1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere generale)
[Su Origene, cf. pp. 65-68].
COURTRAY R., Prophète des temps derniers. Jérôme commente Daniel → 28. Gerolamo
[III.2. Les sources chrétiennes de l’In Danielem: 3. Origène (pp. 188-219)].
di Maria, in Omelie sul Vangelo di Luca. Lettura origeniana, 17-26.
[1. Il parallelismo antitipico Eva-Maria. 2. Antropologia origeniana: l’anima dell’uomo, «immagine
dell’immagine». 3. La corruzione dell’immagine: il «bestiario» di Origene. 4. L’umiltà di Maria. 5. La
grandezza di Maria].
DAL COVOLO E., Il Magnificat
DANIELI M.I., Redenzione e salvezza in Origene, in Dizionario di spiritualità biblico-patristica. 56:
Redenzione e salvezza nei Padri della Chiesa, Borla, Roma 2010, 215-272.
[1. Attesa di salvezza: dalle genti a Israele. 2. Aspetti del dramma redentivo. 3. Ampiezza della
redenzione. 4. Le malattie del presente. 5. La speranza della salvezza universale. Bibliografia. – «Dalle
prime alle ultime opere, il pensiero origeniano prosegue con coerenza nella tesi della salvezza
universale, trepidando alle soglie del mistero e mai rinunciando alla speranza di una guarigione
onnicomprensiva, la sola che risponda all’opera redentiva di Cristo» (p. 266)].
–, Omelia XIV: Presentazione di Gesù al tempio, in Omelie sul Vangelo di Luca. Lettura origeniana, 53-74.
[«La conclusione dell’omelia, parlando della novità delle vittime offerte, sottolinea la santità
rinnovatrice del Cristo nella nascita e nella morte, riprendendo il motivo soteriologico dell’inizio.
Così il commento al brano evangelico, iniziatosi con lo sguardo alla sottomissione di Gesù alla
purificazione dell’antica Legge per le sordes e i peccati dell’umanità, vede la conclusione dilatarsi
nella novità dello Spirito che si è posato sul Cristo al Giordano e che da lui dilaga: Colui che ha
assunto la carne umana con le sue povertà è in verità il donatore dello Spirito, Colui che purifica il
tempio che lo accoglie e consentirà le offerte nuove in Spirito e verità» (p. 74)].
DRAKE S., Images of Jewishness in Origen’s Letter to Africanus, in Studia Patristica XLVI, 253-266.
FINN R., Early Christian Asceticism and Almsgiving: Origen’s Ascetic Beginnings, in Studia Patristica XLV, 9-.
GRAPPONE A., Omelie XVIII e XIX: Quando Gesù ebbe dodici anni..., in Omelie sul Vangelo di Luca. Lettura
origeniana, 87-104.
[1. Gesù riempito di sapienza. 2. Giuseppe e Maria alla ricerca di Gesù. 3. Dove trovare Gesù. 4. Il
dolore di Maria e di Giuseppe. 5. Domande e risposte. 6. Il Padre e il tempio. Osservazioni
conclusive. – «HLc 18 e 19, come abbiamo visto, tendono a integrarsi piuttosto che a ripetersi, il che
fa pensare a una nuova spiegazione sulla stessa pericope a breve distanza di tempo e nello stesso
“ciclo”. Consideriamo poi attentamente l’insistenza sin dalle prime battute di HLc 19 sulla divinità
di Gesù, tenendo conto che nell’omelia precedente questa sottolineatura non compare affatto,
anzi, si ha inizialmente un chiaro accenno a una purificazione necessaria per Gesù, senza che
417
Origene si preoccupi di precisare che si tratta dell’anima di Gesù e non del Logos. Possiamo
immaginare che una tale impostazione abbia provocato una discussione nell’uditorio; infatti, specie
i meno introdotti al pensiero origeniano possono aver avuto l’impressione di una negazione o di una
sottovalutazione della divinità di Gesù» (p. 103)].
GROSSO M., “I misteri ai degni”. Un possibile testimonium del Vangelo secondo Tommaso in Origene, CMt
XIV, 14, Adamantius 16 (2010) 389-398.
[«In diverse occasioni Origene stesso fa riferimento a luoghi delle scritture da cui trae la
legittimazione della circolazione controllata di alcune dottrine; a questo proposito abbiamo già
ricordato un testimonium decisivo quale Mt 13,11 e paralleli. Ma l’impiego fatto da Origene
dell’espressione che riecheggia Ev.Th. 62,1 si colloca su un piano differente: la prospettiva
soteriologica che abbiamo individuato in CMt XIV,14, infatti, trasfigura in una dimensione
universalistica il lessico genuinemente misterico di cui essa è parte costitutiva. L’orizzonte della
trasmissione dei µυστήρια da parte di Gesù ai ‘degni’, concepita quale iniziazione dei discepoli a
una realtà trascendente, come mostrano le successive citazioni scritturistiche, si dilata infatti verso il
mondo intero, avendo essa il fine di ottenere la diffusione del vangelo (Mt 21,14) e la redenzione
universale (Gv 6,44) per la potenza conferita alle parole di Gesù nella manifestazione dello Spirito
(1Cor 2,4). È in tale quadro che si inserisce il possibile riferimento al logos gesuano attestato in Ev.Th.
62,1» (pp. 397-398)].
HADOT P., Études de patristique et d’histoire des concepts → 1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere generale
HARL M., Le statut incertain du chant de la vigne (Isaïe 5, 1-7) chez Origène et dans les listes anciennes de
cantiques bibliques, in EUKARPA, 97-106.
[Les deux textes d’Origène en introduction au Cantique du Cantique. L’argumentation d’Origène
en faveur d’Is 5, 1-7: la “précédence” logique des cantiques selon leur contenu. La question posée
par J.L. Kugel. La tradition chrétienne ancienne sur la vigne du bien-aimé: une vigne “de choix”,
qui fait des “épines” par transgression. L’annonce d’un chant d’amour dans le premier verset. Le
Chant de la vigne peut-il être un appel à la conversion avant l’entrée de la jeune fille dans la
chambre nuptiale? Une autre interprétation d’Is 5, 1-7 dans la littérature apologétique chrétienne.
Bibliographie sélective. – «Le contraste entre le sort du Chant de la vigne dans l’Orient grec et celui
qu’il a dans le monde latin est un signe notable de l’immense influence d’Origène en Occident: elle
s’est exercée souterrainement, malgré les querelles théologiques, à travers les traductions de ses
Homélies sur l’Ancien Testament et par la diffusion de sa doctrine ascétique et spirituelle dans les
milieux monastiques. Origène avait montré de façon sereine et généreuse que les chrétiens et
l’Église entière devaient recevoir eux-mêmes les paroles de reproches et de menaces que Dieu
adressait à sa vigne “bien-aimée”. L’introduction du Chant de la vigne par des termes d’amour lui
avait permis de placer ce chant juste avant le cantique de Salomon. Cette mise en relation proche
des deux textes a certainement favorisé le maintien du Chant de la vigne à une place d’honneur
en Occident, et cela parce que les Pères latins avaient une admiration fervente pour le beau
Commentaire d’Origène sur le Cantique des cantiques, riche d’une interprétation mystique qui allait
irriguer tout l’Occident médiéval» (p. 106)].
HEINE R.E., Origen: Scholarship in the Service of the Church (Christian Theology in Context), Oxford UP,
Oxford 2010, pp. XII+275.
[Preface, VII-IX. 1. Alexandria near Egypt, 1-25. 2. Alexandrian Christianity and the formation of
Origen’s thought, 26-64. 3. Origen and the Bible of the Alexandrian Christians, 65-82. 4. The
beginnings of Origen’s published biblical scholarship, 83-103. 5. The Alexandrian commentaries on
the Old Testament, 104-126. 6. The Alexandrian polemical and theological literature, 127-144. 7.
Settling in Caesarea, 145-170. 8. Origen as preacher in Caesarea, 171-187. 9. Scholarship and teaching
in Caesarea, 188-218. 10. The works and themes of the senior scholar, 219-256. Bibliography: Primary
sources, 257-260; Secondary sources, 261-272. Index, 273-275].
418
HENGSTERMANN C., The «Dignity of God’s Image» – Origen’s Metaphysics of Man. Responsio auf Marco
Rizzi, in Natur und Normativität, hrsg. von A. FÜRST und K. MÜLLER (Pontes. Philosophisch-theologische
Brückenschläge, 46), Lit, Münster 2010, 45-62.
[Introduction: Origen’s «system» and the defense of human freedom. 1. «Image» and «likeness» –
Origen’s theology of human dignity. 2. Pre-existence and apokatastasis – Freedom and universal
justice: 2.1. Jacob and Esau – God’s justice in the world; 2.2. «Origen against Plato» – Knowledge
and moral extrinsicism; 2.3. Love and reason – Cosmic soteriology. 3. Origen’s Christian philosophy:
the case for the compassionate universalism. Bibliography].
JACOBSEN A.-C., Normative structures in Origen’s biblical exegesis, in The Discursive Fight over Religious Texts
in Antiquity, 143-156.
[Introduction. Main lines in Origen’s allegorical exegesis. Norms applied by Origen for his exegesis:
Theological norms; Philosophical norms; Literary and rhetorical norms in Origen’s exegesis.
Conclusions. Bibliography. – «... Origen’s allegorical exegesis is by no means totally decided by fixed
norms which would decide the results of his exegesis in advance. Even though Origen recognises a
fixed apostolic tradition, there are still some dogmatic questions left open to be discussed by wise
and spiritually mature Christians like himself. Even though he is philosophically well trained and
therefore adheres to basic philosophical truths of his own time, he is always able to use
philosophical concepts in a way which suits his purposes. Even though he is a well trained
rhetorician, he is able to use the rhetorical rules in a way which suits his exegetical purposes. We
can thus conclude that Origen considers the theological norms to be very strong, while he probably
considers his use of philosophical and rhetorical skills to be mere ‘tools’. From an outsider’s point of
view, all the different norms which he applies to his exegetical work seem to be more or less weak
because in his practice he does not feel strongly tied by any of them» (p. 155)].
JOHNSON A.E., In the Name of Jesus: Consequences of Preaching in Origen’s Homilies on Joshua, in Studia
JUNOD É., Les mots d’Eusèbe de Césarée pour désigner les livres du Nouveau Testament et ceux qui n’en font pas
partie → 19. Eusebio di Cesarea
KEOUGH S.W.J., Eschatology Worthy of God: The Goodness of God and the Groaning of Creation in Origen’s
De Principiis, in Studia Patristica XLVI, 189-194.
KUREK-CHOMYCZ D.A., Scenting the Aroma of Christ: 2Cor. 2:15-6 in Origen’s Interpretation, in Studia
Patristica XLIV, 275-279.
LE BOULLUEC A., Regards antiques sur Adam au Golgotha, in EUKARPA, 355-363.
[Élaboration chrétienne (recours à 1 Co 15, 22). Adam et le sang du Christ (Eph 5,14 et Jn 19,34). Le
«lieu fertile» d’Isaïe 5, 1b. – «La légende chrétienne apparaît pour la première fois par écrit chez
Origène... dans la traduction latine anonyme de son Commentaire sur Matthieu (126), à propos de
Mt 27, 33» (p. 355) ].
LONA H.E., Wahrer Logos – Logos der Wahrheit. Der Umgang des Kelsos mit der Bibel, in Logos der Vernunft –
Logos des Glaubens, 25-52.
[I. Biblische Zitate und Anspielungen in Cels. I,28-2,79: I.1. Die «vituperatio» (1,28-71); I.2. Die
«disputatio» (2,1-79). II. Biblische Zitate und Anspielungen in Cels. 3,1-5,65. III. Biblische Zitate und
Anspielungen in Cels. 6,1-8,75. Schluss. – «Die Bibel als Fundament und Richtlinie des Glaubens
wurde von Kelsos als Quelle und Hauptzeugnis für eine irreparable Entfernung aus der Wahrheit
aufgestellt. Um auf den Titel dieses Aufsatzes zurück zu kommen: Der “Alethes Logos” und der
“Logos der Wahrheit” der Christen sind an sich nicht kompatibel» (p. 51)].
LUGARESI L., Omelia XIII: Gli angeli nostri compagni, il medico celeste e l’episcopo invisibile, in Omelie sul
Vangelo di Luca. Lettura origeniana, 27-52.
419
[1. L’impotenza degli angeli, nostri compagni. 2. Guarire gli uomini: Cristo medico e l’efficacia del
cristianesimo. 3. Sotto lo sguardo degli angeli, sotto lo sguardo di Dio. – «... Noi sappiamo che
Origene è un genio, il più grande genio teologico dell’antichità cristiana, e dunque, anche ammesso
che qui si comporti “come un fanciullo che gioca a dadi”, quello che da lui possiamo aspettarci sarà
pur sempre un gioco geniale, capace di sorprenderci e di arricchirci di insegnamenti preziosi.
Questo vale anche per la nostra piccola Omelia XIII. La mia proposta è di leggerla come un discorso
sugli angeli e sulla potenza divina, o più precisamente sulla compagnia angelica agli uomini; sulla
forza divina e sul suo realizzarsi in un’azione salvifica che ha nell’efficacia il contrassegno della
propria verità; sulla vita umana che si svolge sotto lo sguardo divino e angelico» (p. 27)].
MARX-WOLF H., Third-Century Daimonologies and the Via Universalis: Origen, Porphyry and Iamblichus on
daimones and Other Angels, in Studia Patristica XLVI, 207-216.
METZLER K., Origenes über die Arche Noah. Zur Bestimmung griechischer Fragmente der Genesishomilien (CPG
1411), Adamantius 16 (2010) 399-412.
[1. Tabelle: Fragmente Or, HGn 2 ed. Doutreleau; 2. Tabelle: Procopius Gazensis, Kommentar zu
Gen 6,14 (Fortsetzung) und Gen 6,18 (Anfang) aus der so genannten Oktateuchkatene. –
«Charlotte Köckert hat jüngst den Genesiskommentar des Origenes mit dem des Didymus des
Blinden verglichen und ihre Verschiedenheit herausgearbeitet. Die Parallelen zwischen den
griechischen Fragmenten aus den Homilien des Origenes zur Genesis und den Ausführungen des
Didymus wurden nicht in den Vergleich einbezogen; doch mag ihr Vortrag zum Anlass dienen,
darauf aufmerksam zu machen, dass in Doutreleaus Edition der griechischen Fragmente aus
Origenes’ Genesishomilien versehentlich Texte aufgenommen wurden, die Didymus gehören,
nämlich Doutreleaus Fragmente 4-6, 8 und 26. Die folgende Darstellung schlägt außerdem vor,
den Fragmenten der Genesishomilien weitere Fragmente bzw. Testimonien zuzuschreiben»].
MONACI CASTAGNO A., Note introduttive alla predicazione di Origene sul Vangelo di Luca, in Omelie sul
Vangelo di Luca. Lettura origeniana, 5-10.
[HLc «pur sullo sfondo di una sostanziale fedeltà a se stesso, stupiscono e affascinano per certe
lampeggianti intuizioni. Si rimane colpiti, ad esempio, dalla particolare angolazione in cui in queste
Omelie viene ripensato il tema della “presenza” di Cristo fra i fedeli, che già il Sieben considerava
fra i più rilevanti di questo ciclo omiletico. Il Vangelo narra di una presenza che è corpo, vista,
ascolto, tatto; Origene narra di un’altra presenza sottratta al tempo e al luogo; una presenza
intelligibile percepibile attraverso i sensi spirituali. E tuttavia la sua riflessione non si ferma qui: il
“vedere” non è frutto soltanto dello sforzo dell’uomo, ma si radica nell’incontro tra la libertà del
divino con la libertà dell’uomo. Ora, per i fedeli che lo ascoltano, come allora per i discepoli,
“vedere” è sempre piuttosto un grazioso “darsi a vedere” degli esseri superiori e divini» (p. 9)]
MORLET S., La Démonstration évangélique d’Eusèbe de Césarée. Étude sur l’apologétique chrétienne à l’époque
de Constantin → 19. Eusebio di Cesarea
[Troisième Partie. L’argumentation exégétique: Ch. III. Eusèbe et l’exégèse d’Origène dans la
Demonstration évangélique: I. La dépendance d’Eusèbe à l’égard des commentaires d’Origène: A.
Les Psaumes; B. Isaïe; C. Les autres livres bibliques; Conclusion. II. Les éléments de l’exégèse
d’Origène laissés de côté par Eusèbe. III. Quelques exemples de divergences avec l’exégèse
d’Origène: A. Eusèbe a une conception différente des théophanies; B. Eusèbe donne un sens
christologique à des textes qui n’en ont pas pour Origène. Conclusion: l’exégèse d’Eusèbe, entre
fidélité à Origène et originalité (pp. 585-622)].
