DOCSLIB.ORG

Das Evangelium Nach Petrus. Text, Kontexte, Intertexte

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Das Evangelium Nach Petrus. Text, Kontexte, Intertexte Reviews / Vigiliae Christianae 63 (2009) 83-102 93 Th omas J. Kraus & Tobias Nicklas (eds.). Das Evangelium nach Petrus. Text, Kontexte, Intertexte (Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur, Band 158), Berlin-New York: Walter de Gruyter 2007, VIII + 384 pp., ISBN 978-3-11-019313-8, € 98.00 (cloth). For an up-to-date and broad overview of the state of scholarship on the so-called Gospel of Peter (hereafter EvPet), one simply need turn to this col- laboration of twenty chapters by seventeen different authors in German and English. Many of the leaders in the field contribute, covering a range of perspectives, from paleographical to syntactical analysis, from composi- tion to reception history, from theological to social-scientific criticism. Th e editors, Th omas Kraus and Tobias Nicklas, introduce this volume as the second part of a twofold project (p. 2). Th e first appeared in 2004 as their co-authored Das Petrusevangelium und die Petrusapokalypse, half of which was devoted to EvPet, containing a discussion of issues involved in a critical edition, along with patristic attestations, transcriptions and pho- tographs of all possibly relevant manuscripts, fresh German translations with critical notes, fresh English translations, and a research bibliography. In his review of this first volume, Bart Ehrman noted that it provided the groundwork for but not the purchase of a singular missing piece of the scholarly puzzle at this time, namely, an editio princeps.1 Ehrman appar- ently had in mind a comprehensive edition that not only includes but also attempts to reconcile various possible fragments. Yet as the present volume makes clear, this is far easier said than done, given the many debates and ambiguities about these very fragments and the dating of EvPet in general. On one side of the debate is D. Lührmann, who in this volume summarizes the case he originally made in 1981 for P. O x y. 2949 as an early manuscript of EvPet (31), corroborating on the whole the second century provenance of its text as we know it from the late-written (6th-7th century) Akhmîm codex (P.Cair. 10759). Lührmann also notes his 1993 case for P. O x y. 4009 as part of EvPet (33), and the later possibility he raised for including the long-puzzling P.Vindob.G 2325 and van Haelst 741. On the other side of the debate stand this volume’s editors, who dem- onstrate gracious scholarship by inviting Lührmann’s chapter, even as he critiques their previously stated arguments against the inclusion of P. O x y. 1) Review of Th omas J. Kraus and Tobias Nicklas, eds., Das Petrusevangelium und die Petru- sapokalypse, in: Vigiliae Christianae 61 (2007) 103. © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2009 DOI: 10.1163/157007208X312752 Downloaded from Brill.com04/15/2020 12:14:00AM via free access 94 Reviews / Vigiliae Christianae 63 (2009) 83-102 4009, P.Vindob.G 2325 and van Haelst 741 and against the significance of P. O x y. 2949 as corroboration of a second century provenance for the text of EvPet as we have it in the Akhmîm fragment. In this volume, it is Peter van Minnen who makes their central case, so to speak. Van Minnen performs a thorough paleographical analysis of the Akhmîm codex, which contains both EvPet and the Apocalypse of Peter (hereafter ApPet). He reads both texts as the product of the same, increasingly fatigued scribe and affirms as likely the scenario that while both texts first arose in Jewish-Christian circles, this late-coming scribe imposed an “anti-Jewish slant . on both texts in one go” (59). He concludes with a cautionary note, that the redac- tions evident in comparing P. O x y. 2949 with Akhmîm EvPet, and also Ethi- opic ApPet with Akhmîm ApPet, show how misguided are interpretations of the Akhmîm codex that assume that “it reflected the original, early char- acter of the Gospel of Peter” (60). Th e editors do weigh in for their case, but with more specialized argu- ments. Th omas Kraus begins his chapter by echoing Van Minnen’s conclu- sion, pointing out that P. O x y. 2949 represents marginal and somewhat dubious textual evidence, potentially offering „nur einige Wörter“ to the actual text of EvPet. In other words, any textual analysis of EvPet essentially treats of a 6th-7th century codex, not a 2nd century counterpart (63-64). More specifically, he performs a lexical/linguistic analysis of Akhmîm EvPet, arguing against F. Weißengruber’s defense of an early date based on the conjectured