Chaldean Oracle – Wikipedia

Posted on by

Chaldean oracle (Griechisch words Chaldean Chaldaiika Lógia ) is a name for the first time in the 5th century for an antique religious teaching poem (or a collection of poems) in Greek. It deals with cosmology and soul theory from the point of view of the desired redemption and gives rules of conduct and instructions for theurgy with which redemption is to be obtained. The oracles were highest in the circles in which they were considered authentic revelations of gods.

The seal has not been preserved as a whole. Of the verses (hexameters), which were probably created in the second half of the 2nd century, only 210 are surely preserved authentic and 16 dubious fragments. The commenting literature of the ancient Neoplatonists is also lost.

Around four fifths of the fragments come from the late antique new platonist Proklos; Some of them have been handed down in his preserved works, some of which are handed down in quotations from a lost work. The rest is largely owe to the late antique Neoplatonian Damaskios.

Wilhelm Kroll collected the fragments and published in a Latin treatise in 1894. [first] Today, the fragments are cited after numbering in the critical edition of Édouard des Place, which was first published in 1971.

The author of the oracle traditionally applies to Julian the Theurge, who, together with his father Julian, lived the Chaldean in the 2nd century and is said to have worked with him when recording the revelations. The entry in Suda, a Byzantine lexicon, reports on his work:

Julian, the son of the aforementioned (Julians des Chaldäers) , lived at the time of the emperor Marcus Antoninus (Mark Aurel) . He also wrote theurgics, telestics and sayings in verses as well as other works of hidden acts about this kind of knowledge. Once, when the Romans were thirsty, he is said to have conjured up dark storm clouds and heavy rain with consecutive thunderstorms and flashing. It is said that Julian did this through a certain knowledge. However, others claim that the Egyptian philosopher Arnouphis did the miracle. [2]

The “sayings in verses” listed in the Suda ( Lógia of ‘epōn ) Julian’s Julian are identified with the Chaldean oracles. [3] The historian Cassius Dio also reports of the “rain miracle”; It happened during a campaign of Mark Aurel. The Romans were locked by the enemies in one place without water and were the thirst when a sudden thunderstorm brought the rescue. The Christian version of the legend claimed that the prayer of the Christians in the army had caused the rescue.

The Egyptian Arnouphis mentioned in the Suda is a historical figure, which is also inscribed. Cassius Dio describes him as a companion of Mark Aurels and mentions that the rainwunder was attributed to him. Therefore, research assumes that in the original version of the narrative of Arnouphi as an actual or at least possible author of the miracle, his role was only transferred to Julian 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 to be given authority. [4] If this applies, the possibility of Julian and his father can be expected, because in the time before the late third century there are no indications of their existence in the sources. [5] If Julian is not the author of the oracle’s author, they may not have been created until the 3rd century. John Vanderspoel accepts the formation in the period 280-305 and suspects that the author could be Iulius Iulianus, the grandfather of the Emperor Julian. [6] A different opinion is Polymnia Athanassiadi; She considers the attribution of the Chaldean oracle to Julian the Theurgen is credible. [7]

It is unclear whether the names are to be understood in concrete or metaphorical or metaphorical. You can refer to the fact that Julian the Chaldean (actually or supposedly) came from Chaldäa (or more general: from the Orient), or that the teachings set out in the oracles were linked and connected with “Chaldean” (oriental) wisdom and Julian called “the Chaldeans” in such a meaning. However, Chaldeans are not mentioned in the fragments obtained and the traditional teachings show a Greek character.

