Adoptionism

Beatus of Liébana's (c. 730-c.800) Commentary on the Apocalypse incorporates a commentary of Gregory of Elvira (d. 392) on Noah's Ark.  Noah's Ark is for Gregory an allegorical prefiguration of the Church, and Gregory does not directly expound on the Genesis flood.  Text accompanying the illustrations in Beatus's commentary differs from that in other early medieval manuscripts where Noah's Ark is painted.
 
In contrast to other late antique and early medieval illustrations of Noah's ark, arks in the early Beatus manuscripts are open-form structures without floodwaters, loosening the connection to Genesis and to patristic apocalyptic reinterpretations of the flood.  Depictions of Noah's ark in the early Beatus manuscripts differ from the iconography of the ark in the "Cotton Genesis" tradition of Noah's Ark illustrations examined by Kurt Weitzmann and Herbert Kessler.

Following an article by Marianne Besseyre, I propose that these Beatus Noah's Ark illustrations be interpreted as a medieval bestiary, and one textual source for the Beatus bestiary is Gregory the Great's Moralia in Job.  Understanding these images as bestiaries explains their unique depictions of the Noahide cycle. Beatus's illustrators needed to adapt the patristic trope of ark as church to portray a differentiated boat containing both orthodox believers and heresiarchs.  Since Beatus was engaged in countering the adoptionist Christology of the archbishop Elipandus of Toledo, his later illustrators needed a way to depict a more differentiated boat whose cargo included both orthodox believers and heresiarchs such as Elipandus.  Precedent for a division of the church into saints and sinners could already be found in the fourth-century African Donatist theologian Tyconius, whose commentary on the Book of Revelation was a major source for Beatus's own commentary.  Visualizing Noah's ark as a bestiary allowed Beatus's illustrators to complement his differentiated understanding of the no-longer pure church.

Taking the relationship between cultural transfers and musicology as a starting point, the Kyrie trope, Deus solus et immensus, is an extraordinary case-study in the historical context of local exchanges produced in the repertoire of the liturgical song. Beyond the philological-musical research, the main stylistic patterns of transmission (readings, variant, elements, etc.) are clearly identifiable to be of the utmost importance for some liturgical dynamics as well as the most varied features of identity related to the theological thought in the Christian conception of faith. Thus, it is necessary to take into account both the liturgical and theological effect of a sacred work in order to understand properly the tradition of plainsong such as Deus solus et immensus. Regarding to this point, the moral doctrine “ut legem credendi lex statuat supplicandi” (Prosper of Aquitaine, PL 50, 535B) recovers the most authentic application of its meaning in the liturgy and therefore a comprehensive analysis will be proposed in this paper with the aim of understanding the singularity of a manuscript tradition extended as a whole from St. Gall in the middle of the 10th century to Gerona at the end of the 15th century.

This article describes the process that put an end to the Carolingian domain of the territories in La Marca, the current Old Catalonia, taking advantage of the existence of adoptionism. This heresy was developed in the Visigoth culture which was accustomed to the religious controversies (Arianism) and which mainly lived in an Islamic society. The Arabs, with their disembarking in Hispania, were able to make the most of the division of Visigoths and fragmentation of power. For this reason we can explain the rapid advance of Islam in the Iberian Peninsula. The division between the Visigoth elites, which came from the past, was not extinct with the arrival of Arabs and Berbers. The adoptionism was used by the Carolingian power to culturally standardize the territories of La Marca and Septimania, taking advantage of the ancient divisions between Visigoths.

Abstract: This article disputes two common points made in previous interpretations of the claim that Galen was worshipped by the Theodotians, a group of Christians contemporary with him at Rome. First, the claim is a probable sign of the Theodotians' interest in medical subjects, contrary to suggestions that they were only interested in Galen's works on logic and philosophy. The Theodotians had good reason to be interested in the research of Galen and other doctors, particularly in the area of embryology, a topic that held an underappreciated significance in Christological debates of the second and third centuries. Second, there is no reason to believe that Galen had any personal connection with the Theodotians, much less that he played a significant role in the development of their program of study, as has often been claimed. Galen had no patience for amateur scholars from non-elite backgrounds, and he would thus have had nothing to do with the banausic Theodotians, whose founder was a leather-worker by profession.

It has often been noted that argumentation in the early Middle Ages was mainly based on written authority, while dialectical modes of reasoning were held in suspicion. Towards the end of the eighth century, however, dialectic was back in vogue at the court of Charlemagne. Logical reasoning played a significant role in theological discussions initiated by the court. This article explores the 'rules of engagement' for conducting a debate around 800.

This article describes the process that put an end to the Carolingian domain of the territories in La Marca, the current Old Catalonia, taking advantage of the existence of adoptionism. This heresy was developed in the Visigoth culture which was accustomed to the religious controversies (Arianism) and which mainly lived in an Islamic society. The Arabs, with their disembarking in Hispania, were able to make the most of the division of Visigoths and fragmentation of power. For this reason we can explain the rapid advance of Islam in the Iberian Peninsula. The division between the Visigoth elites, which came from the past, was not extinct with the arrival of Arabs and Berbers. The adoptionism was used by the Carolingian power to culturally standardize the territories of La Marca and Septimania, taking advantage of the ancient divisions between Visigoths.