use of an optative verb (66), as well as his case for period- idiosyncratic grammar when numerous features weigh against this (67-68). Similarly, Kraus critiques D. Karavidopoulos for his defense of EvPet’s hapax legomena as early, new conventions, and shows that his list of ostensibly rare words are in fact quite amply attested, particularly in the LXX (69-76). Th e other editor, Tobias Nicklas, contributes a reception-historical argu- ment against a second century provenance. Specifically, he thoroughly cri- tiques the over-optimistic claims (e.g., made by Vaganay in his magisterial commentary) of the dependence of Sibylline Oracles, book 8, on EvPet (263-265). He explains similarities as based on commonly known tradi- tions (e.g. in the proto-canonical gospels), and that Sib.Or. 8 and EvPet represent distinct portraits of the crucifixion and resurrection (266-276). In a similar vein, Th omas Karmann refutes the thesis of O. Perler that Melito of Sardis depended on EvPet, going so far as to cast doubt on whether Melito even knew of such a text (216-233). At the end, he adds that P. O x y. 2949 only corroborates an early third century Egyptian prove- nance for an antecedent of the Akhmîm codex (232) and does not make a Downloaded from Brill.com04/15/2020 12:14:00AM via free access Reviews / Vigiliae Christianae 63 (2009) 83-102 95 secure connection with the EvPet mentioned by Serapion. Most notable in making this reception-historical critique is Martin Meiser, who takes account of the „spärliche Spuren“ of EvPet, showing that many of its characteristics are corroborated only after the second century in reception-history, includ- ing the portrait of the Jews as the direct agents of the crucifixion of Jesus, or describing the removal of nails (190-191). However persuasive this multi-pronged line of argument sounds, it does not place Lührmann in lonely company across the whole volume, given that most of the contributors to the book favor, explicitly or implicitly, a second-century provenance. Th is provenance was taken for granted univer- sally in the earliest Forschungsgeschichte of the Akhmîm codex, which Paul Foster describes in exquisite detail. While English scholars (Swete, Robin- son, Harris) seemed to evince a particular penchant for playing up its heret- ical features (14-21), French (Bouriant, Lods) and German (Harnack, Hilgenfeld) scholars did not substantially differ in interpreting this text as some kind of second century harmonization (however loosely dependent) of the canonical gospels (21-29). Incidentally, this quickly attained consensus seemed to quell the intense initial interest in the text (between 1894-1897), and over the next hundred years novel hypotheses proved scarce, as Foster notes (29-30). Th e case of P. Gardner-Smith, who in 1926 argued against the dependence of EvPet on the canonical gospels, was a notable exception. In 1988 John Crossan laid out perhaps the most novel case of the century by arguing an early date (40s!) for the earliest stratum of EvPet, and its redaction in the middle of the second century to conform to canonical traditions. Crossan himself contributes a chapter to the present volume (117-134), which does not advance any new line of inquiry, but essentially re-packages his original theory by spelling out textual dynamics in terms of independence and dependence, not exclusive dependence (an approach characteristic of nearly everyone before Crossan). Th e other contributors to the volume tend to laud him for blazing a new trail of scholarship that makes much more mod- est claims about dependence, or else acknowledge him in passing for a pro- vocative thesis that has fallen by the wayside. While a first century provenance appears untenable, a second century one still appears fashionable and even defensible in various respects. Stanley Por- ter’s syntactical analysis of the Akhmîm fragment, populated by long, data- base-like lists of syntactical phenomena, does not offer any overall, synthetic conclusions, apparently in keeping with his stated purpose of merely doing the groundwork for an eventual, intertextual comparison (79). However, on Downloaded from Brill.com04/15/2020 12:14:00AM via free access 96 Reviews / Vigiliae Christianae 63 (2009) 83-102 occasion he does note the congruity of syntactical elements of EvPet with certain New Testament texts (80-81,87), which would seem to point to an early (i.e., second century) provenance. Th omas Hieke works through a „leserorientierte intertextuelle Analyse” of Akhmîm EvPet, specifically elaborating its connections to the LXX, including canonical parallels. He concludes that EvPet demonstrates literary creativity, a fresh and interest- provoking engagement with LXX intertexts that is related to, but not dominated by, certain traditions in canonical gospels (113). Th is conclu- sion nuances but does not displace the provenance commonly held since the late 19th century. In a relatively similar vein, Judith Hartenstein shows how the Passion-history structure of EvPet not only lines up with the canonical gospels, but also with the fairly recently discovered Unbekannte Berliner Evangelium (Pap.Ber. 22220), sharing a first-person witness, an account of the crucifixion as performed by the people of Israel, and a spe- cial role for the cross itself (167).