– La Démonstration évangélique d’Eusèbe de Césarée contient-elle des fragments du Contra Christianos de
Porphyre? À propos du frg. 73 Harnack → 19. Eusebio di Cesarea
MÜHLENBERG E., Der kanonische Brief Gregors von Nyssa und sein Ort im Bußwesen der Alten Kirche → 21.3.
Gregorio di Nissa
420
[«Bei Origenes erfahren wir im Unterschied zu Klemens sehr viel über “Buße” und ihre kirchliche
Praxis. Die Gemeindepredigten im palästinensischen Caesarea haben oft das Evangelium: Hört, es
gibt Buße! Ergreift diese Rettung und, ihr Kircheführer, leitet richtig dazu an! Des Origenes
geistliche Auslegung des alten Testaments bot ihm Gelegenheit und Stoff, sich auf das Thema
“Buße” einzulassen. O wenn Origenes doch ein systematisch geordnetes Handbuch über “Buße”
geschrieben hätte! Zwar haben wir sehr viel Stoff, aber unsere Darstellung ist auch unsere
Rekonstruktion der Fragen, die Origenes bewegt haben könnten» (pp. 227-228)].
NICULESCU M.V., The Spell of the Logos. Origen’s Exegetic Pedagogy in the Contemporary Debate regarding
Logocentrism (Gorgias Eastern Christian Studies, 10), Gorgias Press, Piscataway/NJ 2009, pp. XV+553.
[I. Spelling salvation. Speech address as messianic advent: 1. Argument, 1-3; 2. Logocentric and antilogocentric readings of Origen’s definition of the Gospel as ordinary speech, 3-29; 3. A tentative
placement of Origen’s ordinary gospel pragmatics within the debate regarding logocentrism, 29-36;
4. A non-logocentric definition of the ordinary gospel and its theological transposition, 36-37; 4. A
non-logocentric definition of the ordinary gospel and its theological transposition, 36-37; 5. A
tentative profiling of Origenism as theological logocentrism and the clarification of its use in the
overall argument of this book, 37-41; Synopsis, 41-42. II. Spiritual leavening as the grand scenario of
Origen’s exegetical pedagogy: 1. Growing up. The advent of the Logos as Bible and the Reception
of the Logos as Bible exegesis, 43-84; 2. Upbringing. The advent of the Logos as biblical teaching
and the reception of the Logos as biblical-exegetical learning, 85-117. Retrospect, 117-119. III.
Emmaus and beyond. The growth of the kingdom documented by the doxological gestures,
postures and feelings of a priestly homilist: 1. Leavening (1): a uniform growth?, 121-129; 2.
Transformative gestures. «Placing or hiding in» and «Opening up». A possible correlation between
Origen’s interpretation of the parable of the leaven and the experience of the disciples on the road
to Emmaus, 129-136; 3. Testimonial postures, 137-151; 4. Leavening (2): a catastrophic growth. A
revision of the uniform progress theory of salvation, 152-157; 5. Testimonial feelings, 157-184; 6.
Leavening (3): The surge of an articulate cry, 184-189; 7. A kingdom’s growth, 189-194; 8. Is Origen’s
exegetical pedagogy logocentric?, 194-200. IV. Disputing Emmaus: 1. Emmaus as the Christological
authorization of a typological reading of history, 201-208; 2. A pragmatic-linguistic analysis of
Origen’s exegesis of the Bible as gospel, 209-223; 3. An anti-logocentric critic of Origen’s Emmausian
authorization of the reading of the Bible as gospel, 223-235; 4. An anti-logocentric endorsement of
Origen’s Emmausian authorization of the reading of the Bible as Gospel, 235-253; 5. Disputing
Emmaus, 253-260; 6. About a certain “shrug of the shoulders”, 260-263. Appendix 1: Why the
Middle-Platonist twice-twofold division of the school-curriculum might have resonated with
Origen’s project of biblical instruction, 265-275; Appendix 2: Origen’s interpretation of Gen 26.2632 (the covenant between Isaac and Abimelech), 277-278; Appendix 3: Origen’s interpretation of
the parable of the tenants in Mat 21.33-43, 279-282; Appendix 4: Origen’s school-curriculum
according to his letter to Gregory, 283-285; Appendix 5: Origen’s school-curriculum according to
Gregory Thaumaturgus’ Address to Origen, 287-290; Appendix 6: Origenian Logocentrism in Light
of Three readings of totalitarianism, 291-297. Endnotes, 299-460. Graphs and tables, 461-478.
Bibliography, 479-506. Subject index, 507-543; Ancient author index, 545; Modern author index, 547550; Biblical references, 551-553].
[II.5. Orígenes de Alejandría, 40].
421
[«For Origen (185-253 or 254), the focus of Gal 3,28c is on the spiritual relationship between Christ
and the believer. In his allegorical reading of Song of Songs 2,6, Origen cites Gal 3,28c to support his
view that what Song of Songs speaks of is a spiritual reality, even though the writer of the passage
has used human language to describe the experience» (p. 117)].
O’LEARY J.S., Platonic Dissolution of History in Origen’s Commentary on John X 5-34, in Studia Patristica
XLVI, 241-246.
PAZZINI D., Omelia XV: Simeone e il Nunc dimittis, in Omelie sul Vangelo di Luca. Lettura origeniana, 75-85.
[«La breve omelia si presenta molto compatta, senza particolari excursus, con un tono quasi lirico
nella parte finale. Le succinte note dell’edizione critica di Crouzel, Fournier, Périchon, sia pure in
forma interrogativa, segnalano un possibile simbolismo eucaristico (prendere con le proprie mani).
Crouzel segnala ancora espressioni come queste: circondare con le proprie mani, tenere nel proprio
seno, e commenta: “Tutto in questa omelia deborda di tenerezza, tratto fondamentale della mistica
di Origene”» (p. 75)].
PERRONE L., “Dsaglebis gandevna locvis zhams”: mlocvelis saxe demonebsa da angelozebs šoris: Origenedan
Evagre pontoelamde [tit. orig.: “Chasser les chiens au moment de la priére”. L’image de l’orant entre les démons et
les anges: d’Origène à Évagre le Pontique], in M. MCHEDLIDZE, TS. BIBILEISHVILI, Kristianul-arkeologiuri
dziebani [Studies in Christian Archeology, Tbilisi], 2 (2009) 9-52.
–, La morte in croce di Gesù epifania divina del mistero del Logos fatto carne (Origene, Commentariorum
Series in Matthaeum, 138-140), Adamantius 16 (2010) 286-307.
[Premessa: abbassamento e innalzamento del Crocifisso. CMtS 138: I. Il secondo ‘grido’ di Gesù e la
consegna dello spirito al Padre; CMtS 138: II. Il velo spezzato del Tempio: la rivelazione del mistero
nella morte di Gesù. CMtS 139: il terremoto e gli altri segni – la continuità salvifica del mistero di
rivelazione. CMtS 140: Il riconoscimento del ‘miracolo’ – la morte in croce come frutto della
preghiera di Gesù. – «... la croce di Cristo non è un evento del passato, bensì continua a rinnovarsi
nell’oggi. Questa perennità è legata intrinsecamente per Origene all’atto ermeneutico, in base al
quale il lettore della più drammatica pagina evangelica è chiamato ancora una volta ad
oltrepassare la mera lettera, con tutta la sua durezza e crudezza, per penetrare nel senso profondo,
nascosto dietro di essa. Ma l’epifania divina del Logos fatto carne si manifesta in pienezza nel
Cristo crocifisso, al di là degli stessi prodigi che la contornano, soltanto per chi ha occhi per vedere,
come le donne venute dalla Galilea seguendo Gesù fino a Gerusalemme e capaci di contemplare
lo spectaculum Verbi. Peraltro, questo mistero del Verbo incarnato si porge in maniera differenziata
e con intensità diversa, a seconda della condizione spirituale di chi guarda» (p. 290)].
–, Approximations origéniennes. Notes pour une enquête lexicale, in EUKARPA, 365-372.
[Un «inventeur de mots». Par voie d’approximation: métaphores et paradoxes. – «Gilles Dorival a
marqué les études origéniennes par des contributions fondamentales concernant, en particulier,
l’examen des aspects littéraires trop souvent négligés. M’insérant dans ce même sillon, je voudrais
proposer quelques notes, tout à fait préliminaires, sur deux traits qui me semblent assez significatifs
dans les écrits d’Origène: d’un côté les ‘inventions’ lexicales, c’est-à-dire les mots qui ont l’air d’être
des hapax legomena (au moins dans l’état actuel de nos connaissances); de l’autre côté les
formulations ‘par approximation’, plus précisément les focalisations ou sémantisations particulières
dont certains mots peuvent être l’objet en vue d’une utilisation hors de l’ordinaire,
tendenciellement métaphorique et souvent de nature paradoxale. Les deux traits visés ici nous
offrent des indices intéressants pour mesurer jusqu’à quel point le vocabulaire et le style de
l’Alexandrin sont susceptibles d’originalité et créativité» (p. 365)].
–, La preghiera secondo Origene. L’impossibilità donata (Letteratura Cristiana Antica. Nuova serie, 24),
Morcelliana, Brescia 2011, pp. 745.
[Introduzione, 5-12. Parte I. Il Trattato sulla preghiera: Cap. I. Il contesto del Perì euchês. Lo sfondo
remoto e l’occasione prossima, 15-26; Cap. II. Prospettive della ricerca. Il discorso sulla preghiera fra
422
vita spirituale e teologia, 27-50; Cap. III. In ascolto del testo. Dall’ouverture alla struttura armonica,
51-77; Cap. IV. La critica della preghiera. Quaestio e solutio, 79-121; Cap. V. L’atto della preghiera.
Abbozzi di un’ars orandi, 123-193; Cap. VI. La «Preghiera del Signore» vita del cristiano.
L’interpretazione del Padrenostro, 196-239. Parte II. Il discorso origeniano sulla preghiera e le
trattazioni eucologiche del primo cristianesimo (II-V secolo): Cap. VII. «Come incenso al tuo
cospetto» (Sal 140[141], 2). L’immagine della preghiera nell’opera di Origene, 243-428; Cap. VIII. I
nuclei scritturistici della riflessione origeniana sulla preghiera, 429-510; Cap. IX. La costruzione di
un modello. Origene e il discorso cristiano sulla preghiera da Tertulliano ad Agostino, 511-644.
Conclusione: la preghiera di Origene, 645-656. Abbreviazioni, 657-659; Bibliografia, 661-688. Indici (a
cura di P. BERNARDINI): Indice dei luoghi scritturistici, 691-707; Indice dei luoghi origeniani, 709727; Indice dei termini greci, 729-731; Indice degli autori antichi, 733-734; Indice degli autori
moderni, 735-740. Sommario, 741-745].
–, Zur Edition vom Perì Euchês des Origenes: Rückblick und Ausblick, in Von Homer bis Landino, 269-318.
[Zum Geleit: in der ‘Werkstatt’ der Origenes-Edition. Die Rettung von Perì Euchês: ein wahrer
Glücksfall. Die handschriftliche Überlieferung: die Wanderungen eines codex unicus. Die
Editionsgeschichte als eine Geschichte von Konjekturen. Vorüberlegungen auf dem Weg zu einer
neuen Edition. Zum Abschluss: Konjekturen alt und neu – Einige Kostproben. – «... Ohne hier
regelrechte Prolegomena zu der zukünftigen Edition vorzulegen, möchte ich meine Aufgabe
zunächst im Rahmen der Überlieferungs- und Editionsgeschichte von Perì Euchês betrachten, auch
weil sie von dieser wesentlich bedingt wird, und in einem folgenden Abschnitt einige Beispiele der
editorischen Arbeit bieten, die unsere Schrift mit sich bringt» (p. 271)].
PIERI F., Omelia XXXIV: La salvezza dallo straniero, in Omelie sul Vangelo di Luca. Lettura origeniana, 105-122.
[1. L’Omelia 34 nel contesto delle Omelie su Luca. 2. Dalla pericope all’omelia. 3. Un’allegoresi in
progress. 5 (sic !). “Non ogni uomo...”. 6. Linee di conclusione. – «... Questa è la prima, nella serie delle
omelie lucane conservate, a distaccarsi in modo sensibile dal criterio cui il predicatore si è attenuto
in tutte le precedenti, vale a dire per oltre i tre quarti della raccolta: da questo punto in poi infatti la
serie delle HLc non procede più in modo sequenziale, ma in base ad un differente e non perspicuo
criterio, forse antologico... Del pari che per altri casi consimili, ogni ipotesi sulla stessa esistenza di un
piano della predicazione origeniana è destinata ad arrestarsi di fronte ai limiti della nostra
documentazione. Ma si potrebbe cautamente suggerire di vedere nella forte discontinuità
dell’Omelia 34 – rispetto al modo di proseguire che sarebbe stato più prevedibile – l’indizio di
un’intenzionalità dell’omileta, essendo facilmente individuabile la parabola del samaritano come
uno dei nodi tematici più caratteristici e perciò ineludibili del Vangelo di Luca, priva di riscontri
anche parziali nelle restanti testimonianze dei Sinottici» (pp. 105-106)].
PRINZIVALLI E., Omelia XXXIX: Matteo nascosto dietro Luca, in Omelie sul Vangelo di Luca. Lettura
origeniana, 123-139.
[1. Premessa. 2. Argomento e oscurità dell’omelia 39. 3. Una questione a latere: due frammenti
erroneamente attribuiti a Origene. 4. Esiste un filo conduttore nell’omelia 39? 5. Brandelli di
un’omelia. 6. Il confronto con il Commento a Matteo. 7. La seconda parte dell’omelia 39. – «In
conclusione, quella giunta a noi come l’omelia 39 su Luca non può considerarsi una vera omelia: o si
tratta di appunti non rielaborati e presi male, o si tratta dell’unione forzata di spezzoni di
interpretazione, o chi ha operato i tagli ha reso, consapevolmente o no, incomprensibile la prima
parte, forse per ragioni di scrupolo dottrinale nei confronti della dottrina escatologica di Origene.
Anche se siamo di fronte a un caso estremo nella raccolta su Luca, questa dovrà in futuro essere
meglio studiata» (p. 139)].
–, Origen, in The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity, ed. by L.P. GERSON, Vol. I, Cambridge
U.P., Cambridge etc. 2010, 283-297.
RAMELLI I., Aijwvnio" and Aijwvn in Origen and Gregory of Nyssa, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 57-62.
423
– In Illud: Tunc et ipse Filius... Gregory of Nyssa’s Exegesis, its Derivations from Origen, and Early Patristic
Interpretations Related to Origen’s → 21.3. Gregorio di Nissa
–, Origen’s Anti-Subordinationism and its Heritage in the Nicene and Cappadocian Line, VigChr 65 (2011) 2149.
[1. Premise: Gregory of Nyssa’s close dependence on Origen in his anti-subordinationistic
argument in In illud: Tunc et ipse Filius. 2. Origen precursor of Nyssen and the NiceneConstantinopolitan Creed. Arguments from his works, Pamphilus, Eusebius, Athanasius and other
testimonies. 3. Conclusions on Eusebius’ possible role at Nicaea and on Origen’s antisubordinationism. Origen’s trinitarian heritage in Nyssen, Athanasius, and Eusebius. – Abstract:
«Nyssen’s argument in In illud: Tunc et ipse Filius entirely derives from Origen (probably also
passing through Marcellus of Ancyra and Eusebius). Origen’s influence, theoretical and exegetical,
is evident in every passage, from the argumentative pillars down to the tiniest details of exegesis.
Gregory’s close dependence on Origen in his antisubordinationism, with his polemic against
‘Arianism’, confirms that Origen was not the forerunner of ‘Arianism’, as he was depicted in the
Origenistic controversy and is often still regarded to be, but the main inspirer of the Cappadocians,
especially Nyssen, in what became Trinitarian orthodoxy. Origen inspired Marcellus, who was antiArian, Eusebius, who in fact was no ‘Arian’, Athanasius, the champion of anti-Arianism, and the
Cappadocians. I argue extensively that Origen’s Trinitarian heritage is found, not in Arianism, but
in Nyssen, Athanasius, and other revealing testimonies, pagan and Christian. The origin of the
oJmoouvsio" formula is also investigated in this connection. Further interesting insights will emerge
concerning Eusebius and his first report of what exactly happened at Nicaea» (p. 21)].
RIZZI M., Freedom and Justice: Origen on Man’s Dignity in History, in Natur und Normativität, hrsg. von
A. FÜRST und K. MÜLLER (Pontes. Philosophisch-theologische Brückenschläge, 46), Lit, Münster 2010,
31-44.
