| That Jesus «manifested himself» to the disciples (21:1; this provides an inciusio with 21:14) is also Johannine language (1:31; 2:11; 3:21; 7:4; 9:3; 17:6) and, on a theological level, reflects the expectation in 14:21–23 of postresurrection encounters with Christ (albeit normally in the Spirit after the first encounter of 20:19–23). Jesus was, literally, «on the sea» (21:1); this is acceptable language for «beside the sea» ( Mark 4:1; 5:21 ; cf. John 21:4,9–10 ). It might recall Jesus» theophany on the sea (6:19; cf. Mark 6:47–49 ); but this is probably overexegesis (see 6:16). When John concludes the narrative by reminding the reader that this is the «third» time Jesus was revealed to the disciples (21:14), he includes in this count only the two appearances in the upper room (20:19–23,24–29). Like John " s other counts (2:1,11; 4:46, despite the plural «signs» in 3:2), however, his language may indicate only the third time in the narrative, not the third appearance altogether. 10857 That John 21 does not enumerate all the gospels» resurrection appearances but counts only those in this Gospel seems to me a further piece of evidence favoring Johannine authorship of this chapter. 10858 This passage reflects knowledge of the tradition that Peter and at least some of his colleagues (21:3)–here presumably the sons of Zebedee (21:2)–were fishermen, a tradition undoubtedly widely known in the early church (cf. Mark 1:16–20 ). 10859 It has often been argued as well that the passage reflects knowledge of the same tradition as appears in Luke 5:1–10; although the argument depends, to some degree, on the relative paucity of extant traditions available for our modern perusal, it is probably correct. Peter acts in character, taking the lead in 21(13:24; 18:10,15; cf. Mark 14:31, 37 ), as some students in ancient schools were known to do. 10860 He also displays for Jesus his physical prowess in 21and 21:11; this might appeal to heroic or masculine ideals in the ancient Mediterranean world–perhaps acceptable provided it was used to demonstrate loyalty to his Lord (as it was in 21:7, ll). 10861 This might also be in character; at least some ancient people viewed fishermen as «tough,» inured to the labors of their trade. 10862 |
| Plate 55 Icon of the myrrh-bearing women at the tomb. By Eileen McGuckin. The Icon Studio: www.sgtt.org the New Testament the accounts of Jesus’ resurrection, based on apostolic memories and oral traditions, vary widely in detail. However, the fact and centrality of the resurrection constitute the bedrock of the Christian faith, attested by more than five hundred eyewitnesses ( 1Cor. 15.5–8 ). The gospels indicate that Jesus anticipated his death as blood covenant renewal and viewed his resurrection as God’s vindication of his ministry (e.g., Mk. 8.27–31; 14.22–5, 36, 61–2 ; cf. Acts 3.13–15). Matthew, Luke, and John link Jesus’ resurrection with the gift of the Spirit and the inauguration of the early Christian mission ( Mt. 28.16–20 ; Lk. 24.44–9 ; Jn. 20.19–23 ; cf. Acts 2.32–3). The Gospel ofJohn magnificently integrates the life, death, resurrection, and enthronement of the Son of God as the mutual glorification between the Father and the Son, marking the decisive victory over the power of death and the gift of abundant life through the Spirit, available to believers in the present as well as the future ( Jn. 1.14 ; 5 .24–9; 7.37–9; 12.30–1; 14.15–24; 17.1–5). In this similar rich vein, the Apostle Paul provides the most detailed theological explication of the death and resurrection of the incarnate Son ( Gal. 4.4–6 ; Rom. 1.1–4 ) and Lord of glory ( 1Cor. 2.8; 15.1–4 ). For Paul, the death and resurrection of Jesus the Christ mark the cosmic shift from the old age of sin, corruption, and death to the new era of grace, life, incorruption, and transformed bodily immortality ( Rom. 3.21–6; 5.12–21; 8.18–39 ; 1Cor. 15.50–7 ). In Paul, as in John, God’s powers of salvation are at work both now and in the future in those who are united with Christ through faith and baptism, and who enact the pattern of Jesus’ death and resurrection by crucifying their sinful passions and offering themselves as living sacrifice to God ( Rom. 6.1–23; 8.9–13; 10.9–13; 12.1–2 ; 2Cor. 4.7–18 ; Gal. 3.16–24 ). |
