Chaldean Oracle

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Chaldean Oracle (Greek λόγια Χαλδαικά lógia Chaldaiká ) is a name first attested in the 5th century for an ancient religious didactic poem (or a collection of poems) in the Greek language. It treats cosmology and the doctrine of the soul from the point of view of the desired salvation and gives rules of conduct and instructions for the theurgy with which salvation is to be achieved. The oracles were in the highest esteem in those circles in which they were considered authentic revelations from gods.

Lore

The poetry as a whole has not been preserved. Of the verses ( hexameters ) that were probably written in the second half of the 2nd century, only 210 definitely authentic and 16 dubious fragments have survived. The commenting literature of the ancient Neo-Platonists is also lost.

Around four fifths of the fragments come from the late ancient Neo-Platonist Proclus ; they are passed down partly in his surviving works, partly in quotations from a lost work. The rest is largely due to the late antique Neo-Platonist Damascius .

Wilhelm Kroll collected the fragments and published them in a Latin treatise in 1894. Today the fragments are cited according to the numbering in the critical edition of Édouard des Places , first published in 1971 .

Emergence

Traditionally , the author of the oracles is Julian the Theurg , who lived with his father Julian the Chaldean in the 2nd century and is said to have worked with him in the recording of the revelations. The entry dedicated to him in the Suda , a Byzantine lexicon, reports on his activities :

Julian, the son of the aforementioned (Julians des Chaldäers) , lived at the time of the Emperor Marcus Antoninus ( Mark Aurel ) . He, too, wrote theurgics, telestics and proverbs in verse, as well as other works dealing with hidden things about this kind of knowledge. Once, when the Romans were dying of thirst, it is said to have conjured up dark storm clouds and generated heavy rain with successive thunderbolts and lightning. It is said that Julian did this through some knowledge. However, others claim that the Egyptian philosopher Arnouphis performed the miracle.

The “Proverbs in Verses” ( Lógia di 'epōn ) of Julian's the Theurge cited in the Suda are identified with the Chaldean oracles. The historian Cassius Dio also reports on the “rain wonder” ; it happened during a campaign by Marcus Aurelius. The Romans were trapped by enemies in a place without water and were dying of thirst when a sudden thunderstorm brought their rescue. The Christian version of the legend claimed that the prayer of the Christians in the army brought about salvation.

The Egyptian Arnouphis, mentioned in the Suda, is also a historical figure attested by inscriptions. Cassius Dio calls him Mark Aurel's companion and mentions that the rain miracle was attributed to him. Therefore, the research assumes that in the original version of the narrative Arnouphis was mentioned as the actual or at least possible author of the miracle and that his role was only transferred to Julian the Theurge much later - in the late third or early fourth century - either because Julian was better known at the time than Arnouphis or because it was intended to give him authority. If so, the possibility that Julian the Theurg and his father are invented figures is to be reckoned with, for no evidence of their existence can be found in the sources before the late third century. If Julian the Theurg is not the author of the oracles, they may not have originated until the 3rd century. John Vanderspoel assumes that it was composed in the period 280–305 and suspects that the author could be Iulius Iulianus , the grandfather of Emperor Julian . Polymnia Athanassiadi disagrees ; she considers the attribution of the Chaldean oracles to Julian the Theurge to be credible.

It is unclear whether the terms “Chaldean” and “ Chaldean ” are to be understood concretely or metaphorically , or both. You can refer to the fact that Julian the Chaldean (actually or allegedly) came from Chaldea (or more generally: from the Orient), or that the teachings presented in the oracles were associated with “Chaldean” (oriental) wisdom and Julian called "the Chaldean" in such a figurative sense. However, Chaldeans are not mentioned in the surviving fragments and the traditional teachings show a Greek character.

content

Because of the fragmentary nature of the tradition, the content of the oracles can only be reconstructed in outline. The author was evidently familiar with the worldview of Platonism , especially with Plato's dialogue Parmenides , on whose ideas he fell back. With regard to the transmitted details, it should be noted that the Neo-Platonists, to whom the present information can be traced back, interpreted the oracles in terms of their own philosophical models and thus possibly significantly changed the original meaning.

The oracles are attributed to different gods. They are the gods' answers to human questions, but the questions have not been handed down. The goddess Hecate plays a particularly important role . In contrast to a popular tradition in which Hecate appears primarily as a terrifying figure, she is shown here as a benevolent, helpful goddess. It is the life-giving principle from which the world soul emerges. According to an older research opinion, it is to be equated with the world soul, but in more recent research the view has prevailed that it is superior to the world soul and its origin. Hecate is also the source of virtue or excellence ( aretḗ ) .