[1. Origen’s theological system in the context of ancient philosophy. 2. A possible symmetry of
reasoning. 3. A sort of conclusion. Bibliography].
ROBERTSON D.G., Origen on Inner and Outer Logos, in Studia Patristica XLVI, 201-206.
RUTHERFORD J.E., The Alexandrian Spirit: Clement and Origen in context, in The Holy Spirit in the Fathers
of the Church, 32-56.
[Su Origene, cf. pp. 40-46].
SCHENKER A., L’apport durable des Hexaples d’Origène. Bilan de la Lettre à Africanus, bilan aujourd’hui, in
EUKARPA, 385-394.
[Grandeur exceptionnelles et limites de l’œuvre critique d’Origène sur la Bible. Le bilan d’Origène
dans la lettre à Jules l’Africain, §§ 3-9. Les cinq genres de différences entre Bible hébraïque et Bible
grecque. Les trois conclusions d’Origène pour son travail critique sur le texte de la Bible. L’apport
durable des Hexaples: distinction entre différences textuelles et littéraires. La colonne de la LXX
dans les Hexaples et la LXX origénienne. Conclusion. – «Le bilan d’Origène dans la lettre à Julius
Africanus concerne le but qu’il poursuit dans les Hexaples et le résultat qu’il en déduit. Quant au
but, Origène a voulu avoir la vision d’ensemble de toutes les divergences entre la Bible hébraïque
(pour laquelle il s’est appuyé surtout sur son décalque grec qu’était la traduction d’Aquila) et la
Bible de la LXX et de Théodotion (et sur l’autre traduction proche de la LXX que fut la Quinta,
pour le Psautier). Origène était le seul chercheur à avoir inventorié la totalité des différences
textuelles. Malheureusement cet inventaire n’a pas traversé les siècles. Quant au résultat, Origène
a fait la découverte de la masse de différences plus ou moins importantes. Les deux Bibles se
distinguaient trop pour être unifiées en une seule Écriture. Ce résultat demandait une explication.
Comment était-il possible que la traduction grecque de la LXX et, en partie, celle de Théodotion
s’éloignassent si massivement du modèle sémitique qu’elles transposaient en grec? Origène eût pu
négliger la traduction et revenir à l’original hébreu. Il écarta cette possibilité pour des motifs
théologiques et philologiques. Théologiques, parce que le Seigneur n’avait pas pu laisser l’Église sans
424
Bible authentique; philologiques, parce que la Bible hébraïque semble, sans Bible grecque, soulever
des problèmes propres absents de la Bible grecque et conduire à la perte de parties bibliques de
valeur. En même temps, il maintenait la Bible hébraïque. Dans une large proportion, elle était, en
effet, le modèle que les Bibles grecques de la LXX et de Théodotion avaient effectivement traduit!
Il eût été déraisonnable de sacrifier l’original au profit d’une traduction, si importante fût elle. En
prenant ainsi acte de l’irréductibilité des deux Bibles sémitique et grecque, Origène fut le premier
critique textuel, exégète et théologie à découvrir que paradoxalement la Bible subsiste en deux
formes textuelles synoptiques qui se recoupent largement, mais se distinguent suffisamment entre elles
pour exclure la réunion des deux Bibles en une seule» (pp. 393-394)].
alessandrina → 1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere generale
SCOTT M.S.M., Guarding the Mysteries of Salvation: The Pastoral Pedagogy of Origen’s Universalism, JECS 18
(2010) 347-368.
[Origen’s repudiation of universalism as «insane». «No longer an enemy: universal salvation beyond
purification. Mysteries revealed and concealed. Conclusion. – Abstract: «Origen has an enduring
reputation as a universalist. Patristic scholars and non-specialists alike routinely associate him with
the doctrine of universal salvation. This article complicates the simplistic portrayal of Origen as a
universalist while affirming the universalist implications of his theology. Far from explicitly teaching
universalism, particularly the salvation of the devil, Origen consistently presupposes the reality of
hell and the destruction of the devil. He circumspectly reserves the deeper mysteries of salvation,
including the possibility of salvation beyond the purging fires of hell, for the intellectually and
spiritually mature. With the “simple-minded” and “common crowd”, however, he conceals
potentially subversive speculations about universal salvation. As a prudent teacher and caretaker of
souls, Origen carefully calibrates his theological reflections to the intellectual and spiritual capacity
of his audience»].
SHUVE K., Entering the Story: Origen’s ‘Dramatic’ Approach to Scripture in the Homilies on Jeremiah, in
Studia Patristica XLVI, 235-240.
SIMONETTI M., Su Origene, Commento a Matteo 16,9-13, Aug. 49 (2009) 303-319.
[«In CMt 16, 9-13 Origene interpreta il breve racconto della guarigione di due ciechi (Mt 20, 29-34).
L’interpretazione si divide in due parti ben distinte: nella prima (cc. 9-11) Origene, dopo aver
esposto il contenuto della pericope evangelica, l’interpreta mediante l’allegoria in senso spirituale;
nella seconda parte (cc. 12-13) l’interpretazione si allarga e si complica mediante il riferimento ai testi
paralleli dei vangeli di Marco e di Luca. Queste nostre brevi note hanno come oggetto soltanto
alcuni dettagli di questa articolata interpretazione, con particolare interesse al rapporto tra il testo
greco giunto a noi e l’antica traduzione latina che lo correda» (p. 303)].
–, Omelia I: Inizio del Vangelo di Luca, in Omelie sul Vangelo di Luca. Lettura origeniana, 11-16.
[«(...) Il giudizio di Girolamo si limita a contrapporre genericamente, come opera di minore
impegno, l’omelia origeniana al commentario, il che appare piuttosto ovvio. Non possiamo
comunque neppure trascurare la constatazione che, rispetto alle altre raccolte omiletiche di
Origene, questa su Luca si distingue per due caratteri: è la sola superstite dedicata a uno scritto
neotestamentario; le omelie sono mediamente di non poco più brevi delle omelie comprese nelle
altre raccolte. Solo quest’ultima considerazione potrebbe far pensare alla raccolta delle omelie su
Luca come a una delle prime performances omiletiche di Origene, ma anche questa osservazione
urta contro il dato eusebiano della seriorità di tutte le omelie che Origene autorizzò a mettere per
scritto» (p. 12)].
SPANGLER S., Christology as the Basis of Metaphysics in Origen’s Commentary on John, in Studia Patristica
XLVI, 247-252.
425
STEFANIW B., Exegetical Curricula in Origen, Didymus, and Evagrius: Pedagogical Agenda and the Case for
Neoplatonist Influence → 1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere generale
–, Mind, Text, and Commentary: Noetic Exegesis in Origen of Alexandria, Didymus the Blind, and Evagrius
Ponticus → 1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere generale
TZVETKOVA-GLASER A., Pentateuchauslegung bei Origenes und den frühen Rabbinen (Early Christianity in
the Context of Antiquity, 7), Peter Lang, Frankfurt am Main 2010, pp. 467.
[Vorwort, 15-16. Einleitung, 17-31. Kap. 1. Weltschöpfung, 32-86. Kap. 2. Die Schöpfung des
Menschen, 87-116. Kap. 3. Eden, 117-125. Kap. 4. Die Geschichte Noahs, 126-153. Kap. 5.
Beschneidung, 154-185. Kap. 6. Die Opferung / die Bindung Isaak, 186-202. Kap. 7. Kleinere
Themen aus der Patriarchen-Geschichte, 203-239. Kap. 8. Allegorische Deutung der Plagen der
Ägypter, 240-252. Kap. 9. Interpretation des Pascha, 253-271. Kap. 10. Die Überquerung des
Schilfmeeres. Auslegung von Ex 13:17-14:31, 272-276. Kap. 11. Das Manna. Allegorische Deutungen,
277-283. Kap. 12. Gabe und Empfang der Tora (Ex 19-20), 284-299. Kap. 13. Interpretation des
Stiftszeltes, 302-315. Kap. 14. Priestertum, 316-338. Kap. 15. Interpretation des Opferkultes, 339-358.
Kap. 16. Interpretation der Reinheitsgesetze (Lev 11-15), 359-396. Kap. 17. Interpretation des
Versöhnungstags, 397-414. Kap. 18. Interpretation der Sabbatfeier, 415-430. Schlusswort, 431-441.
Abkürzungen, 443; Benutzte Editionen und Übersetzungen antiker Texte, 443-451; Konsultierte
Sekundärliteratur, 451-467].
–, Polemics against Judaeo-Christian Practices in Origen’s Homilies, in Studia Patristica XLVI, 217-222.
13. L’origenismo e la fortuna di Origene
delle note e della bibliografia a cura di B. CANGEMI TROLLA → 1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere generale
Girolamo di Stridone. Commento alla Epistola ai Galati. Introduzione, traduzione e note a cura di
G. RASPANTI → 28. Gerolamo
[Il metodo esegetico nell’In Galatas: Il rapporto con Origene e gli altri esegeti paolini, 34-44].
CHIN C.M., Rufinus of Aquileia and Alexandrian Afterlives: Translation as Origenism
Aquileia
→ 25. Rufino di
CRISTEA H.-J., Schenute von Atripe: Contra Origenistas. Edition des koptischen Textes mit annotierter
Übersetzung und Indizes einschließlich einer Übersetzung des 16. Osterfestbriefs des Theophilus in der
Fassung des Hieronymus (ep. 96) (Studien und Texte zu Antike und Christentum, 60), Mohr Siebeck,
Tübingen 2011, pp. VIII+ 387.
[Vorwort, V-VI. Einleitung 1. Der Text und seine Überlieferung, 7-42. Einleitung 2. Das Werk und
seine Quellen, 43-109. 3. Der Autor, 111-133. Schenute, Contra Origenistas: Edition, 111-230.
Theophilus, ep. fest. 16: Koptisch-lateinische Synopse, 231-306. Exkurse zur Übersetzung, 307-314.
Indizes, 315-352. Register der Bibelstellen, 353-356. Anhang: Abbildungen von Handschriften, 357-372.
Abkürzungs- und Literaturverzeichnis, 373-387].
DELL’OSSO
C., Cristo e Logos. Il calcedonismo del VI secolo in Oriente → 1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere
generale
HAUSPIE K., Hebrew Transliterations in the Septuagint Version of Ezekiel elucidated: in the Search of the
Sources of Theodoret of Cyrrhus → 4. LXX
VERCRUYSSE J.-M., Tyconius a-t-il lu Origène?, in Studia Patristica XLVI, 155-160.
VIGNE D., L’amitié de David et Jonathan chez deux Pères grecs: Grégoire le Thaumaturge et Jean Chrysostome,
in David et Jonathan. Histoire d’un mythe (→ 1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere generale), 91-105.
426
[Grégoire le Thaumaturge, le disciple fasciné. Jean Chrysostome, l’orateur lyrique. – «À un siècle et
demi d’écart, Grégoire le Thaumaturge et Jean Chrysostome témoignent de deux approches
parfaitement convergentes. Leurs réflexions s’appuient sur une expérience personnelle inoubliable
– l’amitié d’Origène pour le premier, celle de Basile pour le second – qui leur ont fait découvrir la
grandeur de l’amitié en Christ. Leurs textes s’accordent à voir en celle-ci une élévation commune,
de nature spirituelle et supra-affective, dans laquelle l’un des deux amis joue – au moins au départ
– un rôle privilégié. Enfin, leur référence commune à la typologie de David et Jonathan montre
chez l’un et l’autre des lecteurs avertis de l’Écriture. Malgré leurs différences de sensibilité
(alexandrine chez l’un, antiochienne chez l’autre), ils témoignent de la profonde continuité entre
les récits de l’Ancien Testament et leur relecture chrétienne, illuminée par celui qui osa cette
parole définitive: “Je vous appelle amis!”» (pp. 104-105)].
14. Dionigi Alessandrino
BLUMELL L., A Note on Dionysius of Alexandria’s Letter to Novatian in Light of Third-Century Papyri, ZAC
14 (2010) 356-361.
[Abstract: «Im sechsten Buch seiner Historia ecclesiastica zitiert Euseb einen Brief des Dionysius von
Alexandria an Novatian, in dem er ihn ermahnt, sich mit der Kirche in Rom zu versöhnen. Dieser
Brief ist unter allen Briefen des Dionysius, die von Euseb angeführt werden, insofern einzigartig, als
er in voller Länge zitiert wird. Dementsprechend kann er mit zeitgenössischen Briefen auf Papyri
aus Ägypten verglichen werden. Ein solcher Vergleich zeigt eine Rolle von spezifischen Parallelen in
auf Papyrus erhaltenen Briefen aus christlichem wie nichtchristlichem Kontext. Auch wenn Euseb
im Hinblick auf seine Art und Weise, Quellenmaterial selektiv zu benutzen und anzuführen, oft
verdächtig ist, kann man jedenfalls in diesem Fall davon ausgehen, dass Euseb sorgfältig und
zuverlässig eine authentische Kopie von Dionysius’ Brief an Novatian wiedergibt» (p. 361)].
15. Pierio di Alessandria
ZAGANAS D., Cyrille d’Alexandrie aux prises avec un exégète allégoriste au début de son In Oseam: Didyme
l’Aveugle ou Piérius d’Alexandrie? → 31. Cirillo Alessandrino
16. Pietro di Alessandria
17. Alessandro di Alessandria
18. Ario
BRENNECKE H.C., Die letzten Jahre des Arius, in Von Arius zum Athanasianum. Studien zur Edition der
«Athanasius Werke», 63-83.
[«Das Schweigen des Athanasius als Bischof über Arius und dessen etwaige Versuche, wieder in
den alexandrinischen Klerus aufgenommen zu werden, das so nicht überzeugende historische
Konstrukt einer zweiten Verurteilung des Arius durch Constantin im Jahre 333 und der
anschließenden Wiederaufnahme in die Kirche durch die Jerusalemer Enkainiensynode im Jahre
335 hat uns zu der Annahme geführt, daß vielleicht Arius schon bald nach seiner Rehabilitierung
durch eine Synode, die vermutlich 327 stattgefunden hat, verstorben war. Ob Athanasius als
Bischof überhaupt mit der Person Arius konfrontiert worden ist, läßt sich nicht sicher entscheiden.
Für Athanasius jedenfalls spielt Arius als etwaiger kirchenpolitischer Gegenspieler keine Rolle
mehr» (p. 80)].
STOCKHAUSEN A. VON, Die pseud-athanasianische Disputatio contra Arium. Eine Auseinandersetzung mit
«arianischer» Theologie in Dialogform, in Von Arius zum Athanasianum. Studien zur Edition der «Athanasius
Werke», 133-155.
[Vorbemerkung. Hinführung zum Text. Die Disputatio contra Arium: Die Überlieferung des
Textes; Der Titel der Schrift; Der Aufbau des Dialoges; Auffällige und unstimmige Elemente im
427
Text; Autorschaft und Datierung; Fazit; Literatur. – «... Dieser Beitrag [sollte] ein erster Versuch
im Rahmen eines noch auszuarbeitenden Projektes sein, das die Edition der pseudathanasianischen Schriften und Untersuchungen über diese Werke zum Inhalt hat» (p. 153)].
19. Eusebio di Cesarea
La Storia Ecclesiastica di Eusebio: alle origini della storiografia cristiana, a cura di L. PERRONE e A. VILLANI
ADLER W., The Chronographiae of Julius Africanus and its Jewish Antecedents → 3. Giudaismo ellenistico
AMERISE M., Monotheism and the Monarchy. The Christian Emperor and the Cult of the Sun in Eusebius of
Caesarea, JAC 50 (2007 [ma 2009!]) 72-84.
–, Eusebio fra storiografia e teologia politica: l’imperatore cristiano dalla Storia Ecclesiastica agli scritti
costantiniani, Adamantius 16 (2010) 52-62.
[1. La Storia Ecclesiastica. 2. Il Discorso per i trenta anni di regno (Triakontaeterikos). 3. La Vita di
Costantino. – «Dal 315 al 325 al 335 si possono registrare le tappe della riflessione storica di Eusebio.
Con l’avvento di Costantino, la storia cambia: cristianesimo e impero intrecciano i loro destini e
Costantino, in un breve percorso che occupa venti anni, diventa l’imperatore ‘amico di Dio’,
immagine e imitazione dell’unico Dio e del suo Logos e pertanto unico a poter essere chiamato
veramente imperatore. È Eusebio che, in modo progressivo, teorizza la ‛svolta costantiniana’ e crea
un modello che avrà un valore universale, pur tra alterne fortune. Da queste pagine si spera sia
emerso, seppur brevemente, quale sia stato il contributo di Eusebio nel determinare e consegnare
alla posterità una determinata lettura storica in riferimento all’impero e all’imperatore cristiano.
