Sus aux solécismes, haro sur les barbarismes

L’Académie française, dans la huitième édition de son Dictionnaire, soulignait que « Le barbarisme et le solécisme sont les deux principaux vices d’élocution ”. Quelque grande puisse être l’influence du milieu anglophone dans lequel nous vivons, les expatriés se doivent de corriger ces vices.

Pour mémoire, selon le même Dictionnaire ,le solécisme est « une faute contre la syntaxe au regard de la grammaire » alors que le barbarisme est « une faute contre le langage soit dans la forme ,soit dans le sens du mot (mot créé ou altéré ,dévié de son sens ,impropre….Faute caractéristique d’un étranger (gr. barbaros) particulièrement celle qui consiste dans l’emploi d’une forme inexistante, par opposition avec le solécisme, qui est l’emploi fautif dans un cas donné d’une forme par ailleurs correcte. Nominer pour nommer, citer est un barbarisme. »

Lors d’une récente réunion d’expatriés, l’animateur avait demandé à plusieurs expatriés de faire une courte présentation sur l’activité du domaine dudit membre. Les solécismes et les barbarismes émaillant  les discours étaient  affligeants pour qui respecte la langue française.

La perle des solécismes revient à un intervenant  qui a commencé son intervention par la phrase : « J’écoutais ce que vous parliez ». Non, je n’invente pas !

Les barbarismes sont beaucoup plus fréquents que les solécismes dans la bouche des cadres expatriés.

Nombre d’entre eux sont l’expression d’un laxisme lexical, d’une paresse intellectuelle, de snobisme  et d’un manque inadmissible de respect de la langue française. Comment autrement qualifier le discours tenu par un des expatriés : « Anyway, il faut continuer… », ou ordonnant à un des intervenants  de «  faire ton overview rapidement » et, plus tard, ajoute qu’il faudra convaincre « d’autres villes on the road » de participer.

Les intervenants qui parlèrent d’une certaine industrie ont fait assaut de barbarismes en observant que dans cette industrie, le « retail » était « drivé » par ceci ou cela. Le « commerce de détail » et son pendant le « commerce de gros » ont-ils disparus ? Au lieu de « drivé » pourquoi ne pas dire « mus par les moteurs.. ». Le barbarisme « retailization » m’a laissé pantois .Il est nécessaire de dire « tendance » au lieu de « trend ».

De même, « data center » ou « centre de data » doit céder la place à « centre de données » et n’est-il pas plus exact de dire « amélioration de la performance » au lieu de « augmentation de la performance »?

Plusieurs barbarismes méritent une mention particulière :

« Challenge »

Plusieurs intervenant ont employé le mot « challenge », l’un d’entre eux ayant même poussé le vice jusqu’à dire « être challengé ». Le mot « challenge » existe bien en français mais pas dans le sens de la phrase. En français moderne un « challenge » selon le Trésor de la langue française est une «  Épreuve périodique entre deux sportifs ou deux équipes pour la conquête d’un titre ou d’un trophée (coupe, statue, etc.) que le vainqueur garde en dépôt, puis cède au vainqueur d’une nouvelle épreuve. Lancer, gagner un challenge; faire disputer un challenge. ».Le sens sportif du mot nous vient de l’anglais : vers 1380 le mot anglais « challenge », emprunté au vieux français, avait pris le sens de « défi dans un combat ». En ancien français, le mot « chalongier » ou « chalengier » signifiait « chicane, attaque, défi » (XIIe s.).Le mot provenait  du latin classique calumnia terme juridique « accusation fausse, chicane » formé sur le participe du verbe « caluor » = »chicaner, tromper » puis « réclamation, accusation, litige » en latin médiéval.

L’Académie dans sa 9ème édition estime que ce mot doit être écrit « chalenge » car «  (On écrit aussi, moins bien, Challenge.) et que le sens de « provocation, défi » est  un emploi déconseillé.

Ainsi, pour être correct, il convient d’employer le mot « défi » pour traduire « challenge » sauf si le contexte sportif permet l’emploi du mot « challenge ».

« basique »

C’est un faux ami qui est encore une mauvaise traduction de l’anglais « basic ».L’Académie dans la neuvième édition de son Dictionnaire limite l’emploi de l’adjectif basique à la chimie (= qui a les propriétés d’une base) et à la minéralogie (=roche ou sol de composition alcaline).Il fallait dire choses relativement élémentaires.