Because of the fragmentary character of tradition, the content of the oracle can only be reconstructed outdated. The author was apparently familiar with the worldview of Platonism, especially with Plato’s dialogue Parmenides , on the ideas of which he returned. [8] With regard to the detailed details, it must be taken into account that the new platonists, to whom the available information goes back to the oracle in the sense of their own philosophical models, interpreted the original meaning significantly. [9]

The oracle sayings are attributed to various gods. They are answers from the gods to questions of people, but the questions have not been handed down. The goddess Hekate plays a particularly important role. In contrast to a folk tradition, in which Hekate appears mainly as a scary figure, it is portrayed here as a benevolent, helpful goddess. It is the life -giving principle from which the world soul emerges. After an older research opinion, it is equivalent to the world soul, but in recent research, it has become clear that the world soul is overridden and its origin. Hekate is also the source of virtue or excellence (aretḗ) . [ten]

According to tradition, the oracles come from the Divine Triassic (threeness), to which the hierarchical world order is due. After the oracle teaches, the Triassic culminates in the intelligible “father”, the top principle that is characterized as a fire. This principle represents a unit, but since it transcends the world of numbers, its name is rejected as “one”. The other two components of the Triass are the “strength” ( mattress ) and the intellect ( We ). They are subordinate to the father, but in a way form a unit with him. The intellect exists twice, there are two intellects with different functions (the importance of teaching from the two intellect and their functions is unclear and controversial in research). The father “withdrawn”, that is, he has withdrawn and thus solved from his original unit with the strength and intellect (at least in a way). With this act of separation, it made it possible for the undifferentiated divine unit to exist in diversity and thus a varied world. The father does not work as a world creator, but the intellect takes over this task as a demiurg. [11]

The Platonic ideas are seen in the oracles as the thoughts of the father. At the father level from which they emerge, they form an undifferentiated unit. From there you descend to the level of the intellect on which you differentiate yourself. They affect the sensually perceptible world via the world soul. [twelfth]

In principle, it is possible for the human soul to recognize the father. However, knowledge of God does not take place like the knowledge of things, because the highest deity is not a single. A special ability is required, an instrument of the soul called the oracle “blossom of the intellect”. One prerequisite for the act of knowledge is that the spirit is emptied by all its content and enters into a passive state of susceptibility. He then does not direct his “eye” directly on the deity, but is reached by it. [13]

There are different types of non -embodied intellectual beings in the oracles, including the “angels” and the ynges mentioned messengers that convey between the divine world and people, as well as the synocheís (“Together”) that ensure the preservation of the cosmic order. Eros plays an important role, which is understood as a universal, the universe penetrating and harmonizing power. [14] The soul migration theory is announced, in a variant that – in contrast to Plato’s view – declares the settlement of human souls into animals impossible, since the reasonable human soul cannot go into reasonlessness against its nature. [15]

An important topic of the oracle is the descent of the soul from the spiritual world into the body world and its intended recurrence, i.e. their return to their homeland. The descent has the soul through that in Plato’s dialogue Thymars described seven planetary spheres led to earth, using the soul wagon. In this way, it has been under the violence of the compulsion prevailing in the material area. The goal she now pursues is her rescue from the “unfortunate earth” and the recovery of its original freedom. The oracles describe the necessary steps and means. When the soul remembers its origin and follows the instructions of the oracle, it can detach herself from its bond with the earth and to strive the divine light. However, it is hindered by evil demons. It is supposed to “naked” to the divine, that is, by turning away from the body that envelops it like a dress. [16] The expectation is expressed that the soul finally escapes with its return of matter and will not descend again, since it has no tendency to do so after its return. [17]

The discrepancy between the common Chaldean image of the Roman Empire and the teachings of the Oracle is striking. The Chaldeans were often considered to be astronomers, astronomers, fortune tellers and – especially in Latin -writing authors. In the oracles, on the other hand, astrology, as well as other fortune notification methods (bird and victim show), is rejected because fortune is unnecessary and distracted by the essential- the salvation of the soul. For the salvation path of the oracle, concentration on the virtues is decisive, the research of the laws of the material world, including the star influences, is considered a waste of time. [18]

Antiquity [ Edit | Edit the source text ]

In ancient times, the oracles were mostly only briefly referred to as “the sayings” ( I ); The adjective “Chaldean” was rarely added before the 11th century. In the sources there is often talk of “the Chaldeans” or “the theurgen”, from which it is probably to be explained that the recording of the oracle as a Julian Community of the Theurgen and his father was considered. [19]