Nonostante ciò, l’immagine di Eusebio che prevale tutt’oggi tra gli studiosi è ancora quella del
vescovo cortigiano, dell’arricciatore della parrucca imperiale, privo di un vero pensiero, ma solo
pronto ad adulare, immagine di ascendenza burckhardiana ma che ha precedenti ancora più
remoti. Questa immagine non rende in realtà ragione del profondo sforzo di sintesi operato da
Eusebio di Cesarea. Dai pochi esempi scelti emerge che non c’è adulazione in Eusebio, ma una
riflessione storica profonda, la capacità di percepire i mutamenti epocali e soprattutto la volontà di
creare un modello di riferimento che non solo potesse dare una spiegazione degli eventi ma
soprattutto potesse porsi al servizio della fede cristiana, per la quale in modo fervido egli ha speso
l’intera esistenza» (pp. 61-62)].
ANDREI O., Dai Chronici Canones di Eusebio al Chronicon di Girolamo. Translatio come costruzione di un
nuovo modello cronografico, VetChr 47 (2010) 5-22.
–, I Chronici Canones di Eusebio di Cesarea. Una rivoluzione cronografica, Adamantius 16 (2010) 34-51.
[1. Cronografia preeusebiana e modello esamillenario. 2. Eusebio contro Giulio Africano: il modello
esamillenario. 3. Il senso di una riforma cronografica: schema dei sei millenni e sbocchi millenaristici.
4. Aspetti di una rivoluzione cronografica: la ridefinizione semantica dell’impero romano. – «Per
concludere e precisare meglio il senso della rivoluzione eusebiana in cronografia, direi che questa
consiste nell’aver ideato strutture e forme di esposizione del passato e di valutazione del presente
innovativamente congrue al carattere di sfida globale (politica ed intellettuale) del contesto: un
risultato che si elabora in accordo ad una distinzione tra ajkribhv" e ‘vana’ (‘infondata’) cronografiva
maturata su delegittimazione di un Giulio Africano inteso quale espressione di una descriptio
temporum esamillenaria a sbocco millenaristico» (p. 51)].
–, I martiri di Lione in Eusebio dai Chronici Canones alla Historia Ecclesiastica , Rivista di Storia del
Cristianesimo 7 (2010) 461-488.
AUWERS J.-M., Le thiase des chrétiens ou la revanche de Dionysos?, in EUKARPA, 281-287.
[«Origène hésitait à désigner les témoins de la résurrection de Jésus comme “les membres de son
thiase”. Il n’aurait peut-être pas apprécié qu’Eusèbe de Césaré († 340) écrive à son sujet, pour faire
428
son éloge: “Tu connais sans doute l’homme qui, par les écrits soigneusement élaborés qu’il a légués,
danse aujourd’hui encore au milieu des thiases du Christ” (Χριστοῦ ejn qiavsoi"…coreuvonta).
Eusèbe de Césarée n’éprouve aucun scrupule à employer le mot “thiase” pour désigner l’Église du
Christ et θιασῶται pour parler des disciples qui l’ont suivi de son vivant, des chrétiens en général ou
encore des officiants du culte chrétien qui “font écho aux thiases angéliques dans le ciel”» (p. 285)].
BALCÁREK P., Some Remarks on the Response to Iconoclasm in the Old Slavonic Vita Constantini, in Studia
Patristica XLVIII, 355-360.
BARNES T.D., Notes on the Letter of Eusebius to Constantia (CPG 3503), in Studia Patristica XLVI, 313-318.
BERNASCONI A., I codici Bononienses Graeci 3643-3644 della Praeparatio e della Demonstratio Evangelica di
Eusebio, Adamantius 16 (2010) 109-119.
[«Lo scopo della comunicazione è valorizzare i manoscritti della Praeparatio e della Demonstratio
Evangelica di Eusebio della Biblioteca Universitaria, esposti in occasione della giornata di studi e di
cui si troveranno alcuni specimina alle tavole che seguono il testo di questo articolo. Per i primi due
manoscritti si allegherà anche una scheda descrittiva che intende completare le sommarie
informazioni fornite con questo discorso. Sono rispettivamente: – Eusebius, Praeparatio evangelica,
XIII sec., ms. 3643; – Eusebius, Demonstratio evangelica, XIII sec., ms. 3644; – Eusebius,
Demonstratio evangelica; Tatianus, Oratio ad Graecos. XVI sec., ms. 2304» (p. 109].
BLUMELL L., A Note on Dionysius of Alexandria’s Letter to Novatian in Light of Third-Century Papyri → 14.
Dionigi Alessandrino
[Ch. 8. Ebionites: 8.3. The classic patristic tradition (3.7. Eusebius, 196). Ch. 9. Elkesaites,
Cerinthians, Symmachians: 1. Elkesaites (1.2. Origen and Eusebius, 215; 2. Cerinthians: 2.6. Jerome,
226-227)].
CASTELLI E., Un insospettato caso di pseudepigrafia nel terzo secolo: l’attribuzione del Peri; τοῦ pantov" a
Flavio Giuseppe → 9. Flavio Giuseppe
COURTRAY R., Prophète des temps derniers. Jérôme commente Daniel → 28. Gerolamo
[III.2. Les sources chrétiennes de l’In Danielem: 1. Eusèbe de Césarée, Apollinaire de Laodicée,
Méthode d’Olympe (pp. 164-171)].
COVER M., Reconceptualizing Conquest: Colonial Narratives and Philo’s Roman Accuser in the Hypothetica
→ 7. Filone Alessandrino
DRAKE H.A., Playing With Words: Is There a Corpus in the Vita Constantini?, in Studia Patristica XLVI, 339346.
HEYNE T., The Devious Eusebius? An Evaluation of the Ecclesiastical History and Its Critics, in Studia
JUNOD É., Les mots d’Eusèbe de Césarée pour désigner les livres du Nouveau Testament et ceux qui n’en font pas
partie, in EUKARPA, 341-353.
[Les classifications d’Eusèbe dans le livre III de l’Histoire ecclésiastique: La classification bipartire de
III, 3, 1-7; La récapitulation bipartire de III, 25, 1-7; Le bref résumé tripartire de III, 31, 6. Le lexique
d’Eusèbe: La désignation des livres appartenant indéniablement au Nouveau Testament; La
désignation des livres dont l’appartenance au Nouveau Testament est discutée; Les cas de novqo" et
de gnhvsio"; Une signature d’Eusèbe: le paire ajntilegovmeno" – oJm ologouvmeno"; La trouvaille mortnée d’Eusèbe: ejndiavqhko"; Une trouvaille mort-née. Bibliographie. – «La non-utilisation de
ejndiavqhko", terme qui paraît être resté confiné dans le cercle d’Origène et de ses tout proches
héritiers, s’explique sans doute par l’accueil fait dans les Églises grecques dès le milieu du IVe siècle
aux mots de la famille de kanwvn. Le “canonique” s’est largement et durablement imposé, le
429
“testamentaire” n’a fait qu’une fugitive apparition. Mais cette désaffection est aussi une marque
de l’absence d’influence exercée par l’HE d’Eusèbe sur le processus de constitution du Nouveau
Testament dans l’Église grecque» (p. 352)].
MARGUERAT D. – JUNOD É., Qui a fondé le christianisme? → 1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere generale
[4. L’étonnante réponse d’Eusèbe de Césarée, 87: 1. Le témoin et l’interprète d’une époque
cruciale, 88-89. Le double modèle de l’Histoire ecclésiastique, 89-92. Une histoire qui débute par un
exposé et un récit consacrés au fondateur, 92-93. D’abord démontrer la divinité et l’antiquité du
christianisme, 94-95. Preuves de la divinité et de la préexistence du Christ, 96. Une théologie de
l’histoire pour expliquer pourquoi le Christ s’est incarné si tard, 97-100. Sur le double nom Jésus
Christ, 100-101. Le lien entre la piété des Hébreux et celle des chrétiens, 102-103. Un récit
apologétique surtout destiné à insérer Jésus Christ dans l’histoire du monde, 104-106. Le
Testimonium Flavianum, 106-108. La correspondance entre Jésus et le roi Abgar, 109-111. Une
réponse surprenante?, 111-113. Pour aller plus loin, 114 – Il cap. è opera di É. Junod].
MARTIN A., Les continuateurs grecs d’Eusèbe de Césarée: le cas de Théodoret, Adamantius 16 (2010) 88-100.
[La spécificité du projet de Théodoret. Ses procédés de composition et d’écriture. Le choix des
documents. Théodoret et l’Église d’Antioche. – «L’histoire des Églises y est brossée à grands traits et
campe quelques grands personnages, parmi lesquels, en priorité et tout naturellement, de grands
Antiochiens, dont les actions exemplaires constituent la trame de la mémoire commune à ses
lecteurs et auditeurs. Mais cette histoire doit être lue à deux niveaux, celui, historiographique, du
récit des événements, et celui, théologique, qui les interprète à la lumière de Dieu, et dont la
fonction est de montrer «l’invincibilité de l’Église». Une telle histoire, apologétique et engagée,
contre les hérésies arienne et apollinariste, et contre le paganisme, reste plus proche de celle
d’Eusèbe dont l’évêque de Cyr est, avec le prêtre Rufin, le plus fidèle continuateur, que de celle de
Socrate qu’il utilise parfois» (p. 100)].
MONACI CASTAGNO A., L’agiografia cristiana antica. Testi, contesti, pubblico
carattere generale
→1. Miscellanee e studi di
MORLET S., La Démonstration évangélique d’Eusèbe de Césarée. Étude sur l’apologétique chrétienne à l’époque
de Constantin (Collection des Études Augustiniennes. Série Antiquité, 187), Institut d’Études
Augustiniennes, Paris 2009, pp. 701.
[Avant-Propos, 7-23. Introduction. Le projet apologétique d’Eusèbe, 25: Ch. I. Le statut de la
Démonstration évangélique dans le diptyque apologétique, 35-61; Ch. II. Titre, forme, circonstances,
63-94; Ch. III. Structure et cohérence de l’apologie, 95-147. Première Partie. Les grands axes de la
polémique: Ch. I. La Loi et l’Évangile (livre I), 151-208; Ch. II. Les promesses de l’Écriture, entre juifs
et chrétiens (livre II), 209-237; Ch. III. Le Christ (livres III-IV), 239-307. Deuxième Partie.
L’argumentation scripturaire: Ch. I. Eusèbe et les testimonia: position du problème, 311-328; Ch. II.
L’usage des testimonia dans la Démonstration évangélique, 329-404; Ch. III. Les testimonia dans la
Démonstration évangélique: essai de synthèse, 405-417. Troisième Partie. L’argumentation
exégétique: Ch. I. Une exégèse polémique, 421-472; Ch. II. Une exégèse savante, 473-583; Ch. III.
Eusèbe et l’exégèse d’Origène dans la Demonstration évangélique, 585-622. Conclusion, 623-634.
Abréviations, 635. Bibliographie, 637-659. Index biblique, 661-668; Index des auteurs anciens et
médiévaux, 669-696].
–, La datation du Contra Christianos de Poprhyre. À propos d’un passage problématique d’Eusèbe de Césarée
(Histoire Ecclésiastique, VI, 19, 2), REAug 56 (2010) 1-18.
[Abstract: «Critics generally date the composition of the Contra Christianos to Porphyry’s sojourn in
Sicily, and thus most often around 270 AD. This date stems only from a misreading of Eusebius’
testimony in the HE VI, 19, 2, where the allusion to Porphyry’s Sicilian sojourn is not a way to date
his antichristian work, but rather the activity of the philosopher as a whole. All the arguments often
430
put forward to favour a later date are not more convincing, but one should admit with T.D. Barnes
that Eusebius’ text has generally been misunderstood. The only certainty is that the Contra
Christianos was written between the publication of a work on which it depends, the History of the
Ptolemies by Callinicus Sutorius (between the end of 270 AD and summer 272 AD), and the death
of Porphyry himself, around 305 AD» (p. 18)].
– La Démonstration évangélique d’Eusèbe de Césarée contient-elle des fragments du Contra Christianos de
Porphyre? À propos du frg. 73 Harnack, in Studia Patristica XLVI, 59-64.
[«La conclusion de cette étude est que le frg. 73 ne reproduit pas une accusation de Porphyre. S’il
n’est pas exclu qu’il rejoigne sur certains points les attaques du philosophe (ou celles d’un autre
adversaire d’Eusèbe, Hiéroclès), il s’agit avant tout d’un ‘centon’ composé à partir de plusieurs
passages du Contre Celse, auxquels Eusèbe a imprimé en partie la marque de son propre style. Ces
quelques remarques démontrent une nouvelle fois la fragilité du travail de Harnack et la nécessité
d’une nouvelle édition des fragments du Contra Christianos» (p. 64)].
NERI V., Romani, Greci, Barbari: identità etniche ed universalismi nell’opera di Eusebio di Cesarea,
Adamantius 16 (2010) 63-87.
[Identità etnica ed universalismo greco. Etnicità ed universalismo romano. I barbari come limite ai
due universalismi e la prospettiva cristiana di superamento di questo limite. – «Nella Historia
ecclesiastica le chiese ed i loro membri più significativi, vescovi e martiri, sono presentate come diffuse su
tutta l’ecumene, che appare come la totalità della terra abitata, anche se in certi casi il contesto rende
evidente che si tratta dell’ecumene romana. La ragione precipua di quest’enfasi celebrativa è certo la
straordinaria dilatazione della prospettiva ecumenica del cristianesimo prodotta dalla identificazione
costantiniana delle fortune dell’impero con quelle del cristianesimo e della chiesa. È questa dilatazione
che porta Eusebio a celebrare l’universalismo imperialistico romano e che dà forza alla sua radicale critica
di quello culturale greco» (p. 87)].
[II.7. Eusebio de Cesarea, 42: 7.1. Las fuentes de la polémica antioracular en Eusebio, 44-46; 7.2.
Eusebio y la profecía bíblica. La Demonstratio evangelica, 46-47; 7.3. Eusebio y la profecía pagana. La
Praeparatio evangelica, 47-52].
PERRONE L., La Storia Ecclesiastica di Eusebio: alle origini della storiografia cristiana, Adamantius 16 (2010)
6-11.
[Introduzione alla sezione monografica contenente gli atti della giornata di studio tenuta a Bologna
(10.1.2008)].
PRINZIVALLI E., Conclusioni, Adamantius 16 (2010) 120-124.
[Considerazioni conclusive su «La Storia Ecclesiastica di Eusebio: alle origini della storiografia
cristiana», a cura di L. PERRONE e A. VILLANI. – «È facile, persino ovvio, dire che senza la sua opera
non ci sarebbe nessuna possibilità di recuperare l’ordito storico dei primi tre secoli del cristianesimo.
Possiamo fare di più oggi, e anche grazie a questa Giornata di studio: possiamo ribadire che Eusebio
è davvero il padre della storia della chiesa. E non perché la sua visione provvidenzialistica di un Dio
che guida la storia, idea derivata dal giudaismo, o la connessione instaurata fra cristianesimo e
impero, già presente in Luca, siano inedite, ma perché, con lucida consapevolezza di cui il prologo
della Storia Ecclesiastica è testimonianza, organizza questi e molti altri elementi in una struttura
specificamente pensata» (p. 120)].
RAMELLI I., ‘Maximus’ on Evil, Matter, and God: Arguments for the Identification of the Source of Eusebius, PE
VII,22 with Maximus of Tyre, Adamantius 16 (2010) 230-255.
[The question at stake. Eusebius’s ‘Maximus’, the Philocalists, Methodius and the Dialogue.
Thematic convergences. ‘Maximus’ and Maximus of Tyre: puzzles and common elements. Analysis
of Eusebius’s report from Maximus’s work on matter. Analysis of Maximus of Tyre’s Diatribe 41.
431
Reflections and further points of convergence. Conclusive remarks and contribution to research. –
«Maximus may have been known to Origen before Eusebius, and may have been taken by
Eusebius from him, which would also explain the enigmatic presence of the same material both in
Methodius and in the Dialogue of Adamantius. Eusebius might even have had available a Christian
reworking of Maximus in a dialogue, such as Methodius’s piece. For Maximus might have been
“imported” into the Christian debate by Methodius as well» (p. 254)].
–, Origen’s Anti-Subordinationism and its Heritage in the Nicene and Cappadocian Line → 12. Origene (4.
Studi)
SCOGNAMIGLIO R., «Dio mio, Dio mio, perché mi hai abbandonato?» (Sal 21, 2). Esegesi patristica in area
SIMMONS M.B., Universalism in the Demonstratio evangelica of Eusebius of Caesarea, in Studia Patristica
XLVI, 319-324.
