|
The ''Collectio canonum Quesnelliana'' is a vast collection of canonical and doctrinal documents (divided into ninety-eight chapters) prepared (probably) in Rome sometime between 494 and (probably) 610.〔M. Elliot, ''Canon Law Collections in England ca 600–1066: The Manuscript Evidence'', unpubl. PhD dissertation (University of Toronto, 2013), pp. 220–21.〕〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=Einsiedeln, Stiftsbibliothek, Codex 191(277) )〕 It was first identified by Pierre Pithou and first (edited by Pasquier Quesnel in 1675 ), whence it takes its modern name. The standard edition used today is (that prepared by Girolamo and Pietro Ballerini in 1757 ). ==Purpose, origin and organization== The collection can be divided broadly into three sections according to the nature of its contents: cc. I–V, containing conciliar canons from the major fourth-century eastern and African councils; cc. VI–LVII, being a long series of documents (mostly letters) pertaining to doctrinal disputes that arose from the teachings of Pelagius and Celestius and also of Nestorius and Eutyches―at the centre of which series is a dossier (c. XXV) of material pertaining to the council of Chalcedon in 451—and cc. LVIII–XCVIII, a collection of dogmatic and disciplinary letters written by Pope Leo I, many of which (most notably Leo’s ''Tomus'') were directed to eastern figures in Leo’s contests with the Eutychian and Monophysite heresies. The entire collection, with its focus on Chalcedon and the letters of Leo, is quite obviously meant as a manifesto against the Acacian schism, in which eastern Bishops led by Acacius, patriarch of Constantinople, challenged the decisions of the council of Chalcedon and the Christology set down in Pope Leo’s ''Tomus''. The compiler’s principal of selection thus seems to have been any and all documents that support doctrinal unity in general and Leonine Christology in particular. Interestingly, the compiler of the ''Quesnelliana'' has avoided inclusion of doubtful or spurious documents, like the so-called Symmachean forgeries and the ''Decretum Gelasianum de libris recipiendis''. But this would seem to be the extent of discrimination exercised in the compilation of the ''Quesnelliana''. Previous scholars have in fact spoken rather disparagingly of the overall organization of the ''Quesnelliana'', characterizing it as something of a hotchpotch, a patchwork of several older and smaller collections that were available to the compiler. Despite its organizational flaws, however, the ''Quesnelliana'' enjoyed some popularity in the Gallic church during the eighth century, and much of the ninth as well, until it was superseded by the more comprehensive historical collections (notably the ''Collectio canonum Dionysio-Hadriana'' and pseudo-Isidorian collections) that arose in the later Carolingian period. Of the large chronological canon collections to have come out of the early Middle Ages, the ''Quesnelliana'' is perhaps the earliest and, after the ''Collectio canonum Dionysiana'' and ''Collectio canonum Hispana'', probably the most influential. It contains Latin translations of the eastern councils that are (with the exception of the council of Chalcedon) taken from a now lost collection of Latin canons made ca. 420. This earliest Latin collection of fourth- and fifth-century conciliar canons was previously known to scholars as either the ''versio Isidori'' or the ''Collectio Maasseniana'', but is today referred to as the ''Corpus canonum Africano-Romanum''.〔For the title ''Corpus canonum Africanum-Romanum'', see L. Kéry, ''Canonical collections of the early Middle Ages (ca. 400–1140): a bibliographical guide to manuscripts and literature'', History of medieval canon law (Washington, D.C., 1999), 1–5. C.H. Turner gives a lucid account of the development and character of this collection in his "Chapters in the history of Latin MSS. of canons. V", in (''The journal of theological studies'' 30 (1929) ), 337–46, at pp. 338–39. E. Schwartz and H. Mordek have since made important modifications to Turner's account, and these are summarized in ''Clavis canonum: selected canon law collections before 1140. Access with data processing'', ed. L. Fowler-Magerl, MGH Hilfsmittel 21 (Hanover, 2005), pp. 24–7. Although now lost, portions of the collection are transmitted indirectly in several extant medieval canon law collections, including the ''collectiones Frisingensis prima'', ''Diessensis'', ''Wirceburgensis'', ''Weingartensis'' and the latter half of the ''Quesnelliana'' as found in the manuscript Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Lat. 2141. Turner collated the conciliar canons from all these collections under the siglum 'M', to which he added Berlin, Staatsbibliothek Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Phillipps 84.