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Colin Mcallister Regnum Caelorum Terrestre: the Apocalyptic Vision of Lactantius May 2016
    Colin McAllister Regnum Caelorum Terrestre: The Apocalyptic Vision of Lactantius May 2016 Abstract: The writings of the early fourth-century Christian apologist L. Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius have been extensively studied by historians, classicists, philosophers and theologians. But his unique apocalyptic eschatology expounded in book VII of the Divinae Institutiones, his largest work, has been relatively neglected. This paper will distill Lactantius’s complex narrative and summarize his sources. In particular, I investigate his chiliasm and the nature of the intermediate state, as well as his portrayal of the Antichrist. I argue that his apocalypticism is not an indiscriminate synthesis of varying sources - as it often stated - but is essentially based on the Book of Revelation and other Patristic sources. +++++ The eminent expert on all things apocalyptic, Bernard McGinn, wrote: Even the students and admirers of Lactantius have not bestowed undue praise upon him. To Rene Pichon [who wrote in 1901 what is perhaps still the seminal work on Lactantius’ thought] ‘Lactantius is mediocre in the Latin sense of the word - and also a bit in the French sense’; to Vincenzo Loi [who studied Lactantius’ use of the Bible] ‘Lactantius is neither a philosophical or theological genius nor linguistic genius.’ Despite these uneven appraisals, the writings of the early fourth-century Christian apologist L. Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius [c. 250-325] hold, it seems, a little something for everyone.1 Political historians study Lactantius as an important historical witness to the crucial transitional period from the Great Persecution of Diocletian to the ascension of Constantine, and for insight into the career of the philosopher Porphyry.2 Classicists and 1 All dates are anno domini unless otherwise indicated.
    [Show full text]
  • AUGUSTINUS HIPPONENSIS, Enarrationes in Psalmos CXX-CXXXIII in Latin, Decorated Manuscript on Parchment Northern Italy, Likely Milan (Abbey of Morimondo?), C
    AUGUSTINUS HIPPONENSIS, Enarrationes in Psalmos CXX-CXXXIII In Latin, decorated manuscript on parchment Northern Italy, likely Milan (Abbey of Morimondo?), c. 1150-1175 99 ff., preceded and followed by a modern parchment flyleaf, missing at least a quire at the beginning (collation: i-xii8, xiii3), written by a single scribe above the top line in a twelfth-century relatively angular minuscule in brown ink, text copied on 25 lines (justification: 115/125 x 75 mm), added explicits and chapter headings at the end of each textual division in a different rounded script (most in pale brown ink, some in pale red ink), prickings in outer margins, ruled in hard point, catchwords on ff. 32v and 40v, rubrics in bright red, liturgical lessons marked in the margins in red or brown ink roman numerals (sometimes preceded by the letter “lc” for “lectio” (e.g. f. 8), some initials and capitals stroked in red, larger painted 3-line high initials in red, one 4-line high initial in green with downward extension for a further eight lines, some with ornamental flourishing (e.g. f. 82v), some contemporary annotations and/or corrections. Bound in a modern tanned pigskin binding over wooden boards, renewed parchment pastedown and flyleaves, brass catches and clasps, fine restored condition (some leaves cropped a bit shorter, a few waterstains in bottom right corner of a number of folios, never affecting legibility). Dimensions 165 x 105 mm. Twelfth-century copy of the middle section of the important and influential exegetical treatise devoted to the Psalms, Augustine’s longest work. The codex boasts a twelfth-century ex-libris from the abbey of Morimondo, and it appears in the Morimondo Library Catalogue datable to the third quarter of the twelfth century.
