Origène. Homélies sur la Genèse. Latin text, translation and notes by Louis Doutreleau. Sources Chrétiennes, 7 bis. Paris: Cerf, 1977. 434 pp. 199 fr. - Origène. Homélies sur Jérémie, I. Greek text, introduction and notes by Pierre Nautin; translation with Pierre Husson. Sources Chrétiennes, no., 232. Paris: Cerf, 1976, 434 pp. 175 fr. - Didyme l'Aveugle. Sur la Genèse, I. Greek text, introduction, translation and notes by Pierre Nautin. Sources Chrétiennes, no. 233. Paris: Cerf, 1976. 336 pp.

1977 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 392-393
Author(s):  
Robert M. Grant
Keyword(s):  
Greek Text ◽  
Latin Text

Sulla versione latina delle Epistole a Cledonio

Augustinianum ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 381-403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Capone ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Greek Text ◽  
Latin Text ◽  
Syntactic Features ◽  
Latin Version

This contribution focuses attention on the lexical and syntactic features of the Latin version of the Letters to Cledonius: In the passages examined it highlights the differences between the translation and the Greek text, recreates the practices and the strategies of the translator, with particular reference to the two Letters and in some cases to other of Gregory of Nazianzen's texts as reported in Laur. San Marco 584. Lastly the article evaluates the genuineness of the Latin text that was handed down and the possible supply to the constitution of the Greek text.

I nomi dell’amore: Un’indagine sulla traduzione latina del Commento al Cantico dei Cantici di Origene

2015 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vito Limone
Keyword(s):  
Song Of Songs ◽  
Latin Translation ◽  
Greek Text ◽  
Original Text ◽  
Latin Text ◽  
Greek Language ◽  
Latin Language

AbstractThe aim of this paper is to compare the Greek fragments of Origen’s Commentary on the Song of Songs and the Latin translation by Rufinus. In particular, in Commentarius in Canticum Canticorum, prol. 2,20 the Latin text lists four names of the love: amor and cupido with regard to the physical love, and dilectio and caritas with regard to the spiritual love. In Greek fragments there are only “agape” with regard to the spiritual love and “eros” with regard to the physical love. Then, this paper aims to compare the Greek language through which Origen expresses the love in the fragments with the Latin language in which Rufinus translates Origen’s original text, so Rufinus seems to have complicated the original Greek text of Origen. Moreover, the paper lists also other important words through which Origen expresses the love in the fragments, i.e. “philia” and “philanthropia.”

The Latin Translations of Josephus on Jesus, John the Baptist, and James: Critical Texts of the Latin Translation of the Antiquities and Rufinus’ Translation of Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History Based on Manuscripts and Early Printed Editions

2014 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-79 ◽  
Author(s):  
David B. Levenson ◽  
Thomas R. Martin
Keyword(s):  
Critical Edition ◽  
Complete List ◽  
Latin Translation ◽  
Greek Text ◽  
Latin Text ◽  
Ecclesiastical History ◽  
John The Baptist ◽  
Historia Ecclesiastica ◽  
Editio Princeps

Abstract This article presents the first critical texts of the passages on Jesus, John the Baptist, and James in the Latin translation of Josephus’ Antiquitates Iudaicae and the sections of the Latin Table of Contents for AJ 18 where the references to Jesus and John the Baptist appear. A commentary on these Latin texts is also provided. Since no critical edition of the Latin text of Antiquities 6-20 exists, these are also the first critical texts of any passages from these books. The critical apparatus includes a complete list of variant readings from thirty-seven manuscripts (9th-15th c.e.) and all the printed editions from the 1470 editio princeps to the 1524 Basel edition. Because the passages in the Latin AJ on Jesus and John the Baptist were based on Rufinus’ translation of Eusebius’ Historia Ecclesiastica, a new text of these passages in Rufinus is provided that reports more variant readings than are included in Mommsen’s GCS edition. A Greek text for these passages with revised apparatus correcting and expanding the apparatuses in Niese’s editio maior of Josephus and Schwartz’s GCS edition of Eusebius is also provided. In addition to presenting a text and commentary for the passages in the Latin Antiquities and Rufinus’ translation of Eusebius, there is catalogue of collated manuscripts and all the early printed editions through 1524, providing a new scholarly resource for further work on the Latin text of the Antiquities.

A Note on the Status of Origen's De Principiis in English

2007 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronnie Rombs
Keyword(s):  
English Translation ◽  
Critical Edition ◽  
Latin Translation ◽  
Greek Text ◽  
Original Text ◽  
Latin Text ◽  
English Edition ◽  
Critical Editions ◽  
English Translations ◽  
The Status

AbstractThe standard English translation of Origen's De principiis, translated by G.W. Butterworth and published in 1936, is based upon the earlier critical edition of Paul Koetschau. Origen's text survives through the Latin translation of Rufinus, a version that Koetschau fundamentally distrusted: Rufinus had admittedly expurgated Origen's text and could not, accordingly, be trusted. Hence the job of the editor and translator was judged to be the reestablishment—as far as was possible—of Origen's original text. Such suspicion of the text led to, among other problems, the awkward printing of parallel Greek and Latin passages in columns in Butterworth's English edition. Greek fragments and Origenistic material—that is to say, passages that were not direct quotations of De principiis, nor even directly Origen's—were inserted into Koetschau's text based upon presumed doctrinal parallels between those fragments and Origen's 'authentic' thought.We cannot reconstruct the Greek text; what we have inherited for better or worse is Rufinus's Latin translation of Peri archôn, a text that the more recent scholarship of G. Bardy and others have significantly rehabilitated confidence in. With the notable exception of English, translations of De principiis have been made in French, Italian and German, based upon more recent and more balanced critical editions. The author proposes a new English translation of Rufinus's Latin text based upon the critical edition of Henri Crouzel and Manlio Simonetti, published in the Sources Chrétiennes series.

