Dans le cadre du séminaire “Jean Chrysostome : édition et histoire des textes”, le mercredi 18 mars 2026 de 14h à 16h, Juditha Oosterhuis-den Otter (Univ. d’Apeldoorn, Pays-Bas) donnera à l’IRHT (14, cours des Humanités, 93322 Aubervilliers), salle 2.001 (2e étage) une communication en anglais intitulée:
The relationship between four pseudochrysostomic homilies on Job (CPG 4564) and an anonymous Latin commentary on Job (CSEL 96): puzzling connections
Voici la présentation qu’elle en a rédigée:
A critical edition of four pseudo-Chrysostomian homilies on Job will soon be appearing in CCSG. All four homilies have been handed down under the name of John Chrysostom. Today, however, Severian of Gabala is recognised to be the author of Homilies II-IV.
Besides similarities between these homilies and various Greek commentaries on Job, there are also striking parallels with an anonymous Latin commentary on Job. This commentary is published in 2006 in CSEL by Kenneth Steinhauser. There is much debate about when the commentary was written and who can be considered its author. It is assumed that the author is an Arian and that the commentary stands in the Antiochian tradition. In 2003, Leslie Dossey argues that the Latin author used the homilies by Severian directly as a source. Since Severian preached in Constantinople between 400 and 430 AD, this could provide a terminus post quem for the period of origin. However, Kenneth Steinhauser believes the commentary to have been written at the end of the fourth century. If he is correct, it is impossible for the Latin author to have used the homilies as a direct source. He explains the parallels between the Latin commentary and the homilies by suggesting, among other things, that the Latin author and Severian may have drawn on a common homiletic tradition.
My aim is to investigate whether more can be said about the relationship between the Latin commentary and the four Greek homilies. I intend to do this by studying all the parallels between the commentary and the homilies. Parallels that can also be found in other Greek authors should be disregarded, as they can be considered commonplaces of patristic exegesis of Job. It will be demonstrated that the beginning of the fifth century is a plausible terminus post quem for the origin of the commentary.
Lien de visioconférence (attention il est nouveau): https://visio.numerique.gouv.fr/zmg-zgql-ghe
Pour participer par téléphone, composez le +33 9 79 94 06 78 et saisissez ce code : 802 226 9299#
Contact : pierre.augustin@irht.cnrs.fr, guillaume.bady@mom.fr