STRUTWOLF H., Hypostase und Ousia in Contra Eunomium des Basilius von Caesarea – Zur homöousianischen
Herleitung der neunizänischen Theologie → 21.1. Basilio di Cesarea
TIMM S., Eusebius und die Heilige Schrift. Die Schriftvorlagen des Onomastikons der biblischen Ortsnamen
(Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur, 166), De Gruyter, Berlin 2010,
pp. XIV+653.
[Vorwort, V. Abkürzungen und Siglen, XI-XIV. Was zitierte Eusebius in seinem Onomastikon,
wenn er aus der Heiligen Schrift zitierte?: 0. Präzisierung, 1-4; 1. Zitate aus dem Buch Josua, 5-40; 2.
Zitate aus dem Pentateuch, 41-211; 3. Die Vorlage für das Richterbuch, 213-268; 4. Die Vorlage des
Onomastikons für das Erste und Zweite Samuelbuch, 269-333; 5. Die Vorlage des Onomastikons für
das Erste und Zweite Buch der Könige, 334-418; 6. Die Vorlage für die prophetischen Bücher, 419503; 7. Neutestamentliche Ortsnamen, 504-532. Literaturverzeichnis, 533-556. Register, 557-653].
TODA S., The Syriac Version of Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History Revisited, in Studia Patristica XLVI, 333-338.
VERDONER M., Überlegungen zum Adressatenkreis von Eusebs Historia ecclesiastica, ZAC 14 (2010) 362-378.
[Abstract: «In this essay a prevailing confusion concerning the readership of Eusebius’ Historia
ecclesiastica is sought to be remedied by virtue of a literary reading of the Historia ecclesiastica as a
unified whole. The approach taken does neither intend to find out who actually read the work nor
who the intended readers were. Instead of that, the question of the implied readership is raised. It
is contended that the Historia ecclesiastica is characterized by an immediate understanding
between the reader and the narrator, and that the reader must possess a certain amount of
knowledge of Christianity in order to profit from the work. Furthermore, it is shown that the
implied reader must be able to follow rather technical discussions concerning the genealogy of
Christ or the delimitation of the New Testament canon. It follows that the reader should not be
regarded as uneducated. While the predominant emic-perspective of the Historia ecclesiastica
suggests that the implied readers should be understood as Christians, the apologetic introduction
to the work might imply that adversaries of the Christian faith should also be counted among the
implied readers. As regards to this problem, the stance of the essay is to regard the adversaries as a
secondary audience. Furthermore, it is rejected that the implied readership should also consist of
pagans and Jews sympathetic towards Christianity as these groups are not offered any foot hold in
the work» (p. 378)].
20. Atanasio
Atanasio. Lettera agli Antiocheni, Introduzione, testo, traduzione e commento a cura di A. SEGNERI
(Biblioteca Patristica, 46), EDB – Edizioni Dehoniane Bologna, Bologna 2010, pp. 208.
[Premessa, 7-9. Introduzione: 1. Breve storia della crisi tra Nicea e Alessandria (362), 11-43; 2. Il
concilio di Alessandria del 362: circostanze, 43-59; 3. Gli effetti del concilio di Alessandria e del
Tomus ad Antiochenos, 59-67; 4. La tradizione testuale del Tomus ad Antiochenos, 68-75. Conspectus
432
siglorum, 77-78. Lettera agli Antiocheni, Testo e traduzione, 79-103. Commento, 105-181. Bibliografia,
185-200. Indice delle citazioni bibliche, 201; Indice di nomi e parole notevoli, 203-206; Indice
generale, 207-208].
Athanasius Werke, Erster Band, Erster Teil: Die dogmatischen Schriften, 4. Lieferung: Epistulae I-IV ad
Serapionem, besorgt von K. SAVVIDIS, De Gruyter, Berlin 2010, pp. LIII-LVI+383-600.
[Vorbemerkungen, LIII-LIV; 1. Generelle Abkürzungen, LV; 2. Zeichen und Abkürzungen der
Textedition, LVI. Epistulae I-IV ad Serapionem: Praefatio, 385-386; Conspectus Epistularum in ordine
Codicum, 386; I. Epistula I ad Serapionem und Epistula II ad Serapionem, 387-417; II. Epistula IIb ad
Serapionem und Epistula III ad Serapionem, 418-424; III. Epistula IV ad Serapionem – In illud: Qui
dixerit verbum, 425-445. Text: Epistula I ad Serapionem, 449-534; Epistula II ad Serapionem, 537-563;
Epistula III ad Serapionem, 567-575; Epistula IV ad Serapionem – In illud: Qui dixerit verbum, 579600].
carattere generale
→ 1. Miscellanee e studi di
NEAMŢȚU M., The Life of the Cross in St Athanasius, in Salvation according to the Fathers of the Church, 45-59.
[Status quaestionis. ‘Veritas index sui’. The cosmic revelation of the Cross. Beyond mythology.
Conclusions. – «I have attempted to prove that the Cross plays in the Athanasian writings a double
role. First, it grounds a theological epistemology that avoids the Greek pitfall of speculating about
God in terms of ‘ultimate cause’ or ‘immaterial substance’. Athanasius grapples instead with the
force of truth and goodness revealed in Christ. He proves the truth of the Gospel not on the
pristine whiteboard of dialectical thinking, but rather in the rhetorical sphere of narrative action
(for example, life of chastity, self-denial and martyrdom). The Cross embraced by the Christian
ascetics and confessors reveals the cosmic environment that shapes the relationship between man
and God. The Cross is the examination which all Christians have to pass, if they hunger for
freedom from sin, corruption and mortality» (p. 59)].
[II.6. Atanasio de Alejandría, 40-42].
PEDERSEN N.A., The New Testament Canon and Athanasius of Alexandria’s 39th Festal Letter, in The Discursive Fight over Religious Texts in Antiquity, 168-177.
[«... Athanasius won for himself an authority which was not only bound up with his office or his
direct power. He was the man who never compromised, and who suffered for what he believed in.
The same reasons that made him a saint after his death made his canon a success. I think that we
can sense how he plays on this kind of ‘charismatic’ authority in the 39th Festal Letter in not
mentioning a fact that all his readers knew: his ordination as bishop of Alexandria made him the
highest bishop in Egypt. Instead he refers to the tradition received from his predecessor, and points
to his own unutterable greatness as the one who only wishes to be the disciple of Christ» (p. 175)].
RAMELLI I., Origen’s Anti-Subordinationism and its Heritage in the Nicene and Cappadocian Line → 12.
Origene (4. Studi)
TEAL A., Athanasius and Apollinarius: Who Was the Chicken and Who Was the Egg?, in Studia Patristica XLVI,
281-288.
–, How Authentic is the Antiochene Construction of Athanasius and His Theology in Nestorius and Theodoret?,
in Studia Patristica XLVIII, 33-40.
433
Von Arius zum Athanasianum. Studien zur Edition der «Athanasius Werke», herausgegeben von A. VON
STOCKHAUSEN und H.C. BRENNECKE (Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen
Literatur. Archiv für die Ausgabe der Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten Jahrhunderte,
164), De Gruyter, Berlin-New York 2010, pp. X+318.
[Vorwort, V-VIII. Athanasius in Übersetzung: C. MÜLLER, Das Phänomen des «lateinischen
Athanasius», 3-42; A. AVAGYAN, Die armenische Athanasius-Überlieferung, 43-59. Studien zu den
Dokumenten zum arianischen Streit: H.C. BRENNECKE, Die letzten Jahre des Arius, 63-83; U. HEIL,
Markell von Ancyra und das Romanum, 85-103; A. WINTJES, Die ursprüngliche Fassung der Dokumente
von Serdica, 105-129. Studien zu Pseud-Athanasiana: A. VON STOCKHAUSEN, Die pseud-athanasianische
Disputatio contra Arium. Eine Auseinandersetzung mit «arianischer» Theologie in Dialogform, 133-155;
A. VON STOCKHAUSEN, Die pseud-athanasianische Homilia de semente. Einleitung, Text und
Übersetzung, 157-203. Geschichte der «Athanasius Werke»: A. VON STOCKHAUSEN, Einblicke in die
Geschichte der «Athanasius Werke». Die Briefe Hans-Georg Opitz an Eduard Schwartz, 207-304. Register,
305-318].
W EINANDY T.G., Athanasius’ Letter to Marcellinus: A Soteriological Praying of the Psalms, in Studia
21. I Padri Cappadoci
CARNEVALE L., Giobbe dall’antichità al medioevo →1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere generale
[III.1.3. I Padri cappadoci (pp. 71-75)].
FATTI F., Giuliano a Cesarea. La politica ecclesiastica del principe apostata (Studi e Testi Tardoantichi, 10),
Herder, Roma 2009, pp. 290.
[R. LIZZI TESTA, Prefazione, 9-11. Premessa, 13-16. Costantinopoli, 19-47. Un vescovo per Cesarea, 4999. Un martire politico, 101-147. Indeclinabile iudex, 149-196. Epilogo. Dimenticare l’Apostata, 197220. Appendice. Cronologia indiziaria dei fatti di Cesarea (362-363), 221-. Bibliografia, 223-278.
Indici, 279-288].
LEVY A., The Rise of the Beautiful in the 3rd and 4th centuries. The Cappadocian Fathers and the Foundation of a
Byzantine Aesthetics, Nicolaus 37 (2010) 149-172.
[The Tetrarchs of San Marco: Conversion and aesthetic shift. The Cappadocians and Early
Patristic literature: The leap from Anti-aesthetics to super-aesthetics. Monasticism: Beauty and the
face of Christ. – «Before the development of monasticism, Christianity lacked an aesthetic ideal
that could have competed with the Neoplatonizing trends of the late Roman Empire. It was the
rise of a new concept of aesthetics based on the Christian ascetic experience that accomplished the
transformation process of the Roman Empire. Indeed, the cultural impact of this new aesthetics
came from its alliance with the highly coherent picture of the world laid down in the works of
theologians, as the Cappadocian Fathers. Thanks to the latter, monastic aesthetics came to be, as it
were, built into theology» (p. 173)].
21.1. Basilio di Cesarea
AYRES L. –R ADDE-G ALLWITZ A., Basil of Caesarea, in The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity,
459-470.
[Introduction. Basil on creation and providence. Philosophy in trinitarian theology. – «In
scholarship over the past century or so it is Gregory of Nyssa who has gained the reputation of
being the most ‘philosophical’ among the ‘Cappadocian’ theologians. More recent scholarship has
tempered this claim, especially by recognizing the contributions of his older brother Basil. In order
to appreciate Basil’s work, however, it is no good expecting him to see ancient positions reported
434
with accuracy and handled in ways their authors would respect. We have always to deal with a
Christian thinker, who bends all to his own use» (pp. 469-470)].
DEL COGLIANO M., Basil of Caesarea, Didymus The Blind, and The Anti-Pneumatomachian Exegesis of Amos
4:13 and John 1:3, JThS 61 (2010) 644-658.
[Abstract: «Recent scholarship has increasingly questioned the traditional assumption that
Athanasius of Alexandria was a major influence upon Basil of Caesarea. This study seeks to make a
concrete contribution to this debate by suggesting that Basil’s anti-pneumatomachian exegesis of
Amos 4:13 and John 1:3 was influenced by Didymus the Blind rather than by Athanasius. It begins
by demonstrating four parallels in the exegesis of these two verses between Basil’s Against Eunomius
and Didymus’ On the Holy Spirit, and that they are not due to a common use of Athanasius. After
ruling out other possible sources for Basil, it next argues that these parallels are best interpreted as
indicating that Basil was influenced by Didymus rather than vice versa. If this thesis is correct,
Didymus’ On the Holy Spirit needs to be dated to the late 350s or early 360s (much earlier than the
date of the 370s advocated in recent scholarship), and it should prompt a reassessment of Basil’s
sources and theological development»].
KEIDEL A.G., Basil of Caesarea and Free Will, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 85-90.
LO CICERO C., Tradurre i Greci nel IV secolo. Rufino di Aquileia e le omelie di Basilio
Aquileia
→ 25. Rufino di
MAXWELL J., The Attitudes of Basil and Gregory of Nazianzus toward Uneducated Christians, in Studia
Patristica XLVII, 117-122.
MIRA IBORRA M., About the Structure of De Spiritu sancto by Basil of Caesarea, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 97104.
MORESCHINI C., Tritheism in Basil and Gregory of Nazianzus, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 111-116.
NESSELRATH H.-G., Libanio e Basilio di Cesarea: un dialogo interreligioso?, Adamantius 16 (2010) 338-352.
[1. Premesse. 2. Due vite opposte e pure per molti aspetti parallele: Libanio e Basilio. 3. Relazioni fra
Libanio e Basilio? 4. Il carteggio fra Libanio e Basilio. 5. Valorizzazione del carteggio dalla tarda
antichità ad oggi. 6. Il ruolo di Libanio in un impero divenuto cristiano. – «Alla domanda che
compare nel titolo di questo articolo devo purtroppo rispondere negativamente: non ci fu alcun
dialogo interreligioso fra Libanio e Basilio. Il falso carteggio fra i due è tuttavia un corpus meritevole
di attenzione, che mostra come la parte cristiana cercò di integrare il grande Libanio, pagano, nel
proprio universo culturale. Basilio, che nel suo discorso Ai giovani: in che modo essi possano trarre
profitto dalla letteratura greca, si pone su una simile via d’integrazione, avrebbe forse gradito l’idea di
realizzare un tale carteggio e se lui stesso lo avesse fatto, forse i risultati sarebbero stati migliori di
quelli attuali» (p. 352)].
RUARO E., Flying with Fleshy Wings: Ps.-Basil’s Demonology in the Exegesis of Isaiah 2:20, in Studia Patristica
XLIV, 157-162.
SARISKY D., The End of Interpretation in Basil of Caesarea’s De spiritu sancto, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 91-96.
STRUTWOLF H., Hypostase und Ousia in Contra Eunomium des Basilius von Caesarea – Zur homöousianischen
Herleitung der neunizänischen Theologie, in Von Homer bis Landino, 403-434.
[1. Der eusebianische Hintergrund von Contra Eunomium. 2. Die Lehre von der göttlichen oujsiva in
Contra Eunomium. – «Man kann also als Ergebnis festhalten: theologisch ist die so genannte
“neunizänische” Theologie bei Basilius schon in Contra Eunomium angelegt, wenn sie auch erst
später zur theologischen Formel gerinnt. Aber theologische Formeln waren, wie wir wissen, für
Basilius als solche nicht von eminentem Interesse» (p. 434)].
435
TSUCHIHASHI S., Homotimia and synarithmêsis in Basil of Caesarea’s De Spiritu sancto, in Studia Patristica
XLVII, 105-110.
21.2. Gregorio di Nazianzo
ABRAMS REBILLARD S., The Autobiographical Prosopopoeia of Gregory of Nazianzus, in Studia Patristica
XLVII, 123-128.
BACCI L., Lo strano caso del dio Zamolxis che tira frecce tra la folla. Qualche considerazione in merito a Greg.
Naz. Carm. II, 2, 7 vv. 274 s., in Studia Nazianzenica II, ed. A. SCHMIDT (CCG, 73), Brepols, Turnhout
2010, 249-256.
BRAUCH T., Gregory of Nazianzus’ Letters 24 and 38 and Themistius of Constantinople, in Studia Patristica
XLVII, 129-134.
BOUTENEFF P., Whatever That Was! Paradise According to Gregory of Nazianzus, in Studia Patristica XLVII,
141-146.
DALEY B.E., Who is the Real Bishop of Constantinople? A Reconsideration of Gregory of Nazianzus’ Will, in
Studia Patristica XLVII, 147-152.
HARRISON V.E.F., The Logos Cries Out from the Virgin’s Womb: Gregory of Nazianzus, Oration 45.13, in
MAXWELL J., The Attitudes of Basil and Gregory of Nazianzus toward Uneducated Christians, in Studia
MCGUCKIN J.A., Gregory of Nazianzus, in The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity, 482-497.
[Gregory’s place in history. A brief life. Gregory as religious philosopher. – «…Gregory certainly
paves the way for a transition between the theories of late Second Sophistic on transcendence, and
the fifth-century patristic rearticulation of the Gospel imperatives. In this he positioned himself as
one of the leading Christian sophists of the earlier period. Considering his significant contributions
to Christological doctrine (the function of the active soul in the Incarnate Logos), his structuring of
the classical Trinitarian theory, his interesting rehabilitation of Origenian anthropology, and not
least his pure Hellenistic idiom, Gregory Nazianzen seems to have been unjustly neglected as a
major Christian sophist» (p. 497)].
carattere generale
→ 1. Miscellanee e studi di
MORESCHINI C., Tritheism in Basil and Gregory of Nazianzus, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 111-116.
