Tesis. Crespo Losada. Traducción y comentario filológico del “Tractatus primus” de Prisciliano de Ávila, intitulado “Liber apologeticus”. 2009.

TRADUCCIÓN Y COMENTARIO FILOLÓGICO
DEL “TRACTATUS PRIMUS” DE PRISCILIANO
DE ÁVILA, INTITULADO “LIBER
APOLOGETICUS”.

MEMORIA PARA OPTAR AL GRADO DE DOCTOR
PRESENTADA POR

Manuel José Crespo Losada

 

CARACTERIZACIÓN DE PRISCILIANO Y DE SU OBRA

Lo poco que sabemos acerca de Prisciliano y de las páginas que protagoniza en la historia de Hispania durante la segunda mitad del siglo IV ha sido motivo de numerosos trabajos en los que la investigación histórica se ha afanado por reconstruir los hechos a partir, sobre todo, de la Crónica de Sulpicio Severo, cuyos datos han sido cruzados y completados con la exigua noticia que ofrece el segundo de los Tratados de Würzburg, intitulado Ad Damasum episcopum. Con tales noticias los historiadores han podido recomponer algunos trazos de su perfil social, como su pertenencia a las clases altas de la sociedad hispánica y su formación en la escuela romana. Convertido al cristianismo(1), es instruido por Agape y el rétor Helpidio, a quienes Severo hace hijos espirituales de Marco de Menfis. El ímpetu apostólico(2) y el rechazo de mediocridades (3) le llevan a difundir un estilo de vida basado en la radicalidad evangélica, al modo de Pablo. Las fuentes confirman la adhesión de algunos obispos como Instancio y Salviano (más tarde se les añade Higino de Córdoba). Le siguen también otros insignes personajes de la época; sobre todo destaca Tiberiano, cuya personalidad no ha sido suficientemente valorada (4); también Simposio, y mujeres como Prócula y su madre Eucrocia, esposa del rétor Delfidio, amigo del poeta Ausonio.

Los datos, que lo sitúan en la segunda mitad del siglo IV, hacen referencia a la última etapa de su vida: en 380 se celebra el concilio de Cesaraugusta, mencionado por el propio Prisciliano como acontecimiento relevante dentro de la contienda con su principal adversario, Hidacio de Mérida. Algunos pretenden deducir del número de obispos asistentes, y de la diversidad regional de procedencia de los mismos, la extensión de lo que luego se llamaría priscilianismo o, más correctamente, la difusión del modo de vida y de pensamiento de la secta(5) que, por ese tiempo, según dicha hipótesis, habría llegado hasta Aquitania, provincia gala muy relacionada por ese tiempo con Hispania. Hacia el 382 se producen los acontecimientos a los que hace referencia la carta a Dámaso, el único tratado del códice de Würzburg que ofrece datos históricos. Dicho escrito, el segundo de los Tratados editados por Schepss, confirma la presencia de Hidacio en el concilio de Cesaraugusta. El autor, así mismo, relata brevemente la visita de los de Prisciliano a Mérida –y su violento resultado–, así como la revuelta de cristianos emeritenses a raíz de las acusaciones públicas infligidas a Hidacio por parte de uno de sus sacerdotes. Dos personajes también mencionados son Ambrosio, a la sazón obispo de Milán, y un cuestor de palacio, de nombre desconocido, ante quien formulan una petición de audiencia Prisciliano y sus acompañantes en un viaje que los lleva a Milán y a Roma(6). Un último apunte cronológico es el año del proceso en Tréveris y de la muerte de Prisciliano, durante el mandato del usurpador Máximo (383-385). Las fuentes no se ponen de acuerdo acerca de este asunto. De las referencias internas en la crónica de Sulpicio Severo se deducen dos fechas distintas: 382 y 385, esta última la más probable, pues coincide con la noticia de Próspero de Aquitania, que data la ejecución de Prisciliano tras la celebración, en 385, del concilio de Burdeos. En la misma línea, la Chronica Gallica sitúa el juicio de Tréveris antes de una disputa entre Ambrosio y Justina, ocurrida en marzo de 386. Por su parte, Idacio de Chaves retrasa la ejecución hasta el 387(7).

