{"id":773,"date":"2017-06-20T15:10:50","date_gmt":"2017-06-20T13:10:50","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/wp.unil.ch\/aelac\/?p=773"},"modified":"2017-06-20T15:13:39","modified_gmt":"2017-06-20T13:13:39","slug":"apocrypha-27-2016","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/wp.unil.ch\/aelac\/apocrypha-27-2016\/","title":{"rendered":"Apocrypha 27 (2016)"},"content":{"rendered":"

Le volume 27 de la revue\u00a0Apocrypha<\/em> vient de para\u00eetre<\/a>. Vous trouverez ci-dessous le r\u00e9sum\u00e9 des articles.
\n<\/p>\n\n

\u00ab Les Actes de Paul et Th\u00e8cle latins<\/i>. \u00c9dition de la version A et de sa r\u00e9\u00e9criture dans le manuscrit de Dublin, Trinity College, 174 \u00bb, par Jean-Daniel Kaestli et G\u00e9rard Poupon, p. 9-55<\/h2>\n

L\u2019\u00e9dition qui suit se pr\u00e9sente \u00e0 la fois comme un hommage et un compl\u00e9ment \u00e0 l\u2019ouvrage monumental d\u2019Oscar von Gebhardt, Passio s. Theclae virginis. Die lateinischen \u00dcbersetzungen der Acta Pauli et Theclae<\/i> (1902). Elle est le fruit d\u2019une nouvelle recherche sur la tradition latine des Actes de Paul et Th\u00e8cle (APThe)<\/i> et apporte une plus grande pr\u00e9cision \u00e0 l\u2019apparat de l\u2019\u00e9dition du texte grec, pr\u00e9par\u00e9e par Willy Rordorf et Jean-Daniel Kaestli (\u00e0 para\u00eetre dans la Series apocryphorum<\/i> du Corpus christianorum<\/i>). Deux textes sont ici \u00e9dit\u00e9s, traduits et annot\u00e9s en regard. La page de gauche contient une nouvelle \u00e9dition de la version A des APThe<\/i> latins (latA<\/sup>) sur la base de trois manuscrits : A = Paris, BnF, 5306, XIVe<\/sup> s. ; B = Toulouse, Bibl. municipale, 479, XIVe<\/sup> s. ; Du = Dublin, Trinity College, 174, XIe<\/sup> s. Les deux premiers, copi\u00e9s sur un m\u00eame mod\u00e8le, ont \u00e9t\u00e9 utilis\u00e9s par Gebhardt, mais Du \u00e9tait in\u00e9dit jusqu\u2019ici. Sur la page de droite, on trouve l\u2019\u00e9dition quasi diplomatique et la traduction du ms. de Dublin, qui se caract\u00e9rise par l\u2019alternance de passages tr\u00e8s proches du texte premier de la version latA<\/sup> et de passages largement r\u00e9\u00e9crits. Le t\u00e9moignage nouveau de Du permet d\u2019am\u00e9liorer sous plusieurs aspects le texte \u00e9dit\u00e9 par Gebhardt comme \u00ab \u00dcbersetzung A \u00bb. Il restitue des passages omis par A B (notamment au chap. 5 et au chap. 43) ; il refl\u00e8te souvent mieux que A B le texte premier de latA<\/sup> ; il en conserve des traces m\u00eames dans les parties r\u00e9\u00e9crites ; il permet d\u2019arbitrer entre A et B et d\u2019identifier les le\u00e7ons secondaires de l\u2019un et de l\u2019autre. Mais le ms. de Dublin est int\u00e9ressant non seulement comme t\u00e9moin de la version latA<\/sup>, mais aussi en tant que r\u00e9\u00e9criture originale de cette m\u00eame version. Cette r\u00e9\u00e9criture pr\u00e9sente en effet plusieurs caract\u00e9ristiques remarquables. Outre l\u2019alternance \u2013 dont la logique est parfois difficile \u00e0 saisir \u2013 entre passages inchang\u00e9s et passages r\u00e9\u00e9crits, il faut relever : (1) la transformation fr\u00e9quente, mais pas syst\u00e9matique, du discours direct en dis cours indirect, qui contribue \u00e0 amplifier le texte, et non \u00e0 l\u2019abr\u00e9ger comme c\u2019est g\u00e9n\u00e9ralement le cas (cf. Monique Goullet, \u00c9criture et r\u00e9\u00e9criture hagiographiques<\/i>, Turnhout 2005, p. 165) ; (2) la recherche d\u2019un niveau stylistique plus \u00e9lev\u00e9 que celui du texte de d\u00e9part ; (3) le souci de donner au texte un ancrage biblique, qui est une caract\u00e9ristique des r\u00e9\u00e9critures hagiographiques de l\u2019\u00e9poque carolingienne (cf. M. Goullet, op. cit.<\/i>, p. 35).<\/p>\n