| 5 Известные постановления конгрегации пропаганды от 1 Апреля 1890, 13 июня 1891 г. и 10 Мая 1892 г., смотри в Archiv fur kath. Kirchenrecht. Bd. 67. S. 475. Bd. 68. S. 442. cf. Bd. 69. S. 117—120: Die Coelibatspflicht des griechuniretn Klerus in Nordamerica. 6 Относительно России см. у H. Суворова. Курс Церк. Права. Ярославль 1890. Стр. 281. Относительно Сербии см. у Др. Ч. Митровича. О брачним парницама. Београд. 1906. 1. 59. Относительно Черногории чл. 173, 2. консисторского устава. 7 Относительно Австрии § 63. Свода гражданских законов: „Geistliche, welche schon hohere Weihen empfangen, wie auch Ordenspersonen von beiden Geschlechten, welclie feirliche Gelübde per Ehelosigkeit abgelegt haben, können keine giltigen Eheverträge schliessen». Относит. Испании чл. 83, 4. свода гражд. законов 1889 года. 8 Friedberq Kirchenrecht S. 409. Hinschius, System. 1, 162, 163. 9 1 Тим. 3, 2— 6 : Но епископ должен быть непорочен, одной жены муж, трезв, целомудрен, благочинен, честен, страннолюбив, учителен, не пьяница, не бийца, не сварлив, не корыстолюбив, но тих, миролюбив, не сребролюбив, хорошо управляющий домом своим, детей содержащий в послушании со всякою честностью; ибо, кто не умеет управлять собственным домом, тот будет ли пещись о Церкви Божией? Не должен быть из новообращенных, чтобы не возгордился и не подпал осуждению с диаволом. Тит.1:5, 6: Для того я оставил тебя в Крите, чтобы ты довершил недоконченное и поставил по всем городам пресвитеров, как я тебе приказывал: если кто непорочен, муж одной жены, детей имеет верных, не укоряемых в распутстве или непокорности. 10 1 Kop. 7, 8, 9: Ибо желаю, чтобы все люди были, как и я; но каждый имеет свое дарование от Бога, один так, другой иначе. Безбрачным же и вдовам говорю: хорошо им оставаться, как я. Но если не могут воздержаться, пусть вступают в брак; ибо лучше вступить в брак, нежели разжигаться. 11 Лев. 21:7. 8. 14. 15. 12 Быт. 2:18. 22—24. 13 Мф. 19:4. 5: Он сказал им в ответ: не читали ли вы, что Сотворивший вначале мужчину и женщину сотворил их? И сказал: посему оставит человек отца и мать и прилепится к жене своей, и будут два одною плотью. Μρ . 10, 6: В начале же создания, Бог мужчину и женщину сотворил их. |
| The same Prophet Hosea, proclaiming the name of God and addressing the chosen people, says: “for I am God, and not man; the Holy One in the midst of thee” (Hosea 11:9). God defines Himself as such, which means that holiness is one of the most important definitions of God (Cf., Leviticus 11:44–45; 19:2; 20:3, 7, 26; 21:8; 22:2, 32. Jesus of Navi [Joshua] 24:15, 19. 1 Kings Samuel] 2:2, 10; 6:20; 2 Kings Samuel] 22:7; 4 Kings Kings] 19:22. 1 Paralipomena Chronicles] 16:10, 27, 35; 29:16. 2 Paralipomena Chronicles] 6:2; 30. 