Evagre le Pontique a exposé sa philosophie ascétique, centrée sur la notion d'une liste de vices à combattre et de vertus correspondantes, dans plusieurs traités, dont certains ont déjà fait l'objet d'éditions critiques. Le présent travail consiste en une introduction, une édition, et une traduction de deux textes occupant une place particulière dans l'œuvre d'Evagre. Le traité adressé au moine Euloge, et celui qui décrit les Vices opposés aux Vertus, qui apparaît comme un appendice au précédent dans une bonne partie de la tradition manuscrite, présente des spécificités en termes de style et de doctrine qui ont pu faire douter de son authenticité. Une étude approfondie des témoins manuscrits, à la fois de l'original grec et des différentes versions en langues orientales, syriaque, arabe, arménien, géorgien et éthiopien, qui en sont conservées, a permis de confirmer l'authenticité du traité et d'en établir un texte sûr. Ils ont en effet subi de nombreux aléas au cours de leur transmission; outre les dégâts matériels, les œuvres d'Evagre ont surtout circulé en grec sous le nom de Nil d'Ancyre, en raison de la condamnation qui a frappé Evagre, pour son Origénisme supposé, au concile de Constantinople II en 553. Le commentaire accompagnant l'édition permet d'évaluer la proximité de la pensée d'Evagre avec celle du docteur Alexandrin, ainsi que de mettre en lumière la genèse, l'expression et la postérité de la doctrine évagrienne par excellence, celle de la liste des vices, dans le contexte philosophique et ascétique où elle a pris naissance. / Evagrius Ponticus expounded his ascetic philosophy, centered on the notion of a list of vices and corresponding virtues, in several treatises, several of which have already been critically edited. The present work consists of an introduction, an edition, and a French translation of two texts which stand out, to a certain degree, within the Evagrian opus. The treatise addressed to the monk Eulogius, along with its appendix describing the Vices opposed to Virtues, which appears adjoined to the former in a majority of manuscripts, display stylistic and doctrinal characteristics which have often called its authenticity into question. A detailed study of the manuscript testimony, both of the Greek original and of the various oriental versions (Syriac, Arabic, Armenian, Georgian and Ethiopic), has allowed us to confirm the treatises' authenticity and to establish their text reliably, as it can be seen to have suffered considerable turmoil during its transmission. Aside from material damage, Evagrius' works, in the Greek medium, were mainly distributed under the name of Nilus of Ancyra, owing to Evagrius' condemnation for alleged Origenism, at the council of Constantinople II in 553. The accompanying commentary aims at addressing the proximity of Evagrian thought with the legacy of Origen, as well as highlighting the formation, formulation, and posterity of that most remarkable of Evagrian doctrines, the list of vices, and the philosophical and ascetic context wherein it originated.

The emperor Justinian's religious policy has sometimes been characterized as haphazard or incoherent. This dissertation examines religious policy in the Roman Empire from the accession of the emperor Justin to the inception of the Three Chapters controversy in the mid 540's AD. It considers the resolution of the Acacian Schism, Justinian's apparent ambivalence with regard to the Theopaschite formula, the attempt to court the anti-Chalcedonians in Constantinople in the period leading up to the Council of 536, and the relationship between the genesis of the Three Chapters and Second Origenist controversies. Even during these seemingly disparate episodes, this dissertation argues that it is possible to account for the apparent incoherence of this period. To do so, we create an account which includes and appreciates the embeddedness of imperial policy within a social context with two key features. First, we must bear in mind the shifting interests and information available to the individual agents through and over whom the emperor hoped to project influence. Second, we must identify the shifting and hardening symbolic and social boundaries established through the interactions of these same, competing agents. These form the basis for in- and out-group categorization. The individual interests of individual people—whether Justinian, Vitalian, Dioscorus, Leontius, Eusebius, Theodore Askidas, or Pelagius—within complex networks must always be accounted for to give a complete picture. When this social context is accounted for, Justinian's approach appears as that of a rational actor, having incomplete information, with consistent policy goals, working within inconsistent constraints to achieve those goals.

L’elaborato analizza la ricezione del pensiero di Origene di Alessandria (c. 184-c.253) nell’opera del teologo arminiano Jean Le Clerc (1657-1736), soffermandosi in particolare sulla concezione origeniana della libertà e sulle questioni che vi sono annesse. Tale analisi consente anche di chiarire alcune pratiche argomentative e dinamiche intellettuali, soprattutto riguardanti i dibattiti religiosi ed interconfessionali, nella seconda metà del XVII secolo. L’elaborato è diviso in tre sezioni. La prima, di carattere introduttivo, mira ad indagare le premesse epistemologiche di Le Clerc, nonché la sua relazione con le auctoritates religiose ed intellettuali del passato. La seconda sezione prende in esame le citazioni dirette di Origene presenti nella vasta produzione di Le Clerc, come pure i suoi rimandi all’opera dell’Alessandrino e al suo pensiero, consentendo in questo modo di delineare un quadro preciso dell’Origene letto e reinterpretato da Le Clerc. La terza sezione restringe infine il campo d’indagine allo sguardo che Le Clerc porta sulla dimensione più propriamente teologica di Origene ed in particolar modo su quel nodo di concetti che ruota attorno al tema della libertà umana (peccato originale, grazia e predestinazione, il problema del male). Questo studio mostra come, malgrado l’indubbia, e talvolta malcelata, simpatia per Origene, Le Clerc non possa essere definito tout court un ‘origenista’, dal momento che la sua visione epistemologica, scritturale e teologica lo distanzia da una acritica e piena adesione al pensiero dell’Alessandrino. / The present thesis analyses the reception of the thought of Origen of Alexandria (c. 184-c. 253) in Jean Le Clerc (1657-1736). Its particular focus is on Origen's conception of freedom and the theological doctrines related to it. The goal of this thesis is to uncover, through Le Clerc's use of Origen, some of the argumentative practices and the intellectual dynamics of the time, in particular in religious, especially inter-confessional, debates. This thesis is divided into three main parts. The first part has mainly an introductory character and looks at the epistemological assumptions of Le Clerc and his relationship with intellectual and religious authorities of the past. The second part reviews the various ways in which Le Clerc quoted, referred to or otherwise made use of the thought or the name of Origen in his vast production. This part provides a first result in that it frames, in general, Le Clerc's reception of Origen. This step is, at the same time, also preparatory for the material contained in part three. In the third part, only the material is considered which is strictly related to Origen's idea of freedom and the related theological doctrines of original sin, grace/predestination, and the problem of evil. The result of this analysis, as it appears form the examination of argumentative practices in the previous sections, is that Le Clerc was no simple "Origenist" but neither was he was fully uncommitted to the Origenian cause. A full commitment to Origen, despite this strong sympathy, was still hindered by Le Clerc's epistemological, scriptural and theological outlook.