Cet article propose l’édition et le commentaire d’un traité inédit copié en minuscule AB dans le ms. Berlin, SBPK, Hamilton 132. Ce traité, que l’on intitule Epistola contra hereticos, se veut la réfutation d’hérétiques inconnus des années 800-810, affirmant que le Christ n’est pas ressuscité dans sa “vraie” chair et n’a pas pu la conserver au ciel. L’article déconstruit le montage hérésiologique de l’auteur, qui fait de ces hérétiques des successeurs à la fois de l’arianisme et de l’adoptianisme, tout en montrant, grâce à la critique interne du traité et au témoignage externe de la lettre 41 d’Alcuin, que des débats sur le corps ressuscité du Christ ont bien eu lieu dans le sillage de l’adoptianisme. Le texte ne peut être attribué à aucun des grands auteurs du règne de Charlemagne ; par sa forme (des questions et réponses articulées autour de versets bibliques), il témoigne de la polémicité locale, ordinaire, d’un monde carolingien en pleine renaissance culturelle.

This article provides the edition and commentary of a theological treatise copied minuscule in ms. Berlin, SBPK, Hamilton 132. This text, which we propose to call Epistola contra hereticos, intends to refute an otherwise unknown heresy born around 800; these heretics allegedly claimed that Christ did not rise in his “true” flesh and did not keep a “real” human body after his ascension. This paper deconstructs the heresiological discourse behind these accusations, according to which these “heretics” are the heirs of both arianism and adoptianism. Nonetheless, internal critique and the external evidence of Alcuin’s letter 41 tend to show that such discussions on the risen body of Christ did take place in the wake of adoptianism. The treatise cannot be attributed to any known author under Charlemagne’s reign. The form of the text (questions and answers about biblical verses, instructions on how to refute the opponent) bears witness to a local sphere of theological debate, as soon as the first wave of the Carolingian reform.

In the twenty-first century, the chance to discover, study and edit a quasi-unknown and disregarded Latin text from the Early Medieval Ages is remarkably rare. The Homiliary of Luculentius offers us this exceptional opportunity. All current indicators favour our hypothesis that this considerable source, known only from selected parts, is a rarity in the proper sense: it appears to be the earliest autochthonous monument of Latin literature of the so-called Spanish March, the northeastern part of the Iberian Peninsula dominated by the Carolingians and their culture. Our new research project aims at the full edition of this work, the identification of its sources and the religious, social and political contextualisation of the probably monastic author and his network. The exploration of this work will fundamentally change our vision of Carolingian culture in a still-underrated periphery of Charlemagne's Empire.

In the twenty-first century, the chance to discover, study and edit a quasi-unknown and disregarded Latin text from the Early Medieval Ages is remarkably rare. The Homiliary of Luculentius offers us this exceptional opportunity. All current indicators favour our hypothesis that this considerable source, known only from selected parts, is a rarity in the proper sense: it appears to be the earliest autochthonous monument of Latin literature of the so-called Spanish March, the north-eastern part of the Iberian Peninsula dominated by the Carolingians and their culture. Our new research project aims at the full edition of this work, the identification of its sources and the religious, social and political contextualisation of the probably monastic author and his network. The exploration of this work will fundamentally change our vision of Carolingian culture in a still-underrated periphery of Charlemagne’s Empire.

RESUMEN: Se estudia a los migecianos y casianistas como un grupo con propuestas religiosas ascéticas que fue combatido por Toledo y la Iglesia hispana desde c 780. Al hacerlo, la Iglesia mostraba su capacidad para mantener viva su antigua función eclesiástica de vigilar las desviaciones religiosas. Migecianos y casianistas fueron definidos como herejes, mientras que la vieja Iglesia reforzaba su posición de ortodoxia y hacía palpable su autoridad. Las acusaciones lanzadas contra migecianos y casianistas nos permiten saber más sobre cuál fue el centro de la polémica. A pesar de la diatriba de Elipando, en estos debates la dicusión sobre las personas y la trinidad no parece haber ocupado el centro del problema; este estuvo concentrado en los temas de convivencia con los no cristianos y, sobre todo, en las cuestiones de autoridad. Palabras clave: Herejía; Migecio; Adopcionismo; Reliquias; Historia de la Iglesia; Iberia en la temprana Edad Media; Carolingios. ABSTRACT: Migetians and Casianists are studied as a group with ascetic religious proposals which was fought by Toledo and the Hispanic Church since ca 780. Doing so the Church showed its capacity to maintain its old ecclesiastical function of monitoring religious deviations. Migetians and Casianists were defined as heretics while the old Church reinforced its condition of orthodoxy and made evident its authority. The accusations launched against Migetians and Casianists allow us to know more about what was at the centre of the controversy. Despite Elipandus' diatribe, disputes on the persons or the trinity do not seem to have had a fundamental role. The controversy focused in the coexistence with non-Christian populations and above all on authority.