Rudolf von Ems, 'Barlaam und Josaphat': Edition, Translation, Critical Commentary

该项目的目的是制作一个全新的学术版鲁道夫冯埃姆斯的“巴拉姆和Josaphat”（c。1220），根据编辑的领先手稿。保存在51手稿已知的日期，'Barlaam'是最流行的中世纪版本的原始印度传说的佛陀已经从中世纪幸存下来。然而，文本自1843年由Pfeiffer第一版以来从未进行过修订，其语言学标准今天被认为是过时的，并且从根本上缺乏现代实用主义特征，使文本能够被学生或非专业人士阅读。该项目旨在通过以更符合历史和语言学的方式编辑文本，并通过添加注释，现代德语翻译以及考虑手稿传统，来源，体裁和当前文本研究的介绍来解决这种情况。因此，新版本将为研究人员以及各学科的学生和读者提供可靠和更准确的文本。文献学研究证实，“Barlaam”手稿的传统允许接近手稿证人以及假定的“作者”文本的版本。因此，该项目选择了稍微规范和修改的主导手稿做法，这反映了两个文献学发现：一方面，大量的“Barlaam”手稿几乎可以追溯到鲁道夫本人的时代，其中一些甚至保留了作者的Alemannic方言;另一方面，手稿传统清楚地表明了两个主要的文本“条件”，（一个主要是宫廷，其他宗教），这可以在整个文本的传输个别修改方面观察到，无论其stemmatological秩序。就目前而言，手稿D（弗赖堡，13世纪最后四分之一）最适合作为主要手稿。它提供的文本很可能是整个手稿传统的代表。它的机械损失和故意削减将填补文字从另一个旧的和完整的手稿，并明确标记。因此，读者将第一次能够观察到文本的主要接受方式和相当引人注目的运动，特别是当涉及到对学术传统中文本解释至关重要的段落时。差异将记录在编辑文本下方的设备中。这一全新的鲁道夫'Barlaam'学术版将鼓励文化研究和学术编辑领域的新视角;目的是促进对鲁道夫最受欢迎和最有趣的文本之一的进一步研究。该项目还与最近关于编辑方法的辩论的更广泛背景有关，目的是展示如何以接近作者和手稿的方式编辑中世纪文本。

The project aims to produce a completely new scholarly edition of Rudolf von Ems's "Barlaam and Josaphat" (c. 1220), basing the editing on a leading manuscript. Preserved in 51 manuscripts known to date, the 'Barlaam' is the most popular medieval version of the originally Indian legend of the Buddha that has survived from the Middle Ages. The text has, however, never yet been revised since its first edition by Pfeiffer in 1843, the philological standards of which are today considered obsolete, and which fundamentally lacks the modern pragmatic features that allow the text to be read by students or non-specialists. The project aims to resolve this situation by editing the text in a more historically and philologically adequate way, and also by adding a commentary, a modern German translation, as well as an introduction that considers the manuscript tradition, the sources, the genre and current research on the text. The new edition will thus offer a reliable and more accurate text to researchers as well as to students and readers of various disciplines.Philological research has confirmed that the tradition of the 'Barlaam' manuscripts allows for an edition close to both manuscript witnesses as well as to an assumed 'authorial' text. As such, the project opts for a slightly normalized and modified leading-manuscript practice, which reflects two philological findings: on the one hand, a significant number of manuscripts of the 'Barlaam' date back almost to the time of Rudolf himself, with some of them even preserving the author's Alemannic dialect; on the other hand, the manuscript tradition clearly shows two major textual 'conditions' (one primarily courtly, the other religious), which can be observed in terms of individual modifications throughout the text's transmission, irrespective of its stemmatological order. As it stands, manuscript D (Freiburg, last quarter of the 13th century) suits best as the leading manuscript. The text it provides is likely to be very representative of the manuscript tradition on the whole. Both its mechanical losses and its intentional cuts will be filled in with text from another old and complete manuscript and clearly marked. Readers will therefore for the first time be able to observe the major modes of reception and the quite striking mouvance of the text, especially when it comes to passages that have been crucial to the interpretation of the text in the scholarly tradition. Variances will be documented in an apparatus below the edited text.This completely new scholarly edition of Rudolf's 'Barlaam' will encourage new perspectives in the fields of both cultural studies and scholarly editing; the aim is to promote further research into one of Rudolf's most popular and intriguing texts. The project is furthermore connected to a broader context of recent debate about editorial methods, with the aim of demonstrating how medieval texts can be edited in a manner close to both author and manuscript.