This edition is designed as a tribute and as a complement to the irreplaceable work of Oscar von Gebhardt, Passio s. Theclae virginis. Die lateinischen \u00dcbersetzungen der Acta Pauli et Theclae<\/i> (1902). It is the result of a new research on the Latin tradition of the Acts of Paul and Thecla (APThe)<\/i> and intends to increase the accuracy of the apparatus of the Greek text edited by Willy Rordorf and Jean-Daniel Kaestli (to be published in the Corpus christianorum, Series apocryphorum<\/i>). Two texts are edited, translated and annotated on facing pages. The left page contains a new edition of version A of the Latin APThe<\/i>, based on three manuscripts : A = Paris, BnF, 5306, fourteenth cent. ; B = Toulouse, Bibl. municipale, 479, fourteenth cent ; Du = Dublin, Trinity College, 174, eleventh cent. For his edition, Gebhardt used A and B, which have been copied from the same model, but Du was hitherto unknown. The right page is devoted to a quasi-diplomatic edition and translation of the Dublin manuscript, which is characterised by largely rewritten passages alternating with passages remaining very close to the original text. The new evidence supplied by Du allows improving in several ways the text edited by Gebhardt as \u00ab \u00dcbersetzung A \u00bb. Du preserves some passages omitted by A B (see in particular chapters 5 and 43) ; it often reflects the original text of latA<\/sup> more accurately than A B ; it contains traces of it even in totally rewritten chapters ; it helps arbitrate between A and B and identify the secondary readings of one or the other. But the Dublin MS is of great interest not only as a valuable witness of version latA<\/sup>, but also as a very original rewriting of the same version. This rewriting presents several noteworthy characteristics. Beside the already mentioned alternation of rewritten and unchanged passages \u2013 whose logic is sometimes difficult to grasp \u2013 three features are standing out ; (1) direct speech is frequently, but non systematically, changed into indirect speech, with the result that the text is amplified, and not abbreviated as it is normally the case (cf. Monique Goullet, \u00c9criture et r\u00e9\u00e9criture hagiographiques<\/i>, Turnhout 2005, p. 165) ; (2) the rewriter aims at enhancing the style of the source text ; (3) he strives to anchor the text in the Biblical world, as it happens with hagiographical rewritings of the Carolingian period (cf. M. Goullet, op. cit.<\/i>, p. 35).<\/p>\n

\u00ab La Lettera di Pilato a Claudio<\/i> : uno scritto antigiudaico latino ? \u00bb, par Alberto D\u2019Anna,
\np. 111-135<\/h2>\n

Starting from some Max Bonnet\u2019s remarks, the article discusses the relationship between the Latin text and the Greek texts of the Letter of Pilate to Claudius<\/i>, transmitted by the three recensions of the Acts of Peter and Paul<\/i> : it seems possible to confirm and also to sustain more the linguistic and textual priority of the Latin form. The article considers then the issue of the early state of the Letter<\/i>, if independent or since the beginning part of the Acts<\/i> : on the basis of arguments relating to content and narrative, the independent origin is held the most reasonable.<\/p>\n