Poco más se sabe acerca del personaje y de los convulsos acontecimientos en los que se vieron implicados los eclesiásticos y los políticos más relevantes de la época. La conocida como “contienda priscilianista” da comienzo en Hispania, probablemente a partir de una carta en la que Itacio de Ossonuba previene a Hidacio de Mérida sobre el peligro que podía entrañar cierto grupo de rigoristas capitaneados por un tal Prisciliano, y culmina con el proceso de Tréveris y con la muerte de nuestro protagonista junto con la de no pocos de sus secuaces. Muerto Prisciliano, y con él la controversia priscilianea(8), empieza lo que con más precisión puede llamarse priscilianismo(9).

1 Cf. Fontaine 1981: 189. Estudiosos como Babut (1909: 283s.) niegan este extremo y son partidarios de considerar a Prisciliano “cristiano viejo”.
2 Sin salir del primer tratado, resultan palmarias las muestras de la vehemencia con que Prisciliano exhorta a la conversión a los cismáticos (Tract.1.10.24ss., 1.27.26ss.) y, así mismo, de la importancia que para él tiene el hecho de hablar de Dios como elemento constitutivo del don de profecía (Tract.1.32.14ss.).
3 Cf. Ap.3.15.16 en 1.27.30-28.1. Las referencias a una entrega total a Cristo aparecen con frecuencia vinculadas al bautismo (cf. Tract.1.5.2s., 2.34.18ss.).
4 Ni siquiera en el excelente catálogo prosopográfico del Priscilianismo elaborado por Piay (2006) Tiberiano Bético sale del anonimato al que le reducen Sulpicio Severo y Jerónimo, consignado en el PLRE1 como Tiberianus 3. En nuestro comentario aventuramos otras posibilidades respecto a su identidad, que podría coincidir con la de otro Tiberiano, poeta, consignado en el mismo corpus prosopográfico como Tiberianus 1 (cf. § 16).
5 Olivares 2004: 19.
6 El dato cronológico, sin embargo, lo facilita Sulpicio Severo, al vincular las intrigas palaciegas de la cuestión priscilianista con Macedonio, magister officiorum de la corte del emperador en Milán, en el 382- 383.
7 Para un desarrollo completo acerca de la fecha de la ejecución, cf. Vilella 1997: 529, n.173.
8 Romero Pose (1996) engloba dentro del vocablo ‘priscilianeo’ todo lo relativo a la vida de nuestro autor, distinto de lo ‘priscilianista’, que sazona, tras su muerte, la historia de Hispania desde el siglo V hasta el VII. Adoptamos en nuestra introducción esta distinción terminológica.
9 La vinculación documental de Prisciliano con la herejía se produce a partir del primer Concilio de Toledo (circa 400), en cuyas actas aparecen expresiones como aduersus Priscilliani sectatores et haeresem. El término ‘priscilianista’ lo acuña Orosio en su Commonitorio (circa 414).

Crespo Losada , Manuel José (2009) Traducción y comentario filológico del “Tractatus primus” de Prisciliano de Ávila, intitulado “Liber Apologeticus”. [Tesis]

[img] PDF 
5MB

 

Tipo de documento: Tesis
Información Adicional: Tesis de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Filología, Departamento de Filología Latina, leída el 27-02-2009
Directores (o tutores):
Nombre Email del director (o tutor)
Ayán Calvo, Juan José
Caerols Pérez, José Joaquín
Palabras clave: Prisciliano de Ávila, Tractatus primus, Liber Apologeticus
Materias: Humanidades > Filología > Filología latina
Código ID: 9709
Depositado: 04 Dic 2009 13:25
Última Modificación: 06 Feb 2014 08:30

Mateo Donet. La Ejecución de los Mártires Cristianos en el Imperio Romano. 2016.

