Brief an die Wittenberger Theologen

From Theatrum Paracelsicum
Revision as of 16:58, 25 June 2022 by JP (talk | contribs) (Created page with "<b>Printing History, Manuscripts</b>. Edited by Johannes Staricius in the collection <i>Philosophia de limbo</i> (1618) where it was followed by a compilation of different Paracelsian writings on the Lord’s Supper. Five manuscripts (the Gotha manuscript in Valentin Weigel’s hand). <b>Editions</b>. Not edited by Huser, Sudhoff or Goldammer. <b>Relationship between different versions</b>. There seems to be only one version. <b>Structure, genre/form, perspective, sty...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Printing History, Manuscripts. Edited by Johannes Staricius in the collection Philosophia de limbo (1618) where it was followed by a compilation of different Paracelsian writings on the Lord’s Supper. Five manuscripts (the Gotha manuscript in Valentin Weigel’s hand).

Editions. Not edited by Huser, Sudhoff or Goldammer.

Relationship between different versions. There seems to be only one version.

Structure, genre/form, perspective, style. Written in the first person in the form of a letter, directly addressing the recipients.

Relationship to other texts. Written to accompany and recommend the author’s (i.e. Paracelsus’s) interpretation of Matthew 1–5.

Authenticity, authorship. The authenticity of this letter of Paracelsus to Martin Luther, Johannes Bugenhagen and Philipp Melanchthon accompanying Paracelsus’s interpretation of Matthew 1–5 was and is still disputed, especially among historians of Paracelsus. It has been included in the critical editions of the letters of both Luther (1933) and Melanchthon (1995). Sudhoff considered it spurious or at least questionable. Kurt Goldammer was uncertain about the date 1525, Hartmut Rudolph contributed arguments for its authenticity, Stefan Rhein voted against authenticity while Ute Gause tended to consider it authentic, and Kühlmann and Telle rather doubted its authenticity. Dane Daniel, however, sees “little reason to doubt” it, based on the theology implied in the letter.

Time of writing. Written ca. 1525 (if authentic) or the early 1560s (if spurious).

Manuscripts:

  • Görlitz, Oberlausitzische Bibliothek der Wissenschaften: Th vi 146, 167–168, 249
  • Gotha, Forschungsbibliothek: Chart. B 908, f. IIIr, IVr–VIv, 250–251
  • Kopenhagen, Det Kongelige Bibliotek: Thott 35 folio, f. 1r–1v
  • Kopenhagen, Det Kongelige Bibliotek: Thott 119 kvart, f. 1r–1v
  • Wolfenbüttel, Herzog August Bibliothek: Cod. Guelf. 194.3 Extrav., f. 1r–2r

First printed:

  • 1618 (in: Philosophia de limbo […] Doctoris Aurelij Philippi Theophrasti Paracelsi ab Hohenhaim, ed. Johannes Staricius (Magdeburg: Johann Francke, 1618); VD17 23:263455M; Sudhoff, Bibliographia Paracelsica, 508–511 n° 303).

Critical edition:

  • D. Martin Luthers Werke. Kritische Gesamtausgabe (Weimarer Ausgabe), Briefwechsel vol. 3 (Weimar, 1933), 465–467 n° 850 [based on the Gotha manuscript]
  • Melanchthons Briefwechsel, vol. T2, ed. Richard Wetzel (Stuttgart, 1995), 269–273 n° 385 [based on the Görlitz manuscript].