The edition under review goes back to a PhD thesis at Cologne University in the winter semester 2008/09. Only a few publications (one text edition, one library catalogue) that have appeared since then have been consulted for this publication, possibly due to the fact that the author now works as a teacher at a Gymnasium and as a politician in Cologne. The book falls into two parts of more or less equal length: an introduction, and the edition of a relatively unknown treatise of a ninth-century bishop of Lyon.
Amolo, the successor of the much better known Agobard of Lyon, was bishop from 841-852. Only a few of his letters and his treatise on the Jews are transmitted. The latter, which seems to have been completed in 846 (see 36-7), is transmitted in two manuscripts and in Migne's Patrologia Latina only. Herbers-Rauhut now presents the first critical edition, accompanied by a reliable German translation.
Amolo's treatise falls into two parts. The first part deals with theological arguments against Jews, while the second part is a juridical argumentation that was adopted in c. 73 of the synod of Meaux (845). Herbers-Rauhut argues that Amolo might have compiled that second part for the synod itself, whereas the first part was added later.
In her introduction, Herbers-Rauhut first presents information about Amolo's life and works. Apart from the time of his episcopate, there are some letters by him or sent to him. Although the present treatise is transmitted under Hrabanus Maurus' name, it is quite likely that Amolo is its author (XIX-XXIII). In a second step, the editor presents the two manuscripts that contain the treatise. One manuscript (from Montpellier) is dated to the ninth or tenth century, the other (from Padua) to the tenth century. The manuscripts are not directly related to each other (XXXVII). In a third step, the author turns to the deacon Florus, who was a collaborator of both Agobard and Amolo. The question is whether Florus was Amolo's collaborator in writing the treatise, or whether they both used the same compilations and manuscripts. Herbers-Rauhut opts for the latter. She states that in some cases the "vorlage manuscripts can be identified without doubt" (XLII), and in other cases it can be excluded that Amolo used manuscripts kept in the Lyon library. Although these manuscripts are still extant with Florus' marks, "his direct authorship" can be excluded "without doubt" (XLIX). Nonetheless it might be stated that Amolo used Florus' compilations. In a fourth step (more than 50 pages!) the author scrutinises Amolo's sources. For the Bible he relies on the Vulgate. References to further biblical translations rely on Jerome's works. A second group of sources is formed by the works of the church fathers, most of them mainstream references from Irenaeus to Leo. The majority of quotations stem from Augustine and Jerome. More than half of the fourth chapter is dedicated to an analysis of the juridical sources. Amolo made use of the Lex Romana Visigothorum, the Constitutiones Sirmonidianae, the Laws concerning the Jews of the Visigothic kings, and the Councils, mainly of the sixth century. A fourth group of possible sources is formed by "Jewish" sources. The author mentions the Toledot Yeshu, "Hebrew terms," and rabbinical apocalyptical traditions. This part seems to me the weakest part of the introduction because one gets the impression that the author does not know the matter treated. The Toledot Yeshu do not rely on "Talmudic literature" (LXXXIX; cf. XCV: the postulated view on the Talmud was not possible in ninth-century Europe), but on rabbinical traditions. Since they seem to have been transmitted orally, one would have to explain possible contacts between Amolo and the person(s) transmitting these traditions. (One misses, e.g., Peter Schaefer's works on that subject.) For the traditions of the two Messiahs, one could also turn to Christian apocryphal literature, e.g. the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (Here one misses a discussion of writings by Matthias Henze and others.), or to Midrashic literature, which may have been circulated in Lyon, but might be lost today (the transmission of Midrashic literature is quite complicated). A final, fifth group of references goes back to historical sources. Amolo is one of the few sources on deacon Bodo's conversion to Judaism. Finally, the fifth chapter of the introduction traces the reception of Amolo's treatise in the Council of Meaux. Herbers-Rauhut shows that c. 73 depends on Amolo, whereas the further chapters do not. Within this chapter the author also discusses the possibility that Amolo's treatise might be interpreted within a broader tendency to "Christianise the world" (CXXIII), which required limiting the Jewish influence in society.
The edition of Amolo's treatise tries to establish a readable text. Medieval Latin spellings are transformed to classical Latin spelling. Commas are inserted to make the Latin text easier to read. The translation is fluid and readable.