Die Wahl des koptisch-orthodoxen Patriarchen Ägyptens vom 8. bis zum 13. Jahrhundert durch das Los und andere Methoden

Short Description

The election of a suitable successor to a deceased patriarch of the Coptic Orthodox Church of Egypt always marks an important turning point in the everyday life of this oriental church. Since 1957, its head has been chosen by lot - an altar lot is drawn from the names of three previously duly elected candidates in order to determine the new Coptic Orthodox patriarch.

While the drawing of lots has been a regular feature of the election process since 1957, this selection method has historically been the exception to the rule. To date, only 7 of the 118 Coptic Orthodox patriarchs have been elected by drawing lots. Between the 8th and 13th centuries, there were only two. This is actually astonishing, as the Copts could basically refer to Acts 1:15 - 26 as a relevant precedent for the application of this selection method: After the death of the traitor Judas, a successor had to be found for him. The assembled disciples prayed about this and nominated two men, Joseph and Matthias, as suitable successors. Lots were then cast for them - the choice fell on Matthias, who was henceforth counted among the apostles.

According to the research programme of the Münster Collaborative Research Centre 1150 "Cultures of Decision-Making", drawing lots is considered an "extreme case of decision-making", which makes the application of this selection method extremely presuppositional. So why, in the few cases that have come down to us, did the Copts agree to select the head of their church by drawing lots? What historical and cultural conditions made the use of casting lots as a selection method possible in the first place? What considerations spoke in favour of drawing lots and against the use of other selection methods? And how did these considerations influence the technical-instrumental side as well as the symbolic-expressive side of the drawing of an altar lot used in the individual cases?

A systematic, historical-comparative analysis of the application of both the drawing of lots and other selection methods in the context of the election of the Coptic Orthodox patriarch was a desideratum that had not yet been realised. This study now fulfils this requirement for those patriarchs who were brought to office by drawing lots between the 8th and 13th centuries. Of course, this also includes the other selection methods that can be documented for the regulation of the succession of a deceased patriarch during this period.

Description

The election of a suitable successor to a deceased patriarch of the Coptic Orthodox Church of Egypt always marks an important turning point in the everyday life of this oriental church. Since 1957, its head has been chosen by lot - an altar lot is drawn from the names of three previously duly elected candidates in order to determine the new Coptic Orthodox patriarch.

While the drawing of lots has been a regular feature of the election process since 1957, this selection method has historically been the exception to the rule. To date, only 7 of the 118 Coptic Orthodox patriarchs have been elected by drawing lots. Between the 8th and 13th centuries, there were only two. This is actually astonishing, as the Copts could basically refer to Acts 1:15 - 26 as a relevant precedent for the application of this selection method: After the death of the traitor Judas, a successor had to be found for him. The assembled disciples prayed about this and nominated two men, Joseph and Matthias, as suitable successors. Lots were then cast for them - the choice fell on Matthias, who was henceforth counted among the apostles.

According to the research programme of the Münster Collaborative Research Centre 1150 "Cultures of Decision-Making", drawing lots is considered an "extreme case of decision-making", which makes the application of this selection method extremely presuppositional. So why, in the few cases that have come down to us, did the Copts agree to select the head of their church by drawing lots? What historical and cultural conditions made the use of casting lots as a selection method possible in the first place? What considerations spoke in favour of drawing lots and against the use of other selection methods? And how did these considerations influence the technical-instrumental side as well as the symbolic-expressive side of the drawing of an altar lot used in the individual cases?

A systematic, historical-comparative analysis of the application of both the drawing of lots and other selection methods in the context of the election of the Coptic Orthodox patriarch was a desideratum that had not yet been realised. This study now fulfils this requirement for those patriarchs who were brought to office by drawing lots between the 8th and 13th centuries. Of course, this also includes the other selection methods that can be documented for the regulation of the succession of a deceased patriarch during this period.

Biographical Note

Fabian Erben, born on 30 August 1988, lives with his wife in the town of Unna in the eastern Ruhr region. "Die Wahl des koptisch-orthodoxen Patriarchen Ägyptens vom 8. bis zum 13. Jahrhundert durch das Los und andere Methoden" is his first major book publication and also his dissertation.

He studied History and German Studies at the Ruhr University Bochum (2009 - 2015). He then worked at the University of Münster from 2015 to 2019 as a research He worked as a research assistant at the Collaborative Research Centre 1150 "Cultures of Decision-Making". Finally, from 2020 to 2022, he worked as a scient. Volunteer at the LWL-Römermuseum in Haltern am See, where he was involved in the planning, conception and realisation of the special exhibition "Rome in Westphalia 2.0".

Fabian Erben is currently working as a personal assistant and supports a physically disabled person in his everyday life. At the same time, he is studying to become a secondary school teacher of German and history at Ruhr University Bochum.

Series Description

No English description available. Showing German description:
Sprachen und Kulturen des Christlichen Orients

Hg. von Johannes den Heijer, Stephen Emmel, Martin Krause
und Andrea B. Schmidt

Die international angelegte Reihe bietet Monographien, Handbücher, Sammelbände und Quellen zum Christlichen Orient. Dieser soll sowohl in seiner linguistischen und philologischen Breite erfasst werden (Äthiopisch, Arabisch, Armenisch, Georgisch, Koptisch, Nubisch, Syrisch) als auch in seiner kulturellen, religiösen und historischen Thematik. In ihrer zeitlichen Dimension erstreckt sich die Reihe von der frühbyzantinischen Epoche bis ins Spätmittelalter. Sie berücksichtigt vereinzelt auch gegenwartsbezogene Darstellungen über die orientalischen Gemeinschaften im Hinblick auf ihre Verwurzelung im christlich-historischen Umfeld.
Die Erforschung des Christlichen Orients erfolgt heute in verschiedenen Einzeldisziplinen, die jeweils auf bestimmte Sprachen oder geographische Regionen konzentriert sind. Neben dieser Spezialisierung besteht zugleich ein übergreifendes interdisziplinäres Interesse, die kulturellen und historischen Gemeinsamkeiten der einzelnen christlich-orientalischen Gemeinschaften in ihrer Verflochtenheit sichtbar zu machen. Die Absicht der Herausgeber ist es daher, detaillierte Fachstudien von führenden Wissenschaftlern aus ihrem jeweiligen Forschungsgebiet aufzunehmen. Zum andern wollen sie interdisziplinär angelegten Werken ein Forum bieten.
Der Christliche Osten hat für die Kulturgeschichte des europäischen Abendlandes eine wesentliche Rolle gespielt und dem Westen ein reiches Erbe vermittelt. Um diese Bedeutung zu erschließen, wendet sich die Reihe auch an Studenten und an die größere Öffentlichkeit. Mit dieser Gewichtung soll der Christliche Orient in seinen vielfältigen kulturhistorischen, künstlerischen und philologischen Aspekten gebührend ins Blickfeld gerückt werden.

Den Herausgebern steht ein internationales Beratergremium zur Seite.