According to tradition, the oracles come from the divine triad , to which the hierarchical world order can be traced back. According to the teaching of the oracles, the triad culminates in the intelligible “father”, the supreme principle, which is characterized as fire. This principle represents a unity, but since it transcends the world of numbers, its designation as " the one " is rejected. The other two components of the Triassic are “power” ( dýnamis ) and intellect ( nous ). They are subordinate to the Father, but in some ways form a unit with him. The intellect exists twice, there are two intellects with different functions (the meaning of the doctrine of the two intellects and their functions is unclear and controversial in research). The father has "withdrawn", that is, he has withdrawn and thus released from his original unity with strength and intellect (at least in certain respects). Through this act of separation he made it possible that, in addition to the undifferentiated divine unity, there is also diversity and thus a diverse world. The father is not active himself as the creator of the world, but this task is taken over by the intellect as a demiurge .

The oracles take the Platonic ideas as the thoughts of the father. At the level of the Father, from which they arise, they form an undifferentiated unity. From there they descend to the level of intellect where they differentiate. Via the world soul, they have an impact on the sensually perceptible world.

It is fundamentally possible for the human soul to recognize the Father. However, the knowledge of God does not take place like the knowledge of things, because the highest deity is not an individual thing. What is needed is a special ability, an instrument of the soul that the oracles call the "blossom of the intellect". A prerequisite for the act of knowledge is that the mind is emptied of all its contents and enters a passive state of receptivity. He then does not direct his “eye” directly to the deity, but is reached by it.

Various types of non-embodied spiritual beings appear in the oracles, including the "angels" and the messengers called íynges , who mediate between the divine world and humans, as well as the synocheís ("cohesionists"), who are responsible for maintaining the cosmic order to care. Eros plays an important role, as it is understood as a universal power that pervades the universe and harmonizes it. The doctrine of the migration of souls is proclaimed in a variant which - contrary to Plato's view - declares the incarnation of human souls in animals to be impossible, since the rational human soul cannot go against its nature in the unreasonable .

An important theme of the oracles is the descent of the soul from the spiritual world into the physical world and its intended ascent, i.e. its return to its home. The descent has led the soul to earth through the seven planetary spheres described in Plato's dialogue Timaeus , using the soul chariot . So it has come under the power of the compulsion in the material realm. The goal that she is now pursuing is her rescue from the “unhappy earth” and the regaining of her original freedom. The oracles describe the steps and means required for this. If the soul remembers its origin and follows the instructions of the oracles, it can break away from its bond with the earth and strive towards the divine light. In doing so, however, she is hindered by evil demons. She is supposed to align herself “naked” with the divine, that is, by turning away from the body that envelops her like a dress. The expectation is expressed that the soul will finally escape matter with its ascent again and will not descend again, since it no longer has any inclination to do so after its return home.

What is striking is the discrepancy between the common Chaldean image of the Roman Empire and the teachings of the oracles. The Chaldeans were seen as astronomers, astrologers, fortune tellers and - especially among Latin authors - often as charlatans. In the oracles, on the other hand, astrology as well as other divination methods (bird and sacrifice viewing) are rejected because divination is superfluous and distracts from the essential - the redemption of the soul. Concentration on the virtues is decisive for the oracle's path to salvation, the investigation of the laws of the material world, including the influences of the stars, is considered a waste of time.

reception

Antiquity

In ancient times, the oracles were usually only briefly referred to as "the proverbs" ( ta lógia ); the adjective “Chaldean” was rarely added before the 11th century. The sources often speak of "the Chaldeans" or "the theurges", which presumably suggests that the record of the oracles was regarded as a joint work of Julians the theurge and his father.

In the surviving fragments of the works of the Middle Platonist Numenios , who lived in the 2nd century, there are similarities with the Chaldean oracles, which reveal an influence. It is unclear whether Numenios knew the oracles or their authors knew the works of Numenios or both. Contact between the two possibly came about because the author of the oracles was a priest in the Temple of Belos in Numenios' hometown of Apamea in the Roman province of Syria .