    [Show full text]
  • Historiae Ab Initio Bellorum Civilium
    Maria Chiara Scappaticcio Historiae ab initio bellorum civilium: Exegetical Surveys on the Direct Transmission of Seneca the Elder’s Historiographical Work Abstract: Working on P.Herc. 1067 has revealed it to be the only direct witness to the otherwise unknown Seneca the Elder’s Historiae ab initio bellorum civilium. This paper highlights the importance of philological work on unpublished Latin literary papyri in order to open new perspectives on the study of Latin literature and to write new chapters of it. An overview of the reconstructable contents is offered through a work of Quellenforschung of Imperial historiography and biography. Reading the text of P.Herc. 1067 together with the Tiberian chapters from the Annales of Tacitus, the historical work of Cassius Dio and the Lives of Suetonius is instructive in order to recover possible traits of the plot of a section of the historiographical work by Seneca the Elder. Genesis: P.Herc. 1067, Robert Marichal, and the authorship of an Annaeus Recovering new fragments of Latin literature from papyri is not predictable; it is complex and often hard to achieve, but it can lead to unexpected results. When The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (Grant agree- ment no. 636983); ERC-PLATINUM project, University of Naples ‘Federico II’, I lead as Principal Investigator. The present work represents an abridged version of Scappaticcio (2018) (submitted in July 2017), an exegetical contribution of all the text transmitted by P.Herc. 1067, based on the editio princeps of the papyrus published by Piano (2017b) within the project PLATINUM.
    [Show full text]
  • EK Schreiber
    E.K. Schreiber Rare Books List of 16th- 18th-Century Books And a Remarkable Early 15th-Century MS Document 285 Central Park West . New York, NY 10024 Telephone: (212) 873-3180; (212) 873-3181 Email: [email protected] Web: www.ekslibris.com ***Visitors by Appointment Only*** E.K. Schreiber. New York, NY 10024. (212) 873-3180 [email protected] ______________________________________________________________________________________ 1. AESCHYLUS. [Greek] Αἰσχύλου τραγωδιάι Ζ ... σχολία εἰς τὰς αὐτὰς τραγωδίας. Aeschyli Tragoediae VII. (Ed. P. Vettori & H. Estienne). [Geneva]: Henri Estienne, 1557. $5,600 4to (leaf size: 244 x 170 mm), [4] leaves, 397 (numbered 395: with 2 unnumbered pages [fol. n2] between pp. 138 and 139) pp., [1] blank leaf. Greek type; Estienne device [Schreiber 15] on title. 18th-century white calf, double gilt fillet round sides, brown morocco label on spine titled in gilt; all edges gilt; copy ruled in red throughout; on the front paste-down is the engraved armorial bookplate of Robert Shafto, Esq., of Benwell; on the rear paste-down is the engraved armorial bookplate of William Adair, Esq.; old, unobtrusive ownership signature on title; binding somewhat soiled; overall a fine, wide-margined copy. First complete edition of the tragedies of the first dramatist of Western civilization. This edition is important for including the editio princeps of Agamemnon, the greatest Aeschylean tragedy, and one of the greatest masterpieces of Western dramatic literature. The three previous editions (the Aldine of 1518, and Robortello's and Turnèbe's editions of 1552) had all been based on a manuscript tradition exhibiting a lacuna of more than two-thirds of Agamemnon.