NIMMO SMITH J., From Gorgias to Gregory of Nazianzus – a Platonic Formula Revisited, in Studia Patristica
XLIV, 329-334.
W ENZEL A., Libanius, Gregory of Nazianzus, and the Ideal of Athens in Late Antiquity, Journal of Late
Antiquity 3 (2010) 264-285.
[Abstract: «In Late Antiquity, an idealized “Athens” could be used as an abstract symbol to
represent paideia and Greek culture. At the same time, Athens was a particular and physical place
with resonances of its own. Individuals could use the interplay between the abstract “Athens” and
their own personal associations with the literal Athens to create differing definitions of the symbolic
“Athens”. This article examines the apparently paradoxical portrayals of Athens by Libanius (a
pagan who criticized Athens) and Gregory of Nazianzus (a Christian who adored Athens). Both
men were devoted to the paideia “Athens” represented on an abstract level, but the city also had a
specific role to play in their perceptions of the geography and autobiography of paideia. This article
proposes to solve the paradox by viewing Libanius’ critique of “Athens” in the context of his
436
professional rivalry with the schools of Athens and in his desire to magnify his native Antioch as a
center of Greek culture at the expense of Athens. It further suggests reading Gregory’s positive
portrayal of “Athens” as way for him to remember his student days there with Basil of Caesarea
(and enhance his own reputation in the process) and also as a way to show good Christians how
they could safely approach pagan paideia. In seeing these portrayals of Athens thus, we can also see
in microcosm two of the major ideological debates of Late Antiquity, namely, whether or not
definitions of Hellenism should be tied to its traditional home in mainland Greece and how
Christianity can appropriate classical culture»].
21.3. Gregorio di Nissa
ANDIA Y. DE, Moïse et Paul, modèles de l’expérience mystique chez Grégoire de Nysse et Denys l’Aréopagite, in
Studia Patristica XLVIII, 189-204.
CASSIN M., Réfuter sans lasser le lecteur: Pratique de la réfutation dans le Contre Eunome de Grégoire de Nysse, in
CVETKOVIC V., St Gregory’s argument concerning the lack of diastema in the divine activities from Ad
Ablabium, in V.H. DRECOLL & M. BERGHAUS (eds.), Gregory of Nyssa: The Minor Treatises on Trinitarian
Theology and Apollinarism, Brill, Leiden 2010, 369-382.
HAIKKA T., Gregory of Nyssa’s Canticum behind the Akathistos Hymn?, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 63-70.
HOWARD N.D., Familial Askêsis in the Vita Macrinae, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 33-38.
KÖCKERT C., The Concept of Seed in Christian Cosmology: Gregory of Nyssa, Apologia in Hexaemeron, in
LA MATINA M., Analytic Philosophy of Language and the Revelation of Person. Some Remarks on Gregory of
Nyssa and Maximus Confessor, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 77-84.
LAIRD M., Gregory of Nyssa and Divinization: A Reconsideration, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 39-44.
LEEMANS J., Reading Acts 6-7 in the Early Church: Gregory of Nyssa’s First and Second Homilies on Stephen the
Protomartyr, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 9-20.
LEUENBERGER-WENGER S., Ethics and Christian Identity in Gregory of Nyssa, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 45-50.
MASPERO G., Remarks on Eros in Plato and Gregory of Nyssa, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 51-56.
MATZ B., Alleviating Economic Injustice in Gregory of Nyssa’s Contra usurarios, in Studia Patristica XLIV,
549-553.
MEREDITH A., Divine Incomprehensibility in Gregory of Nyssa and Augustine, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 3-8.
–, Gregory of Nyssa, in The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity, 471-481.
[Life and works. Thought of Gregory. Conclusion. – «One of the difficulties in assessing Gregory’s
own philosophical approach and his relationship to the current Hellenism of his day is this. His
main launching point was not the discovery of a basic philosophical idea or system, but the desire
to understand the faith he had received with the help of philosophy. Most of his writings are in this
sense occasional. He uses what suits him and can modify what he has used in ways perhaps
uncacceptable to the Platonic past he inherited» (p. 481)].
MONACI CASTAGNO A., L’agiografia cristiana antica. Testi, contesti, pubblico → 1. Miscellanee e studi di
carattere generale
MÜHLENBERG E., Der kanonische Brief Gregors von Nyssa und sein Ort im Bußwesen der Alten Kirche, in Von
Homer bis Landino, 207-242.
[«Der Brief ist systematisch angelegt, umfassend und sehr präzise ausgeführt. Deswegen lohnt es
sich, diese kompakte Darstellung nachzuzeichnen und in die Geschichte des Bußwesens der Alten
Kirche einzuordnen. Denn trotz einer Fülle von Literatur bleiben viele Fragen zu beantworten» (p.
207). – Con approfondimenti su Clemente Alessandrino (pp. 223-227) e Origene (pp. 227-234)].
437
OJELL A., The Most Evident Idea in Theology? Gregory of Nyssa and Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita on the
Theological Significance of Incarnation, in Studia Patristica XLVIII, 183-188.
ad Agostino: 7. Gregorio di Nissa: la preghiera come confessione della creaturalità e memoria della
patria celeste, 587-595].
RADDE-G ALLWITZ A., Epinoia and Initial Concepts: Re-assessing Gregory of Nyssa’s Defense of Basil, in Studia
RAMELLI I., Aijwvnio" and Aijwvn in Origen and Gregory of Nyssa, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 57-62.
– In Illud: Tunc et ipse Filius... Gregory of Nyssa’s Exegesis, its Derivations from Origen, and Early Patristic
Interpretations Related to Origen’s, in Studia Patristica XLIV, 259-274.
–, Origen’s Anti-Subordinationism and its Heritage in the Nicene and Cappadocian Line → 12. Origene (4.
Studi)
W ESSEL S., Memory and Individuality in Gregory of Nyssa’s Dialogus de anima et resurrectione, JECS 18
(2010) 369-392.
[Genre and interpretation. Macrina on memory and the ascent toward the Good (De anima [PG
46:88C-97A]). Memory at the resurrection. Conclusion. – Abstract: «This article suggests that
Gregory used the genre of Platonic dialogue in order to transform philosophical contradictions into
paradoxical, meaningful tensions. The tension explored here is his treatment of memory, in which
the memory that is quieted once the soul has lovingly experienced the Good is later revived to
account for the individual’s bodily atoms at the resurrection. When understood in the context of
the treatise’s dynamic literary genre, the dialectical movement of the soul in hope and memory is
continuous with its experience of the Good. Human impulses that take place within time gradually
move human beings closer toward an encounter with the divine»].
22. Ambrogio di Milano
BURINI DE LORENZI C., Il Magnificat (Lc. 1, 46-55) nella interpretazione di Origene e di Ambrogio → 12.
Origene
CLANCY F.G. SJ, Christ the Scented Apple and the Fragrance of the World Redemption: A Theme in St Ambrose’s
Commentary on Psalm 118, in Salvation according to the Fathers of the Church, 70-92.
[The landscape of sin. Christ the salvation of God. Conclusion. – «In this exploration of Ambrose’s
Expositio Psalmi CXVIII, I have outlined some of the characteristic features of his sketch of the
sinful landscape inhabited by the progeny of Adam and Eve. We also explored the central place of
the cross and the story of salvation in his exegesis of the psalm text. Various images of Christ as
saviour were examined, focusing especially on his creative usage of the images of the lily, the
scented apple and the balsam tree. Linked with each of these three images was the theme of the
fragrance of salvation, as the antidote or remedy to the stench of sin that characterised the
ensnared progeny of Adam and Eve» (p. 89)].
DULAEY M., Les larmes dans les premiers siècles chrétiens: Ambroise et l’Occident latin, Adamantius 16 (2010)
320-337.
[I. Larmes admises et larmes requises dans la société chrétienne: 1. Un chrétien peut-il pleurer?; 2.
Larmes rituelles: la pénitence canonique; 3. Larmes et funérailles. II. Ambroise et les larmes: 1.
Pleurs d’Adam et pleurs du Christ; 2. Larmes et péché; 3. Larmes et prière. – «Ambroise est avec
Augustin celui des Pères d’Occident qui a le plus parlé du rôle des larmes dans la vie chrétienne.
Conséquence de la chute, elles sont aussi à ses yeux une aide puissante à la restauration de
438
l’humanité, grâce à l’Incarnation et aux larmes que le Fils de Dieu lui-même y répandit pour les
hommes» (p. 328)].
MARITANO M., Maria e la relazione in Ambrogio e Giovanni Damasceno, Theotokos 18/1 (2010) 29-83.
23. Didimo il Cieco
AYRES L., The Holy Spirit as the ‘Undiminished Giver’: Didymus the Blind’s De spiritu sancto and the
development of Nicene pneumatology, in The Holy Spirit in the Fathers of the Church, 57-72.
[Introduction. The Undiminished Giver. Basil and Didymus. Basil and the two Gregories.
Didymus and the triune life. Conclusions].
BENNETT B., The Person Speaking: Prosopopoeia as an Exegetical Device in Didymus the Blind’s
Interpretation of Romans 7, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 173-178.
CARNEVALE L., Giobbe dall’antichità al medioevo (→1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere generale)
[III.1.2. Il Giobbe didimiano (pp. 70-71)].
DELCOGLIANO M., Basil of Caesarea, Didymus The Blind, and The Anti-Pneumatomachian Exegesis of Amos
4:13 and John 1:3 → 21.1. Basilio di Cesarea
GELJON A.-K., Didymus the Blind: Commentary on Psalm 24 (23 LXX): Introduction, Translation and
Commentary, VigChr 65 (2011) 50-73.
[Introduction. Translation. Comments: 1. The first of the Sabbath; 2. The soul as the earth; 3. The
sea of life; 4. The ascent of the mountain; 5. The coming and ascension of Christ; 6. The
interpretation of Apollinaris. Conclusion. – Abstract: «This article offers a translation of and some
comments on the commentary on Ps 24 (23 LXX) by Didymus the Blind. Didymus regards the
Psalm as indicating the moral progress of the soul towards perfection. He interprets the second half
of the Psalm as a reference to Christ’s dwelling on earth and his ascension. In his exegesis Didymus
relies heavily on predecessors, like Clement of Alexandria and Origen» (p. 50)].
METZLER K., Origenes über die Arche Noah. Zur Bestimmung griechischer Fragmente der Genesishomilien (CPG
1411) → 12. Origene (4. Studi)
–, Mind, Text, and Commentary: Noetic Exegesis in Origen of Alexandria, Didymus the Blind, and Evagrius
STEIGER P.D., Peter and Paul in the Commentaries of Didymus the Blind, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 167-172.
l’Aveugle ou Piérius d’Alexandrie? → 31. Cirillo Alessandrino
24. Evagrio
CASIDAY A., Universal Restoration in Evagrius Ponticus’ Great Letter, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 223-228.
DYSINGER L., Exegesis and Spiritual Guidance in Evagrius Ponticus, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 209-222.
JOHNSÉN H.R., Dödssyndernas genealogi: Evagrios Pontikos åtta onda grundtankar och det antika arvet [The
genealogy of the cardinal sins: The eight thoughts of Evagrius Ponticus and the heritage from Antiquity], in
C. STENQVIST & M. LINDSTEDT CRONBERG (éds.), Dygder och laster: Förmoderna perspektiv på tillvaron,
Lund 2010, 23-38.
LOUTH A., Evagrius on Anger, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 179-186.
439
PERRONE L., “Dsaglebis gandevna locvis zhams”: mlocvelis saxe demonebsa da angelozebs šoris: Origenedan
Evagre pontoelamde → 12. Origene (4. Studi)
–, La preghiera secondo Origene. L’impossibilità donata → 12. Origene (4. Studi)
ad Agostino: 6. Evagrio Pontico: la «preghiera pura» come vertice dell’itinerario monastico di
perfezione, 564-587].
RICH A.D., Discerning Evagrius Ponticus Discerning: Diavkrisi" in the Works of Evagrius, in Studia Patristica
XLVII, 203-208.
– Mind, Text, and Commentary: Noetic Exegesis in Origen of Alexandria, Didymus the Blind, and Evagrius
TOBON M., The Health of the Soul: Ἀπάθεια in Evagrius Ponticus, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 187-201.
25. Rufino di Aquileia
CHIN C.M., Rufinus of Aquileia and Alexandrian Afterlives: Translation as Origenism, JECS 18 (2010) 617-647.
[Authors and librarians. Transmission and subordination. Translation and transformation.
Conclusion. – Abstract: «Placing Rufinus of Aquileia’s translation projects into the larger theological
context of the Origenist controversy suggests a correspondence between Rufinus’s methods of
textual alteration and restoration and Origen’s notion of the fall of souls and their ultimate return to
God. This correspondence also parallels an emphasis in Rufinus’s work on the idea of a Christian
literary aggregate, or the idea of a Christian library, which contrasts with the idea of the Christian
author as found in Rufinus’s contemporaries, notably Jerome; for Rufinus, the library overshadows
individual authors in the same way that God overshadows souls in the final reunification. Thus
Rufinus’s translations of Christian texts should be read both as contributions to the idea of a body of
Christian literature, as this idea became established in the late fourth and early fifth centuries, and
as material practices that participate in an Origenist cosmology of fall and return»].
LO CICERO C., Tradurre i Greci nel IV secolo. Rufino di Aquileia e le omelie di Basilio (Studi e Testi
Tardoantichi, 9), Herder, Roma 2008, pp. 327.
[Premessa, 7. Introduzione, 9-15. Occasioni, modalità, scopi della traduzione e consapevolezza del
traduttore: prefazioni (e un epilogo) alle versioni dal Greco di Rufino di Aquileia, 17-125. La
comparatio di Basilio e Cipriano e la Praefatio di Rufino alla versione delle omelie basiliane, 127-139.
Rufino, Basilio e Seneca: fra aemulatio e arte allusiva, 141-145. Rufino ed un’imitazione basiliana di
Ambrogio, 147-156. Rufino traduttore di Basilio: emulazione e citazioni bibliche, 157-175. Come
romanizzare Basilio: tecniche del vertere in Rufino, 177-209. La versione delle Omelie di Basilio: una
traduzione letteraria, 211-240. I munera del cristiano: Rufino di Aquileia lettore di Cipriano, 241-261.
Rufino e la tecnica compositiva del ‘richiamo a distanza’, 263-272. Ἐνάργεια e riecheggiamenti
letterari in un passo di Rufino, 273-277. Bibliografia, 279-304. Indice dei luoghi di Rufino e di Basilio
discussi, 305-307; Indice dei luoghi biblici citati, 308-310; Indice dei luoghi citati, 311-326].
26. Teofilo di Alessandria
CRISTEA H.-J., Schenute von Atripe: Contra Origenistas → 13. L’origenismo e la fortuna di Origene
27. Sinesio di Cirene
BERNARD A., The Alexandrian School. Theon of Alexandria and Hypatia
alessandrina
→ 2. Ellenismo e cultura
BREGMAN J., Synesius of Cyrene, in The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity, 520-537.
440
[1. Life. 2. Writings. 3. Thought: 3.1. Hellenic later Platonism: Hymn 1, the Dion and philosophical
Epistles; 3.2. The incarnation; 3.3. On dreams, the Chaldaean Oracles, dualism, and the resurrection;
3.4. Epistle 105; 3.5. Hellenic/Christian syncretism in the Hymns; Hermetic Easter and the
resurrection. 4. Conclusion. – «Hellenic later Platonism determined Synesius’ conception of reality.
Perhaps he was a Christian from birth, but the little knowledge of Scripture he had could have also
been acquired as an outsider, in the same way Porphyry acquired knowledge of Judaism. Synesius
mentioned Christianity only in his hymns and letters. His early works are Hellenic, as are his later
prose work, both philosophically and religiously. Once he saw a rising orthodox Christian empire as
the wave of the future he had to make a choice. In the light of his conversion to philosophy,
whether or not he was born a Christian becomes irrelevant. In his form of Christianity,
‘philosophical reason’ exceeds ‘revelation’, with Platonic and Chaldaean symbols equated with, and
(where possible) assimilated to, Christian symbols» (p. 535)].
28. Gerolamo
Girolamo di Stridone. Commento alla Epistola ai Galati. Introduzione, traduzione e note a cura di
G. RASPANTI (Corpus Christianorum in Translation, 1 – Corpus Christianorum. Series Latina LXXVII A),
Brepols, Turnhout 2010, pp. 396.