scholarly journals A Most Sovereign Herb: Pseudo-Antonius Musa on Betony

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 ◽  
pp. 131-148
Author(s):  
Klaus-Dietrich Fischer
Keyword(s):  
Old English ◽  
Greek Text ◽  
Turn Of The Millennium ◽  
Latin Text ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Relationship

This essay studies various important aspects of the history of text of the treatise De herba Vettonica, ultimaty attributed to Antonius Musa, Augustus' physician and the brother of King Juba II. The possible existence of an original Greek text, the relationship between the treatise and the writings of Pliny, and the translation of the treatise into Old English are discussed, among other topics. With respect to this translation, the author insists on its importance for the establishment of the Latin text of the treatise, because it dates certainly before the turn of the millennium, and the majority of Latin manuscripts is from a later period.

Agustín y la Biblia griega en las 'Enarrationes in Psalmos'

Augustinus ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-20
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Caruso ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Saint Augustine ◽  
Greek Text ◽  
Latin Text ◽  
Greek Language ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Textual Interpretation ◽  
Saint Jerome ◽  
Enarrationes In Psalmos ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Point Of Departure

The article presents a summary of the ideas of different scholars concerning the real knowledge that Saint Augustine had of the Greek Language, to point out that the competence of Saint Augustine was increasing over the years. It also addresses the relationship between Saint Augustine and Saint Jerome regarding the translations of the Bible, and the value that Saint Augustine attributed to the LXX text. Subsequently, some examples taken from the 'enarrationes in Psalmos' help to stress the work of the augustinian emendatio of the Latin text, taking as point of departure the Greek text, as well as the use the Greek text in Augustine’s own textual interpretation of the psalms.

A Lost Page of Codex Bezae: Traces of the Bezan Greek Text of Acts 10.4–9

2018 ◽  
Vol 64 (2) ◽  
pp. 213-230
Author(s):  
Elijah Hixson
Keyword(s):  
High Resolution ◽  
Mirror Image ◽  
Greek Text ◽  
Latin Text ◽  
High Resolution Images ◽  
Photo Editing ◽  
First Time

Codex Bezae lacks the Greek text of Acts 10.4–14, but the Latin text survives on fol. 455a. Damage to the manuscript has caused traces of ink from the now-lost Greek text to be transferred onto the Latin page of Acts 10.4–14. They preserve a mirror image of text from fol. 454b, the facing page at the time of the damage. By reversing high-resolution images of fol. 455a with photo-editing software, the offset ink can be deciphered. As a result, the surviving Greek text from Acts 10.4–9 in Codex Bezae is published here for the first time.

Augustan Rome and the Body of Christ: A Comparison of the Social Vision of theRes Gestaeand Paul's Letter to the Romans

2013 ◽  
Vol 106 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-36
Author(s):  
James R. Harrison
Keyword(s):  
New Testament ◽  
The Body ◽  
Greek Text ◽  
Latin Text ◽  
Son Of God ◽  
The Social ◽  
New Testament Studies ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Greek East

A surprising omission in New Testament studies of the imperial world is a comparison of Augustus's conception of rule in theRes Gestae(RG) with Paul's eschatological gospel of grace in his letter to the Romans. Even though each document has been foundational in the history of Western civilization, a comparison of their vastly different social outcomes has not been undertaken. Neil Elliott has made an outstanding contribution in laying the foundations for such a study, offering a scintillating analysis of Paul's letter to the Romans in terms ofiustitia(justice),clementia(mercy),pietas(piety), andvirtus(valor), the four virtues of Augustus inscribed on the Golden Shield erected in the Julian senate house (RG34.2). However, a full-scale investigation of the Augustan conception of rule in theRGwould open up new perspectives on Paul's engagement with the imperial world in Romans, given that Augustus became the iconicexemplumof virtue for his Julio-Claudian successors. Nonetheless, the difference in genre and aims of each document makes such a comparison daunting for New Testament scholars, as does the controversy that each document continues to generate in its own discipline. Further, we are unsure about the extent of the exposure that Paul might have had to theRG, directly or indirectly. Possibly Paul saw a Greek version of theRGtext at Pisidian Antioch, along with the Latin text that still survives there, during his first missionary journey (Acts 13:14–50), even though there are no archaeological remains of the Greek text at Antioch today. Presumably Paul would have been aware that the original Latin copy of theRGwas inscribed in bronze at Augustus's mausoleum at Rome. This article will argue that Paul, in planning to move his missionary outreach from the Greek East to the Latin West (Rom 15:19a–24), thought strategically about how he was going to communicate the reign of the crucified, risen, and ascended Son of God to inhabitants of the capital who had lived through the “Golden Age” of grace under Augustus and who were experiencing its renewal under Nero. What social and theological vision did Paul want to communicate to the city of Rome in which Augustus was the yardstick of virtue to which future leaders of Rome should aspire?

Erasmus and the New Testament: The Pastoral Context

Moreana ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 35 (Number 133) (1) ◽  
pp. 37-48
Author(s):  
Germain Marc’hadour
Keyword(s):  
New Testament ◽  
Greek Text ◽  
Great Freedom ◽  
The New Testament

Erasmus, after the dry philological task of editing the Greek text of the New Testament with annotations and a new translation, turned to his paraphrases with a sense of great freedom, bath literary and pastoral. Thomas More’s debt to his friend’s Biblical labors has been demonstrated but never systematically assessed. The faithful translation and annotation provided by Toronto provides an opportunity for examining a number of passages from St. Paul and St. James in the light of bath Erasmus’ exegesis and More’s apologetics.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document