In the 3rd century the Neo-Platonist Porphyrios studied the Chaldean oracles. One of his lost works is the writing "To (the oracles) Julians des Chaldäers " ( Eis ta Ioulianoú tou Chaldaíou ), which is perhaps identical with the also not preserved writing "The Oracle of the Chaldeans" ( Tōn Chaldaíōn ta lógia ). In late antiquity , too , the Chaldean oracles were received intensively by the Neoplatonists and were held in great esteem by them; therefore they are referred to in the research literature as the "Bible of the Neoplatonists". Especially Iamblichus of Chalkis , who very likely lived and taught in Apamea, held her in great esteem. He wrote an extensive commentary on at least 28 books that has not survived. Emperor Julian, as well as the Neo-Platonists Synesius of Cyrene and Proclus, were enthusiastic followers of the oracles' teachings, and Damascius, who was the last head of the Neoplatonic school in Athens in the early 6th century, studied their interpretation. Proclus' extensive commentary on the oracles is lost today.

middle Ages

Michael Psellos , a Byzantine polymath of the 11th century, studied the oracles extensively. He also noted similarities and differences between their worldview and Christian teaching. The basis of his knowledge of the work was the commentary of Proclus , which he might not be able to use directly; perhaps he only had excerpts and quotations in a late antique Christian counter-script. He mentioned the oracles in several of his works and wrote three writings in which he dealt exclusively with their teachings. These three writings have been preserved. It is a commentary (Greek Exḗgēsis ) on the oracles, a "sketch" ( Hypotýpōsis ) and a "statement" ( Ékthesis ). The works of Psellos are important sources for our knowledge of the Chaldean oracles; 42 fragments have come down to us through him. Another source is the “17. Letter ”from the Byzantine scholar Michael Italikos (12th century), who drew his knowledge of the teachings of the oracles from a lost script that was also available to Psellos.

In the late Middle Ages , the Byzantine scholar Georgios Gemistos Plethon , who was particularly interested in the religious dimension of Platonism, compiled 36 of the 42 oracle sayings that he found at Psellos (60 partly defective hexameters); he left out the other six, which he thought were false. He made considerable editorial interventions in the text. He also wrote a commentary and a "brief explanation of the unclear statements in these oracles". As the author of the teachings he regarded Zarathustra , whose disciples had recorded them. He was convinced that the teachings of Zoroaster were adopted by Plato and were therefore consistent with Platonism. He considered the oracles to be the oldest surviving document of this wisdom tradition, which he wanted to revive. In the 15th century his collection of oracle texts was translated into Arabic in the Ottoman Empire .

Early modern age

Plethon's collection brought Proverbs to the West in the 15th century. The humanist Marsilio Ficino († 1499) had a copy of the text including Plethon's commentary. Giano Lascaris translated the oracles into Latin between 1500 and 1503. The first edition of the Greek text appeared in Paris in 1538. The following year a Latin translation of Proverbs and Plethon's Commentary was printed in Paris. The poet François Habert (* around 1510, † around 1561) translated the sayings into French verse ( Les divins oracles de Zoroastre , published in Paris in 1558). Johannes Opsopoeus (1556–1596) published an edition with a new Latin translation in 1589; he also edited the commentaries on the Psellos and Plethon.

In the West, Plethon's view of the origins of proverbs in the Renaissance was initially accepted without criticism. It was believed that these were authentic teachings of Zoroaster. Scholars such as Marsilio Ficino, the papal librarian Agostino Steuco († 1548) and Francesco Patrizi († 1597) researched the oracles under this assumption. There was a widespread belief that one was dealing with evidence of the most ancient wisdom, which could be used to corroborate philosophical claims and arguments. In 1591 Patrizi's work Zoroaster et eius CCCXX oracula Chaldaica ("Zarathustra and his 320 Chaldean oracles") was published, the first independent modern collection of Chaldean fragments (edition and Latin translation). Patrizi took the passages from the works of Proclus, Damascius, Simplikios , Olympiodoros and Synesios. In doing so, he increased the number of known fragment texts by more than five times. His enthusiasm for the teachings of the pseudo-Zarathustra was one of the circumstances that brought him into conflict with the Inquisition . In 1596 his work Nova de universis philosophia , which contained numerous oracle quotations and the edition in the appendix, was placed on the index of forbidden books, all copies found in Rome should be destroyed. Nevertheless, the reception of his edition of the oracles remained extremely broad, until around the middle of the 18th century a new edition appeared almost every decade. In the 17th century, however, numerous scholars rejected the claim that Zarathustra was the author. Criticism of the traditional ascription became increasingly popular in the 18th and 19th centuries. In the theosophy of the 19th and early 20th centuries ( Helena Petrovna Blavatsky , Annie Besant ), however, the authenticity of the pseudo-Zoroastrian oracles was retained.