La Ejecución de los Mártires Cristianos en el Imperio Romano

 

M.ª Amparo Mateo Donet
ISBN: 978-84-944757-4-0
DL: MU 34-2016
299 páginas
Publicado: 1-1-2016

Resumen:

Los primeros siglos del cristianismo fueron designados como la era de las persecuciones debido a los continuos procesos que se llevaron a cabo contra sus miembros por parte del Imperio romano. La crueldad extrema y la extravagancia en los suplicios han sido consideradas las características definitorias de tales sucesos; sin embargo, la realidad fue muy distinta. A través de los textos de los Padres de la Iglesia y especialmente de la literatura hagiográfica se abordan los tipos de ejecución y tortura a que fueron sometidos los mártires cristianos en el contexto de la sociedad romana –desde los denominados summa supplicia (crucifixión, cremación, condena a las bestias) hasta los considerados privilegiados (decapitación, exilio), pasando por aquellos equiparados a ordalías y los que implicaban una muerte indirecta (precipitación, envío a minas)-, para ofrecer una visión definitiva sobre el desarrollo de estos acontecimientos en la Antigüedad.

La autora: Amparo Mateo Donet es licenciada en Historia por la Universidad de Valencia, donde también se doctoró en Historia Antigua en 2014, con la tesis a partir de cuyos resultados se publica la presente monografía y por la que recibió un premio de la Fundación Pastor de Estudios Clásicos el mismo año.
Trabaja desde 2008 en el Dpto. de Historia de la Antigüedad y la Cultura Escrita (Universidad de Valencia) mediante contratos de becas predoctoral y postdoctoral, concedidas por la Generalitat Valenciana, que continúa hasta la actualidad. Asimismo ha realizado estancias en centros de investigación en el extranjero, principalmente en el Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum de Roma.
Es autora de numerosos artículos referentes a temas de Historia Antigua de Roma y Cristianismo primitivo, publicados en diversas revistas científicas nacionales e internacionales.

Libro disponible en la página web del CEPOAT – Universidad de Murcia.

Izydorczyk. The Medieval Gospel of Nicodemus : texts, intertexts, and contexts in Western Europe. 1997.

The Medieval Gospel of Nicodemus :
texts, intertexts, and contexts in Western Europe

Author: Izydorczyk, Zbigniew S., 1956-
Published: 1997
Topics: Gospel of Nicodemus
Publisher Tempe, Ariz. : Medieval & Renaissance Texts & Studies
Pages: 604
Possible copyright status: Permission Granted to Digitize Item
Language: English
Call number: 0866981985
Digitizing sponsor: University of Toronto
Book contributor: MRTS Online
Collection: IterProject; toronto

At least twice in its fifteen hundred years of history the apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus (GN) has been a victim of its own success. First, at the close of the Middle Ages, its popularity and prestige attracted the censure of church reformers striving to rid Christian religion of fancy and superstition. Then, half a millennium later, the daunting multiplicity of its medieval versions and manuscripts, extant in most European languages, discouraged comprehensive, crosslinguistic studies of its literary career in Western Europe. Although the past century has shed much light on individual vernacular strands of the apocryphon’s tradition, it has produced no broadly based overview of the GN in all its textual, literary, and linguistic forms. The only generally available survey of its Western vernacular translations, adaptations, and influence remains Richard Wülcker’s 1872 essay Das Evangelium Nicodemi in der abendländischen Literatur. Although it has served well generations of scholars, this essay is by now sadly out of date: its factual information is fragmentary, its bibliographical references are outdated and unreliable, and its treatment of various intertextual relationships rarely goes beyond the superficial. Based on second- and third-hand information, it often frustrates modern expectations of thoroughness and exactitude. That it continues to be used, however, demonstrates a clear need for a guide to the apocryphon’s textual forms, intertextual relationships, and contextual variety in Western Europe.
In response to that need, the present volume brings together a series of essays documenting and exploring the presence of the GN in Western literary traditions of the Middle Ages. The essays cover a vast territory, both thematically and linguistically, for networks of the apocryphon’s translations, adaptations, thematic borrowings, and allusions extended to most Romance, Germanic, and Celtic vernaculars. Accordingly, the medieval languages surveyed here include Latin, French, Catalan, Occitan, and Italian; English, High German, Dutch, Low German, and Norse; and Irish, Welsh, and Cornish.
The polyglot nature and vast scope of this undertaking have dictated its collaborative format. The essays collected here, all but two commissioned for this volume, have been written by scholars specializing in different linguistic and literary traditions. Some have been actively involved in the editing of medieval recensions of the apocryphon, others have pursued textual or critical issues arising from it, still others have been attracted to it through the study of works it inspired or influenced. This diversity of scholarly backgrounds and critical interests of the contributors accounts for the diversity of theoretical perspectives on and practical approaches to the apocryphon in the present volume. However, the substance and character of each essay are determined not solely by the author’s critical ideology but also, and perhaps more fundamentally, by the extent of the GN‘s presence in a particular linguistic tradition and the current state of scholarship on it.