In the fragments of the works of the Middle Platonian Numenios, who lived in the 2nd century, there are agreement with the Chaldean oracles that reveal an influence. It is unclear whether Numenios knew the oracle or its authors the works of the Numenios or both. A contact between the two may have come about by the author of the oracle worked as a priest in the temple of the Belos in Numenios’ hometown Apameia in the Roman province of Syria. [20]

In the 3rd century, the Neoplatonian Porphyrios dealt with the Chaldean oracles. [21] One of his lost works includes the writing “to the (the oracles) of Julian of the Chaldeans” ( Eis ta ioulianoú tou chaldaíou ), who may be “the oracle of the Chaldeans” ( Tōn chald ta giagia ) is identical. In late antiquity, too, the Chaldean oracles were intensively received by the Neoplatonists and were highest with them; Therefore, they are referred to in the research literature as the “Bible of Neoplatonists”. [22] She particularly appreciated Iamblemlos from Chalkis, who very likely lived and taught in Apameia. He wrote an extensive comment of at least 28 books that is not preserved. [23] Kaiser Julian [24] as well as the Neubatoniker Syrenesios from Kyrene [25] And Proklos were enthusiastic supporters of the teachings of the oracles, and Damaskios, who was the last head of the Neoplatonic School in Athens in the early 6th century, dealt with their interpretation. The Proklos’s extensive comment on the oracles is lost today.

middle Ages [ Edit | Edit the source text ]

Michael Pselle, a Byzantine universal scholar of the 11th century, dealt intensively with the oracles. In doing so, he also noted matches and differences between her worldview and Christian teaching. The basis of his knowledge of the work was the comrade’s comment, which he may not be able to use directly; Perhaps he was just excerpts and quotes in a late antique Christian counter. [26] He mentioned the oracle in various of his works and wrote three writings in which he only treated their teachings. These three writings are preserved. It is a comment (Greek Exḗg ) to the oracles, a “sketch” ( Hypotypōsis ) and a “presentation” ( Ékthesis ). The works of the Psellos are important sources for our knowledge of the Chaldean oracle; 42 fragments have been handed down by him. Another source is the “17. Letter “by the Byzantine scholar Michael Italianikos (12th century), who obtained his knowledge of the teachings of the oracle from a lost script that also presented pseless.

In the late Middle Ages, the Byzantine scholar put Georgios Gemistos Pllethon, who was particularly interested in the religious dimension of Platonism, 36 of the 42 oracle sayings that he found in PSllos (60 partly defective hexameters); The remaining six, which he considered fake, left away. He made considerable editorial interventions in the text. He also wrote a comment and a “brief explanation of the unclear statements in these oracles”. As the author of the teachings, he viewed the “Magus” [27] Zarathustra, whose pupils she would have recorded. According to his conviction, the teachings of Zarathusta were taken over by Plato and therefore agreed with Platonism. He considered the oracle sayings to be the oldest traditional document of this wisdom tradition, which he wanted to revive. [28] In the 15th century, his collection of oracle texts in the Ottoman Empire translated into Arabic.

Early modern age [ Edit | Edit the source text ]

Pllethon’s collection also made the sayings known in the west in the 15th century. Humanist Marsilio Ficino († 1499) had a copy of the text including the Pllethon comment. Giano Lascaris translated the oracle into Latin between 1500 and 1503. [29] The first edition of the Greek text appeared in Paris in 1538. The following year a Latin translation of the sayings and the comment Pllethon was printed in Paris. The poet François Habert (* around 1510, † around 1561) transferred the sayings to French verses ( Zoroaster’s Divine Oracles , Published in Paris in 1558). Johannes Opsopoeus (1556–1596) published an edition with a new Latin translation in 1589; He also edited the comments of the Psellos and Pllethon. [30]