[Introduzione: La svolta esegetica di Girolamo: com’è nato il Commentario In Galatas, 7-25; Il
metodo esegetico nell’In Galatas, 25-44; I temi dell’esegesi di Girolamo su ep. Gal., 44-66; Nota alla
traduzione ed alla bibliografia, 66-67. Bibliografia, 68-77. Commento alla Epistola ai Galati:
Prefazione, 81-85; Note alla Prefazione, 85-93. Libro primo, 94-154; Note al Libro primo, 154-182. Libro
secondo, 183-251; Note al Libro secondo, 251-272. Libro terzo, 273-333; Note al Libro terzo, 333-349.
Indici, 351-396].
L’esegeta romanziere. Gerolamo, le Vite di Ilarione, Paolo e Malco e gli inizi dell’agiografia monastica, a cura
di L. PERRONE e G. GRANDI, Adamantius 17 (2010) 125-192.
[L. PERRONE, Introduzione, 125-129. G. GRANDI, Il problema del genere letterario delle Vite
geronimiane: storia di una scelta ardita e vincente, 130-140. L. LUGARESI, Santità e spettacolo:
dimensioni ‘teatrali’ nella Vita di Ilarione e in altri testi della letteratura agiografica tra IV e V secolo,
141-163. R.M. PARRINELLO, Misure del monachesimo a Gaza: dal ‘fondatore’ Ilarione alla scuola
monastica di Gaza, 164-177. C. DELCORNO, La fortuna delle Vite geronimiane tra Medioevo e
Umanesimo, 178-192].
ADKIN N., Some Jeromian Gingerbread? (Epist. 31), Revue Bénédictine 120 (2010) 5-11.
[«If the armillae, epistulae and columbae had really been gingerbread, it might be thought that such
moralizing would have been inserted immediately after the mention of these particular items,
especially since Jerome’s ensuing remark that St. Peter’s day should be celebrated festius solito (31,2,
1) supplies the perfect cue for this kind of moralistic comment. Jerome’s careful detachment of his
gastronomic preachment from the bracelets, letter and odves is another ground for supposing that
they are not in fact gingerbread» (p. 8)].
ANDREI O., Dai Chronici Canones di Eusebio al Chronicon di Girolamo. Translatio come costruzione di un
nuovo modello cronografico → 19. Eusebio di Cesarea
[Ch. 7. Nazarenes: 1. Jerome and the Nazarenes, 164-174 (1.1 The Gospel according to the Hebrews,
164-166; 1.2. A Nazarene version of Jeremiah, 166; 1.3. A case against the Nazarenes, 166; 1.4. The
Nazarene commentary on Isaiah, 166-171; 1.5. Other references by Jerome, 172-173; 1.6. Summation,
173). Ch. 8. Ebionites: 8.2. Jerome and the Ebionites, 208. Ch. 9: Elkesaites, Cerinthians,
Symmachians: 2. Cerinthians (2.6. Jerome, 226-227)].
441
CAIN A., An Unidentified Patristic Quotation in Jerome’s Commentary on Galatians (3.6.11), JThS 61
(2010) 216-225.
[Abstract: «In his Commentary on Galatians (3.6.11) Jerome quotes and criticizes an interpretation of
Galatians 6:11 which reads the verse as showing that Paul was unable to write Greek. This article
rejects the attribution of the quotation to Chrysostom and suggests instead that it is taken from
Eusebius of Emesa. Jerome is known to have used Eusebius’ Commentary on Galatians elsewhere in
his own and criticizes Eusebius in similar words to the commentary in his Quaestiones hebraicae in
Genesim. It is further suggested that Eusebius’ own experience of bilingualism may have shaped his
perception of Paul’s difficulty, and that his interpretation may have influenced Chrysostom’s
strictures on Paul’s inability to write Greek clearly»].
COURTRAY R., Prophète des temps derniers. Jérôme commente Daniel (Théologie historique, 119),
Beauchesne, Paris 2009, pp. 508.
[G. SABBAH, Préface, 7-11. Introduction, 13-19. I. Approches du Commentaire sur Daniel: 1. Date et
circonstances de la rédaction, 23-29; 2. Le prologue du Commentaire sur Daniel, 30-41; 3. La
composition du livre, 42-61. II. Le texte de Daniel: 1. Jérôme et la Bible, 65-81; 2. Le texte des lemmes
dans l’In Danielem, 82-115; 3. Jérôme face aux questions soulevées par le texte de Daniel, 116-128. III.
Jérôme et ses sources: Jérôme au travail, 131-135: 1. Le traité Contre les Chrétiens de Porphyre, 136-163;
2. Les sources chrétiennes de l’In Danielem, 164-230; 3. La question des sources juives, 231-260; 4.
Un exemple exceptionnel: l’exégèse des soixante-dix semaines d’années, 261-281. Synthèse: la place
des sources, 282-287. IV. L’exégèse de Jérôme dans l’In Danielem: 1. Le commentaire biblique selon
Jérôme, 293-310; 2. Le cas de l’In Danielem, 311-388. V. Le sens de l’histoire: Jérôme et la succession
des Empires, 391-422; 2. Les temps escahtologiques, 423-437. Conclusion, 439-446. Bibliographie, 447464. Index des auteurs modernes, 467-470; Index des auteurs anciens, 471-479; Index des autres
œuvres de Jérôme, 480-488; Index des références à l’In Danielem, 489-499].
DELCORNO C., La fortuna delle Vite geronimiane tra Medioevo e Umanesimo, Adamantius 16 (2010) 178-192.
[«Il successo delle biografie di Girolamo (le vite di Paolo, di Ilarione, di Malco) è strettamente
connesso con la diffusione della raccolta di scritture monastiche note come Vitae Patrum. Dalla
tarda antichità all’età umanistica non si dà esperienza di rinnovamento religioso che ignori il
modello del monachesimo orientale, l’orientale lumen che splende per la prima volta nelle biografie
e nei detti degli anacoreti egiziani, siriani e palestinesi. Basterà in questa sede accennare ad alcuni
momenti della fortuna dell’agiografia geronimiana tra Medioevo e Umanesimo. La figura di Ilarione
è singolarmente ammirata e imitata – lo notava Étienne Delaruelle – da parte dei protagonisti del
rinnovato eremitismo che dall’Italia si diffonde oltralpe, soprattutto in Francia, tra la fine del secolo
X e l’inizio del secolo XI» (p. 178)].
GRANDI G., Deserto, città e conflitti ecclesiastici nelle Vite di Gerolamo, ASEs 27 (2010) 171-180.
[Abstract: «The purpose of the article is to study the relationship between city and desert in IVth
century and to analyze how this relationship is seen through the eye, often influenced by moods
and ideologies, of an author who lived his whole life between East and West: Jerome from Stridon.
In the three Hermit Lives, written by the saint in the space of ten years, is mirrored the opposition
– but also the possible integration – between conflicting worlds such as city and desert
(respectively seen as symbols of corruption and purity), classical and pagan culture, ecclesiastical
organization and monachism»].
–, Il problema del genere letterario delle Vite geronimiane: storia di una scelta ardita e vincente, Adamantius 16
(2010) 130-140.
[1. Straniamento e recettività. 2. Il naufragio del classicismo e la Vita Malchi. 3. L’importanza del
messaggio. Conclusione. – «Se, come abbiamo visto, non è possibile definire un genere di
appartenenza delle tre Vite o di ciascuna di esse, questo non può far scoraggiare il lettore o farlo
parlare semplicemente di idiomorfismo. Ogni Vita è diversa, ma intimamente connessa alle altre.
442
Esse sono fantasie, riflesso del ‘pastiche’ dell’anima di Gerolamo, ma sono tutt’altro che innocenti ed
innocue per il lettore. Esse lo guidano, divertendolo ed ammaestrandolo, lungo un percorso ben
preciso – che è lo stesso compiuto da Gerolamo (il quale, all’interno delle Vite parla di sé, sebbene
non apertamente come invece Agostino) –, un percorso volto all’esaltazione del monachesimo
rispetto alla Chiesa ufficiale, all’abbattimento delle apparenze, al recupero della letteratura classica
volgendola a nuovi fini, al conseguimento della salvezza» (p. 140)].
GRAPPONE A., Girolamo e l’epistolario tra Seneca e san Paolo, Aug. 50 (2010) 119-145.
[Abstract: «The article begins by noting that the first mention of the Correspondence between
Seneca and Paul appears in De viris illustribus of Jerome. After a summary of the status quaestionis, it
examines the context of the De viris, particularly the information on Seneca. Then the article
presents an analysis of some aspects of the Correspondence in order to highlight the harmony
between the views of the Correspondence and the ideas of Jerome, especially the considerations on
the inadequacy of the language of the Pauline letters. After finding other reasons of convergence,
we formulate a hypothesis about the origin of the Correspondence» (p. 145)].
GRESCHAT K., Finale im Garten einer villa. Beobachtungen zu den letzten Kapiteln der Vita Hilarionis des
Hieronymus, in Von Homer bis Landino,115-132.
[I. Die Vita Hilarionis und ihre Adressaten. II. Hilarions Pilgerfahrt auf den Spuren des Antonius.
III. Asketische Märtyrerfrömmigkeit im Kontext der spätantiken villa. IV. Hilarions Gartengrab
und die Duplizität seiner Verehrung. V. Fazit. – «Mit seiner Vita Hilarionis gestaltete Hieronymus
nicht allein eine Art “Antoniusleben für das anspruchsvolle Publikum”, das er der römischen
Dame Asella verehrte... Er wählte für seine Darstellung vielmehr einen anderen, für seinen
Adressatenkreis deutlich besser passenden Rahmen, indem er die athanasianische Erzählung vom
Rückzug des Antonius in den von ihm angelegten Garten nicht nur aufgriff, sondern auch sehr
breit ausgestaltete. Auf diese Weise wurde das Leben des Hilarion für die Frömmigkeit einer an
einem asketischen Leben interessierten Schicht von Asketinnen und Asketen zugeschnitten, die
im Kontext der villa lebte und selbstverständlich auch mit der traditionellen laus ruris bestens
vertraut war. Doch Hieronymus war das noch immer nicht genug: Er nutzte seine Darstellung des
asketen Hilarion auch dazu, die von ihm eifrig propagierte Reliquienverehrung zu fördern, die in
der Vita Antonii gerade nicht angelegt war» (pp. 131-132)].
LAURENCE P., Le monachisme féminin antique: idéal hiéronymien et réalité historique (Spicilegium Sacrum
Lovaniense. Études et Documents, 52), Peeters, Leuven 2010, pp. VIII+362.
[Sigles, V-VI; Avant-propos, VII-VIII. Introduction, 1-5. I. La chasteté et ses modèles: 1. La
correspondance de Jérôme et le monachisme: l’épître 22 à Eustochium, 9-25; 2. Lettres sur la mort
d’une fille: Servius Sulpicius Rufus et saint Jérôme, 27-49; 3. Suicide et chasteté chez Jérôme, 51-69;
4. Jérôme et les puellae: un vocabulaire connoté, 71-89; 5. La Vie de Malchus et l’Epitaphium de Paula
par saint Jérôme, 91-108. II. La chasteté et ses contre-modèles: 6. Ivresse et luxure féminines: les
sources classiques de Jérôme, 111-127; 7. La courtisane dans l’œuvre de saint Jérôme, 129-170; 8.
Virilis et effeminatus chez saint Jérôme, 171-187. III. Statut, culture et religion: 9. Jérôme et l’ancilla
Christi: servitude et liberté, 191-207; 10. Les représentations de la domina chez Jérôme, 209-223; 11.
Les pèlerinages des Romaines sous le regard de saint Jérôme, 225-241; 12. Marcella, Jérôme et
Origène, 243-272; 13. L’implication des femmes dans l’hérésie: le jugement de saint Jérôme, 273-303.
Bibliographie, 305-321. Index, 323-362].
LUGARESI L., Santità e spettacolo: dimensioni ‘teatrali’ nella Vita di Ilarione e in altri testi della letteratura
agiografica tra IV e V secolo, Adamantius 16 (2010) 141-163.
[1. Fuori e dentro il teatro di Efeso: il forfait di Paolo e la performance taumaturgica di Giovanni. 2.
Ilarione e gli spettacoli: un uomo santo tra incontri di lotta e corse truccate. 3. Santi istrioni, santi
incursori e santi mimi. – «Nel corso di questo articolo, abbiamo più volte sottolineato come
l’esplorazione di possibili dimensioni spettacolari della santità e l’ipotesi di una ‘conquista cristiana del
443
teatro’ da parte dei santi appartengano, nel cristianesimo antico, ad un risvolto tutto sommato
secondario, benché niente affatto irrilevante, della coscienza ecclesiale, storicamente impegnata in
una campagna ideologica di lungo respiro per l’emarginazione del sistema degli spettacoli dall’orizzonte
di vita dei fedeli e, dopo la svolta costantiniana, dall’intera società. Una battaglia che non sarebbe
stata mai vinta completamente, ma che sicuramente non consentiva, se non sul piano strettamente
letterario del racconto agiografico, la coltivazione di sogni affascinanti, ma proprio per questo ambigui e
pericolosi, come quello di una risignificazione cristiana del teatro» (pp. 162-163)].
MAGNY A., Porphyry in Fragments: Jerome, Harnack, and the Problem of Reconstruction, JECS 18 (2010) 515-555.
[Introduction. The problem of Harnack. After Harnack. New methods. Conclusions. – Abstract:
«Everyone working on Porphyry’s Against the Christians refers to the fragment collection compiled
by Adolf von Harnack in 1916. Harnack’s scholarship was impressive, but his work is difficult to use,
and needs revision in the light of new approaches to the collection and interpretation of fragments.
This paper draws mainly on the methodological work of Most et al. (1997) to argue that a fragment
should not be read apart from its contextual framework. As a case study, this paper examines the
Porphyrian fragments that attack the New Testament as preserved by Jerome and concludes that
Jerome has his own theological agenda, which influences the way in which he quotes Porphyry.
Ultimately, this paper proposes a new fragment collection»].
MEISER M., Hieronymus als Textkritiker, in Die Septuaginta – Texte, Theologien, Einflüsse, 256-271.
[1. Die Aufgabe antiker Textkritik. 2. Die persönlichen Voraussetzungen des Hieronymus. 3.
Grenzen heutiger Nutzung seiner Textkritik. 4. Kriterien textkritischer Entscheidungen. – «In
diesem Beitrag will ich folgende These zur Diskussion stellen: Als Textkritiker der Antike bietet
Hieronymus eine sachliche Bewertung mancher Lesarten, die für das Verständnis ihrer Genese
aufschlussreich sein kann. Dass wir, anders als er, diese Lesarten gerade um diese Bewertung willen
für sekundär halten, ist in einem differierenden Verständnis der Intention antiker und moderner
Textkritik begründet, ändert aber nichts an ihrem heuristischen Wert» (p. 256)].
carattere generale
→1. Miscellanee e studi di
NOVEMBRI V., Philosophia and Christian Culture: An Antidote for Female Weakness in Jerome’s Letters, in
Studia Patristica XLIV, 471-485.
NUGENT P., Patristics and Pedagogy: Jerome and Augustine, in Studia Patristica XLIX, 3-8.
PALLA R., Inclementi secare ferro (nota testuale a Hier. epist. 40,1), in Satura Rudina. Studi in onore di
Pietro Luigi Leone, Pensa Multimedia, Lecce 2009, 157-160.
PARRINELLO R.M., Misure del monachesimo a Gaza: dal ‘fondatore’ Ilarione alla scuola monastica di Gaza,
Adamantius 16 (2010) 164-177.
[Ilarione è il fondatore del monachesimo di Gaza? Il training ascetico. I miracoli di Ilarione. Altri
aspetti: l’ ajmerimniva, la discretio spirituum e la xeniteiva. – «Al termine di questo rapido confronto tra
il monachesimo ‘fondato’ da Ilarione e quello successivo, ho cercato di pormi il problema delle
caratteristiche identitarie del monachesimo di Gaza, di ciò che lo costituisce storicamente sul lungo
periodo e lo differenzia da altre forme monastiche: ad esempio l’accento posto sulla ξενιτεία, che
non ritroviamo nell’esperienza del monachesimo di Giuda, può essere considerato come
un’ ’invarianza’, un retaggio comune che risale a Ilarione. Vi sono poi anche variabili di contesto che
non interrompono, però, a parer mio la continuità. Credo come altri che insomma si possa attribuire
alla figura di Ilarione una certa storicità e che Girolamo non si sia limitato a trasferire su Ilarione le
propria personale visione, attribuendogli caratteri che egli mutua dall’esperienza monastica a
Betlemme, così come ritengo che Giovanni di Gaza, nella lettera 618, citando Ilarione renda omaggio
a una figura che, se proprio non fondò il monachesimo di Gaza, incarnò comunque alcuni identity
markers tipici dell’esperienza monastica successiva» (pp. 176-177)].