View this document in the Bibliotheca Pretiosa.

Díaz y Díaz [Comp.]. Isidoriana; colección de estudios sobre Isidoro de Sevilla. 1961.

Isidoriana; colección de estudios sobre Isidoro de Sevilla (1961)

Author: Díaz y Díaz, Manuel C., comp
Subject: Isidore, of Seville, Saint, d. 636
Publisher: León, Centro de Estudios “San Isidro,”
Language: Spanish; English; French; German; Italian
Call number: BX4700.I78 D52 1961
Digitizing sponsor: Princeton Theological Seminary Library
Book contributor: Princeton Theological Seminary Library
Collection: majorityworldcollection; Princeton; americana

Díaz y Díaz (Comp.). Isidoriana; Colección de estudios sobre Isidoro de Sevilla. 1961. by Patrologia Latina, Graeca et Orientalis

Quote. Robert M. Grant. ‘Early Christians and Animals’, Ch. 4, “Alexandrians and the Phisiologus”, 3: Clement. 1999.

The primary work of Clement of Alexandria, in eight books, was his Stromateis or Miscellanies. Like Aelian, he used a good source (an epitome of Aristotle’s History of Animals by Aristophanes of Byzantium), but added a good deal of erudite nonsense. As an Alexandrian, Clement is naturally concerned with Egyptian matters. He refers to “the gods of Egypt such as cats and weasels,” as well as “cat or crocodile or native snake.” On a literary level he analyzes Egyptian writing as epistolographic (= demotic) or hieratic or hieroglyphic. There are two kinds of hieroglyphs, literal and symbolical, while the symbolical in turn is divided into three: (1) literal by imitation (the sun is a circle, the moon looks like a moon), (2) figurative, and (3) allegorical using enigmas. He illustrates the third type by stars depicted as snakes because of their oblique orbits, the sun as a beetle because it fashions a ball of ox-dung and rolls it before its face. Later he discusses the symbolical meanings of animals in the hieroglyphs. Some Egyptians show the sun on a ship, others on a crocodile; they mean that the sun generates time, or else that the crocodile symbolizes time. On the sacred Pylon at Diospolis there was a boy, the symbol of generation, and an old man, decay. A hawk was the symbol of God, a fish of hatred, while the crocodile can mean shamelessness. Taken together, the symbols mean this: “You who are born and die, God hates shamelessness.” (This last account is close to Plutarch, except that he locates the carving in the temple of Athena at Sais and identifies the shameless animal as the hippopotamus.) In addition, the lion symbolizes strength and vigor; the ox, agriculture and nourishment; the horse, courage and boldness; the sphinx, strength with understanding, for it has the body of a lion, the face of a man. A man symbolizes intelligence, memory, power, and art. In the processions of the gods they carry gold images: two dogs, one hawk, and one ibis. The dogs symbolize two hemispheres; the hawk the sun, the ibis the moon; or else the dogs are the tropics, the hawk the equinoctial line, and the ibis the ecliptic. The errors in this exegesis are comparable only to those in the Hieroglyphics of Horapollo, who wrote several centuries after Clement, but relied on similar sources. Both authors took the symbols seriously but did not know what they meant.

