{"title":"重新检查Ambrose的Ep。24.主教聆讯的例外个案","authors":"H. Tone","doi":"10.1163/18177565-00160a18","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Ep. 24 was not simply the record of the dispute and it was entangled with unclear sentences which sometimes confused previous researches. The present study will specify the cause of its confusion and will argue the possibility of the change of the point at issue. As a result, it becomes clear that the case of Ep. 24 was the exceptional one of the bishop’s hearing in which bishop’s judgement was tended to be unfair to one interested party and the result of its dispute was not necessarily dependent upon Ambrose’s authority as a bishop.","PeriodicalId":38562,"journal":{"name":"Scrinium","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18177565-00160a18","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Re-examining Ambrose’s Ep. 24. The Exceptional Case of the Bishop’s Hearing\",\"authors\":\"H. Tone\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/18177565-00160a18\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Ep. 24 was not simply the record of the dispute and it was entangled with unclear sentences which sometimes confused previous researches. The present study will specify the cause of its confusion and will argue the possibility of the change of the point at issue. As a result, it becomes clear that the case of Ep. 24 was the exceptional one of the bishop’s hearing in which bishop’s judgement was tended to be unfair to one interested party and the result of its dispute was not necessarily dependent upon Ambrose’s authority as a bishop.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38562,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scrinium\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18177565-00160a18\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scrinium\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/18177565-00160a18\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scrinium","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18177565-00160a18","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
Re-examining Ambrose’s Ep. 24. The Exceptional Case of the Bishop’s Hearing
Ep. 24 was not simply the record of the dispute and it was entangled with unclear sentences which sometimes confused previous researches. The present study will specify the cause of its confusion and will argue the possibility of the change of the point at issue. As a result, it becomes clear that the case of Ep. 24 was the exceptional one of the bishop’s hearing in which bishop’s judgement was tended to be unfair to one interested party and the result of its dispute was not necessarily dependent upon Ambrose’s authority as a bishop.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