A partire da alcune osservazioni di Max Bonnet, l\u2019articolo affronta il tema della relazione tra il testo latino e i testi greci della Lettera di Pilato a Claudio<\/i>, trasmessi dalle tre recensioni degli Atti di Pietro e Paolo<\/i> : appare possibile confermare e anche maggiormente sostenere la priorit\u00e0, linguistica e testuale, della forma latina. L\u2019articolo, poi, considera la questione dello statuto originario della Lettera<\/i>, se indipendente o sin dall\u2019inizio parte degli Atti<\/i> : in base ad argomenti di ordine contenutistico e narrativo, l\u2019origine indipendente \u00e8 ritenuta maggiormente plausibile.<\/p>\n

\u00ab The Life of the Virgin Mary According to Middle Byzantine Preachers and Hagiographers : Changing Contexts and Perspectives \u00bb, par Mary B. Cunningham, p. 137-159<\/h2>\n

This article examines the Byzantine homiletic and hagiographical treatment of the Virgin Mary, \u201cTheotokos\u201d or \u201cBirth-giver of God\u201d, seeking to determine why diverse narratives concerning this holy figure began to appear from about the early ninth century onward (assuming, in agreement with Phil Booth\u2019s recent article, that the Greek prototype for the Georgian Life of the Virgin<\/i> that is attributed to Maximos the Confessor should more probably be dated to the tenth century). The divergences, which may reflect various early apocryphal traditions, follow somewhat generic lines : whereas homilies, which were delivered in the context of liturgical vigils or eucharistic celebrations and incorporated well-known narratives such as the Protevangelium of James<\/i> and versions of the Transitus Mariae<\/i>, three Marian hagiographical works reflect a variant version of the Virgin\u2019s legendary biography. The present study seeks not only to identify some of the more important variations in post-ninth-century narrative traditions surrounding the Virgin Mary, but also to examine the didactic purposes of preachers and hagiographers. It is likely both that ongoing Christological discussions played a part in inspiring Byzantine reflection on Mary, as human mother of Christ and intercessor, and that monastic revival caused greater focus on the Virgin\u2019s ascetic and apostolic qualities in this period.<\/p>\n

Cet article examine le traitement de la Vierge, \u00ab Theotokos \u00bb ou \u00ab M\u00e8re de Dieu \u00bb, dans la tradition homil\u00e9tique et hagiographique by- zantine, et tente d\u2019expliquer les raisons des nombreuses diff\u00e9rences dans les r\u00e9cits de sa vie \u00e0 partir du IXe<\/sup> si\u00e8cle. Nous acceptons ici la proposition r\u00e9cente de Phil Booth de dater le prototype grec (attribu\u00e9 \u00e0 Maxime le Confesseur) de la Vie de la Vierge<\/i> g\u00e9orgienne d\u2019apr\u00e8s le Xe<\/sup> si\u00e8cle et non pas, comme Michel van Esbroeck et Stephen Shoemaker l\u2019ont propos\u00e9, au d\u00e9but du VIIe<\/sup> si\u00e8cle. Les diff\u00e9rences entre les traditions homil\u00e9tiques et hagiographiques que nous avons constat\u00e9es paraissent \u00e0 la fois suivre des traditions apocryphes diff\u00e9rentes et se conformer \u00e0 leurs propres formes litt\u00e9raires. En effet, alors que les hom\u00e9lies, compos\u00e9es pour des offices ou liturgies eucharistiques reprennent des r\u00e9cits bien connus tels que le Prot\u00e9vangile de Jacques<\/i> et des versions du Transitus Mariae<\/i>, trois textes hagiographiques refl\u00e8tent quant \u00e0 eux une autre variante de la vie l\u00e9gendaire de la Vierge. Dans cette \u00e9tude, nous essayons non seulement d\u2019identifier les diff\u00e9rences dans la tradition narrative concernant la Vierge Marie apr\u00e8s le IXe<\/sup> si\u00e8cle, mais nous examinons aussi l\u2019objectif didactique des pr\u00eatres et des hagiographes. Il est possible que les discussions christologiques aient continu\u00e9 d\u2019influencer la r\u00e9flexion byzantine sur la M\u00e8re de Dieu \u00e0 cette \u00e9poque, mais aussi qu\u2019une renaissance monastique ait conduit \u00e0 insister davantage sur ses qualit\u00e9s asc\u00e9tiques et apostoliques.<\/p>\n

