The Muratorian Fragment as a Late Antique Fake?: An Answer to C. K. Rothschild
In a recent essay, Clare K. Rothschild has tried to reopen the question of the date of the Muratorian Fragment by proposing a novel view: according to her, this text may well be a late fake, for which she proposes several possible historical settings ranging from the 4th to the 8th or even 9th centu...
| Published in: | Revue des sciences religieuses |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Print Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Université de Strasbourg
[2019]
|
| In: |
Revue des sciences religieuses
Year: 2019, Volume: 93, Issue: 1/2, Pages: 73-90 |
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Chromatius, Aquileiensis -407
/ Muratorian Fragment
/ Forgery
|
| RelBib Classification: | KAB Church history 30-500; early Christianity |
| Further subjects: | B
Bible; Canon
B Codicology B Rothschild, Clare K, 1964- B Forgery of manuscripts B Manuscripts; Certification B Muratorian Fragment B Chromatius, of Aquileia, Saint, Bp , d 407 B Manuscript dating |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (Verlag) |
| Summary: | In a recent essay, Clare K. Rothschild has tried to reopen the question of the date of the Muratorian Fragment by proposing a novel view: according to her, this text may well be a late fake, for which she proposes several possible historical settings ranging from the 4th to the 8th or even 9th century. The present article engages critically with this theory, especially by reminding that, since Chromatius of Aquileia (✝ 407) knew and used the Muratorian Fragment, any date after the beginning of the 5th century cannot come under consideration in any hypothesis, and by pointing to an issue that C. K. Rothschild does not discuss: that of the original language of the Muratorian Fragment. Since the text was originally written in Greek, but is likely Western in origin, a 2nd-century dating remains the most plausible hypothesis. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0035-2217 |
| Reference: | Kritik von "The Muratorian Fragment as Roman Fake (2018)"
Kritik von "The Muratorian fragment as Roman fake (2018)" |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Revue des sciences religieuses
|