Editions and translations

  • Ruth Majercik (Ed.): The Chaldean Oracles . Brill, Leiden 1989, ISBN 90-04-09043-6 (Greek text, English translation, introduction and commentary)
  • Édouard des Places (Ed.): Oracles chaldaïques, avec un choix de commentaires anciens . 5th edition, Les Belles Lettres, Paris 2010, ISBN 2-251-00203-0 (critical edition of the Greek text and French translation)

Medieval commentaries

  • Dominic J. O'Meara (Ed.): Michaelis Pselli philosophica minora , Volume 2: Opuscula psychologica, theologica, daemonologica . Teubner, Leipzig 1989, ISBN 3-322-00462-7 , pp. 126–151 (critical edition of the three writings of Psellos)
  • Brigitte Tambrun-Krasker (Ed.): Magika logia tōn apo Zōroastrou magōn. Geōrgiou Gemistou Plēthōnos exēgēsis eis ta auta logia. Oracle's Chaldaïques. Recension de Georges Gémiste Pléthon . Vrin, Paris et al. 1995, ISBN 2-7116-9832-7 (critical edition of Plethon's oracle collection, his commentary and his “brief explanation” with French translation and commentary; in addition, pp. 157–171 there is the Arabic version of Michel Tardieu Collection with French translation)

literature

Overview representations

Investigations

  • Polymnia Athanassiadi: The Chaldaean Oracles: Theology and Theurgy. In: Polymnia Athanassiadi, Michael Frede (Ed.): Pagan Monotheism in Late Antiquity. Clarendon Press, Oxford 1999, ISBN 0-19-815252-3 , pp. 149-183.
  • Álvaro Fernández Fernández: La teúrgia de los Oráculos Caldeos. Cuestiones de léxico y de contexto histórico . Granada 2011 (Dissertation, Universidad de Granada, online only)
  • Otto Geudtner: The theory of the soul of the Chaldean oracles. Hain, Meisenheim am Glan 1971, ISBN 3-445-00786-3 .
  • Hans Lewy : Chaldaean Oracles and Theurgy. Mysticism, Magic and Platonism in the Later Roman Empire. 3rd edition, Institut d'Études Augustiniennes, Paris 2011, ISBN 978-2-85121-243-6 (thorough investigation, published after the death of the author who died in 1945; partly outdated; with supplement Les Oracles chaldaïques 1891–2011 )
  • Henri-Dominique Saffrey: Les Néoplatoniciens et les Oracles Chaldaïques. In: Revue des Études Augustiniennes. Vol. 27, 1981, pp. 209-225.
  • Helmut Seng , Michel Tardieu (ed.): The Chaldean Oracle: Context - Interpretation - Reception. Winter, Heidelberg 2010, ISBN 978-3-8253-5862-4 .
  • Helmut Seng: Un livre sacré de l'Antiquité tardive: les Oracles Chaldaïques. Brepols, Turnhout 2016, ISBN 978-2-503-56518-7

Web links

Reading editions (not scientifically usable)