27. Tobit 3:11; 8:5, 15; 12:12, 15. Judith 9:13; Job 6:10; Psalms 2:6; 3:5; 5:8; 10 14 15 17 19 21 23 26 27 32 42 45 46 47 50 64 67 70 76 77 54; 78 88 97 98 5, 9; 101 102 104 42; 105 110 137 144 21; Proverbs 9:10; Wisdom of Solomon 1:5; 9:8, 10, 17; 10:20. Wisdom of Sirach 4:15; 17:8; 23:9–10; 43:11; 47:9, 12; 48:23. Esaias [Isaiah] 1:4; 5:16, 19, 24; 6:3; 8:13; 10:17, 20; 11:9; 12:6; 17:7; 29:19, 23; 30:11–12, 15; 31:1; 37:23; 40:25; 41:14, 16, 20; 43:3, 14–15; 45:11; 47:4; 48:17; 49:7; 52:19; 54:5; 55:5; 56:7; 57:13, 15; 58:13; 60:9, 14; 63:10–11; 65:11, 25; 66:20. Jeremias [Jeremiah] 23:9; 31:23; 50:29; 51:5. Baruch 2:16; 4:22, 37; 5:5; 20:39–40; 28: 14; 36:20–22; 39:7, 25. Ezekiel 43:7–8; Daniel 3:52–53; 4:5–6, 10, 14–15, 20; 5:11; 9:16, 20, 24. Joel 2:1; 3:17; Amos 2:7. Abidias 1:16. Jonas 2:5, 8; Michaias [Micah] 1:2; Abbacum [Habbakuk] 1:12; 2:20; 3:3; Sophonias [Zephaniah] 3: 11–12; Zacharias [Zechariah] 2:13; 2 Maccabees 8:15; 14:36; 15:32; 3 Maccabees 2:2, 11, 16; 5:8; 6:1–2, 4, 17, 26; 7:8; 2 Esdras 14:22; Matthew 1:18, 20; 3:11; 12:32; 28:19. Mark 1:8, 24, 29; 12:36; 13:11; Luke 1:15, 35, 41, 49, 67, 72; 2:25–26; 3:16, 22; 4: 1, 34; 11:13; 12:10, 12. John 1:33; 7:39; 14:26; 17:11; 20:22; Acts 1:2, 5, 8, 16; 2:4, 33, 38; 3:14; 4:8, 25, 27, 30–31; 5:3, 32; 6:3, 5; 7:51, 55; 8:15, 17–19, 39; 9:17, 31; 10:38, 44–45, 47; 11:15–16, 24; 13:2, 4, 9, 35, 52; 15:8, 28; 16:6; 19:2, 6; 20:23, 28; 21:11; 28:25. 1 Peter 1:12, 15–16; 2 Peter 1:21; 1 John 2:20; 5:7. Jude 1:20; Romans 5:5; 9:1; 14:17; 15:13, 16; 1 Corinthians 2:13; 3:17; 6:19; 12:3; 2 Corinthians 6:6; 13:13. Ephesians 3:5; 4: 30; 1 Thessalonians 1:5–6; 4:8; 2 Timothy 1:14; Titus 3:5; Hebrews 2:4; 3:7; 6: 4; 9:8, 14; 10: 15; Revelation 3:7; 4:8; 6:10; 15:3–4; 16:5). |
| John prepares the way of Yahweh (1:23)–and hence of Jesus–and testifies of Jesus» preexistence (1:30). Jesus proves to be one greater than Moses (2:1–11). Jesus would come down from heaven more like divine Wisdom or Torah than like Moses (3:13, 31). Like Torah or Wisdom, Jesus is the bread of life (6:48). He existed as divine before Abraham existed (8:56–59). Jesus is far greater than the «gods» to whom God " s Word came at Sinai (10:33–39). Repeatedly in John the Scriptures testify to Jesus» identity and mission, but the climax of this motif appears when we learn that Isaiah spoke of Jesus when he beheld his glory in the theophany of Isa 6 ( John 12:39–41 ). Jesus is the perfect revelation of the Father (14:8–10) and shared the Father " s glory before the world existed (17:5,24). His self-revelation can induce even involuntary prostration (18:6), and confession of his deity becomes the ultimately acceptable level of faith for disciples (20:28–31). Where Jesus parallels Moses, he is greater than Moses (e.g., 9:28–29), as he is greater than Abraham and the prophets (8:52–53) or Jacob (4:12). Elsewhere, however, Jesus parallels not Moses but what Moses gave (3:14; 6:31), and even here, Moses should not get too much credit for what was «given through» (cf. 1:17) him (6:32; 7:22). Moses may have given water in the wilderness from the rock, but Jesus is the rock himself, the foundation stone of the new temple (7:37–39). How do Jesus» «signs» contribute to this high Christology (as they clearly must– 20:30–31)? Even though John has specifically selected them (21:25), most signs in the Fourth Gospel are of the same sort as found in the Synoptic tradition, which often applies them to the messianic era (Isa 35:5–6 in Matt 11/Luke 7:22). As in the Synoptics, the closest biblical parallels to Jesus» healing miracles are often the healing miracles of Elijah and Elisha. But in some other signs, John clearly intends Jesus to be greater than Moses: for his first sign he turns water to wine instead of to blood (2:1–11; cf. Rev 8:8). Later he feeds a multitude in the wilderness and, when they want to make him a prophet-king like Moses (6:15), he indicates that he is the new manna that Moses could not provide (6:32). The walking on water sign (6:19–21) probably reflects faith in Jesus» deity even in Mark. In this broader Johannine context, the healing miracles themselves may further evoke one story about Moses: people who beheld the serpent he lifted up would be healed. Yet Jesus parallels not Moses but the serpent, through which healing came directly (see 3:14, in a context addressing Wisdom, Torah, and Moses). Those who «see» him (parallel Johannine language to «believe» and «know» him) are healed. |
