Examining the usage of the term ??????????? throughout the Patristic period, this study illustrates the gradual change in its meaning from stressing the hypostatical independence of the trinitarian persons to upholding the reality of Christ's two natures in his unique hypostasis.
Examining the usage of the term ἐνυπόστατος both in the trinitarian debates before Chalcedon and especially the Christological ones afterwards, this study illustrates the gradual, yet profound change in its meaning initiated by Leontius of Byzantium: In distinguishing between the hypostasis and the ἐνυπόστατον Leontius initiates a crucial shift in that an ἐνυπόστατον is no longer straightforwardly considered as a proper, independent hypostasis of its own, but as something realized in a hypostasis which is by no means necessarily endowed with a hypostasis of its own. This technical discussion of the term is accompanied by an attempt at classifying the entirety of the different usages it keeps on displaying despite its Christian theological origin and its outstanding importance during the post-chalcedonian Christological debates.
The author presents a comprehensive historical examination of the early Christian graeco-latin translations of the biblical 'apocrypha' and 'pseudepigrapha'. The analysis of the translation techniques employed yields a distinction between 'literal' and 'adaptive' translations on the hand and translations associated with the textual tradition of the bible and those not associated with it. Whereas the former can be distinguished by the respective handling of textual macrostructures, the latter 'biblical' translations were subject to constant revision according to their original and thus always display a number of different versions. Als erster Schritt hin zu einer Geschichte der christlichen Übersetzungsliteratur werden hier die lateinischen Übersetzungen griechisch erhaltener „Apokryphen“ und „Pseudepigraphen“ erstmals umfassend historisch einzuordnen versucht und einer übersetzungstechnischen Analyse unterzogen. Obwohl keine dieser Übersetzungen wirklich sklavisch wörtlich vorgeht, ergibt sich dabei doch ein relativ deutlicher Unterschied zwischen ‚wörtlichen‘ und ‚literarischen‘ Übersetzungen einerseits und mit der biblischen Überlieferung assoziierten und nicht damit assoziierten andererseits: Lassen sich die ersteren beiden primär anhand ihres Umgangs mit textlichen Makrostrukturen auseinanderhalten, zeichnet sich die biblische Überlieferung durch ständig neue Rückbindung einer Übersetzung an ihr Original in Form unterschiedlicher Revisionen aus.
The first English-language monograph on Melissus of Samos, the most prominent representative of Eleaticism as inaugurated by Parmenides. Includes a reconstruction of the preserved textual evidence for his philosophy. Important for those working on the Presocratics, fifth-century BCE intellectual life, and the development of philosophical arguments.
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.