Littérature scientifique sur le sujet « Ierone" »

V stat'e daetsja obzor izvestnyh avtografov ierom. Pahomija Serba (Logofeta) i ukazyvaetsja na ego do sih por ne otmecennyj avtograf - ?Podvizniceskie nastavlenija? v nacale sbornika RGB, TSL 753 (ll. 1-51 ob.). V rukopisnoj tradicii ?Podvizniceskie nastavlenija? (????????? ?????????; Constitutiones asceticae) pripisyvajutsja sv. Vasiliju Velikomu, no, po mneniju bol'sinstva issledovatelej, emu ne prinadlezat. V srednie veka oni byli dobavleny k ?Velikomu Asketikonu? sv. Vasilija. Na osnovanii sravnenija spiska ?Podvizniceskih nastavlenij? TSL 753 s bolgarskim spiskom v ?Asketikone? RGB, TSL 129 (ll. 150-175) ustanavlivaetsja, cto ierom. Pahomij ispol'zoval spisok TSL 129 v kacestve podlinnika. V rabote izlagajutsja rezul'taty sopostavlenija oglavlenija i predislovija ?Podvizniceskih nastavlenij? v dvuh upomjanutyh spiskah. Osoboe vnimanie udeljaetsja osobennostjam spiska Pahomija Serba - orfograficeskim, jazykovym i izmenenijam v tekste.

In this review, methods for the selective intramolecular epoxide ring opening (IERO) of 4,5-epoxy-alcohols are discussed as well as biosynthetic pathways to tetrahydropyran-containing natural products which utilise IERO reactions.

Questa tesi verte sulla maniera in cui i principali Stoici romani, vale a dire Seneca, Musonio Rufo, Epitteto, Ierocle e Marco Aurelio, concepivano e si servivano della nozione di καθῆκον (officium in latino), ereditata dalla tradizione stoica precedente. L’idea centrale che argomentiamo nel corso della tesi è che gli Stoici romani avevano tutti una concezione forte del καθῆκον, che testimonia una loro tendenza teorica comune, derivata dalla riflessione degli Stoici precedenti su questa nozione; inoltre, la prospettiva degli Stoici romani sul καθῆκον ci permette di conoscerne aspetti trascurati dalle fonti dossografiche apparentemente più informative a questo proposito: pensiamo, per esempio, al rapporto fra καθήκοντα e parenesi, all’importanza delle emozioni nel compimento dei καθήκοντα e all’antagonismo fra καθήκοντα e πάθη. Nella letteratura critica esistente sull’etica stoica e sul pensiero degli Stoici romani la tematica del καθῆκον è spesso considerata tangenzialmente rispetto ad altre, soprattutto perché, a eccezione di Epitteto, gli Stoici romani non tematizzano quasi mai la nozione di καθῆκον. Tuttavia, la nostra ricostruzione della rete concettuale del καθῆκον nella tradizione stoica ci permette di riconoscere la presenza, importante sebbene talora implicita, di questa nozione nella riflessione e nell’insegnamento degli stoici romani. Riusciamo così a delineare, per quanto possibile, la concezione del καθῆκον di questi filosofi. Le sujet de cette thèse est la façon dont les principaux stoïciens romains, tels que Sénèque, Musonius Rufus, Épictète, Hiéroclès et Marc Aurèle, ont conçu et employé la notion de καθῆκον (officium en latin), héritée de la tradition stoïcienne précédente. L’idée que nous y soutenons est que les stoïciens romains avaient tous une conceptualisation forte du καθῆκον, témoignant d’une tendance théorique commune entre eux qu’ils dérivaient de la réflexion des stoïciens précédents sur cette notion ; de plus, leur perspective sur le καθῆκον nous permet d’en connaître des aspects négligés par les sources doxographiques apparemment les plus éclairantes à ce sujet : nous pensons par exemple au lien entre καθήκοντα et parénèse, à l’importance des émotions dans l’accomplissement des καθήκοντα et à l’antagonisme entre καθήκοντα et πάθη. Dans la littérature critique existante concernant l’éthique stoïcienne ou bien la pensée des stoïciens romains, le thème du καθῆκον est souvent considéré marginalement par rapport à d’autres, surtout parce que, sauf pour Épictète, les autres stoïciens romains ne thématisent presque jamais la notion de καθῆκον. Cependant, une fois compris le réseau conceptuel du καθῆκον dans la tradition stoïcienne, nous parvenons à reconnaître la présence, importante bien que parfois implicite, de cette notion dans la réflexion et l’enseignement des stoïciens romains. Par cette méthode nous reconstruisons, dans la mesure du possible, la conceptualisation du καθῆκον par ces philosophes. This thesis deals with how the most important Roman Stoics, i.e. Seneca, Musonius Rufus, Epictetus, Hierocles and Marcus Aurelius, conceived and employed the notion of καθῆκον (officium in Latin), that they inherited from the previous Stoic tradition. Our claim is that all the Roman Stoics shared a strong conception of καθῆκον, in accordance with a general theoretical stance derived from the tradition of the earlier Stoics. Moreover, the perspective of the Roman Stoics on this topic allows us to discover some aspects of the καθῆκον that are neglected by the doxographic sources, apparently the most informative ones on this topic: we are thinking, for example, about the link between καθήκοντα and paraenesis, about the importance of emotions in performing καθήκοντα and about the opposition between καθήκοντα and πάθη. In the scholarship concerning Stoic ethics or the thought of the Roman Stoics, the theorical domain of the καθῆκον is often considered tangentially with regards to others, especially because the Roman Stoics almost never focus on the notion of καθῆκον, Epictetus being a notable exception. However, reconstructing the conceptual network of the καθῆκον in the Stoic tradition allows us to recognize its presence, important though sometimes implicit, in the Roman Stoics’ reflection and teaching. Thus, we manage to re-establish, insofar as possible, these philosophers’ conception of καθῆκον.

The Department of Manuscripts of the Russian State Library contains letters of Hegumen Ieron (worldly Ivan Nosov-Vasil’yev), Schemamonk Innokentiy (worldly last name — Sibiryakov) and Iosif the monk, the brethren of New Athos Monastery, named after Simon the Canaanean, to Archimandrite Leonid (worldly Lev Kavelin), Rector of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, a prominent scientist, a prominent scholar of the Russian Orthodox Church, one of the most enlightened priests of the 19th century. In 1885, the book “Abkhazia and New Athos Monastery, Named after Simon the Canaanean, in It” by Archimandrite Leonid was a real event. The published letters were written by the brethren of the monastery, people of different cultural levels; but they are all imbued with a sense of gratitude to the author, who wrote a book about their holy monastery, which they love and care about the improvement of. Hegumen Ieron’s letters contain numerous details about the opening of Pitsunda Monastery as a skete of New Athos Monastery, about the restoration of the ancient Pitsunda temple, about its beautification and the forthcoming consecration. Schemamonk Innokentiy’s letters provide detailed information about the history of the Monastery, as well as some cartographic data needed by Archimandrite Leonid for his book. Monk Iosif ’s letter contains details of the economic life of the monastery.