Work dossier · summary and historical context
The treatise *De trinitate* (On the Trinity), traditionally attributed to Athanasius of Alexandria, is a theological work defending the consubstantiality and co-eternity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Written in Greek, it employs scriptural exegesis and philosophical analogies (e.g., mind, word, spirit) to articulate Trinitarian doctrine against Arian and pagan critiques. The text contrasts Christian monotheism with Greek polytheism and Jewish strict monotheism, arguing for three hypostases within a single divine nature. Its authorship is disputed, and it is now commonly classified among Athanasius's spuria, likely composed in the late 4th or early 5th century. The work survives in multiple manuscripts and was cited in medieval Latin florilegia, influencing later Western Trinitarian debates.
*De trinitate* is significant as a witness to the development of Trinitarian theology in the post-Nicene period, even if pseudepigraphical. Its use of analogies (e.g., mind, word, spirit) and its contrast of Christian monotheism with pagan and Jewish views influenced later patristic and medieval thought. The work's citation in Latin florilegia shows its role in shaping Western Trinitarian debates, despite its dubious authorship.
The *De trinitate* is attributed to Athanasius of Alexandria (c. 296–373), a key defender of Nicene orthodoxy against Arianism. However, its contested authorship and theological vocabulary (e.g., developed use of 'hypostasis') suggest a date after Athanasius's death, likely in the late 4th or early 5th century. The work reflects post-Nicene Trinitarian controversies, particularly the distinction between ousia and hypostasis, and the need to counter both pagan polytheism and Jewish monotheism. It was composed in Greek, probably in an Eastern monastic or scholarly community. The text circulated widely, as evidenced by its survival in multiple manuscripts and its use in medieval Latin florilegia, indicating transmission through both Greek and Latin channels. The khazarzar edition lacks a critical apparatus, obscuring its manuscript basis and editorial choices.
Apparatus · what the pipeline recorded
| Coptic | Rendering | Count | First |
|---|---|---|---|
| no glossary terms recorded | |||