    [Show full text]
  • The First Printed Edition of the Greek Text of Aristophanes' Nine Comedies
    The first printed edition of the Greek text of Aristophanes’ nine comedies, published by Aldus Manutius. Aristophanes. Comoediae Novem. Venice: Aldus Manutius, 1498. Folio, 13 inches x 9 1/16 inches (330 x 230 mm), 696 pages. The earliest printed texts of the ancient classics were almost exclusively Latin. Only toward the end of the fifteenth century was a programmatic effort made to bring the Greek classics into print. The campaign was led by Aldus Manutius (ca. 1450–1515), a sometime classical tutor, with the assistance of several Greek exiles, chief among them the Cretan scholar Marcus Musurus (ca. 1470–1517). Aldus was not the first to print books in Greek—editions of Homer, Theocritus, and Hesiod had already been produced elsewhere —but he did publish the first editions of some 30 classical authors. These editiones principes included the Greek texts of Aristotle (1495), Aristophanes (1498), Herodotus (1502), Sophocles (1502), Euripides (1503), Demosthenes (1504), Plato (1513), Pindar (1513), Pausanias (1516), and Aeschylus (1518). This editio princeps of Aristophanes includes a preface recommending the plays not as masterworks of literature but as a guide to conversation: a reader steeped in Aristophanes (the editors claimed) could not help but have learned to speak a pure and fluent Attic Greek. This stance was in perfect keeping with Aldus’s attitude to typography. His fonts imitated the swift cursive Greek in contemporary commercial use, with its many ligatures and abbreviations, rather than the formal uncial types of earlier printers. It was not always possible to gather together an author’s entire surviving work: this edition contains only nine of the plays.
    [Show full text]
  • Lucretius, His Copyists and the Horrors of the Underworld (De Rerum Natura 3.978-1023)
    ACTA CLASSICA XXIX (1986) 43 - 56 ISSN 0065-1141 LUCRETIUS, HIS COPYISTS AND THE HORRORS OF THE UNDERWORLD (DE RERUM NATURA 3.978-1023) by H .D . Jocelyn (University of MC;lnchester) Epicurus denied that the underworld depicted by poets' and painters' existed3 and gave an allegorical interpretation of the particular punishments said to be suffered there.4 What men feared in the afterlife took place according to him in this life. The idea came to Epicurus from the writings of Democritus. 5 It turned up in various forms in the teachings of other philosophical schools. 6 Lucretius no doubt would have taken the general substance of his criticism of conventional beliefs about the afterlife from Epicurus. Some details, however, reflect the life of Republican Rome rather than that of fourth century Athens. Most modern discussion has revolved slowly and uselessly around the question of how widespread belief in an afterlife was among Lucretius' readers. 7 Only a few scholars have tried to grapple with the problem of the origin of the details of Lucretius' argument.8 Something, I believe, remains to be said about these details. The text itself presents a number of problems. At five points'' our two witnesses of the direct tradition, codd. Leiden, Bib!. d. Rijksuniv. Voss. Lat. F. 30 (0) and Q. 94 (Q), vary; at one of these most editors seem to me to err about what lay in the archetype. At thirteen points"' 0 and Q agree in manifest nonsense too great even for the most conservative of editors to stomach; at two further points at least I find it difficult to believe that Lucretius wrote what is transmitted.
    [Show full text]
  • Akroterion 60 (2015) 33-63 34 DIJKSTRA & HERMANS
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Akroterion (E-Journal) MUSURUS’ HOMERIC ODE TO PLATO AND HIS REQUESTS TO POPE LEO X1 R Dijkstra (Radboud University, Nijmegen) & E Hermans (Institute for the Study of the Ancient World, New York University) This article provides the first philological analysis and interpretation of the ode to Plato written by Marcus Musurus in 1513 in Venice and published as a dedicatory poem in the editio princeps of the works of Plato. Musurus asks pope Leo X to found a Greek academy in Rome and start a crusade against the Ottoman empire to liberate Greece. The article includes the first English translation of the entire poem since Roscoe (1805). Key words Musurus, Greek academy, Plato, Homer, crusades The year 1513 is probably most famous for the accession of the Medici pope Leo X. However, it also saw the publication of the first edition of the complete works of Plato in Greek. This edition, printed by the press of Aldus Manutius in Venice, was accompanied by a dedicatory poem, about which the contemporary historian Paolo Giovio made the flattering remark: (sc. poema) commendatione publica cum antiquis elegantia comparandum.2 The poem, written by Marcus Musurus, is indeed a remarkable literary achievement. Although it is often referred to in modern scholarship in the context of the history of Greek humanism, it has never been treated in depth.3 1 We would like to thank the anonymous referee of Akroterion, Philip Mitsis (New York University), Leslie Pierce (New York University) and in particular Han Lamers (Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin) for their remarks and suggestions.