\u00ab Thomas peregrinus<\/i>. The Apostle as Stranger in the Latin Apocryphal Acts of Thomas<\/i> \u00bb, par Els Rose, p. 161-175<\/h2>\n

In the apocryphal Acts of Thomas<\/i>, the apostle Thomas is presented as a stranger (?????, peregrinus<\/i>). The present article explores how in the late Roman rewritings of the ancient Acts, the position of the apostle as an outsider is highlighted as an essential part of his role in the process of conversion and Christianisation. Whereas previous publications in Apocrypha<\/i> have signalled Thomas\u2019 identity as a \u201cstranger\u201d (?????) and his appeal to his converts to become \u201cstrangers\u201d with him in the ancient Acts of Thomas<\/i> (Drijvers 1990, Myers 2006), the Latin rewritings of this apocryphon are at the centre of the present contribution. These texts give a detailed account of the way the apostle, as an outsider, transforms the cities of his mission area from within into Christian communities. The Latin rewritings of the Acts of Thomas<\/i> thus form a representation of a paradoxical approach to the binary opposition of insider and outsider, presenting Thomas emphatically as a \u201cstranger\u201d as opposed to civis<\/i>. At the same time, the Passio Thomae<\/i> (BHL<\/i> 8036) in particular emphasises in an elaborate digression the way the apostle grants his converts an inalienable share in a new civic identity, which concerns both life in the Christian community on earth and, eschatologically, life in the heavenly city.<\/p>\n

Les Actes apocryphes latins de Thomas pr\u00e9sentent l\u2019ap\u00f4tre comme un \u00ab \u00e9tranger \u00bb (?????, peregrinus<\/i>) \u00e0 maintes reprises. Le pr\u00e9sent article cherche \u00e0 savoir comment, dans le monde romain antique tardif et m\u00e9di\u00e9val, cette qualit\u00e9 d\u2019\u00e9tranger repr\u00e9sente un aspect essentiel du r\u00f4le de l\u2019ap\u00f4tre dans le processus de conversion et de christianisation. Tandis que l\u2019identit\u00e9 de Thomas comme \u00ab \u00e9tranger \u00bb dans les Actes de Thomas<\/i> anciens et son appel aux convertis \u00e0 devenir eux aussi des \u00ab \u00e9trangers \u00bb ont \u00e9t\u00e9 \u00e9tudi\u00e9s dans divers articles d\u2019Apocrypha<\/i> (Drijvers 1990, Myers 2006), les r\u00e9\u00e9critures latines de cet apocryphe montrent en d\u00e9tail comment l\u2019ap\u00f4tre comme \u00ab outsider<\/i> \u00bb transforme les civitates Indorum<\/i> en communaut\u00e9s chr\u00e9tiennes. Ainsi, les Actes de Thomas<\/i> latins repr\u00e9sentent une approche paradoxale de l\u2019opposition entre citoyens et \u00e9trangers, en pr\u00e9sentant Thomas explicitement comme \u00ab \u00e9tranger \u00bb oppos\u00e9 \u00e0 civis<\/i>. La Passion de Thomas<\/i> (BHL<\/i> 8036), en particulier, illustre dans une interpolation \u00e9labor\u00e9e de quelle mani\u00e8re l\u2019ap\u00f4tre accorde \u00e0 ses convertis une nouvelle identit\u00e9 civique inali\u00e9nable \u00e0 la fois dans la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 chr\u00e9tienne terrestre et, eschatologiquement, dans la cit\u00e9 c\u00e9leste.<\/p>\n

\u00abTowards a Re-Edition of the Ethiopic Dossier of the Apocalypse of Peter<\/i> : A Few Remarks on the Ethiopic Manuscript Witnesses\u00bb, par Alessandro Bausi, p. 179-196<\/h2>\n

