3。大英馆藏及其来源:回顾中世纪教皇信函的关键证人的可信度

Christof Rolker
{"title":"3。大英馆藏及其来源:回顾中世纪教皇信函的关键证人的可信度","authors":"Christof Rolker","doi":"10.1515/zrgk-2022-0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The Collectio Britannica, compiled in the late 11th century and preserved in only one manuscript (London, BL, Add MS 8873), contains numerous excerpts from papal letters dating from the fifth to the eleventh centuries, including many that are not known from other sources. For a long time it was considered a reliable source, but between the 1940s and 1980s some scholars expressed doubts about the authenticity of various letters found in the Britannica, and even in more recent research the collection is still viewed with suspicion. However, a re-examination of the relevant studies shows that many arguments against the authenticity of the papal letters as found in the Britannica were speculative at best. Most ‘suspicious’ elements are in fact found only in the extant London copy of the Britannica, not in the version used in the 1090s by Ivo of Chartres and his collaborators. Only in very few cases is there reason to believe that the sections of the Britannica in question contain extracts from forged or falsified papal letters. With the exception of the section on Leo IV, the relevant parts of the Britannica can usually be relied upon to faithfully retain the content, wording, cursus, and even the order of the papal registers on which they are ultimately based. Content: I. Introduction, The Extant Copy, Why Think the Britannica Draws on Registers? – II. Possible Manipulations by the Britannica Compiler, p. 121, Sancta octo and the Ecumenicity of Constantinople IV, The Britannica Interpolated by Ivo?, Kuttner’s Doubts on JL 5383 and JE 3180, Confusing Nicholas I, Hincmar, and Saint Cyprian, Summary. – III. Much Smoke but Little Fire: Supposed Forged Sources Behind the Britannica, p. 132, Leo’s pallium Grant for Hincmar, The Excommunication of the Emperor, A ‘Great Stumbling Block’: Ullmann and JE 2646, Ullmann on the Letters of Gelasius I, The ‘Archbishop of Dol’ in JE 3003, Summary. – IV. Chronological Order, p. 149, Gelasius I and Pelagius I, Alexander II, John VIII, Saint Boniface, Urban II, Leo IV (and Stephen V), Summary. – V. Selection Criteria, p. 161. – VI. Conclusions, p. 165","PeriodicalId":24010,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte: Kanonistische Abteilung","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"III. The Collectio Britannica and its Sources: Reviewing the Trustworthiness of a Key Witness of Medieval Papal Letters\",\"authors\":\"Christof Rolker\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/zrgk-2022-0003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The Collectio Britannica, compiled in the late 11th century and preserved in only one manuscript (London, BL, Add MS 8873), contains numerous excerpts from papal letters dating from the fifth to the eleventh centuries, including many that are not known from other sources. For a long time it was considered a reliable source, but between the 1940s and 1980s some scholars expressed doubts about the authenticity of various letters found in the Britannica, and even in more recent research the collection is still viewed with suspicion. However, a re-examination of the relevant studies shows that many arguments against the authenticity of the papal letters as found in the Britannica were speculative at best. Most ‘suspicious’ elements are in fact found only in the extant London copy of the Britannica, not in the version used in the 1090s by Ivo of Chartres and his collaborators. Only in very few cases is there reason to believe that the sections of the Britannica in question contain extracts from forged or falsified papal letters. With the exception of the section on Leo IV, the relevant parts of the Britannica can usually be relied upon to faithfully retain the content, wording, cursus, and even the order of the papal registers on which they are ultimately based. Content: I. Introduction, The Extant Copy, Why Think the Britannica Draws on Registers? – II. Possible Manipulations by the Britannica Compiler, p. 121, Sancta octo and the Ecumenicity of Constantinople