Remarks

  1. ^ Wilhelm Kroll: De oraculis Chaldaicis , Breslau 1894, reprint Olms, Hildesheim 1962.
  2. ^ Ada Adler (Ed.): Suidae Lexicon , Vol. 2, Leipzig 1931, p. 642 (Adler No. I 434). Online: [1] .
  3. ^ Richard Goulet: Iulianus (Julien) le Théurge . In: Richard Goulet (ed.): Dictionnaire des philosophes antiques , Vol. 3, Paris 2000, pp. 978–979, here: 978.
  4. ↑ Garth Fowden: Pagan Versions of the Rain Miracle of AD 172 . In: Historia 36, 1987, pp. 83-95, here: 87-94; Henri-Dominique Saffrey: Les Néoplatoniciens et les Oracles Chaldaïques , in: Revue des Études Augustiniennes 27, 1981, pp. 209–225, here: 213f .; Helmut Seng: Kosmagoi, azonoi, zonaioi , Heidelberg 2009, pp. 145–147.
  5. ↑ Rowland Smith: Julian's Gods , London 1995, pp. 92–97, expresses skepticism about the historicity of father and son . Cf. Henri-Dominique Saffrey: Les Néoplatoniciens et les Oracles Chaldaïques , in: Revue des Études Augustiniennes 27, 1981, pp. 209–225, here: 210–215; John Vanderspoel: Correspondence and Correspondents of Julius Julianus . In: Byzantion 69, 1999, pp. 396-478, here: 459-463.
  6. ^ John Vanderspoel: Correspondence and Correspondents of Julius Julianus . In: Byzantion 69, 1999, pp. 396-478, here: 459-465.
  7. ↑ Polymnia Athanassiadi: Julian the Theurgist: Man or Myth? In: Helmut Seng, Michel Tardieu (eds.): The Chaldean Oracle: Context - Interpretation - Reception , Heidelberg 2010, pp. 193–208; Polymnia Athanassiadi: The Chaldaean Oracles: Theology and Theurgy . In: Polymnia Athanassiadi, Michael Frede (ed.): Pagan Monotheism in Late Antiquity , Oxford 1999, pp. 149–183, here: 150.
  8. ↑ Gerald Bechtle: A neglected testimonium (fragment?) On the Chaldaean Oracles . In: Classical Quarterly 56, 2006, pp. 563-581, here: 563-565, 579.
  9. ↑ Ruth Majercik: Chaldaean triads in Neoplatonic exegesis: some reconsiderations . In: Classical Quarterly 51, 2001, pp. 265-296; Otto Geudtner: The theory of the soul of the Chaldean oracles , Meisenheim am Glan 1971, p. 2f., 4.
  10. ↑ See the study by Sarah Iles Johnston: Hecate Soteira. A Study of Hekate's Roles in the Chaldean Oracles and Related Literature , Atlanta (Georgia) 1990. Johnston later modified her interpretation of Hekate's role; see John F. Finamore, Sarah Iles Johnston: The Chaldaean Oracles. In: Lloyd P. Gerson (Ed.): The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity , Vol. 1, Cambridge 2010, pp. 161-173, here: 165f. and note 15. See Helmut Seng: Un livre sacré de l'Antiquité tardive: les Oracles Chaldaïques , Turnhout 2016, pp. 52–56, 81–84.
  11. ↑ See Gerald Bechtle: A neglected testimonium (fragment?) On the Chaldaean Oracles . In: Classical Quarterly 56, 2006, pp. 563-581, here: 566, 576-581.
  12. ↑ John F. Finamore, Sarah Iles Johnston: The Chaldaean Oracles. In: Lloyd P. Gerson (Ed.): The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity , Vol. 1, Cambridge 2010, pp. 161-173, here: 164.
  13. ↑ John F. Finamore, Sarah Iles Johnston: The Chaldaean Oracles. In: Lloyd P. Gerson (Ed.): The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity , Vol. 1, Cambridge 2010, pp. 161-173, here: 167.
  14. ↑ Ruth Majercik (Ed.): The Chaldaean Oracles , Leiden 1989, p. 16.
  15. ↑ Otto Geudtner: The theory of the soul of the Chaldean oracles , Meisenheim am Glan 1971, p. 15f.
  16. ↑ Otto Geudtner: Die Seelenlehre der Chaldean Orakel , Meisenheim am Glan 1971, pp. 56-77.
  17. ↑ Otto Geudtner: Die Seelenlehre der Chaldean Orakel , Meisenheim am Glan 1971, pp. 11, 13, 16–34.
  18. ^ Ilinca Tanaseanu-Döbler: Wise men or charlatans? Chaldean images of the Greco-Roman Empire and the Chaldean oracles . In: Helmut Seng, Michel Tardieu (eds.): The Chaldean oracles: Context - Interpretation - Reception , Heidelberg 2010, pp. 19–42, here: 34f., 40.