    [Show full text]
  • INTRODUCTION Caesar Has Never Been an Author in Search of An
    INTRODUCTION Caesar has never been an author in search of an editor. Witness the large number of printed texts of the Commentaries. 1 With this indisputable fact in mind, one wonders if anything more can be said about the textual transmission of an ancient writer who has enjoyed such popularity. The explanation and justification for this study are simply that the basic problems confronting any editor who approaches his task systematically are still unresolved for the Civil War. A brief survey of various editions from the Renaissance to the present will supply the background needed to make this clear, and may also be of interest to those concerned with the history of scholarship. The first phase in the editing of the Civil War belongs solely to Italian incunabula. Giovanni Andrea Bussi (Joannes Andreas Aleriensis) is responsible for the editio princeps which was printed in 1469 at Rome by Conrad Sweynheym and Arnold Pannartz 2 and contains the genuine as well as the spurious Wars. Born in 1417 at Vigevano, Bussi pursued a somewhat undistinguished career until 1451 when he became an acolyte to Pope Nicholas V. Hence­ forth his path lay in the service of pontiffs and cardinals, and he was named Bishop of Accia (Corsica) in 1462 by Pius II and trans­ ferred to the see of Aleria on that same island by Paul II in 1466. 3 Whether a matter of personal preference or whether he could not get away from more pressing duties, he appears never to have gone to Corsica. As an editor of classical works during a three-year association with Sweynheym and Pannartz (1469-71), he ranks among the most active scholars of the period: to him are due first editions of such authors as Apuleius, Aulus Gellius, Cicero (letters 1 There have been well over a hundred editions of the Civil War.
    [Show full text]
  • Pliny, Naturalis Historia Xxx, 11)
    THE ENIGMA OF THE MAGICIAN LOTAPES (PLINY, NATURALIS HISTORIA XXX, 11) BY STEPHEN GERO Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen In a famous passage Pliny the Elder refers to a school of magic which, long after the time of Zoroaster, originated from Moses, Jannes, Lotapes and the Jews: "est et alia magices factio a Mose et Janne et Lotape ac Judaeis pendens, sed multis milibus annorum post Zoro- astren."' Moses' reputation as a powerful magician needs no comment here;' Jannes is also well known as an Egyptian wizard who resisted Moses.' The name of Lotapes by contrast has been a crux interpretum ever since the publication of Pliny's text in the fifteenth century.' The purpose of the present contribution is to survey the emendations and explanations which have been hitherto proposed and to proffer, with all due caution, still another, hopefully more satisfactory, solution. 1. The Printed Text and Its Interpretation The initial efforts at understanding the precise import of the pas- sage have been hindered by the unfortunate fact that at the point of 1 Ed. C. Mayhoff, C. Plini SecundiNaturalis Historiae libri XXXVII, vol. 4 (Leipzig, 1907; reprint Stuttgart, 1967), p. 423, lines 16-18. 2 See e.g. J.G. Gager, Mosesin Greco-RomanPaganism (Nashville/New York, 1972),pp. 134ff. 3 See the dossier now assembled in A. Pietersma, TheApocryphon of Jannesand Jambres the Magicians(Leiden, 1994), especially pp. 24ff. and the present writer's "Parerga to 'The Book of Jannes and Jambres,'" Journal for the Studyof the Pseudepigrapha9 (1991), pp. 67ff. 4 Though Pliny's work was of course much used also earlier, the passage of interest here was not cited or commented upon by any author in late antiquity or in the Middle Ages, to my knowledge.
