The Problem of the Uniqueness of Ambrosiaster on the Material of his Commentary on the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31802/GB.2021.3.41.004Keywords:
Ambrosiaster, literary connections, Acts of Peter, Tertullian, Marius Victorinus, Diodorus of TarsusAbstract
Ambrosiaster, an anonymous Roman exegete of the 4th century, known for a number of commentaries on certain passages and books of Holy Scripture. His largest work is the corpus of the XIII Commentaries on the Epistles of St. Paul, among which the central place is occupied by the interpretation of the epistle of St. Paul to the Romans. The question of literary influence on the formation of the style and ideas of Ambrosiaster remains still not entirely clear. And although there are quite a lot of studies on the literary connections of the studied author with other Latin writers, there are practically no works on his connections with Eastern exegetes. At the same time, some scholars note the similarities between the exegetical approach and some ideas of Ambrosiaster with the tradition of the Antiochian school. This article attempts to systematize information about the literary connections and dependence of Ambrosiaster, and also describes the results of a comparative analysis of the interpretations of the Roman exegete and Diodorus of Tarsus on the epistle of St. Paul to the Romans. The conclusion is made about the necessity and prospects of a deeper study of the literary interdependence of Diodorus of Tarsus and Ambrosiaster.
Downloads
References
Ambrosiaster. Commentarius in epistulas Paulinas / ed. H. J. Vogels. Vindobonae: Hoelder–Pichler-Tempsky, 1966–1969. (CSEL; vol. 81. 1–3).
Ambrosiaster. Quaestiones Veteris et Novi Testamenti / ed. A. Souter. Vindobonae: F. Tempsky, 1908. (CSEL; vol. 50).
Ambrosiaster. Contre les païens (Question sur l’Ancien et le Nouveau Testament 114) et Sur le destin (Question sur l’Ancien et le Nouveau Testament 115) / ed. et trans. Bussières M.–P. Paris: Cerf, 2007. P. 115–233. (SC; vol. 512).
Staab K. Pauluskommentare aus der griechischen Kirche. Münster i. W.: Verlag der aschendorffschen Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1933. (Neutestamentliche Abhandlungen; Bd. 15).
Tertullianus. Adversus Marcionem // PL. T. 2. Col. 239–524.
Hieronymus Stridonensis. Epistulae / ed. I. Hilberg, editio altera supplementis aucta curante M. Kamptner. Viena: F. Tempsky, 1996. (CSEL; vol. 54).
Zeno Veronensis. Tractatus S. Zenonis // PL. T. 11. Col. 253 – 527.
Евдокимов А. А. Учение о предопределении ап. Павла в свете творений Отцов и Учителей Церкви II–VIII вв. // Материалы VIII международной студенческой научно–богословской конференции СПбДА, 2016. С. 135–141.
Зайцев Д. В. Амброзиастер // ПЭ. 2001. Т. 2. С. 104–108.
Лысевич А. Е., иер. Комментарий Амвросиаста на Послание к римлянам: особенности библейского текста и их интерпретация толкователем // БВ. 2019. № 3 (34). С. 39–54.
Ambrosiaster’s Commentary on the Pauline Epistles: Romans / transl. by S. A. Cooper, D. G. Hunter. Atlanta (GA): SBL Press, 2017.
Baxter J. H. Ambrosiaster Quoted as «Ambrose» in 405 // JTS. 1923. Vol. 24. P. 187.
Beatrice P. F. The Transmission of Sin: Augustine and the Pre-Augustinian Sources / transl. by A. Kamesar. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. Р. 128–142.
Ambrosiaster’s Commentaries in XIII Epistulas Paulinas. Commentaries on Galatians – Philemon / transl. and. ed. by G. L. Bray. Downers Grove, 2009. (Ancient Christians Texts; vol. 3).
Bussières M.–P. Les quaestiones 114 et 115 de l’Ambrosiaster ont-elles été influencées par l’apologétique de Tertullien // Revue d’Etudes Augustiniennes et Patristiques. 2002. Vol. 48 (1). P. 101–130.
Cain A. In Ambrosiaster’s Shadow: A Critical Re-Evaluation of the last Surviving Letter Exchange Between Pope Damasus and Jerome // Revue d’études augustiniennes et patristiques. 2005. Vol. 51 (2). P. 257–277
Volgers A. Damasus’ Request. Why Jerome Needed to (Re-)Answer Ambrosiaster's Questions? // Studio Patristica. 2006. Vol. 43. P. 531–536.
Chadwick H. The Church in Ancient Society: From Galilee to Gregory the Great. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001. (Oxford History of the Early Church).
Cooper S. A. Marius Victorinus’ Commentary on Galatians / ed. G. Clark, A. Louth. Oxford (NY): Oxford University Press, 2005. (Oxford Early Christian Studies).
Sluiter I. Commentaries and the Didactic Tradition / ed. G. Most // Commentaries — Kommentare. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1999. P. 173–205.
Lunn–Rockliffe S. Ambrosiaster’s Political Theology. Oxford; New York; Auckland [etc.]: Oxford University Press, 2007.
D’Alès A. L’Ambrosiaster et Zénon de Vérone // Gregorianum. 1929. Vol. 10. P. 404–409.
Epistula ad Ephesios / ed. H. J. Frede. Freiburg: Herder, 1962–1964 (Vetus Latina; vol. 24.1).
Greer R. A. Theodore of Mopsuestia: The Commentaries on the Minor Epistles of Paul // Atlanta (GA): SBL, 2010. (Writings from the Greco–Roman World; vol. 26).
Hušek V. The True Text: Ambrose, Jerome, and Ambrosiaster on the Variety of Biblical Versions // The Dynamics in Transmission and Reception of Canonical Texts / ed. J. Dušek, J. Roskovec. Berlin, 2016. P. 319–336.
Kannengiesser C. Handbook of Patristic Exegesis: The Bible in Ancient Christianity. Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2004. Vol. 2.
Karl H. Schelkle Paulus, Lehrer der Väter. 2nd ed. Düsseldorf: Patmos, 1959.
Marshall J. T. Remarkable Readings in the Epistles Found in the Palestinian Syriac Lectionary // JTS. 1904. Vol. 5 (19). P. 437–445.
Mundle W. Die Exegese der paulinischen Briefe im Kommentar des Ambrosiaster. Diss. Marburg, 1919.
Schweizer E. Diodor von Tarsus als Exeget // Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der Älteren Kirche. 1941. Vol. 40. P. 33–75.
Simonetti M. Lettera e/o allegoria: un contributo alla storia dell’esegesi patristica. Roma: Institutum Patristicum «Augustinianum», 1985.
Smith A. J. The Latin Sources of the Commentary of Pelagius on the Epistle of St Paul to the Romans // JTS. 1918. Vol. 19. P. 162–230.
Souter A. The Earliest Latin Commentaries on the Epistles of St. Paul. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1927. ( r 1999).
Vosté J. M. La Chronologie de l’activité littéraire de Théodore de Mopsueste // Revue Biblique. 1925. Vol. 34. P. 54–81.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
