{"title":"弗朗茨·费迪南德·恩格尔斯伯格,一位十七世纪从犹太教皈依基督教的人,对托莱多·耶苏的未知德语翻译","authors":"Yaacov Deutsch","doi":"10.36253/cromohs-14221","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, I focus on a hitherto unknown version of the polemical text Toledot Yeshu published in 1640 by a convert from Judaism named Franz Ferdinand Engelsberger. Following a short biography of Engelsberger, I describe the text and focus on a number of its unique features, that do not appear in other versions of the narrative. In addition, I demonstrate that the text includes certain narrative elements that were known thus far only from the later Huldricus’ version of the story from 1705. These elements indicate that the boundaries between the three main families of the texts identified by Di segni are not as strict as previously thought and that there was much fluidity between the different versions. ","PeriodicalId":38885,"journal":{"name":"Cromohs","volume":"39 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Unknown German Translation of Toledot Yeshu by Franz Ferdinand Engelsberger, a Seventeenth Century Christian Convert from Judaism\",\"authors\":\"Yaacov Deutsch\",\"doi\":\"10.36253/cromohs-14221\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this article, I focus on a hitherto unknown version of the polemical text Toledot Yeshu published in 1640 by a convert from Judaism named Franz Ferdinand Engelsberger. Following a short biography of Engelsberger, I describe the text and focus on a number of its unique features, that do not appear in other versions of the narrative. In addition, I demonstrate that the text includes certain narrative elements that were known thus far only from the later Huldricus’ version of the story from 1705. These elements indicate that the boundaries between the three main families of the texts identified by Di segni are not as strict as previously thought and that there was much fluidity between the different versions. \",\"PeriodicalId\":38885,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cromohs\",\"volume\":\"39 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cromohs\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36253/cromohs-14221\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cromohs","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36253/cromohs-14221","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在这篇文章中,我关注的是一个迄今为止不为人知的争论文本Toledot Yeshu的版本,它出版于1640年,由一个名叫Franz Ferdinand Engelsberger的犹太教皈依者出版。在恩格斯伯格的简短传记之后,我描述了这个文本,并把重点放在它的一些独特的特征上,这些特征在其他版本的叙述中没有出现。此外,我还论证了文本中包含的某些叙事元素,这些元素迄今为止仅从1705年胡尔德里克斯的版本中才知道。这些因素表明,Di segni确定的三个主要文本家族之间的界限并不像以前认为的那样严格,不同版本之间存在很大的流动性。
An Unknown German Translation of Toledot Yeshu by Franz Ferdinand Engelsberger, a Seventeenth Century Christian Convert from Judaism
In this article, I focus on a hitherto unknown version of the polemical text Toledot Yeshu published in 1640 by a convert from Judaism named Franz Ferdinand Engelsberger. Following a short biography of Engelsberger, I describe the text and focus on a number of its unique features, that do not appear in other versions of the narrative. In addition, I demonstrate that the text includes certain narrative elements that were known thus far only from the later Huldricus’ version of the story from 1705. These elements indicate that the boundaries between the three main families of the texts identified by Di segni are not as strict as previously thought and that there was much fluidity between the different versions.