« profitabilité »

Si les mots « profit » et « profitable » sont acceptés dans la 9ème édition du  Dictionnaire de l’Académie, le mot « profitabilité » n’y figure pas. Il en est ainsi dans le Trésor de la langue française (Tl). Il faut dire plutôt « rentabilité » (=Aptitude à engendrer des profits, des bénéfices » Tlf.).Notons que « profit » n’a pas qu’un sens matériel .Selon la 9ème édition le « profit » : est un  « Avantage d’ordre pratique, moral ou intellectuel que l’on retire d’une chose, bénéfice…ÉCON. Revenu résiduel, correspondant aux recettes d’une entreprise desquelles on a soustrait les coûts de production et de distribution des biens et des services produits. Profit d’exploitation. Compte de profits et pertes, Passer par pertes et profits. »

« Flop »

Un des intervenants estima que la stratégie de diversification d’une certaine industrie avait été un « flop ». Ce mot ne figure ni à la 9ème édition du Dictionnaire de l’Académie ni dans la base informatique du Tlf. Si certains dictionnaires, Larousse ou Robert, le mentionnent, ils s’accordent à considérer que cet anglicisme est d’un emploi familier utilisé principalement pour indiquer l’échec d’un roman ou d’une pièce de théâtre.

Dans Les Mémoires d’Outre-tombe (t.2, 1848, p.702) Chateaubriand observait qu’  « Une langue (…) ne saurait changer sa syntaxe qu’en changeant son génie. Un barbarisme heureux reste dans une langue sans la défigurer; des solécismes ne s’y établissent jamais sans la détruire. » Très rares, sinon inexistants, sont les barbarismes faits par les expatriés que l’on pourrait objectivement considérer comme des barbarismes heureux car, pour l’essentiel d’entre eux ils ne sont que l’expression du laxisme lexical précité.

Valentine’s Day and the takeover of pagan festivals by the Church

The celebration of Valentine’s Day on February 14 provides us with an opportunity to think about the symbolism of the pagan festivals that were taken over by the Church.

Today, Valentine’s Day is the symbol of lovers, thus, indirectly, the symbol of fertility. According to tradition, Roman Emperor Claudius the Cruel had banned marriages amongst young people on the grounds that married young men were reluctant to enlist in the Roman army. Valentine, a Catholic priest, disobeyed the ban and continued to perform marriages amongst young people. Caught, and condemned by the prefect, he was sentenced to be beaten and beheaded. According to tradition, the sentence was carried out on February 14 of either year 270 or 278. In fact, the very serious Catholic Encyclopedia tells us that there were at least three St. Valentines all martyred on February 14 but in three different places!

 

In ancient Rome February 14 was right in the middle of the festival of the Lupercalia (February 13 – 15). This festival, marking the end of the Roman year, was a celebration of purification, health and fertility. It was celebrated in a cave, most likely situated at the foot of Palatine Hill, called the Lupercal in honor of Lupercus, god of shepherds. The ritual involved the sacrifice of a he-goat by priests clad in goatskins who then anointed two young men, of patrician families, by daubing them with the blood of the sacrificed goat whose skin was then cut up in strips. Upon washing away the sacrificial blood, the youths were to burst out laughing, dress in goatskins and then run, more or less naked, through the streets of Rome using the strips of goatskin to flagellate any woman desiring to bear child within the year!

 

The festival harked back to an even older ritual, one of spring cleaning called Februa, hence the name of the month of February. Thus, beyond purification, the ritual is also a rite of passage: the sacrifice in the cave is of course a symbol of death (remember the initiation rites in the Magic Flute) and the laughter outburst a symbol of resurrection while the he-goat symbolizes fertility.

 

In spite of the ban on pagan festivals in a Rome that had become largely Christian, the festival of Lupercalia continued to coexist with Christianity during several centuries. However, in the fifth century, Pope Gelasius the first (494 – 496) thought that, since the Lupercalia was at that time only observed by the rabble, the original purpose no longer warranted its continued existence. So, he decided to ban the Lupercalia, ordering its replacement by the feast of St. Valentine.