When Clement attacked anthropomorphists who held that God literally enjoys smelling the smoke of sacrifices (Gen. 8:21), he turned to natural history for analogies. Do insects breathe or not? Clement marshalled a scientific account of breathing, to combat the idea that God breathes. Aristotle (On Respiration) had argued that insects do not breathe because when centipedes are cut up the parts stay alive, and flies and bees can swim in liquid for a long time. On the other hand, in his History of Animals he noted that all insects die if covered with oil, a point suggesting that they do breathe. Clement deals with the question by defining terms. Plants are nourished from the density of the air, while hibernating bears are nourished from the exhalation arising from their own bodies. Demons ventilate internally (diapneitai). Fish inhale (empneitai) through the dilation of their gills. Insects circumspire (peripneitai) through pressure of membranes on the waist. Finally, there are creatures that inhale (anapnei) by rhythmic beats corresponding to the counter-dilation (anti-diastole) of the lungs against the chest. A little later, Clement notes that land animals and birds inhale as human beings do, though fish breathe the air infused into the water at the creation. Theophilus too had remarked on this infusion.

Clement dealt with diet from points of view both moral and philosophical. He quoted Paul as saying, “It is good not to eat meat or drink wine” (shortened from Romans 14:21), in agreement with the Pythagoreans – for whose opinions he quotes the Stoic Musonius Rufus: “meat, though appropriate for wild animals, darkens the soul.” He adds, however, that he who eats meat sparingly does not sin. In his view the best diet consists of bulbs, olives, herbs, milk, cheese, fruits, and “all kinds of cooked food without sauces.” (The list comes from Plato through Plutarch.) But Clement is willing to include meat, preferably roasted, not boiled. He cites the frugal disciples, who offered the risen Lord “a piece of broiled fish, which he ate before them” (Luke 24:42–43).

In a later work Clement reflects deeper concerns. Christians can abstain from meat on reasonable grounds, not the Pythagorean dream about the transmigration of souls. One might abstain because animal meat has “already been assimilated to the souls of irrational creatures.” In addition, wine and meat harm the mind, as (the Pythagorean) Androcydes said. Similarly one of the late second-century Sayings of Sextus, authoritative for both Clement and Origen, claims that though abstinence is more rational, eating animate beings is really a matter of indifference.

Egyptian priests in their purifications abstain from meat and fish, for “such food makes the flesh flabby.” Elsewhere Clement lists a few fishes “venerated” at various places: one kind at Syene, another at Elephantine, yet another at Oxyrhynchus. This kind of information reflects the interests of the age, not those of Christians generally save for the literary-minded author himself.

He also tells how some Phoenician Syrians “venerate” fishes, while Porphyry mentions Syrians in general, as well as initiates into the mysteries at Eleusis. The Christian apologist Athenagoras says Syrians “venerate” fish because of the mythical Derceto (who had a fish’s tail). “Venerate” again means “not eat.”

Clement identifies the serpent with the devil but usually, after Philo, relates his work to pleasure. He adds that the serpent is now the cause of idol-worship, and acts like barbarians who bind their captives to corpses. The simile comes from the Exhortation of Aristotle, but Clement obviously makes it his own.

Since Clement knew something of zoology he could question animal lore, either tacitly or explicitly. In his Miscellanies he paraphrases much of the letter of “the apostle Clement,” but not the section about the phoenix, a bird he mentions elsewhere only as an Egyptian astrological symbol. Presumably he did not accept the story. When he commented on Barnabas, whom he regarded as an apostle, he relied on Aristotle for questioning the story about the hyena, though without naming either the apostle or the philosopher. He agreed with Barnabas that Moses spoke allegorically but rejected his ideas about what he meant. “I do not agree with this exegesis of what was said symbolically.” Closer to Aristotle than to Barnabas, Clement says the hare really has a bifurcated uterus. And as for the weasel, the Hellenistic Jewish Epistle of Aristeas said that the weasel conceives through the ear and gives birth through the mouth; Plutarch states that “many suppose and say that the weasel conceives through the ear and gives birth through the mouth.” Harnack and others thought Zeno of Verona was expressing a like thought when he said that “Christ enters Mary through the ear.” They did not notice that Zeno was simply giving allegorical exegesis of the angel’s speaking a word to her, just as when he said that the devil crept into Eve through her ear. This was not Barnabas’ notion. The author of the Clementine Recognitions rather sensibly supposed that these unusual habits prove that the Creator specifically chose the usual modes of conception and birth as norms. The Physiologus, as usual, went back to gossip, claiming that the hyena is androgynous, alternating sexes, while the weasel conceives through the mouth and gives birth through the ears. The latter statement simply reverses Aristeas’ notion.