| John is calling his audience to a full confession of resurrection faith: Jesus is God in the flesh, and therefore his claims cannot be compromised, for synagogue or for Caesar. John will settle for no faith less secure than this. Further, while Thomas " s faith by sight is accepted, the faith without sight expected of John " s audience is greater (20:29; cf. 2Cor 5:6–7 ; 1Pet 1:8 ). It is grounded in the beloved disciplés testimony sampled in the Gospel (20:30–31), confirmed to hearers by the Paraclete (15:26–16:15). 10778 E.g., Ellis, Genius, 297–98; Minear, «Functions.» The «signs» include the resurrection chapter (esp. 20:27, 29) but also the rest of the «signs» in this Gospel (with, e.g., Lightfoot, Gospel, 336). 10779 E.g., Aeschines Timarchus 196; Cicero Fin. 5.32.95–96; Or. Brut. 40.137; Polybius 39.8.3; Dionysius of Halicarnassus Demosth. 32; Thucyd. 55; Musonius Rufus 6, pp. 54.26–56.11 (esp. 54.26; 56.7–11); Aelius Aristides Fifth Leuctrian Oration 43–44; Rhet. Alex. 36,1443b.l5–16; 1444b.21–35; 37, 1445b.21–23; Hippolytus Haer. 10.1; Anderson, Rhetorical Theory, 181–82; less fully, cf. Matt 28:18–20; Rom 16:17–19 . Of course, open or abrupt endings also appear, as in Mark 16 (see our comments on Mark 16:9–20 above, on the resurrection tradition). 10780 E.g., Isaeus Estate of Cleonymus 48, out of fifty-one paragraphs. Often they come at the conclusion of the proofs, though this might be near the work " s end (Cicero Quinct. 28.85–29.90), possibly relevant here; they could also conclude a section (Xenophon Hel1. 3.5.25, ending book 3; 4.8.19, ending only some events; Polybius 2.71.7–10, esp. 2.71.7–8; Cicero Fin. 3.9.31; Quinct. 19.60). 10781 Aeschines Timarchus 111. After his closing summary (Polybius 39.8.4–6), Polybius adds only closing comments (39.8.7–8). 10782 Achtemeier, «Miracle Workers,» 176. Even if redactional, Homer " s claim that Aeneas would rule the Trojans (Il. 20.303–308) is pre-Virgil and virtually invited the sort of development one finds in Virgil Aeneid. 10783 E.g., Valerius Maximus 2.7.5; 3.8.ext.l; Musonius Rufus 10, p. 78.22. Epideictic bards might also complain that time provided the only limit on their praises (Pindar Nem. 4.33–34; O1. 2.95; Pyth. 4.247–248; cf. Heb 11:32). In many oral genres, one should limit onés examples (Menander Rhetor 2.4, 393.25–30). 10787 Dionysius of Halicarnassus Thucyd. 55; Isaeus 19–20; Demosth. 42,46, 58; Lit. Comp. 11. More detailed discussion might await another occasion, but he needed to use most wisely the space that he had (Demosthenes 32; Isaeus 14); he wanted to avoid wasting the reader " s time (Demosthenes 40). |
| Nicodemus calls Jesus «teacher» (3:2), which is a correct term for disciples to employ (1:38; 11:28; 13:13–14; 20:16), 4764 even if it is not a complete Christology by itself. Although the leaders may have thought themselves the appropriate guardians of sound teaching (9:34), Jesus teaches (6:59; 7:14, 28, 35; 8:20; 18:20), just as do the Father who sent him (5:20; 6:45; 8:28) and the Spirit who carries on his teaching (14:26). In this context, the most striking point is that Jesus is much more truly a teacher than the ignorant «teacher of Israel» who comes to him to learn (3:10). Although Nicodemus is not a completely reliable voice in the narrative, John elsewhere confirms Nicodemus " s recognition that God is with Jesus (8:29; cf. 1:1–2). 1B. Nicodemus Comes by Night (3:2) Scholars propose various reasons why Nicodemus came by night. Jewish teachers often studied at night, 4765 especially those who had to work during the day; 4766 thus Nicodemus may have come to receive instruction from a greater sage, namely, Jesus. More likely, he comes at night to avoid being seen (cf. 7:51–52; 12:42–43; 19:38); night was the time for secret (sometimes antisocial) deeds and whatever one wished not to be known. 