In the west, Pllethon’s view of the origin of the sayings in the Renaissance was initially taken over without criticism. It was believed that it was authentic teaching of Zarathusta. Scholars like Marsilio Ficino, the papal librarian Agostino Stuco († 1548) and Francesco Patrizi († 1597) explored the oracles under this assumption. [thirty first] It was generally the conviction that it was dealing with certificates of oldest wisdom that were suitable for the confirmation of philosophical allegations and evidence. In 1591 Patrizi’s work appeared Zoroaster and 320 oracles chaldaica (“Zarathustra and its 320 Chaldean oracles”), the first independent modern collection of Chaldean fragments (edition and Latin translation). Patrizi took the places from works by Proklos, Damaskios, Simplikios, Olympiodoros and Synesios. In doing so, he increased the scope of the 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 came New of all philosophy , which contained numerous oracle quotes and the edition in the appendix, on the index of the forbidden books, all copies that can be found in Rome should be destroyed. [32] Nevertheless, the reception of his edition of the oracle remained extremely wide until the middle of the 18th century appeared a new edition almost every decade. In the 17th century, however, numerous scholars already warned the claim of the authorship of Zarathustras. The criticism of the traditional attribution increasingly prevailed in the 18th and 19th centuries. [33] In the theosophy of the 19th and early 20th centuries (Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, Annie Besant), however, was held on to the authenticity of the pseudo-carathustric oracle. [34]

  • Ruth Majercik (ed.): The Chaldean Oracles . Brill, Leiden 1989, ISBN 90-04-09043-6 (Greek text, English translation, introduction and comment)
  • EDDUOUARD DUCKES (HRSG.): Chaldaic oracles, with a choice of old comments . 5th edition, Les Belles Lettres, Paris 2010, ISBN 2-251-00203-0 (critical edition of the Greek text and French translation)

Medieval comments

  • Dominic J. O’Meara (Hrsg.): Michaelis Pselli philosophical smaller , Band 2: Brochures psychological, theological demonologica . Teubner, Leipzig 1989, ISBN 3-322-00462-7, pp.
  • Brigitte Tambrun-Krasker (ed.): Magika Logia tōn apo zōroastrou magōn. Geōrgiou gemistou plēthōnos ex ēgēsis eis ta auta logia. Oracles Chaldaïques. Recension de Georges Gémiste pléthon . Vrin, Paris and 1995, ISBN 2-7116-9832-7 (critical edition of Pllethon’s oracle collection, his comment and his “short explanation” with French translation and comment; there is also pp. 157–171 the Arabic version of the collection with French translation published by Michel Tardieu )))

Overview representations

  • Luc Brisson: Oracles Chaldaïques. In: Richard Goulet (Hrsg.): Dictionary of ancient philosophers . Band 4, CNRS Éditions, Paris 2005, ISBN 2-271-06386-8, S. 784–792
  • Franco Ferrari: Chaldean oracle. In: Christoph Riedweg u. (Ed.): Philosophy of the imperial era and late antiquity (= Floor plan of the history of philosophy. The philosophy of antiquity. Volume 5/2). Schwabe, Basel 2018, ISBN 978-3-7965-2629-9, pp. 1202–1217
  • John F. Finamore, Sarah Iles Johnston: The Chaldaean Oracles. In: Lloyd P. Gerson (ed.): The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity. Band 1, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2010, ISBN 978-0-521-76440-7, S. 161–173
  • Sarah Iles Johnston: Oracula chaldaica. In: The new Pauly (DNP). Band 9, Metzler, Stuttgart 2000, ISBN 3-476-01479-7, Sp. 1–2.
  • Helmut bed: Oracula chaldaica. In: Christine Walde (ed.): The reception of ancient literature. Cultural History Werklexikon (= The new Pauly. Supplements. Band 7). Metzler, Stuttgart/Weimar 2010, ISBN 978-3-476-02034-5, Sp. 549–556.
  • Cristina Vultaggio: Oracle. B. Greek. VIII. Mantic and oracle in philosophy. In: Real lexicon for antiquity and Christianity. Volume 26, Hiersemann, Stuttgart 2015, ISBN 978-3-7772-1509-9, col. 254–270, here: 263 f.