Robert M. Grant. ‘Early Christians and Animals’, Ch. 4, “Alexandrians and the Phisiologus”, 3: Clement, pp. 46.48. Routledge, 1999.

Vizmanos. Las vírgenes cristianas de la iglesia primitiva : estudio histórico-ideológico seguido de una antología de tratados patrísticos sobre la virginidad. 1949.

Las vírgenes cristianas de la iglesia primitiva : estudio histórico-ideológico seguido de una antología de tratados patrísticos sobre la virginidad (1949)

Author: Vizmanos, Francisco de B
Subject: Virginity; Christian literature, Early
Publisher: Madrid : La Editoral Católica
Language: Spanish
Call number: BV4647.C5 V46 1949
Digitizing sponsor: Princeton Theological Seminary Library
Book contributor: Princeton Theological Seminary Library
Collection: Princeton; americana

NOTE: Please be aware that this item may have legal restrictions in some countries. If possible, verify your current legislation about Copyright’ laws, to determinate if this item may be accessed from your country.

Vizmanos. Las vírgenes cristianas de la iglesia primitiva : estudio histórico-ideológico seguido de una ant… by Patrologia Latina, Graeca et Orientalis

Porcel. La doctrina monástica de San Gregorio Magno y la “Regula monachorum”. 1950.

La doctrina monástica de San Gregorio Magno y la “Regula monachorum” (1950)

Author: Porcel, Olegario Maria, 1914-
Subject: Gregory I, Pope, ca. 540-604; Benedict, Saint, Abbot of Monte Cassino; Monasticism and religious orders
Publisher: [Madrid] : Instituto “Enrique Florez,” Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas, [1950]
Language: Spanish
Call number: BX1076 .P67 1950
Digitizing sponsor: Princeton Theological Seminary Library
Book contributor: Princeton Theological Seminary Library
Collection: Princeton; americana

Porcel. La doctrina monástica de San Gregorio Magno y la "Regula monachorum". 1950. by Patrologia Latina, Graeca et Orientalis

Quote. Kato. Jerome’s Understanding of Old Testament Quotations in the New Testament. 2013.

Jerome is well known as one of the greatest Church Fathers who studied Hebrew and biblical exegesis under his Jewish teachers in Bethlehem and translated the Old Testament from the original Hebrew text into Latin. This image of Jerome, however, can easily change when we examine the history of research related to him.

Gustave Bardy suggested that while Jerome claimed that his Jewish teachers had taught him their exegesis, he, in fact, had plagiarized it from Greek predecessors such as Origen and Eusebius. Jerome, who mastered Greek while living in Syria and Asia Minor, spent a lot of time reading the works of Origen and Eusebius and translated some of them into Latin. According to Bardy, Jerome learned Jewish interpretations of the Bible from their works but pretended to have learned them from his Jewish teachers in order to boast about his knowledge of Hebrew. Moreover, Pierre Nautin considered Jerome’s linguistic competence in Hebrew to be quite low. According to Nautin, Jerome knew so little Hebrew that he had no choice but to depend on his Greek predecessors. Nautin was generally sceptical about Jerome’s statements. For instance, he concluded that Jerome’s correspondence with Pope Damasus I was a complete fiction created to lend authority to his own remarks. In addition, Nautin believed that the Latin Bible which Jerome claimed to have translated from the original Hebrew text was no more than a second-hand translation from the Hexaplaric (recension of the) LXX.