4767 Nicodemus remains a secret believer at this point, not a disciple. 4768 Nicodemus here remains in solidarity with those who fear to confess Jesus lest they be expelled from the synagogue (12:42). 4769 In the story world, fear accounts for Nicodemus coming by night, but John probably also mentions «night» on a more symbolic level for his audience (cf. 13:30), bracketing the narrative with Nicodemus coming «by night» (3:2) and true believers leaving darkness to come to Jesus» light (3:21). 4770 In so doing, John foreshadows Nicodemus " s ultimate discipleship in 19:39–42. 4771 2. Birth from Above (3:3) Jesus responds to Nicodemus " s observation about Jesus» identity by calling him to a greater level of recognition. 4772 For this reason, some suggest that 3is a christological assertion. |
| Веры уподобление 2 . Taken from Polyanthea, ibid., the passage immediately following: «Granum sinapis membrorum viscera calefacit: fidei autem vigor cordium peccata comburit. Ille quidem asperum, algorem frigoris removet: haec autem delictorum diabolicum frigus expellit. Sinapis iniquos humores decoquit corporum: fides autem libidinum fluenta consumit. Per illud medicina capiti procuratur: per fidem autem spirituale caput nostrum, quod est Christus, saepius refovetur, fidei (juxta comparationem sinapis) odore sancto perfruimur. Serm. 1» (ibid.). Веры уподобление 3 . Taken from Polyanthea , ibid. 11. 1–4 cf Polyanthea: «Fides est radix omnium virtutum, & quod super hoc fundamentum aedificaveris, hoc solum ad operis tui fructus, & virtutis proficit mercedem. Ambrosius lib, de Chain & Abel.» (p. 427). 11. 5–8 cf Polyanthea: «Fides lampas est, quia sicut lampas illuminât domum, ita fides animam. Ioannes Chrys. super Matth. 25» (pp. 427–8). Гражданство . Although this poem is located in A among a large number of poems deriving from Faber, it appears to have been taken from Polyanthea, «Respublica». 11. 5–8 cf Polyanthea : «Bias dixit optimam esse Rempublicam in qua legem omnes perinde ac ipsum dominum & regem metuunt. Plut, in convivium septem sapientium« (p. 1010). 11. 9–10 cf Polyanthea: «Chilon Optimam asseruit esse Rempub, quae maxime leges minime autem rhetores audit.» (ibid.). 11. 11–14 cf Polyanthea: » Cleobulus illam Rempubl, maxime dixit bene compositam esse, ubi cives magis infamiam quam legem metuunt» (ibid.). 11. 15–18 cf Polyanthea: «Periander earn judicavit laudatissimam esse Rempubl, in qua cum reliqua aequalia existimentur, virtute quod melius, vitio autem quod detenus est, definiatur» (ibid.). 11. 19–20 cf Polyanthea: »Pittacus ea est, inquit, Respublica bene instiiuta, a cujus gubernaculis mali removentur» (ibid.). 11. 21–2 cf Polyanthea : «Thales optimam esse pronuntiavit Remp. quae cives neque praedivites nec admodum pauperes contineret» (ibid.). 11. 23–8 cf Polyanthea : »Solon illam civitatem optime habitari dixit, in qua viros bonos honoribus affici, contra autem, improbos poenis mos l " uerit. Stob. ser. 41. de Repub.« (ibid.). 11. 29–30 cf Polyanthea: " Solon rogatus, quomodo civitas in optimo statu degeret, dixit: si cives quidem magistratui obediant, magistrates autem legibus. Eod. ser. » (ibid.). |
