Der Kaiser und ein "Gottzeichen am Himmel": Konstantin d.Gr. in den ersten Jahren als Christ
The emperor and a "sign of God in the sky". Constantine the Great in his first years as a Christian" - The article attempts to make plausible that Lactanz in De mortibus persecutorum 44,5 f. understands the caeleste signum dei as a cross that was to be drawn on the shields of the sold...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | German |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Herder
2023
|
| In: |
Römische Quartalschrift für christliche Altertumskunde und Kirchengeschichte
Year: 2023, Volume: 118, Issue: 3/4, Pages: 143-181 |
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Konstantin, I., Römisches Reich, Kaiser ca. 280-337
/ Lactantius, Lucius Caecilius Firmianus 250-317, De mortibus persecutorum
/ Eusebius, Caesariensis 260-339, Historia ecclesiastica
/ Cross
/ Sign
|
| IxTheo Classification: | BE Greco-Roman religions CC Christianity and Non-Christian religion; Inter-religious relations KAB Church history 30-500; early Christianity |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | The emperor and a "sign of God in the sky". Constantine the Great in his first years as a Christian" - The article attempts to make plausible that Lactanz in De mortibus persecutorum 44,5 f. understands the caeleste signum dei as a cross that was to be drawn on the shields of the soldiers of his army according to Constantine's instructions in the dream; that the part of the sentence: transversa X littera summo capite circumflexo, which denotes a so-called staurogramme and not a cross, must be regarded as a marginal gloss that penetrated the text in the course of the manuscript tradition; that the statement: Christum in scutis notat does not point to a staurogram or a Christogram, but in accordance with the dream instruction to the emperor means a cross as a sign symbolising Christ. When comparing the information provided by Eusebius (HE IX,9,2-11) with that of Lactanz, it must be taken into account that Lactanz writes about a shield sign, whereas Eusebius writes about a field sign. This has consequences that have not yet been considered. |
|---|---|
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Römische Quartalschrift für christliche Altertumskunde und Kirchengeschichte
|