  19. ↑ Polymnia Athanassiadi: Apamea and the Chaldaean Oracles: A holy city and a holy book . In: Andrew Smith (Ed.): The Philosopher and Society in Late Antiquity , Swansea 2005, pp. 117-143, here: 121, 126; Polymnia Athanassiadi: Julian the Theurgist: Man or Myth? In: Helmut Seng, Michel Tardieu (eds.): The Chaldean Oracle: Context - Interpretation - Reception , Heidelberg 2010, pp. 193–208, here: 201. Cf. Otto Geudtner: Die Seelenlehre der Chaldean Orakel , Meisenheim am Glan 1971 , P. 1. Henri-Dominique Saffrey has a different opinion: Les Néoplatoniciens et les Oracles Chaldaïques . In: Revue des Études Augustiniennes 27, 1981, pp. 209–225, here: 210f.
  20. ↑ This is what Polymnia Athanassiadi suspects; see their relevant research: Apamea and the Chaldaean Oracles: A holy city and a holy book . In: Andrew Smith (ed.): The Philosopher and Society in Late Antiquity , Swansea 2005, pp. 117-143, here: 123-125, 129-133; Julian the Theurgist: Man or Myth? In: Helmut Seng, Michel Tardieu (eds.): The Chaldean Oracle: Context - Interpretation - Reception , Heidelberg 2010, pp. 193–208, here: 196–203; The Chaldaean Oracles: Theology and Theurgy . In: Polymnia Athanassiadi, Michael Frede (ed.): Pagan Monotheism in Late Antiquity , Oxford 1999, pp. 149-183, here: 153-156. Cf. Ruth Majercik: The Chaldean Oracles , Leiden 1989, p. 3 and note 11.
  21. ↑ Polymnia Athanassiadi: Apamea and the Chaldaean Oracles: A holy city and a holy book . In: Andrew Smith (ed.): The Philosopher and Society in Late Antiquity , Swansea 2005, pp. 117–143, here: 138 Note 10. Cf. Angelika Wintjes: The oracles as means of revelation in Porphyrios . In: Helmut Seng, Michel Tardieu (ed.): The Chaldean Oracle: Context - Interpretation - Reception , Heidelberg 2010, pp. 43–62.
  22. ↑ Polymnia Athanassiadi: The Chaldaean Oracles: Theology and Theurgy . In: Polymnia Athanassiadi, Michael Frede (eds.): Pagan Monotheism in Late Antiquity , Oxford 1999, pp. 149–183, here: 152 and note 15; Henri-Dominique Saffrey: Les Néoplatoniciens et les Oracles Chaldaïques . In: Revue des Études Augustiniennes 27, 1981, pp. 209–225, here: 209; Otto Geudtner: The doctrine of the soul of the Chaldean oracles , Meisenheim am Glan 1971, p. 2 and note 10.
  23. ↑ John Dillon: Iamblichos de Chalkis . In: Richard Goulet (ed.): Dictionnaire des philosophes antiques , Vol. 3, Paris 2000, pp. 824-836, here: 833. See also Friedrich W. Cremer: Die Chaldean Orakel and Jamblich de mysteriis , Meisenheim am Glan 1969 .
  24. ↑ On Julian see Anna Penati: L'influenza del sistema caldaico sul pensiero teologico dell'imperatore Giuliano . In: Rivista di Filosofia neo-scolastica 75, 1983, pp. 543-562; Rowland Smith: Julian's Gods , London 1995, pp. 91f., 143f., 151-157, 162.
  25. ↑ See about him Otto Geudtner: Die Seelenlehre der Chaldean Orakel , Meisenheim am Glan 1971, p. 5f.
  26. ↑ This is the view taken by Leendert Gerrit Westerink : Proclus, Procopius, Psellus . In: Mnemosyne 10, 1942, pp. 275-280. Polymnia Athanassiadi: The Chaldaean Oracles: Theology and Theurgy disagrees . In: Polymnia Athanassiadi, Michael Frede (ed.): Pagan Monotheism in Late Antiquity , Oxford 1999, pp. 149–183, here: 150f. Note 7; she advocates direct use. See Helmut Seng: Kosmagoi, azonoi, zonaioi , Heidelberg 2009, pp. 136–141.
  27. ^ Michael Stausberg : Faszination Zarathustra , Berlin 1998, part 1, pp. 42–44, 57–69; Polymnia Athanassiadi: Byzantine Commentators on the Chaldaean Oracles: Psellos and Plethon . In: Katerina Ierodiakonou (ed.): Byzantine Philosophy and its Ancient Sources , Oxford 2002, pp. 237-252.
  28. ^ Michael Stausberg: Faszination Zarathustra , Berlin 1998, part 1, pp. 127–129.
  29. ↑ For the early modern translations see Helmut Seng: Translations of the Chaldaean oracles in the early modern times . In: Wolfgang Kofler et al. (Ed.): Pontes V. Translation as a mediator of ancient literature , Innsbruck 2009, pp. 82–98.
  30. ↑ Michael Stausberg: Faszination Zarathustra , Berlin 1998, part 1, p. 83f .; on Ficino's reception of the Pseudo-Zarathustra pp. 93, 122–205, 214–228; on Steuco pp. 262-290.
  31. ↑ Michael Stausberg provides a detailed account of Patrizi's role: Faszination Zarathustra , Berlin 1998, Part 1, pp. 291–304, 311–324, 328–330, 336–393.
  32. ↑ See also Michael Stausberg: Faszination Zarathustra , Berlin 1998, part 1, pp. 84–92.
  33. ^ Michael Stausberg: Faszination Zarathustra , Berlin 1998, part 1, pp. 435–437.