Sulpicius Severus

Antologia di testi agiografici latini tardo-antichi e medievali, con schede di presentazione degli autori e delle opere. Gli autori antologizzati sono Sulpicio Severo (Vita Martini), Gregorio di Tours (varie opere agiografiche), Rosvita di Gandersheim (un passo dal poemetto Maria) e Iacopo da Varazze (Legenda aurea).

"The question of whether Titus ordered the burning of the Temple as Sulpicius Severus reports or whether the burning was caused by a soldier acting upon some “supernatural impulse” as Josephus relates [War 6.252] has been debated ever since Bernays in 1861 argued that the former version should be preferred. Leoni gives a very detailed history of scholarship on this question, pointing out how many a priori considerations have led to distrust Josephus. In the end he insists that Josephus’ reliability has to be judged case by case and that with regard to the burning of the Temple his account appears substantially trustworthy" (Joseph Sievers, in Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Period 34.2 (2003), p. 228).

Since Bernays in 1861, scholars have disputed Josephus’ account in Bell. Iud. 6.252 that a Roman soldier during the siege of Jerusalem in 70 CE acted on ‘some supernatural impulse’ when he threw a piece of burning wood into the Temple, thus starting the fire that destroyed it. The vast majority of scholars have followed Bernays in giving more credence to the account of the Christian chronographer Sulpicius Severus, who in his Chronica reports that Titus ordered that the Temple be burned. Many a priori assumptions have come into play when examining Josephus’ narrative, which instead appears unequivocally clear, consistent and substantially trustworthy.

The Church Father Sulpicius Severus, in his history of the world (Chronica), knew the order of the Persian kings, and unhesitatingly said the restored temple was opened in the sixth year of Darius II Ochus! Sulpicius Severus (c 363-c 425) a fourth century Gaul, was persuaded by S Martin into the Christian faith and he wrote a history of the world, excluding only the events of the gospels and Acts as being too sacred to summarize. Historians have judged his work badly, but it was in use over a thousand years after it was written for all that, and in respect of Ezra and Nehemiah, he is fairly clear, considering modern experts are always confused. His main difference is that, on the basis of the scripture, he places Ezra's coming with a host of Jews in the reign of Artaxerxes, twenty years after the temple was restored, which seems unlikely, although, if correct, it makes the foundation of Judaism even later still! What is important is that he gets the kings right, and has no doubt that the temple was opened in the sixth year of Darius II Ochus. Here is what he wrote in two short chapters of his Chronica. Chronica Chapter 9 In the meantime, those Jews, who, as we have said above, returned into their native land by the permission of Cyrus, attempted to restore their city and temple. But, being few and poor, they made but little progress, until, at last, after the lapse of about a hundred years, while Artaxerxes the king ruled over the Persians, they were absolutely deterred from building by those who had local authority. For, at that time, Syria and all Judaea was ruled under the empire of the Persians by magistrates and governors. Accordingly, these took counsel to write to king Artaxerxes, that it was not fitting that opportunity should be granted to the Jews of rebuilding their city, lest, in accordance with their stubborn character, and being accustomed to rule over other nations, they should, on recovering their strength, not submit to live under the sway of a foreign power. Thus, the plan of the rulers being approved of by the king, the building of the city was put a stop to, and delayed until the second year of Darius the king. But, who were kings of Persia throughout this period of time, we shall here insert, in order that the Sulpicius Severus on the Restoration of the Temple by Darius

Étude du schéma d’ensemble de la Vita Martini, puis de l’effet du rapport au temps sur l’architecture de la biographie (à travers la « constance du saint », la perception de la chronologie et du temps du monde, et la composition en médaillons), enfin l’intervention du narrateur, l’évocation de Martin dans l’au-delà et la demande d’intercession.

In questo contributo viene presa in considerazione la breve parentesi a carattere esegetico inserita da Alcimo Avito nei v. 488-509 del de diluvio mundi, tentando di proporre una lettura che tenga conto della pluralità di modelli e intertesti utilizzati dal poeta. Le note di commento si concentrano sulla prima parte della digressione privilegiando l’analisi dei v. 488-501 e in sede conclusiva ci si sofferma sulla presenza di un’eco marzialiana che si rintraccia al v. 499.

This paper analyses the short exegetic parenthesis introduced by Alcimus Avitus in carm. 4,488-509 and tries to point out the interactions between the different models and the modalities of their inclusion. The main section of the paper presents a detailed commentary of the first part of the text and especially of v. 488-501; the final section focusses on v. 499 and more specifically on the presence of an echo of Mart. I 90,7.

See Essay 4 of CERVANTES AND MODERNITY: FOUR ESSAYS ON _DON QUIJOTE_: Just how radical was the first modern novel's sacrilege? What importance, intentional or otherwise, should we attach to it? Critics decry the anachronism of calling Cervantes an Enlightenment skeptic; others insist he is the product of Renaissance religious humanism. Both are unnecessary restrictions. The scatological impertinence of Don Quijote’s rosary figures a materialist critique of theism, just as the general thisworldliness of the novel dispels metaphysical superstitions. By specifying the medieval origin (Sulpicius Severus) and the first serious Enlightenment interpretation (Thomas Hobbes) of the cuerpo muerto (dead body) adventure of DQ 1.19, I will demonstrate how the novel overcomes religious humanism and inaugurates modern empiricism.

Available at Amazon.com: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00OM9MJJA/

This article examines the development of the anonymous Old English
homily for Martinmas throughout the ninth and tenth centuries. In
particular, the work focuses on how the homily was reshaped during
its transmission to conform to the differing thematic approaches
that individual Anglo-Saxon scribes took while “copying” the text.
After situating the context of the Sulpician Martiniana in early
England, the author explores the thematic patterns evident in the
anonymous Old English homily’s selective translation of Sulpicius’s
Vita S. Martini and Epistulae. It is demonstrated that the later Anglo-
Saxon copier’s removal of the diving waterfowl episode is explicable
as consistent with his thematic retelling of Martin’s life, which
excludes the saint’s exorcist activities. In addition to offering an
explanation for the episode’s omission, the article argues that
modern editors should treat the extant versions of the Martinmashomily
as two distinct textual traditions.