Textkritik im Dienste der Wahrheitsfindung? Das VI. Ökumenische Konzil (680/81) und seine Fälschungsnachweise

IF 0.2 3区 历史学 0 MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES BYZANTINISCHE ZEITSCHRIFT Pub Date : 2022-03-01 DOI:10.1515/bz-2022-0010
H. Ohme
{"title":"Textkritik im Dienste der Wahrheitsfindung? Das VI. Ökumenische Konzil (680/81) und seine Fälschungsnachweise","authors":"H. Ohme","doi":"10.1515/bz-2022-0010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article investigates the plausibility of the proof presented at the Sixth Ecumenical Council (680/81) to show that the Logos of Patriarch Menas (536-552) and the two letters of Pope Vigilius (537-555) were forgeries. These texts were among the most important testimonia of the so-called Monotheletes, and prove the assertion of one operation and one will in Christ long before the controversy of the seventh century. Through an analysis of the conciliar acts and other texts it is shown that the argumentation of the council was not only incoherent and self-contradictory but actually scandalous, since the evidence presented by an authentic papyrus roll of the Acts of the Fifth Council, with its clear proof of the authenticity of the Vigilius letters, was ignored. In an adoption and further development of the frequently overlooked treatment of this matter in the 1971 edition of the Acts of the Fifth Ecumenical Council (553) (ACO, ser. I, 4/1) the following is demonstrated: the discovery of the longer first edition of the Acts, containing the Vigilius letters, in the original papyrus rolls of the Acts of the Fifth Council led, from the beginning of the so-called monenergist-monothelete controversy, to the (re‐)introduction of the disputed texts into the shorter second edition contained in codices. It is indisputable that these texts are authentic.","PeriodicalId":44281,"journal":{"name":"BYZANTINISCHE ZEITSCHRIFT","volume":"115 1","pages":"247 - 286"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BYZANTINISCHE ZEITSCHRIFT","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bz-2022-0010","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This article investigates the plausibility of the proof presented at the Sixth Ecumenical Council (680/81) to show that the Logos of Patriarch Menas (536-552) and the two letters of Pope Vigilius (537-555) were forgeries. These texts were among the most important testimonia of the so-called Monotheletes, and prove the assertion of one operation and one will in Christ long before the controversy of the seventh century. Through an analysis of the conciliar acts and other texts it is shown that the argumentation of the council was not only incoherent and self-contradictory but actually scandalous, since the evidence presented by an authentic papyrus roll of the Acts of the Fifth Council, with its clear proof of the authenticity of the Vigilius letters, was ignored. In an adoption and further development of the frequently overlooked treatment of this matter in the 1971 edition of the Acts of the Fifth Ecumenical Council (553) (ACO, ser. I, 4/1) the following is demonstrated: the discovery of the longer first edition of the Acts, containing the Vigilius letters, in the original papyrus rolls of the Acts of the Fifth Council led, from the beginning of the so-called monenergist-monothelete controversy, to the (re‐)introduction of the disputed texts into the shorter second edition contained in codices. It is indisputable that these texts are authentic.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
文本批评为真相调查服务?第六届普世理事会(680/81)及其伪造证据
摘要本文调查了在第六届普世理事会(680/81)上提出的证明的合理性,以表明大主教梅纳斯的Logos(536-552)和教皇维吉利乌斯的两封信(537-555)是伪造的。这些文本是所谓的Monotheletes最重要的见证之一,证明了早在七世纪的争议之前,在基督里就有一个行动和一个意志的主张。通过对《调解法案》和其他文本的分析,可以看出,委员会的论证不仅不连贯和自相矛盾,而且实际上是可耻的,因为第五委员会法案的真实纸莎草卷所提供的证据,以及对维吉利乌斯信件真实性的明确证明,被忽视了。1971年版的《第五届普世理事会法令》(553)(ACO,ser.I,4/1)通过并进一步发展了对这一问题经常被忽视的处理,证明了以下几点:在第五届理事会领导的《法令》的原始纸莎草卷中发现了更长的第一版《法令》,从所谓的货币能论一神论争议的开始,到将有争议的文本(重新)引入法典中较短的第二版。毫无疑问,这些文本是真实的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BYZANTINISCHE ZEITSCHRIFT
BYZANTINISCHE ZEITSCHRIFT MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES-
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
33.30%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: Steeped in tradition, this organ of international Byzantine studies covers literature, history and art history, including the related and peripheral disciplines, equally in all sections (essays, reviews, bibliographies) and thus contributes significantly to the support and development of Byzantine Studies.
期刊最新文献
Of tortoise necks and dialects. A new edition of the Grammaticus Leidensis Constantin VII Porphyrogénète, Le livre des cérémonies, bespr. von Marek Jankowiak Το θέμα Θεσσαλονίκης (1259 – 1341). Συμβολή στη μελέτη της φορολογικής διοίκησης των επαρχιών κατά την πρώιμη παλαιολόγεια περίοδο, bespr. von Kostis Smyrlis Patria 3.8. and echoes of Byzantine military manuals The capacity for self-sufficiency of Middle Byzantine urban settlements
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1