 

The setting of Christmas on December 25th is another example of appropriation of a pagan festival by the Church. The date was chosen to supplant the most important feast of the mithraic cult, that of sol invictus or Natalis invicti. The mithraic cult, widespread in Rome and in Asia Minor in the third and fourth centuries, celebrated by that festival the return of the sun triumphing over the winter night. In the Christian world, the setting of Christmas on December 25 occurred sometime during the fourth century. Pope Benedict XVI considers that it was natural to set Christmas on December 25 since it occurs nine months after the Annunciation! Given the number of Church Fathers who have thought that the relation between sol invictus and Christmas is established, we may wonder whether the date of March 25 for the Annunciation is itself either an arbitrary date or an exercise in bootstrapping: after having set Christmas at December 25 why not set the date of the Annunciation at March 25, nine months before!

 

Valentine’s Day and Christmas on not the only two Christian feasts that have supplanted pagan festivals. While there are numerous other examples, let us examine only two additional ones: Rogation Days and the feast of San John the Baptist.

The Rogation Days where instituted by the Church to appease God’s anger at man’s transgressions and to obtain bountiful harvests. In England, these days where known as “Gang Days" and “Cross Week", and in Germany as it Bittage, Bittwoche, Kreuzwoche. There were two Rogation Days: the Major Rogation Day on April 25 and the Minor Rogation Days which occurred during the three days preceding the feast of the Ascension. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, the Rogation Days "have been introduced to counteract the ancient Robigalia, on which the heathens held processions and supplications to their gods" for bountiful harvests and, in the case of Minor Rogation Days, for the avoidance of late frosts. In Rome, the Robigalia were held on the same days as the Major and Minor Rogations and the Major Rogation Day procession used the same itinerary in the city of Rome as did the supplanted pagan festival!

 

As a last example of appropriation, let us examine the one pagan festival that resisted for a very long time its supplantation by a Christian feast: the Scandinavian feast of the summer solstice on June 21. Today, the feast of St. John the Baptist on the same day has replaced it.

 

It is interesting, as well as enriching, to think back on the symbolism of the pagan festivals that have been supplanted by Christian feasts.

 

Êtes-vous Larousse ou Robert ?

Voici l’intéressante question que nous pose Sébastien Lapaque dans l’édition du 28 juillet 2010  du Figaro  que vous aurez plaisir à lire en cliquant ici.

Van Gogh, Francis Bacon et commodat:quel lien?

Si cette juxtaposition en apparence arbitraire titille votre curiosité,lisez l’intéressant article de Thibault de Ravel d’Esclapon  ( cliquez ici )qui explore à la fois les relations de Bacon avec Arles et les problèmes juridiques qu’une disposition testamentaire de Bacon a suscités. Vous y rencontrerez les vieilles notions de commodat ou prêt à usage ainsi que celles de trust si chères à nos confrères anglo-saxons.

Hôtel Lambert: histoire d’une sauvegarde.

Comme le fait ressortir Thibault de Ravel d’Esclapon dans son article :“Heureux épilogue pour l’affaire de l’hôtel Lambert : les voies de l’amiable ” , l’hôtel Lambert, bijou d’architecture du Grand Siècle, sis à la proue de l’île Saint-Louis, a récemment fait couler beaucoup d’encre. Cet hôtel, site d’un roman d’Eugène Sue, fréquenté par Delacroix, Balzac, Chopin, Liszt et George Sand, fût vendu en 2007 par le baron de Rothschild au frère de l’émir du Qatar pour la bagatelle de 80 millions d’euros. Le nouveau propriétaire voulant faire de nombreux travaux dans cette demeure classée monument historique, une bagarre juridique livrée par l’association pour la sauvegarde et la mise en valeur du Paris historique s’en est suivie. Le détail, et l’heureuse issue de celle-ci est relaté par Thibault de Ravel d’Esclapon que vous pouvez lire en cliquant ici.

Qui décide du bon usage?

Nous savons tous que l’arbitre ultime est le Dictionnaire de l’Académie française mais ce que nous ne savons pas est comment l’Académie décide que tel usage doit  être accepté ou rejeté  ou que tel néologisme peut rentrer dans notre belle langue. Pour comprendre ces mécanismes et le rôle des multiples commissions de terminologie et de néologismes des ministères, écoutez Mme Hélène Carrère d’Encausse, Secrétaire perpétuel de l’Académie française, présidente de la Commission de la langue française expliquer  comment un mot devient digne de figurer au Dictionnaire de l’Académie française :cliquez ici

La fête Roch Hachana:la tête de l’année

Si vous voulez comprendre les aspects à la fois festifs et rigoureux de cette grande fête juive , écoutez l’explication qu’en fait le grand Rabbin Haïm Korsia, aumônier général israélite de l’armée française , sur Canal Académie.Comme lui,souhaitons Shana Tovah à tous nos amis juifs.