IV, The Britannica Interpolated by Ivo?, Kuttner’s Doubts on JL 5383 and JE 3180, Confusing Nicholas I, Hincmar, and Saint Cyprian, Summary. – III. Much Smoke but Little Fire: Supposed Forged Sources Behind the Britannica, p. 132, Leo’s pallium Grant for Hincmar, The Excommunication of the Emperor, A ‘Great Stumbling Block’: Ullmann and JE 2646, Ullmann on the Letters of Gelasius I, The ‘Archbishop of Dol’ in JE 3003, Summary. – IV. Chronological Order, p. 149, Gelasius I and Pelagius I, Alexander II, John VIII, Saint Boniface, Urban II, Leo IV (and Stephen V), Summary. – V. Selection Criteria, p. 161. – VI. Conclusions, p. 165\",\"PeriodicalId\":24010,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte: Kanonistische Abteilung\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte: Kanonistische Abteilung\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/zrgk-2022-0003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte: Kanonistische Abteilung","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/zrgk-2022-0003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

《大英百科全书》编纂于11世纪晚期,仅保存在一份手稿中(伦敦,BL, Add MS 8873),其中包含了从5世纪到11世纪教皇信件的大量摘录,其中包括许多从其他来源不知道的内容。在很长一段时间里,它被认为是一个可靠的来源,但在20世纪40年代到80年代之间,一些学者对在《大英百科全书》中发现的各种信件的真实性表示怀疑,甚至在最近的研究中,人们仍然怀疑这些信件的真实性。然而,对相关研究的重新审视表明,许多反对在《大英百科全书》中发现的教皇信件真实性的论点充其量只是推测。事实上,大多数“可疑”的元素只能在现存的伦敦版《大英百科全书》中找到,而不是在20世纪90年代伊沃·沙尔特和他的合作者使用的版本中找到。只有在极少数情况下,才有理由相信有问题的《大英百科全书》部分包含伪造或伪造的教皇信函的摘录。除了关于利奥四世的部分,大英百科全书的相关部分通常可以可靠地忠实地保留了内容、措辞、诅咒,甚至是它们最终基于的教皇登记册的顺序。内容:1 .引言,现存的副本,为什么认为大英百科全书借鉴寄存器?- II。《大英百科全书》编纂者可能的操纵,第121页,《圣十和君士坦丁堡四世的普世性》,由伊沃?库特纳对jl5383和je3180的质疑,混淆尼古拉斯一世、欣马尔和圣塞普里安,总结。- III。烟多火少:大英百科全书背后的假定伪造来源,第132页,利奥对辛玛尔的pallium Grant,皇帝被逐出教会,一个“巨大的绊脚石”:Ullmann和JE 2646, Ullmann关于Gelasius I的信件,JE 3003中的“Dol大主教”,摘要。-四。时间顺序,第149页,格拉修斯一世和伯拉纠一世,亚历山大二世,约翰八世,圣博尼法斯,乌尔班二世,利奥四世(和斯蒂芬五世),摘要。- V.选择标准,第161页。-六、结论,第165页
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
III. The Collectio Britannica and its Sources: Reviewing the Trustworthiness of a Key Witness of Medieval Papal Letters
Abstract The Collectio Britannica, compiled in the late 11th century and preserved in only one manuscript (London, BL, Add MS 8873), contains numerous excerpts from papal letters dating from the fifth to the eleventh centuries, including many that are not known from other sources. For a long time it was considered a reliable source, but between the 1940s and 1980s some scholars expressed doubts about the authenticity of various letters found in the Britannica, and even in more recent research the collection is still viewed with suspicion. However, a re-examination of the relevant studies shows that many arguments against the authenticity of the papal letters as found in the Britannica were speculative at best. Most ‘suspicious’ elements are in fact found only in the extant London copy of the Britannica, not in the version used in the 1090s by Ivo of Chartres and his collaborators. Only in very few cases is there reason to believe that the sections of the Britannica in question contain extracts from forged or falsified papal letters. With the exception of the section on Leo IV, the relevant parts of the Britannica can usually be relied upon to faithfully retain the content, wording, cursus, and even the order of the papal registers on which they are ultimately based. Content: I. Introduction, The Extant Copy, Why Think the Britannica Draws on Registers? – II. Possible Manipulations by the Britannica Compiler, p. 121, Sancta octo and the Ecumenicity of Constantinople IV, The Britannica Interpolated by Ivo?, Kuttner’s Doubts on JL 5383 and JE 3180, Confusing Nicholas I, Hincmar, and Saint Cyprian, Summary. – III. Much Smoke but Little Fire: Supposed Forged Sources Behind the Britannica, p. 132, Leo’s pallium Grant for Hincmar, The Excommunication of the Emperor, A ‘Great Stumbling Block’: Ullmann and JE 2646, Ullmann on the Letters of Gelasius I, The ‘Archbishop of Dol’ in JE 3003, Summary. – IV. Chronological Order, p. 149, Gelasius I and Pelagius I, Alexander II, John VIII, Saint Boniface, Urban II, Leo IV (and Stephen V), Summary. – V. Selection Criteria, p. 161. – VI. Conclusions, p. 165
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信