| Ite igitur ad metendas segetes nostras, et ut minus timeatis, parate mihi vehiculum: Ecce ego vobiscum ipsa in campos messura descendant. " » II. 7–18 cf Faber: «Ubi cum retractis ntanicis falcem arripuisset, et metere coepisset, (mirum dictu) subito in actu ipso ut erat inclinis, misera diriguit, et quasi marmoris effigies nec sem etipsam erigere, nec falcem e manu dimittere potuit, nec segetem: sed muta et nihil loquens similis simulachro stabat; tantum intuens intuentes. Concurrentes famuli rogant, ut a temeritate resipiscat, dicentes, fortem esse Deum Christianorum: sed ilia nihil respondebat. Iniectis ergo manibus earn erigere conantur, et falcem extorquere; sed frustra. Stabat enim im m obilis quasi m oles terrae affixa.» II. 19–24 cf Faber: «At ubi satis miraculi ac stuporis intuentibus ostenderat ipsique fam uli iam taedio affecti abire, ipsamque dimittere vellent; soluta ilia repente corruit, sontem que animant in ignem tartareum efflavit.» II. 25–30 cf Faber: «Quant levantes in vehiculum : En, inquiunt, qualem de agro manipulum die Dominico reportamus. Inde fam uli ad baptismum festinarunt, et vicini omnes diem Dominicum sedulo observare coeperunt.» Праздник 5 . Taken from Faber, ibid. No. 3 «Dierum festivorum profanatio reprehenditur». The poem summarises the whole sermon, though not in the same order, and with the addition of undesirable Sunday acitivities that relate to Simeon " s own environm ent. II. 9–14 cf sect. 3 «Alii choreas agunt», sect. 4 «Alii vacant com potationibus», sect. 5 «Alii ludis et spectaculis vacant». II. 17–18 cf sect. 1 «Otiantur alii et dormiunt». 1. 19 cf sect. 2 «Alii laborant in servilibus operibus». II. 21–6 cf sect. 6 «Alii nundinantur et lucra quaerunt». II. 27–30 cf sect. 7 «Alii luxum vestium parant». Published in Panenko and PLDR. Праздник 6 . Taken from Faber, ibid., sect. 2 «Alii laborant in servilibus operibus»: «Thomas C antipratensis 1. 2. Apum c. 49. nobili cuidam Germ ano, venationis gratia dies festos profananti ex uxore natam prolem canino capite, et auribus dependulis ad instar canis venatici. |
| 3 . Bryce Trevor R. The Kingdom of the Hittites. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998. 4 . Bryce Trevor R. The World of the Neo-Hittite Kingdoms. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. 5 . Burkert W. Greek Religion: Archaic and Classical. Blackwell Publishing, 2004. 6 . Chadwick J. The Mycenaean World. Cambridge University Press, 1976. 7 . Day J. Yahweh and the gods and goddesses of Canaan. Journal for the study of the Old Testament. Supplement series 265. Sheffield Academic Press, 2002. 8 . Dickinson O. The Aegean Bronze Age (Cambridge World Archaeology). Cambridge University Press, 2010. 9 . Dickinson O. The Aegean from Bronze Age to Iron Age: continuity and change between the twelfth and eighth centuries BC. London and New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2006. 10 . Elkin A.P. Aboriginal men of high degree. Sydney, 1964. 11 . Evans A. The Palace of Minos. Cambridge University Press, 2013. 12 . Feliu Lluís. The god Dagan in Bronze Age Syria. Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 2003. 13 . Gibson J.C.L. Canaanite Myths and Legends. London – New York: T&T Clark International, 2004. 14 . Hodder I. Çatalhöyük. The Leopard’s Tale. London: Thames & Hudson Ltd., 2006. 15 . Hodder Ian. Religion in the emergence of civilization: Çatalhöyük as a case of study. Cambridge University Press, 2010. 16 . Hoffner H.A. Jr. Hittite Myths. Society of Biblical Literature. Scholars Press, Atlanta, Georgia. 17 . Hornung Eric. Conceptions of God in Ancient Egypt: The One and the Many Cornell University Press, 1996. 18 . Horst Kirchner. Ein archäologischer Beitrag zur Urgeschichte des Schamanismus//Anthropos Bd. 47.1952. P. 244–286. 19 . Howitt Cf. A.W. The native tribes of South-East Australia. London – New York, 1904. 20 . King R.J., Ozcan S. S. Differential Y-chromosome Anatolian influences on the Greek and Cretan Neolithic//Annals of Human Genetics (2008). Vol. 72. London. P. 205–214. 21 . Lehtisalo T. Entwurf einer Mythologie der Jurak-Samojeden, Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne. Vol. 53. Helsinki, 1927. |
|
|