    [Show full text]
  • Reading Lucretius in the Renais Sance 
    I TATTI STUDIES IN ITALIAN RE NAIS SANCE HISTORY Sponsored by Villa I Tatti Harvard University Center for Italian Re nais sance Studies Florence, Italy Reading Lucretius IN THE Re nais sance Ada Palmer Cambridge, Massachusetts London, En gland 2014 Copyright © 2014 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College all rights reserved Printed in the United States of America First printing This book was published with the assistance of the Melbern G. Glasscock Center for Humanities Research at Texas A&M University. Library of Congress Cataloging- in- Publication Data Palmer, Ada. Reading Lucretius in the Renaissance / Ada Palmer. pages cm. — (I Tatti studies in Italian Renaissance history) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-674-72557-7 (alk. paper) 1. Lucretius Carus, Titus. De rerum natura I. Title. PA6495.P35 2014 871'.01—dc23 2014002577 Contents List of Tables and Figures vii Preface xi 1. Religion Trampled Underfoot 1 Epicurus, Atomism, Atheism, and Skepticism in the Re nais sance 2. Unchristian Opinion 43 Lucretius’s First Re nais sance Readers 3. Between Fits of Madness 97 Ancient References and Proto- Biographies 4. The Lofty Madness of Wise Lucretius 140 The Re nais sance Biographies 5. The Poverty of the Language 192 The Lucretian Print Tradition Conclusion 233 Deceived but Not Betrayed Appendix A: Lucretius Manuscripts 243 Appendix B: Capitula 250 Appendix C: Lucretius Editions 258 Notes 265 Bibliography 335 A c k n o w l e d g m e n t s 3 5 5 Index 359 Tables and Figures Tables 2.1. Manuscript sizes and materials 48 2.2.
    [Show full text]
  • LUCRETIUS 3.955 Tieth Century, When It Has Been Accepted By
    LUCRETIUS 3.955 In the course of his sermon on the theme that 'death is nothing to us' (3.830-1094), Lucretius, wanting to address some strong words to those who complaìn when it is time for them to die, uses the rethorically-effec- tive and tactfull device of putting them into the mouth of a personified Na- ture. Nature is made to speak twice - first in 933-949, then in 955-962. The frst speech is addressed to one who complains about death, al- though he has had the opportunity to lead a pleasurable life. Nature says that, if he has taken advantage of that opportunity, he should retire like a satisfied guest at the end of a banquet, while, if he has wasted it, there is no point in seeking to prolong a life which is miserable. The addressee, who, it is implied (946-947,952), is not of advanced age, is called frst mortalis (933>, then stulte (939). The addressee of the second speech is an elderly person (952: gran- dior... seniorque), who, having wasted life's opportunities, whines and whinges when his time to die comes. Nature rebukes him in harsher tones (953: non merito inclamet magis et voce increpet acri?) and, if one accepts the reading of O and Q, begins thus: aufer abhinc lacrimas, baratre, et cotnpesce querellas! (955) Although this may be what Lucretius wrote, baratre has worried editors for half a millennium. It does not occur elsewhere in Latin, while in Greek all we have is a doubtful occurrence in Lucian Pseudol.17, where Fópo- Opov, the last in a list of six terms of abuse, is accusative and so could be neuter rather than masculine, and the following statement of Pseudo-Am- monius Diff.B94 p.24 Nickau: Búpo0pog pèv yòp ò papú0pou &froE &vOprorog.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Christian Fathers
    Early Christian Fathers Author(s): Richardson, Cyril C. (1909-1976) Publisher: Grand Rapids, MI: Christian Classics Ethereal Library Description: Part of the Library of Christian Classics series, Early Christian Fathers is the best single-book introduction to the early church fathers, providing an enriching and informative intro- duction to first and second century Christian thought. Con- taining carefully selected letters and works from early church fathers--including among others St. Clement, St. Ignatius, St. Polycarp, St. Justin the Martyr, and St. Irenaeus--Early Christian Fathers gives a representative, though not exhaust- ive, overview of early Christian thought. A brief introduction and extensive notes also accompany each letter or work, making Early Christian Fathers a great study aid. Thus, with flowing and contemporary translations, Early Christian Fath- ers is ideal for beginners and scholars alike; it is essential reading for anyone interested in the early church fathers. Tim Perrine CCEL Staff Writer Subjects: Christianity Early Christian Literature. Fathers of the Church, etc. i Contents Title Page 1 General Editor's Preface 8 Original Table of Contents 9 Preface 12 Introduction to Early Christian Literature and Its Setting 13 The Literature 14 The Setting 18 Basic Works on Early Christian Literature and History 24 Letters in Crises 28 The Letter of the Church of Rome to the Church of Corinth, Commonly Called 29 Clement's First Letter Introduction 30 Manuscripts and Books 36 Text 39 The Letters of Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch
    [Show full text]