Dan Brown’s The Lost Symbol

The Lost Symbol arrived last night and turned out to be a bit of a disappointment. What the book gained in thickness it lost in tautness .Much of the plot’s main "surprise" can be guessed after the first few chapters. Set in a Washington DC awash with Masonic symbolism one cannot help but be reminded of the movie National Treasure. Readers interested in finding more about the Masonic symbols used by Brown should consult the website, http://www.freemasonlostsymbol.com which is a collaboration of the Masonic Society, the Masonic Service Association and the George Washington Masonic Memorial to address the book’s Masonic references.

As in his Da Vinci Code, Brown’s villain here is a thoroughly repulsive psychopath, Mal’akh, reminding one of Silence of the Lambs. I wonder why such psychopaths exert such a fascination on Dan Brown. The rest of his characters lack in depth:Inoue Sato director of a mythical Office of Security within the CIA ,improbably investigating in Washington D.C. seems to step out of a cartoon.

While the book is principally a pean to people’s potential, sadly, it is spoiled by suffused sloppiness. Here are 3 glaring examples:

1-at p.421 and 424,Professor Langdon is struggling to decipher a series of pictograms when he exclaims "The first letter is Η" and then "Suddenly he realized what the word might be :Ηερεδομ" the word "Heredom" which he proceeds to define, correctly, giving a correct  etymology completely misspelled: "From the Greek Ηερεδομ originating from Hieros-domos ".In Greek, as Mr. Brown should have easily ascertained, the letter H is the capital "η"=eta not the English "H". In Greek there is no letter for the aspirated "h", the effect is achieved through the use of a diacritic, the spiritus asper, or rough breathing represented by an inverted comma placed above and before the vowel to be aspirated. Thus the word should have been written   Ἑρεδομ or – Ἡρεδομ.

2-at p.437-8, he writes "all spiritual rituals included aspects that would seem frightening if taken out of context-crucifixion reenactments, Jewish circumcision rites….Islamic niqab…".Sorry Mr.Brown, the niqab is not a spiritual ritual; it is merely an article of clothing that covers the entire body of certain Moslem women leaving only the eyes. Islamic scholars are divided on the question of whether the niqab is mandated or simply permitted by the Koran but none regards the niqab as a spiritual ritual.

3-at p.497, chapter 133 ( yes!) after the protagonists have been chased around ,taken prisoners liberated,escaped from improbable situations all starting with a speech that Prof.Langdon was to give at 7 p.m., Brown writes that Langdon was "still unable to believe that it had been less than ten hours since [about 7 p.m.]".We too are unable to believe that he could have done it in ten hours, however skilled or superhuman Langdon may be!

All in all ,to borrow the phrase :a good yarn ruined.

Comment acquitter la facture du percepteur en donnant un tableau ?

C’est le thème du dernier article de Thibault de Ravel d’Esclapon.Il y explique comment une disposition ajoutée au code des impôts il y a quarante ans permet aux propriétaires d’œuvres d’art  jugées historiquement  importantes de payer certains de  leurs  impôts en donnant ces œuvres au gouvernement.Il explique le mécanisme de la dation en paiement  et relate quelques uns des exemples les plus célèbres ,dont  Le déjeuner sur l’herbe ou le Portrait de Diderot de Fragonard .La dation en paiement ne s’applique pas à tous les impôts-ce serait trop beau-seulement à certains comme  l’ impôt sur la fortune.

Secrets of the Vatican

Bernard Lecomte,former journalist with the influential catholic daily newspaper La Croix, author of a well regarded biography of Pope Jean-Paul II has just published an interesting book :"Les secrets du Vatican"(Perrin 2009).Lecomte is a fine connoisseur of Vatican intrigue and whispered secrets.

Starting with Pope Benedict XV’s desire to have the papacy regain a role in international affairs and ending with Pope Benedict XVI,the former Panzerkardinal, the author highlights "secrets" from the reigns of each of these eight popes. Conspiracy buffs will delight in reading why the Holy See has no interest in proving the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin but will be disappointed by the revelation of the Third Secret of Fatima, by Lecomte’s explanation of Pope John Paul I’s death ,by his views on the Roberto Calvi affair ( Msgr Marcinkus was not dishonest, merely stupefyingly incompetent in financial matters  and Calvi was likely in the clutches of the Cosa Nostra) and by his belief that the Bulgarian connection in the case of Ali Agça’s attempted assassination of John Paul II is a figment of conspiracy theorists’ imagination.

