The Good Ruler from a Papal Perspective: Continuities and Discontinuities in Papal Letters from the Fourth to Eighth Centuries

Florian Hartmann
{"title":"The Good Ruler from a Papal Perspective: Continuities and Discontinuities in Papal Letters from the Fourth to Eighth Centuries","authors":"Florian Hartmann","doi":"10.1515/9783110725612-014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Examining papal perspectives about and towards the good ruler presents two chal-lenges. The first challenge is the relatively long time period from the fourth to eighth centuries with which this volume concerns itself.¹ The second challenge is related to specific source-critical problems that arise because popes almost exclusively con-veyed their thoughts on the good ruler in letters,² as no pope of this period penned a Mirror of Princes (Fürstenspiegel). The broad catalogue of virtues such as the one outlined by Ambrose of Milan for church dignitaries does not resonate with histori-ography composed in the popes ’ inner circles.³ Some emperors were regarded as especially “ good ” by both tradition and church historians, so their catalogue of virtues could, in theory, permit drawing inferences about the idea(l) of a good ruler. ⁴ How-ever, because the popes did not themselves participate in this retroactive “ mytholo-gizing ” of individual emperors, we must rely almost solely on papal letters, the majority of which can be termed “ dogmatic letters ” or having theological, Christological, or canonical contents. ⁵ Perusing the papal letters, it soon becomes apparent that the particular reasons for writing a letter usually determined the specific labelling of the good ruler in each individual case. These reasons and the notions of the good ruler mirrored therein experienced only minor shifts throughout these 500  On account of this timeframe, the bibliography will be limited to absolutely necessary of the Catholic Church in hostile wars fought for the Christian people and you are fighting ec-clesiastical wars like the warriors of God.","PeriodicalId":423918,"journal":{"name":"The Good Christian Ruler in the First Millennium","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Good Christian Ruler in the First Millennium","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110725612-014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Examining papal perspectives about and towards the good ruler presents two chal-lenges. The first challenge is the relatively long time period from the fourth to eighth centuries with which this volume concerns itself.¹ The second challenge is related to specific source-critical problems that arise because popes almost exclusively con-veyed their thoughts on the good ruler in letters,² as no pope of this period penned a Mirror of Princes (Fürstenspiegel). The broad catalogue of virtues such as the one outlined by Ambrose of Milan for church dignitaries does not resonate with histori-ography composed in the popes ’ inner circles.³ Some emperors were regarded as especially “ good ” by both tradition and church historians, so their catalogue of virtues could, in theory, permit drawing inferences about the idea(l) of a good ruler. ⁴ How-ever, because the popes did not themselves participate in this retroactive “ mytholo-gizing ” of individual emperors, we must rely almost solely on papal letters, the majority of which can be termed “ dogmatic letters ” or having theological, Christological, or canonical contents. ⁵ Perusing the papal letters, it soon becomes apparent that the particular reasons for writing a letter usually determined the specific labelling of the good ruler in each individual case. These reasons and the notions of the good ruler mirrored therein experienced only minor shifts throughout these 500  On account of this timeframe, the bibliography will be limited to absolutely necessary of the Catholic Church in hostile wars fought for the Christian people and you are fighting ec-clesiastical wars like the warriors of God.
教皇视角下的好统治者:四世纪至八世纪教皇书信的连续性与断续性
考察教皇对这位好统治者的看法,提出了两个挑战。第一个挑战是相对较长的时期,从四世纪到八世纪,这卷书本身所关注的。¹第二个挑战与具体的来源关键问题有关,因为教皇几乎只在信件中表达他们对这位好统治者的看法,²因为这一时期的教皇没有写过《王子之镜》(f rstenspiegel)。米兰的安布罗斯(Ambrose)为教会达官贵人所概述的那种宽泛的美德目录,与教皇核心圈子里的历史编纂学没有共鸣。有些皇帝被传统和教会历史学家都认为特别“好”,所以理论上,他们的美德目录可以让我们推断出一个好统治者的想法。然而,由于教皇自己并没有参与这种对个别皇帝的追溯性“神话化”,我们必须几乎完全依靠教皇的信函,其中大多数可以被称为“教理信函”或具有神学、基督论或正典内容。细读教皇的信件,很快就会发现,写一封信的特殊原因通常决定了每个具体情况下对好统治者的具体标签。这些原因和其中反映的好统治者的概念在这500年中只经历了微小的变化由于这个时间框架,参考书目将仅限于天主教会在为基督教人民而战的敌对战争中绝对必要的,你像上帝的战士一样在打教会战争。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信