Studies

  • Polymnia Athanassiadi: The Chaldaean Oracles: Theology and Theurgy. In: Polymnia Athanassiadi, Michael Frede (Hrsg.): Pagan Monotheism in Late Antiquity. Clarendon Press, Oxford 1999, ISBN 0-19-815252-3, S. 149–183.
  • Álvaro Fernández Fernández: The theurgy of the Chaldean Oracles. Lexicon and historical context issues . Granada 2011 (Dissertation, University of Granada, Nur Online)
  • Otto Geudtner: The soul teaching 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, Institute 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 Chaldaic oracles 1891–2011 )
  • Henri-Dominique Saffrey: Neoplatonists and Chaldaic oracles. In: Revue of Augustinian studies. Bd. 27, 1981, S. 209–225.
  • Helmut Seng, Michel Tardieu (Hrsg.): The Chaldean oracle: context – interpretation – reception. Winter, Heidelberg 2010, ISBN 978-3-8253-5862-4.
  • Helmut bed: A sacred book of late antiquity: Chaldaic oracles. Brepols, Turnhout 2016, ISBN 978-2-503-56518-7
Reading expenses (not scientifically usable)
  • Thomas Taylor: Collection of the Chaldean Oracles . In: The Classical Journal 16/32 (1817), S. 333–335 ( Digitized at Google Books); 17/33 (1818), pp. 128–133 ( Digitized at archive.org); Also in: Isaac Preston Cory: Ancient fragments of the Phoenician, ChaldÆan, Egyptian, Tyrian, Carthaginian, Indian, Persian, and other Writers , Pickering, London 2. A. 1832, S. 239ff ( Digitized With Google Books, e-Text )
  • William Wynn Westcott (Hrsg.): The Chaldæan Oracles of Zoroaster , Collectanea Hermetica Vol. 6, Theosophical Publishing Society, London 1895. (Based on the issue of Taylor)
  • George Robert Stow Mead: The Chaldean Oracles , 2 Bände, Echoes from the Gnosis Bd. 8–9, Theosophical Publishing Society, London – Benares 1908, Digitalisate von Band 1 and Band 2 at archive.org, e-Text .
  • The Chaldean oracles (Free German translation according to the English edition of Mead)
  1. ↑ Wilhelm Kroll: The Oracular Oracles , Breslau 1894, emphasis Olms, Hildesheim 1962.
  2. ↑ There is Adler (HRSG.): Suidae Lexicon , Bd. 2, Leipzig 1931, S. 642 (Adler-Nr. I 434). Online: [first] .
  3. ↑ Richard Goulet: Julian (Julien) Le Théurge . In: Richard Goulet (Hrsg.): Dictionary of ancient philosophers , Bd. 3, Paris 2000, S. 978–979, here: 978.
  4. ↑ Garth Fowden: Pagan Versions of the Rain Miracle of A.D. 172 . In: History 36, 1987, S. 83–95, yesterday: 87–94; Henri-Dominique Saffrey: Neoplatonists and Chaldaic oracles , in: Augustinian Studies Review 27, 1981, pp. 209–225, Hier: 213f.; Helmut bed: Kosmagoi, Azonoi, Zonaioi , Heidelberg 2009, S. 145–147.
  5. ↑ Rowland Smith expresses skepticism with regard to the historicity of father and son: Julian’s Gods , London 1995, S. 92–97. VGL. Henri-Dominique Saffrey: Neoplatonists and Chaldaic oracles , in: Augustinian Studies Review 27, 1981, S. 209–225, here: 210–215; John Vanderspoel: Correspondence and Correspondents of Julius Julianus . In: Byzantion 69, 1999, S. 396–478, yesterday: 459–463.
  6. ↑ John Vanderspoel: Correspondence and Correspondents of Julius Julianus . In: Byzantion 69, 1999, S. 396–478, yesterday: 459–465.
  7. ↑ Polymnia Athanassiadi: Julian the Theurgist: Man or Myth? In: Helmut Seng, Michel Tardieu (ed.): The Chaldean Oracle: Context – Interpretation – Reception , Heidelberg 2010, S. 193–208; Polymnia Athanassiadi: The Chaldaean Oracles: Theology and Theurgy . In: Polymnia Athanassiadi, Michael Frede (Hrsg.): Pagan Monotheism in Late Antiquity , Oxford 1999, S. 149–183, here: 150.
