No description available.

No description available.

The Sermo antequam iret in exilium and the Sermo cum iret in exsilium are two homilies allegedly pronounced by John Chrysostom in Constantinople at the end of summer 403, some time between the verdict of the Synod of the Oak and the day he left the city for his first exile. The aim of the thesis is to demonstrate that a new critical edition of these texts is needed before any study of their literary and historical value can be conducted. Chapter one sketches the historical background to which the text of the homilies refers and a concise survey about previous scholarship on the homilies on the first exile, from the time of Montfaucon’s edition until our days. The problem of the authenticity occupies the last part of the chapter. Chapter two investigates the history of the texts and takes into account both the direct and indirect traditions. It discusses the existence of double recensions hitherto unknown and provides the prefatory material for the new critical edition of recensio α of Sermo antequam iret in exilium and of the Sermo cum iret in exsilium. Chapter three comprises the Greek editions of the two homilies, as well as a provisional edition of the Latin version of the Sermo antequam iret in exilium. Chapter four is divided into two parts, each presenting a philological commentary on the text of the new editions. Systematic analysis of all the most important variant readings is offered. The final chapter summarizes the new findings and assesses the validity of previous criteria used for discerning the authenticity of the homilies on the exile.

The thesis deals teologic comparison of two patristic commentaries of the Sermon on the Plain from Gospel of Luke - by saint Ambrose and by saint Cyril of Alexandria. Both autors are excerpts from their commentaries of Gospel of Luke. At first are outlined life and literary work of both authors and later an analysis of both texts from the point of view of selected principal theological topics is made. After that the two theological views are compared to the Sermon on the Plain, outlining the initial idea of both autors.

On conserve un nombre inhabituellement élevé de manuscrits ayant appartenu à la bibliothèque du chapitre cathédral de Lyon au IXe siècle, dont bon nombre ont été personnellement utilisés ou produits par le principal acteur de la vie intellectuelle lyonnaise de l’époque, le diacre Florus (floruit v. 825–855). Comme on connaît par ailleurs plusieurs grandes compilations rassemblées également par lui, Florus représente pour nous une double occasion particulièrement rare d’étudier la bibliothèque d’une école cathédrale carolingienne et les méthodes de travail d’un intellectuel de ce temps. Les comparaisons et les nombreux recoupements que permet cette situation étayent et alimentent notre connaissance des livres qu’on utilisait et qui circulaient à l’époque, mais aussi des hommes qui les lisaient et les échangeaient, et des conditions dans lesquelles le travail de Florus a pu passer dans la tradition manuscrite des Pères (première partie). Ces analyses nous peignent Florus un homme de son temps, formé dans un certain milieu à de certaines méthodes, mais que son expérience et ses goûts poussèrent à faire évoluer, tout au long de sa carrière, ses propres méthodes au service de ses propres projets (seconde partie). Un travail d’historiographie est aussi proposé, qui n’avait pas encore été entrepris, et qui fait apparaître les voies de la redécouverte de Florus au cours du XVIIe siècle, puis au XXe. La place de Florus et de sa bibliothèque d’usage, dans l’histoire intellectuelle et dans l’histoire de la transmission des textes antiques, en ressort mieux circonscrite et qualifiée plus précisément, en même temps que se dévoile le cours de sa propre évolution intellectuelle. / An unusual amount of manuscripts that belonged to the Cathedral library of Lyons in the IXth century has been preserved, among which a number were firsthand used or produced by its prominent intellectual figure, the deacon Florus (floruit ca. 825—855). As we also know several large compilations that were gathered by the very same, Florus represents a rare double opportunity to investigate both a Carolingian cathedral library and the work methods of a Carolingian scholar. Numerous comparisons and crosscheckings can strengthen and supply informations regarding the books that were used and circulated at the time, but also regarding the men that read and circulated them, and clarify how Florus’s work on the Fathers has spread in the manuscript tradition (first part). Such analyses depict Florus as a man of his time, who was educated in a certain environment and to use certain methods; but who was then driven, all along his career, by his own experience and taste, to evolve his own methods in the pursuing of his own projects (second part). A historiography study is also held, which was never undertaken before, and reveals the how and why of Florus’s rediscovery in the XVIIth century, and then again in the XXth. Florus’s part and his work library’s, in the intellectual history and in the history of ancient texts transmission, is thus better circumscribed and more precisely described, as is unvailed the course of his own intellectual evolution.