The second-century Apocalypse of Peter (ApPt)<\/i> is transmitted in its entirety only in an Arabic-based Ethiopic translation within a pseudoclementine dossier composed of The second coming of Christ and the resurrection of the dead<\/i> and the A speech on the glorious and arcane mystery of the judgment of sinners and a dispute concerning this speech<\/i>. The codicological analysis of the two manuscripts \u2013 BnF, \u00e9thiopien, d\u2019Abbadie 51 (P), and Lake ??n?, ??n?see 35 = Kebr?n 35 (T) \u2013 transmitting the dossier shows that the Ethiopic ApPt<\/i> dossier goes back to a larger collection. Moreover, there are clues that the blank of a few lines that interrupts, without any apparent omission or material loss, the text of ms<\/span> P on fol. 141vb<\/sup>, is most probably due to team work. The colophon of ms<\/span> T confirms the marked heterodox character of the Ethiopic dossier. After the important contributions by Dennis D. Buchholz and Paolo Marrassini, a new edition of the entire dossier is planned for the Corpus Christianorum Series Apocryphorum<\/i>.<\/p>\n

L\u2019Apocalypse de Pierre (ApPt)<\/i>, dat\u00e9e du deuxi\u00e8me si\u00e8cle, est transmise int\u00e9gralement par une traduction \u00e9thiopienne qui repose sur un mod\u00e8le arabe, dans un dossier pseudo-cl\u00e9mentin qui est compos\u00e9 de La seconde venue du Christ et la r\u00e9surrection des morts<\/i> et d\u2019Un discours sur le glorieux et arcane myst\u00e8re du jugement des p\u00e9cheurs et une dispute concernant ce discours<\/i>. L\u2019analyse codicologique des deux manuscrits \u2013 BnF, \u00e9thiopien, d\u2019Abbadie 51 (P), et Lac ??n?, ??n?see 35 = Kebr?n 35 (T) \u2013 qui transmettent ce dossier, montre que le dossier \u00e9thiopien de l\u2019ApPt<\/i> remonte \u00e0 une collection plus \u00e9tendue. En outre, des indices r\u00e9v\u00e8lent que le blanc de quelques lignes qui interrompt, sans aucune omission apparente, le texte du ms<\/span> P au fol. 141vb<\/sup>, est probablement la cons\u00e9quence d\u2019un travail d\u2019\u00e9quipe. Le colophon du ms<\/span> T confirme le caract\u00e8re h\u00e9t\u00e9rodoxe marqu\u00e9 du dossier \u00e9thiopien. Apr\u00e8s les contributions importantes de Dennis D. Buchholz et Paolo Marrassini, une nouvelle \u00e9dition du dossier entier est envisag\u00e9e pour le Corpus Christianorum Series Apocryphorum<\/i>.<\/p>\n

\u00ab \u00c0 propos de trois ouvrages sur Marcion \u00bb, par Anne-Catherine Baudoin, p. 199-212<\/h2>\n

\u00c9tude critique de:<\/p>\n

    \n
  • Lieu, Judith M., Marcion and the Making of a Heretic. God and Scripture in the Second Century<\/i>, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2015, 502 p. ISBN 978-971-107-02904-0<\/li>\n
  • Roth, Dieter T., The Text of Marcion\u2019s Gospel<\/i> (New Testament Tools, Studies and Documents 49), Leyde-Boston, Brill, 2015, 491 p. ISBN 978-990-04-24520-4<\/li>\n
  • BeDuhn, Jason, The First New Testament. Marcion\u2019s Scriptural Canon<\/i>, Salem (OR), Polebridge Press, 2013, xiv + 387 p. ISBN 978-971- 59815-131-132<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Le volume 27 de la revue\u00a0Apocrypha vient de para\u00eetre. Vous trouverez ci-dessous le r\u00e9sum\u00e9 des articles.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1395,"featured_media":468,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"","_seopress_titles_title":"","_seopress_titles_desc":"","_seopress_robots_index":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[8],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-773","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-nouvelle-publication"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/wp.unil.ch\/aelac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/773","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/wp.unil.ch\/aelac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/wp.unil.ch\/aelac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wp.unil.ch\/aelac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1395"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wp.unil.ch\/aelac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=773"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/wp.unil.ch\/aelac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/773\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wp.unil.ch\/aelac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/468"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/wp.unil.ch\/aelac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=773"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wp.unil.ch\/aelac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=773"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wp.unil.ch\/aelac\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=773"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}