Students of parliamentary procedure will appreciate how John XXIII and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith battled for control of the committees (and their agendas!) for the preparation of Vatican II, how in the discussions within the all-important Theology Committee the high prelates pushing for the adoption of dogmatic-legalistic view of the Doctrine tried to thwart the biblico-pastoral views of the majority and how ,in fine,the Pope’s discovery of his terminal illness decided him to boldly go where no Pope had gone before in his famous opening speech Gaudet mater ecclesia.

Students of politics will delight in the description of the relationship between Mussolini and Pius XI that resulted in the Lateran Accords granting the independent legal status to Vatican City, in how John Paul II’ s political skills ( and accurate intelligence) allowed him to box in Jaruleski  in the matter of Walesa’s Solidarnórsć having correctly anticipated Gorbatchev’s reactions and will truly appreciate the beauty of John Paul II’s move to neutralize the Opus Dei by canonizing its founder José Maria Escriva de Balaguer in 2002.

That being said what struck me most is what the stories told by the author showed without expressly making the point: how at various critical junctures in history one finds men on the front lines of history and one finds those same men later ascending to the throne of Saint Peter.

For Benedict XV the Russian revolution presented an opportunity. For him, the elimination of the tsars, historical supporters of the Orthodox Church meant that there was an opening to help the Russian Catholics. To help him accomplish his goals of helping Russian Catholics and of restoring the papacy’s role in international affairs, Benedict XV relied on two nuncios Achille Ratti ( Pius XI) in Poland and Eugenio Pacelli (Pius XII) in Berlin. The new Soviet regime was anxious to gain recognition and Benedict XV hoped to dangle the recognition card to secure the future of Catholics in the new Soviet State.

Benedict XV died and on February 6, 1922 Achille Ratti is elected as his successor taking the name Pius XI.In 1924, Pius XI continues the strategy of Benedict XV and sends Nuncio Pacelli, the future Pius XII, to negotiate secretly with Lenin and in 1925 Pius XI secretly reestablishes a catholic hierarchy in the USSR asking Nuncio Pacelli  to secretly ordain 46-year old Jesuit Michel d’Herbigny as a bishop for all the USSR at a secret ceremony in Berlin.

Of all the recent popes none has been more controversial than the erstwhile nuncio to Berlin, Eugenio Pacelli elected in 1939 as Pius XII,following Pius XI "who could see clearly and far" .Pius XI  had the courage to promulgate  encyclicals  condemning the "Action française" (1926),fascism ("Non abbiamo bisogno"1931 ) ,Nazism ("Mit brennender Sorge" 1937),and communism ( "Divini Redemptoris" 1937).

Pius XII came from a long line of people close to the Holy See: his grandfather founded the Osservatore Romano and his father as dean of the Holy See lawyers negotiated the Lateran Accords. Pius XII was himself an experienced negotiator of concordats (Serbia 1914, Baveria 1924, Prussia 1929, Baden 1929) who after 12 years as nuncio to Berlin thought he could get to some form of concordat with Hitler.

The legalistic training of Pius XII is, according to Lecomte, the reason underlying Pius XII’s silence on the death camps.Lecomte recounts how UK ambassador Osborne gave a complete dossier on the death camps to Msgr Tardini on December 18, 1942 with the message that the UK and US governments suggest the Pope should use it for his Christmas message to the world. Pius XII refused to take sides not wanting to provoke Hitler any further and believed that he, like a judge, had a duty of reserve. Yet, he was not afraid to use the Church’s buildings throughout Rome to shelter the some 5000 Roman Jews threatened by the Nazis.

The infamous Finaly affair-Jewish child baptized as toddler to protect against Nazi extermination kidnapped by nuns to prevent return to natural Jewish parents and relapse into Judaism- saw the nuncio to Paris Angelo Roncalli ,the future John XXIII siding with the errant nuns while the Pope’s assistant Montini ,the future Paul VI tried to find a negotiated solution.

Similarly, the influence of those titans of the Church can be discerned in the experiment with worker-priests in France. None other than Karol Wojtyla, the future John Paul II, visits Marseille in 1947 to study the experiment of Father Loew: to regain traction with the proletariat more and more taken by the Marxist gospel, priests were sent to work as ordinary factory workers without cassock and collar. The future Paul VI approves the publication of an Italian translation of father Loew’s book on the worker-priests experiment.