  8. ↑ Gerald Bechtle: A Neglected Witness (Fragment?) On the Chaldean Oracles . In: Classical Quarterly 56, 2006, S. 563–581, yesterday: 563–565, 579.
  9. ↑ Ruth Majercik: Chaldaean triads in Neoplatonic exegesis: some reconsiderations . In: Classical Quarterly 51, 2001, S. 265–296; Otto Geudtner: The soul teaching of the Chaldean oracles , Meisenheim am Glan 1971, pp. 2f., 4.
  10. ↑ See the investigation by Sarah Iles Johnston: Hekate Soteira. A Study of Hekate’s Roles in the Chaldean Oracles and Related Literature , Atlanta (Georgia) 1990. Johnston later modified her interpretation of the role of Hekates; 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: A sacred book of late antiquity: Chaldaic oracles , Turnhout 2016, S. 52–56, 81–84.
  11. ↑ See Gerald Bechtle: A Neglected Witness (Fragment?) On the Chaldean Oracles . In: Classical Quarterly 56, 2006, S. 563–581, yesterday: 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 , Bd. 1, Cambridge 2010, S. 161–173, hier: 164.
  13. ↑ John F. Finamore, Sarah Iles Johnston: The Chaldaean Oracles. In: Lloyd P. Gerson (ed.): The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity , Bd. 1, Cambridge 2010, S. 161–173, hier: 167.
  14. ↑ Ruth Majercik (ed.): The Chaldaean Oracles , Leiden 1989, S. 16.
  15. ↑ Otto Geudtner: The soul teaching of the Chaldean oracles , Meisenheim am Glan 1971, pp. 15f.
  16. ↑ Otto Geudtner: The soul teaching of the Chaldean oracles , Meisenheim am Glan 1971, pp. 56–77.
  17. ↑ Otto Geudtner: The soul teaching of the Chaldean oracles , Meisenheim am Glan 1971, pp. 11, 13, 16–34.
  18. ↑ Ilinca Tanaseanu-Döbler: Way or charlatan? Chaldaeer pictures of the Greek-Roman imperial era and the Chaldaei oracle . In: Helmut Seng, Michel Tardieu (ed.): The Chaldean Oracle: Context – Interpretation – Reception , Heidelberg 2010, S. 19–42, hier: 34f., 40.
  19. ↑ Polymnia Athanassiadi: Apamea and the Chaldaean Oracles: A holy city and a holy book . In: Andrew Smith (Hrsg.): The Philosopher and Society in Late Antiquity , Swansea 2005, S. 117–143, hier: 121, 126; Polymnia Athanassiadi: Julian the Theurgist: Man or Myth? In: Helmut Seng, Michel Tardieu (ed.): The Chaldean Oracle: Context – Interpretation – Reception , Heidelberg 2010, pp. 193–208, here: 201. See Otto Geudtner: The soul teaching of the Chaldean oracles , Meisenheim am Glan 1971, p. 1. A different opinion is Henri-Dominique Saffrey: Neoplatonists and Chaldaic oracles . In: Augustinian Studies Review 27, 1981, S. 209–225, here: 210f.
  20. ↑ This suspects Polymnia Athanassiadi; See your relevant studies: Apamea and the Chaldaean Oracles: A holy city and a holy book . In: Andrew Smith (Hrsg.): The Philosopher and Society in Late Antiquity , Swansea 2005, S. 117–143, hier: 123–125, 129–133; Julian the Theurgist: Man or Myth? In: Helmut Seng, Michel Tardieu (ed.): The Chaldean Oracle: Context – Interpretation – Reception , Heidelberg 2010, S. 193–208, hier: 196–203; The Chaldaean Oracles: Theology and Theurgy . In: Polymnia Athanassiadi, Michael Frede (Hrsg.): Pagan Monotheism in Late Antiquity , Oxford 1999, S. 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 (Hrsg.): The Philosopher and Society in Late Antiquity , Swansea 2005, pp. 117–143, here: 138 note 10. See Angelika Wintjes: The oracle as a means of revelation at Porphyrios . In: Helmut Seng, Michel Tardieu (ed.): The Chaldean Oracle: Context – Interpretation – Reception , Heidelberg 2010, S. 43–62.