On the other hand, especially from the viewpoint of the Jewish studies, Jay Braverman and Benjamin Kedar-Kopfstein noted that Jerome was deeply indebted to his Jewish teachers for his exegesis. Further, contrary to Nautin’s view, they estimated Jerome’s competence in Hebrew to be high. Kedar-Kopfstein, for instance, indicated that some interpretations of rabbinic literature and medieval Jewish exegetes were reflected in the passages of the Vulgate, which Jerome seemed to have mistranslated. In other words, it was not Jerome’s low competence in Hebrew but his rather close relationship with Jewish teachers of the time that made passages different in the Vulgate from what they were in the Masoretic text. Furthermore, scholars of Biblical studies, such as Edmund F. Sutcliffe and James Barr, tried to restore the ancient pronunciations of Hebrew words as they were before the Masoretic text by using Jerome’s Latin transliteration. They obviously could not have conducted their research without being convinced of Jerome’s competence in Hebrew.

Following the history of research on Jerome, we are confronted by two questions. First, were all of Jerome’s exegeses plagiarized from his Greek predecessors? Second, what was Jerome’s competence in Hebrew? To answer these questions we first need to consider Jerome’s understanding of Old Testament quotations in the New Testament (hereafter Quot.). When passages of the Old Testament are quoted in the New Testament, the wordings of some differ from those of the LXX which was the Old Testament for Christians in antiquity. Regarding these passages, Jerome claimed that their sources were not the LXX but the original Hebrew text. According to him, whenever the Evangelists and Paul quoted any passages of the Old Testament, they always chose the Hebrew text and translated it into Greek. If this assertion is correct and is based on an accurate knowledge of Hebrew, Jerome’s originality of exegesis and his competence in Hebrew is likely to be confirmed. Accordingly, we will analyse seven texts of Jerome (See section II), especially his Ep. 57, or Liber de optimo genere interpretandi, written c.395. In these texts, Jerome provides examples which indicate that the source of the Quot. was not the LXX but the Hebrew text.

Teppei Kato. ‘Jerome’s Understanding of Old Testament Quotations in the New Testament‘, in Vigiliae Christianae 67, pp. 289-292. Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2013.

Cavallera. Saint Athanase (295-373). 1908.

Saint Athanase (295-373) (1908)

Author: Cavallera, Ferdinand, 1875-1954
Subject: Athanasius, Saint, Patriarch of Alexandria, d. 373; Theology, Doctrinal
Publisher: Paris, Bloud
Possible copyright status: NOT_IN_COPYRIGHT
Language: French
Call number: ALE-1824
Digitizing sponsor: msn
Book contributor: Robarts – University of Toronto
Collection: robarts; toronto

Cavallera. Saint Athanase (295-373). 1908. by Patrologia Latina, Graeca et Orientalis

Grützmacher. Hieronymus : eine biographische Studie zur alten Kirchengeschichte. 1901.

Hieronymus : eine biographische Studie zur alten Kirchengeschichte (August 1901)

Author: Grützmacher, Georg, 1866-
Volumes: 3
Subject: Jerome, Saint, d. 419 or 20; Church history
Publisher: Leipzig : Dieterich
Possible copyright status: NOT_IN_COPYRIGHT
Language: German
Call number: AEQ-0286
Digitizing sponsor: msn
Book contributor: Robarts – University of Toronto
Collection: robarts; toronto

Grützmacher. Hieronymus : eine biographische Studie zur alten Kirchengeschichte. 1901. Volume 1. by Patrologia Latina, Graeca et Orientalis

Grützmacher. Hieronymus : eine biographische Studie zur alten Kirchengeschichte. 1901. Volume 2. by Patrologia Latina, Graeca et Orientalis

Grützmacher. Hieronymus : eine biographische Studie zur alten Kirchengeschichte. 1901. Volume 3. by Patrologia Latina, Graeca et Orientalis

Heinrich. S. Ignatii patris apostolici quae feruntur Epistolae : una cum ejusdem martyrio. 1849.

