Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Orientius and Lactantius

Orientius and Lactantius ORIENTIUS AND LACTANTIUS BY A. HLIDSON-WILLIAMS That Orientius 1 was influenced by Lactantius has been affirmed by some critics and denied by others. Ebert 2 maintains that O. drew his ideas from the Institutiones of L. Teuffel 3 observes that O.'s Commonitorium "scheint sich besonders an Lact. Inst. anzu- schliessen". Bellanger 4 compares certain passages drawn from O. and L. which bear some similarity to each other, and comes to the conclusion that O. was particularly dependent on L. Haverfield 5, on the other hand, indicates some discrepancies between the ideas of the two writers and is unable to find any resemblance which indicates the influence of the one on the other. Schanz 6 declares that "das Urteil Eberts und Teuffels, dass sich 0. bewusst an L. angeschlossen habe, wird durch die Berührungen mit den Inst. (Bell. p. 264) nicht gerechtfertigt". The view held by Haverfield and Schanz is natural enough, for the only tangible evidence adduced by any of the former school, viz. the passages referred to by Bellanger, is dubious in the extreme. In the contrasted passages the similarity is but superficial and argues no more than 238 O.'s acquaintance with the Scriptures and theological literature http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Vigiliae Christianae Brill

Orientius and Lactantius

Vigiliae Christianae , Volume 3 (1): 237 – Jan 1, 1949

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/orientius-and-lactantius-ibddtA4RqQ

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 1949 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0042-6032
eISSN
1570-0720
DOI
10.1163/157007249X00212
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

ORIENTIUS AND LACTANTIUS BY A. HLIDSON-WILLIAMS That Orientius 1 was influenced by Lactantius has been affirmed by some critics and denied by others. Ebert 2 maintains that O. drew his ideas from the Institutiones of L. Teuffel 3 observes that O.'s Commonitorium "scheint sich besonders an Lact. Inst. anzu- schliessen". Bellanger 4 compares certain passages drawn from O. and L. which bear some similarity to each other, and comes to the conclusion that O. was particularly dependent on L. Haverfield 5, on the other hand, indicates some discrepancies between the ideas of the two writers and is unable to find any resemblance which indicates the influence of the one on the other. Schanz 6 declares that "das Urteil Eberts und Teuffels, dass sich 0. bewusst an L. angeschlossen habe, wird durch die Berührungen mit den Inst. (Bell. p. 264) nicht gerechtfertigt". The view held by Haverfield and Schanz is natural enough, for the only tangible evidence adduced by any of the former school, viz. the passages referred to by Bellanger, is dubious in the extreme. In the contrasted passages the similarity is but superficial and argues no more than 238 O.'s acquaintance with the Scriptures and theological literature

Journal

Vigiliae ChristianaeBrill

Published: Jan 1, 1949

There are no references for this article.