  22. ↑ Polymnia Athanassiadi: The Chaldaean Oracles: Theology and Theurgy . In: Polymnia Athanassiadi, Michael Frede (Hrsg.): Pagan Monotheism in Late Antiquity , Oxford 1999, pp. 149–183, here: 152 and note 15; Henri-Dominique Saffrey: Neoplatonists and Chaldaic oracles . In: Augustinian Studies Review 27, 1981, pp. 209–225, here: 209; Otto Geudtner: The soul teaching of the Chaldean oracles , Meisenheim am Glan 1971, p. 2 and note 10.
  23. ↑ John Dillon: Ámblicos de Chalkis . In: Richard Goulet (Hrsg.): Dictionary of ancient philosophers , Vol. 3, Paris 2000, pp. 824–836, here: 833. See also Friedrich W. Cremer: The Chaldean oracles and Jamblich de Mysteriis , Meisenheim am Glan 1969.
  24. ↑ For Julian see Anna Penati: The influence of the hot system on the theological thought of Emperor Giuliano . In: Neo-sculatory philosophy magazine 75, 1983, S. 543–562; Rowland Smith: Julian’s Gods , London 1995, S. 91f., 143f., 151–157, 162.
  25. ↑ See Otto Geudtner to him: The soul teaching of the Chaldean oracles , Meisenheim am Glan 1971, pp. 5f.
  26. ↑ Gerrit Westerink represented this view: Proclus, Procopius, PSELLUS . In: Mnemosyne 10, 1942, pp. 275–280. A different opinion is Polymnia Athanassiadi: The Chaldaean Oracles: Theology and Theurgy . In: Polymnia Athanassiadi, Michael Frede (Hrsg.): Pagan Monotheism in Late Antiquity , Oxford 1999, pp. 149–183, here: 150f. Note 7; It advocates direct use. See Helmut Seng: Kosmagoi, Azonoi, Zonaioi , Heidelberg 2009, S. 136–141.
  27. ↑ Antonio Panaino: Religions in ancient Iran. In: Wilfried Seipel (ed.): 7000 years of Persian art. Masterpieces from the Iranian National Museum in Tehran: an exhibition of the Kunsthistorisches Museum Vienna and the Iranian National Museum in Tehran. Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna 2001, pp. 22–29, here: p. 23.
  28. ↑ Michael Stausberg: Fascination Zarathustra , Berlin 1998, Teil 1, S. 42–44, 57–69; Polymnia Athanassiadi: Byzantine Commentators on the Chaldaean Oracles: Psellos and Plethon . In: Katerina Ierodiakonou (HRSG.): Byzantine Philosophy and its Ancient Sources , Oxford 2002, S. 237–252.
  29. ↑ Michael Stausberg: Fascination Zarathustra , Berlin 1998, Part 1, pp. 127–129.
  30. ↑ For the early modern translations, see Helmut Seng: Translations of the Chaldaeischer Oracle in the early modern period . In: Wolfgang Kofler u. (Ed.): Pontes V. Translation as mediator of ancient literature , Innsbruck 2009, S. 82–98.
  31. ↑ Michael Stausberg: Fascination Zarathustra , Berlin 1998, Part 1, pp. 83f.; To Ficino’s reception of the Pseudo-Zarathustra p. 93, 122–205, 214–228; to Steuco pp. 262–290.
  32. ↑ Michael Stusberg offers a detailed representation of Patrizi’s role: Fascination Zarathustra , Berlin 1998, Part 1, pp. 291–304, 311–324, 328–330, 336–393.
  33. ↑ See Michael Stusberg: Fascination Zarathustra , Berlin 1998, Part 1, pp. 84–92.
  34. ↑ Michael Stausberg: Fascination Zarathustra , Berlin 1998, Part 1, pp. 435–437.