S. Ignatii patris apostolici quae feruntur Epistolae : una cum ejusdem martyrio (1849)

Author: Ignatius, Saint, Bishop of Antioch, d. ca. 110; Petermann, Julius Heinrich, 1801-1876
Subject: Ignatius, Saint, Bishop of Antioch, d. ca. 110
Publisher: Lipsiae : Sumptibus F.C.G. Vogelii
Language: Ancient Greek; Latin; Armenian
Call number: AIU-1829
Digitizing sponsor: University of Toronto
Book contributor: PIMS – University of Toronto
Collection: pimslibrary; toronto
Notes: tight binding, narrow margins

Petermann. S. Ignatii patris apostolici quae feruntur Epistolae : una cum ejusdem martyrio. 1849. by Patrologia Latina, Graeca et Orientalis

Montalembert. Les moines d’Occident depuis Saint Benoít jusqu’a Saint Bernard/The monks of the West, from St. Benedict to St. Bernard. 1878/1861.

A member of the French Academy from 9 January, 1851 Montalembert was both an orator and a historian. As early as 1835 he had planned to write a life of St. Bernard. He was led to publish in 1860, under the title “Les Moines d’Occident”, two volumes on the origin of monasticism; then followed three volumes on the monks in England; he died before he reached the period of St. Bernard. But he left among his papers, on the one hand, a manuscript entitled “Influence de l’ordre monastique sur la noblesse féodale et la société laïque jusqu’à la fin du XIe siàcle”, and on the other hand a work on Gregory VII and the conflict of investitures; and these two manuscripts, published in 1877 by his friend Foisset and his son-in-law the Vicomte de Meaux, made up the sixth and seventh volume of the “Moines d’Occident”.

Goyau, G. (1911). Comte de Montalembert. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved June 6, 2014 from New Advent: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10513b.htm


 

Les moines d’Occident depuis Saint Benoít jusqu’a Saint Bernard (1878)

Author: Montalembert, Charles Forbes, comte de, 1810-1870; Courson, Aurélien, comte de, 1811-1889
Volumes: 7
Subject: Monasticism and religious orders
Publisher: Paris : Lecoffre
Year: 1878
Language: French
Call number: AAM6654
Digitizing sponsor: Brigham Young University
Book contributor: Harold B. Lee Library
Collection: americana

 


The monks of the West, from St. Benedict to St. Bernard (1861)

Author: Montalembert, Charles Forbes, comte de, 1810-1870; Courson, Aurélien, comte de, 1811-1889, ed
Volumes: 7
Subject: Monasticism and religious orders
Publisher: Edinburgh and London, W. Blackwood and sons
Language: English
Call number: BX2461 .M76
Digitizing sponsor: Princeton Theological Seminary Library
Book contributor: Princeton Theological Seminary Library
Collection: Princeton; americana

Description
Original French edition published Paris, 1860-77, v. 6-7 being edited by Aurelien de Courson
–v. 1. Dedication. Introduction. book I. The Roman empire after the peace of the church. book II. Monastic precursors in the East. book III. Monastic precursors in the West. 1861.
–v. 2. book iv. St. Benedict. book v. St. Gregory the Great. Monastic Italy and Spain in the sixth and seventh centuries. book VI. The monks under the first Merovingians. book VII. St. Columbanus. The Irish in Gaul and the colonies of Luxeuil. 1861.
–v. 3. book VIII. Christian origin of the British Isles. book IX. St. Columba, the apostle of Caledonia, 521-597. book X. St. Augustin of Canterbury and the Roman missionaries in England, 597-633. Appendix: Iona. Conclusions of the two papers of M. Varin. 1867.
–v. 4. book XI. The Celtic monks and the Anglo-Saxons. book XII. St. Wilfrid establishes Roman unity and the Benedictine order, 634-709. book XIII. Contemporaries and successors of St. Wilfrid, 650-735. Appendix: Lindisfarne. Peterborough. Hexham. 1867.
–v. 5. Conclusion of book XIII. book XIV. Social and political influence of the monks among the Anglo-Saxons. book XV. the Anglo-Saxon nuns. 1867.
–v.6. book XVIII. The church and the feudal system. The monastic orders and society. book XIX St. Gregory, monk and pope, Appendix. 1879.
–v.7. book XIX continued. book XX. The predecessors of Calixtus II. 1879

 

Both editions available via:

Bibliotheca Pretiosa.

PLGO’ Scribd Account.