444
29. Agostino
Oxford 2007, Vol. XLIX: St. Augustine and his Opponents → 1. Miscellanee e studi di carattere generale
CATAPANO G., Augustine, in The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity, 552-581.
[1. Life and writings. 2. Thought: 2.1. The soul as a created being; 2.2. Knowledge; 2.3. Ethics and
politics; 2.4. The Trinity and creation; 2.5. Biblical hermeneutics; 2.6. Original sin and grace. – «In
conclusion, the outlook on human history which Augustine framed in his controversy against
Pelagianism and expounded in the most exhaustive way in De civitate Dei, may be recapitulated in
the two words ‘sin’ and ‘grace’: the sin of man, which is the cause of man’s troubles and the
common inheritance of everyone, and the grace of God, who rescues a few (He alone knows how
many!) from the right condemnation and leads them through Christ to the blessedness of his
heavenly City. An outlook at once so tragic and hopeful was both the outcome and the source of so
many bitter debates in the history of western thought, but in Augustine’s view it was just Christian
faith made explicit: philosophia christiana (C. Iul. 4.14.72), nothing else» (p. 581)].
DUPONT A., The Prayer Theme in Augustine’s Sermones ad populum at the Time of the Pelagian Controversy:
A Pastoral Treatment of a Focal Point of his Doctrine of Grace, ZAC 14 (2010) 379-408.
[1. Prayer in the Pelagian controversy. 2. Prayer in the Sermones ad populum at the time of the
Pelagian controversy: 2.1. Prayer leads to understanding and faith; 2.2. Prayer as a remedy against sin.
3. Conclusion. – «In Augustinus’ antipelagianischen Abhandlungen fungiert das Gebet, besonders
das Vaterunser, als Argument gegen die impeccantia und wird als ein besonderer Ausdruck der
Gnade Gottes bezeichnet. In den Sermones stellt das Gebet das verbindende Element zwischen den
Themen Glaube und Sünde dar. Menschen müssen beten, um zum Glauben zu gelangen und um
gegen die concupiscentia ankämpfen zu können. Durch den Gegenstand des Gebets rückt der
Prediger nachhaltig die göttliche Gnade ins Licht, aber er bezieht diese nicht auf das Gebet selbst.
In seinen Sermones unterlässt es Augustinus fast völlig, das Gebet als Gottes Gnade oder als seiner
Initiative und seinem dauerhaften Beistand zugehörig zu behandeln. Das Gebet ist vielmehr eine
Aufgabe, zu der Augustinus seine Gemeinde einlädt» (p. 408)].
MEREDITH A., Divine Incomprehensibility in Gregory of Nyssa and Augustine, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 3-8.
NUGENT P., Patristics and Pedagogy: Jerome and Augustine, in Studia Patristica XLIX, 3-8.
[Cap. IX. La costruzione di un modello. Origene e il discorso cristiano sulla preghiera da Tertulliano ad
Agostino: 9. Agostino: la preghiera come gemito dello Spirito nel desiderio della Vita Beata, 609-636].
POLLMANN K., Alium sub meo nomine: Augustine between His Own Self-Fashioning and His Later
Reception, ZAC 14 (2010) 409-424.
[I. Introduction. II. Specific instances and general principles of Augustine’s self-fashioning. III.
Early medieval instances of Augustine’s reception in the light of his self-fashioning. IV. Some
conclusions. – «Wie andere Autoren vor und nach ihm war Augustinus von Hippo sich sehr
bewusst, wie unterschiedlich seine Person und sein Werk von anderen rezipiert werden könnten.
Daher versuchte er, sowohl die Rezeption seines Lebens, durch das Verfassen seiner Confessiones,
als auch die Rezeption seiner Werke, durch das Abfassen der Retractationes, zu kontrollieren.
Dieser Aufsatz analysiert die verschiedenen Methoden, mit denen Augustinus besonders letzteres
zu erreichen versuchte. In einem zweiten Teil demonstriert dieser Aufsatz dann an zwei
Einzelfällen (Beda Venerabilis und Johannes Scotus Eriugena), inwieweit dieses Ansinnen
Augustins tatsächlich erfolgreich war» (p. 424)].
445
30. Isidoro di Pelusio
31. Cirillo Alessandrino
HILLIS G.K., New Birth through the Second Adam: The Holy Spirit and the Miraculous Conception in Cyril of
Alexandria, in Studia Patristica XLVIII, 47-52.
KALANTZIS G., Single Subjectivity and the Prosopic Union in Cyril of Alexandria and Theodore of Mopsuestia,
KEATING D., Christology in Cyril and Leo: Unnoticed Parallels and Ironies, in Studia Patristica XLVIII, 53-58.
[II.9. Las últimas apologías: Teodoreto de Ciro y Cirilo de Alejandría].
l’Aveugle ou Piérius d’Alexandrie?, VigChr 64 (2010) 480-491.
[Abstract: «The purpose of this article is to identify the anonymous commentator with whom Cyril
of Alexandria is in disagreement at the beginning of his Commentary on Hosea, because of the
commentator’s purely allegorical interpretation of the marriage of Hosea with a prostitute (Os 1:23). We present initially the position of the author “not deprived of reputation” as transmitted by
Cyril, then we re-examine F.M. Abel’s assumption in support of Didymus the Blind. Finally, we
propose Pierius, a priest and leader of the Christian school of Alexandria, and his homily On the
Beginning of the Prophet Hosea, as possible candidate behind Cyril’s attack» (p. 480)].
–, Deux fragments inédits de l’In Isaiam de Cyrille d’Alexandrie, in Studia Patristica XLVIII, 41-46.
32. Nonno di Panopoli
CUTINO M., Structure de la composition et exégèse dans la Paraphrase de l’évangile de saint Jean de Nonnos de
Panopolis. Une lecture du chant III, REAug 55 (2009) 225-246.
33. Pseudo-Dionigi Areopagita
ANDIA Y. DE, Moïse et Paul, modèles de l’expérience mystique chez Grégoire de Nysse et Denys l’Aréopagite, in
ARTHUR R.A., The Dating of the Dionysian Corpus, in Studia Patristica XLVIII, 171-176.
FIORI E., Elementi evagriani nella traduzione siriaca di Dionigi l’Areopagita, ASEs 27 (2010) 323-332.
[Abstract: «The paper seeks to explain a case of divergence between the Greek text of the PseudoDionysius Areopagite and its Syriac translation undertaken by Sergius of Resh’ayna in the early 6th
century. The latter makes a terminological distinction between human and angelic intellects, and
introduces the language of inter-mixing. It suggests a deliberate attmpt to bring the Dionysian
language closer to that of Evagrius. This strategy underlines with greater emphasis the polemic,
already implicit in the Greek original, against the more radical developments in Evagrian mysticism
and eschatology in the 4th century, in particular those introduced by Stephen bar Sudaili»].
GARCÍA BAZÁN J.B., La tiniebla y el seno del Padre: gnósticos y Clemente de Alejandría en Dionisio Areopagita,
ASEs 27/2 (2010) 133-156.
[I. Introducción. II. Buqov" – Bavqo" en los gnósticos: a) Naasenos de Hipólito; b) Los setianos de Nag
Hammadi y del Anónimo de Bruce; c) La Gran noticia de Ptolomeo, el Tractatus Tripartitus y el
Evangelium Veritatis. III. Buqov" – Bavqo" en Clemente de Alejandría: a) Los Excerpta ex Theodoto; b)
Los Stromata. IV. Síntesis conclusivas. – Abstract: «Thanks to the connections suggested by the
French scholar Édouard des Places between the pair of words buqov"/ bavqo" of the Chaldean Oracles
as easy to assimilate to the notion of gnovfo" in Dionysius the Areopagite, the following work will
446
attempt to think over this parallel, but now in the light of Gnosticism and Clement of Alexandria.
The exegesis of John 1,18 about Christ being in the Father’s womb or the feminine side of God will
be the proposed interpretation that will enable to connect these thoughts with those of the
Dionysian darkness»].
HARRINGTON M., What Are the ‘Hypothetical Logoi’ of Dionysian Mystical Theology?, in Studia Patristica
XLVIII, 177-182.
IVANOVIC, F., The Ecclesiology of Dionysius the Areopagite, International Journal for the Study of the
Christian Church 11/1 (2011) 1-18.
–, Vizuelni aspekt oboženja po Dionisiju Areopagitu, Zbornik radova Vizantološkog instituta [Institute for
Byzantine Studies SASA], Belgrade, Serbia 47 (2010) 39-54.
[«L’aspetto visuale della deificazione secondo Dionigi Areopagita»].
LOURIE B., Peter the Iberian and Dionysius the Areopagite: Honigmann – Van Esbroeck’s Thesis Revisited,
Scrinium 6 (2010) 143-212.
NEHWEISER D., Ambivalence in Dionysius the Areopagite: The Limitation of a Liturgical Reading, in Studia
OJELL A., The Most Evident Idea in Theology? Gregory of Nyssa and Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita on the
Theological Significance of Incarnation, in Studia Patristica XLVIII, 183-188.
PERL E., Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, in The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity, 767-787.
[1. The hidden God. 2. Causation as manifestation. 3. Procession and reversion. 4. Evil. 5. Hierarchy.
6. Knowledge and mysticism. 7. Symbolism. Conclusion. – «The corpus Dionysiacum appeared at a
critical point in the history of late-antique philosophy. At the very time when non-Christian
Platonism was being repressed by the Christian authorities, this mysterious author produced a
body of works that does not merely adopt isolated terms or concepts from the Platonic
philosophical tradition, but rather integrates the fundamental insights and structures of Platonism
into Christian thought. One of the most striking features of Dionysius, and one of the ways in
which he is, perhaps, closer in spirit to Plotinus than to Proclus despite his strong textual
dependence on the latter, is the way in which he cuts through the elaborate technicalities of fifthcentury Athenian Platonism to articulate what is most essential, although not always explicitly
stated, in it: the vision of all reality, at all levels, as the unfolding or manifestation of God, and of
God as the unfolding, the undifferentiated containment, of all reality; the absolute coincidence of
transcendence and immanence; the idea of all knowledge, all awareness at any level, as knowledge
of God; the understanding of God not as a self-contained monad but as manifestation, procession
or differentiation itself; and hence the centrality of love, interpreted in these ontological terms, as
the constitutive principle of all reality. Dionysius assimilates these insights into a Christian vision by
understanding Christian ideas such as creation, incarnation, divine love, sacramental liturgy and
union with God in terms of these Platonic philosophical principles, and thus offers a Platonic
interpretation of Christianity» (p. 787)].
PODOLAK P., Flores delibare Platonicos: Per la ricezione di Dionigi l’Areopagita in Marsilio Ficino, in Von
Homer bis Landino, 355-384.
[«Quello di Dionigi è uno dei testi che…ha goduto di maggiore successo attraverso le diverse fasi
della storia culturale europea, in particolare nel Medioevo e nel Rinascimento; questo successo è
testimoniato da un numero di traduzioni e commenti che difficilmente trova paragone in altri
autori greci. Interessante fenomeno, le diverse opere di traduzione e interpretazione si concentrano
in periodi ben precisi delle stagioni intellettuali d’Occidente, e spesso vengono eseguite a poca
distanza cronologica l’una dall’altra, come se ogni nuova temperie culturale avesse percepito il
bisogno di provvedersi di traduzioni autonome. Per il periodo che ci interessa si possono distinguere
tre Dionysisus-renaissances: quella di epoca carolingia, con Ilduino (832) e Scoto Eriugena (ca. 867):
447
quella di età scolastica, con Giovanni Saraceno (ca. 1167) e Roberto Grossatesta (ca. 1235) ed infine
quella di età umanistica, nel quindicesimo secolo» (p. 319)].
ROSSUM J., Holy Communion as ‘Symbol’ in Pseudo-Dionysius and Theophanes of Nicaea, in Studia
VAN
34. Cosma Indicopleuste
35. Giovanni Filopono
VERRYCKEN K., John Philoponus, in The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity, 733-755.
[Life and work: Work; Chronology; Two different philosophical systems. The philosophy of the
early Philoponus: Platonic interpretation of Aristotle; A Platonic theology; Soul; The sensible world.
The philosophy of the later Philoponus: The end of the Plato-Aristotle harmonization; A Christian
theology and doctrine of creation; Soul; The sensible world].
36. Massimo il Confessore
BERTHOLD G.C., Aspects of the Will in Maximus the Confessor, in Studia Patristica XLVIII, 65-70.
BRADSHAW D., Maximus the Confessor, in The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity, 813-828.
[Life and works. Ontology. Transformed humanity. Time and eternity. Theory of the will.
Influence. – «The work of Maximus the Confessor (580-662) presents the philosophical world view
of the Greek-speaking Christian tradition in its most fully developed form. It is comprehensive
both in the extent to which it draws upon earlier authors – including Clement of Alexandria,
Origen, the Cappadocian Fathers, Nemesius of Emesa, Evagrius of Pontus, Cyril of Alexandria, and
Pseudo-Dionysius, among others – and in its far-ranging scope. Pride of place among the
influences on Maximus must undoubtedly go to Pseudo-Dionysius. Like the Areopagite, Maximus
regards ‘good’ as the pre-eminent divine name, and he welcomes the Platonic description of the
Good as ‘beyond being’ as appropriate to the Christian God. He is also like Pseudo-Dionysius in his
vision of the cosmos as fundamentally theophanic, a manifestation of intelligible or spiritual reality
in sensible form. However, Maximus is more explicit than Pseudo-Dionysius about the role of the
divine will in creation, and he gives a more prominent role to the Incarnation as the central act by
which the divine is made manifest» (p. 813)].
CATTOI T., The Symphonic Church: Chalcedonian Themes in Maximos the Confessor’s Liturgical Theology, in
CHVÁTAL L., Maxime le Confesseur et la tradition philosophique: À propos d’une définition de la kinêsis, in
CVETKOVIC V., The Identity of the allotrios and his Definition in Ambiguum 7 of St. Maximus the Confessor,
– St Maximus on Pavqo" and Kivnhsi" in Ambiguum 7, in Studia Patristica XLVIII, 95-104.
GAVIN J., «They are like the Angels in the Heavens». Angelology and Anthropology in the Thought of Maximus
the Confessor (SEAug, 116), Institutum Patristicum «Augustinianum», Roma 2009, pp. 322.
GUIU A., Christology and Philosophical Culture in Maximus the Confessor’s Ambiguum 41, in Studia Patristica
XLVIII, 111-116.
IVANOVIC F., Maximus the Confessor on Freedom, Crkvene studije 7 (2010) 53-63.
KAVANAGH C., The Development of the Sacred Symbol in Relation to Christology in the Thought of St
Maximus the Confessor, in Salvation according to the Fathers of the Church, 108-122.
[«As we have seen from the way in which Maximus interprets the significance of the Church,
significance itself – and thus obviously the symbol – is a very rich and multi-layered reality. Any
one symbol – for example, a church building – may make a number of meaning present, and these
meanings often interact with each other as well. These various layers of significance represent
448
different layers of reality, and these realities are organised in a hierarchy, from the non-created
Trinity down to material beings. However, unlike the pagan Neoplatonism, material being is not to
be therefore condemned in Maximus’ system; it too can be made intelligible, and therefore
valuable, through the presence in it of spiritual being» (p. 122)].
LA MATINA M., Analytic Philosophy of Language and the Revelation of Person. Some Remarks on Gregory of
Nyssa and Maximus Confessor, in Studia Patristica XLVII, 77-84.
LOUTH A., St Maximos’ Doctrine of the logoi of Creation, in Studia Patristica XLVIII, 77-84.
MILKOV K., Renunciation According to Maximus the Confessor, in Studia Patristica XLVIII, 71-76.
TOLLEFSEN T.T., Causality and Movement in St. Maximus’ Ambiguum 7, in Studia Patristica XLVIII, 85-94
449

Repertorio bibliografico Adamantius 17

Transcript

Documenti analoghi

Un affascinante legame di interazione con i colori del paesaggio

Entretien et conseils

DE-EN-FR-IT - ACQ SCIENCE GmbH

14. The perceptions of the politicians about Choosing Wisely

Mercatino delle biciclette

AMTLICHES MITTEILUNGSBLATT BOLLETTINO UFFICIALE

creativa - Gran Baita

Auzug KRG - Pro Infirmis

Programma 14.-20.01.2016

PDF-Fassung - Zeitenblicke