〕 The ''Africano-Romanum'' collection/translation predates the competing fifth-century Latin translation that Dionysius Exiguus referred to as the ''prisca'' (upon which the ''Collectio canonum Sanblasiana'' is based). Both the ''Africano-Romanum'' and ''prisca'' translations were largely superseded by the arrival, shortly after 500, of the superior translations of the several collections of Dionysius Exiguus. The exact date of the ''Quesnelliana''’s creation is not yet established, but it could not have been earlier than the appearance of the ''Africano-Romanum'' in the first half of the fifth century; nor could it have been earlier than the date of the ''Quesnelliana''’s most recent document, Pope Gelasius I’s ''Generale decretum'' (not to be confused with the spurious ''Decretum Gelasianum''), which dates to 494. Most historians have accepted the Ballerini brothers’ dating of the ''Quesnelliana'' to just before the end of the fifth century, probably during the pontificate of Pope Gelasius I (492–496).〔See (§4 in the Ballerinis' preface to the ''Quesnelliana'' ). See also (F. Maassen, ''Geschichte der Quellen und der Literatur des canonischen Rechts im Abendlande bis zum Ausgange des Mittelalters. Band I: die Rechtssammlungen bis zur Mitte des 9. Jahrhunderts'' (Graz, 1870), p. 490 ), and (''Ecclesiae occidentalis monumenta iuris antiquissima, canonum et conciliorum Graecorum interpretationes latinae'', 2 vols in 9 parts, ed. C.H. Turner (Oxford, 1899–1939)., vol. I, 2.i, p. xii ).〕 Older scholarship, beginning with the Ballerinis, argued that the ''Quesnelliana'' was a Gallic collection, though one with an admittedly "Roman colour". French historians then developed the theory that the collection originated at Arles, which was thought to have been something of a clearing house for canonical materials in the early sixth century. However, more recent scholarship, making much more of the ''Quesnelliana''’s "Roman colour", has argued for an Italian, possibly even Roman origin.〔See H. Wurm, ''Studien und Texte zur Dekretalensammlung des Dionysius Exiguus'', Kanonistische Studien und Texte 16 (Bonn, 1939), pp. 85–7, 221–23; W. Stürner, "Die Quellen der Fides Konstantins im ''Constitutum Constantini'' (§§ 3–5)", in ''Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte. Kanonistische Abteilung'' 55 (1969), 64–206, at pp. 78–9; H. Mordek, ed., ''Kirchenrecht und Reform im Frankenreich: die Collectio vetus Gallica, die älteste systematische Kanonessammlung des fränkischen Gallien. Studien und Edition'', Beiträge zur Geschichte und Quellenkunde des Mittelalters 1 (Berlin, 1975), p. 239; D. Jasper, "The Beginning of the decretal tradition: papal letters from the origin of the genre through the pontificate of Stephen V", in ''Papal letters in the early Middle Ages'', eds H. Fuhrmann and D. Jasper, History of medieval canon law (Washington, D.C., 2001), pp. 3–133, at pp. 32–3. The theory of a Roman origin is in some ways a return to the opinion of Pasquier Quesnel, the first editor of the ''Quesnelliana''; however, Quesnel's main thesis―that the ''Quesnelliana'' represented the official code of canon law for the Roman church―was fundamentally misguided, and has been universally rejected by modern scholarship. For a review of scholarly opinions (up to 1985) on the origin of the ''Quesnelliana'', see J. Gaudemet, ''Les sources du droit de l’église en occident du IIe au VIIe siècle'' (Paris, 1985), p. 133.〕 Relatively recent work (in 1985) by Joseph Van der Speeten has shown that the ''Quesnelliana'', or at least one of its constituent parts (namely the ''dossier de Nicée et de Sardique''), may have been used as a source for Dionysius's collections.〔See J. van der Speeten, "Le dossier de Nicée dans la Quesnelliana", in ''Sacris erudiri'' 28 (1985), 383–450, esp. pp. 449–50, where he concludes, "l’utilisation de Q() par Denys le Petit ... est tellement évidente pour les canons de Nicée, que C. H. Turner a pu écrire que Denys a pris la traduction des canons de Nicée comme fondement de son travail, que Denys n’a rien de fait d’autre que corriger le texte de Q d’après le grec. Mais ces affirmations sont tout aussi vraies pour le texte des canons de Sardique."〕 If true, this places the ''Quesnelliana'' definitively at Rome during the first decade of the sixth century. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Collectio canonum Quesnelliana」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|