The very same Paul VI wrestled in 1968 with the problem of contraceptive pills for Catholics. In 1930, Pius XI had authorized the natural Ogino method in Casti Connubii.The issue was whether a chemical method should be approved by the Church. Paul VI appointed a blue-ribbon panel of experts,theologians,medical researchers and –innovation-two catholic couples .The panel recommended the approval of the Pill, no doubt in part influenced by the Canadian wife, Colette Poitvin, who asked the panel’s theologians whether they thought God was more likely to ask a woman "did you love" or "did you take your temperature" ?Yet Paul VI hesitated and was finally swayed by the up-and-coming bishop of Kracow he quickly promoted to cardinal, Karol Wojtyla who had written a book “Love and Responsibility” on the meaning of Christian love. And so Paul VI went against his experts’ advice and issued Humanae vitae condemning the Pill.

Scandalmongers will no doubt be disappointed by Lecomte’s book but historians will be grateful for his lifting the veil of secrecy over many temporal/spiritual issues that confronted those eight most recent Popes.

Of Loos and Language

Interested in the differences between American and British usage? If yes ,then do read Roger Cohen‘s delightful piece "Of Loos and Language".Several years ago, Lynn Truss, the former host of the BBC Radio 4′s Cutting a Dash programme published an equally delightful book:Eats, Shoots & Leaves: The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation whose title derives from a well known amphibology :

" A panda walks into a café. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then draws a gun and proceeds to fire it at the other patrons.

‘Why?’ asks the confused, surviving waiter amidst the carnage, as the panda makes towards the exit. The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife manual and tosses it over his shoulder.

‘Well, I’m a panda’, he says, at the door. ‘Look it up.’

The waiter turns to the relevant entry in the manual and, sure enough, finds an explanation. ‘Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves."

Surely,Mrs Truss and Mr. Cohen are as aghast as I am at the American propensity to use "that" to refer to persons and to render obsolete the difference between "that" and "which" .As language is a symbolic way to express oneself, how can one express oneself correctly without correct use of the symbols? A mathematician misusing symbols is hardly likely to come to the right result.

François Guizot (1787-1874)

Canal Académie nous propose une émission sur François Guizot par l’historien Laurent Theis ,auteur d’une biographie de Guizot .Dans cette émission ,il fait ressortir les trois passions , l’enseignement, l’histoire et la religion,d’un homme ayant vécu de la Révolution à la Troisième République et qui  était membre de trois académies : française, des inscriptions et belles-lettres, des sciences morales et politiques.Pour écouter cette émission cliquez sur le lien: http://www.canalacademie.com/Francois-Guizot.html

islamIslam needs to prove it’s a religion of peace

The editorial by Tawfik Hamid in the Wall Street Journal deserves serious consideration for the questions it raises.Like Mr Hamid one cannot help but be disappointed by the British denial of an entry visa to Mr Geert Wilders,the member of the Dutch parliament whose film "Fitna" caused an uproar in circles where criticism of Islam is not regarded as politically correct.This uproar reminds me of that met by Sylvain Gouguenheim ,the highly respected professor of medieval history at Ecole Normale superieure -Lyon,for his book  "Aristote au Mont Saint Michel.Les racines grecques de l’Europe chretienne" a remarkable piece of scholarship .

Interested readers will find much to think about in Christoph Luxenberg’s The Syro-Aramaic Reading Of The Koran: a contribution to the decoding of the language of the Qur’an (2007).Luxenberg,a German philologist specializing in semitic languages took to writing under a pseudonym because he was afraid of suffering from the same fate as Suleiman Bashear a scholar at Al-Nadja University in Nablus who was thrown out of a window by Muslim extremists for professing the same theories as Professor Luxenberg.

Similarly,Hellenism in Byzantium (2008) by Anthony Kaldellis  ,Dimitri Gutas’Greek Wisdom Literature in Arabic Translation (1975 ) and Hellenic Philosophy:Origin and Character (2006) by Christos Evangeliou,are "musts".

Chronique d’un pharaon en justice : dernier acte pour Sésostris III

Pour comprendre les  difficultés de provenance et d’authenticité que peuvent rencontrer les collectionneurs, particulièrement lorsqu’il s’agit d’œuvres de la Haute Egypte lisez :Thibault de Ravel d’Esclapon

Suivre

Recevez les nouvelles publications par mail.