Ibn Abi Usaibia update

I’ve got 26 .htm files now, which contain the output from the OCR process.  My task now is to go through each, rejoin separated lines, make sure that paragraphs appear at the right places, and add page numbers.  I’ve done the first two — some 60 pages.   It will be slow.

Share

“A leak?! Arrest those who found out what we’re doing!”

Curious news today, that the British police have been seizing laptops and routers from a blogger, and requesting police action in two other countries as well.  This pretty clearly violates the principle of freedom of speech online, I think.

The context of all this is the “Climategate” emails.  The climate research centre at the University of East Anglia was one of the big puffers of “climate change”.  Their work was seriously undermined, however, when someone leaked a large tranche of emails from the centre to climate sceptics, who put them online.

The emails revealed key staff engaged in very dodgy-sounding activities.  They were seen deliberately refusing to release data — as they legally should have done under the Freedom of Information Act — when the data would have (supposedly) shown that their conclusions were actually false.  The emails also showed them generally behaving in a less than scientific or professional way. A second tranche of emails was leaked a little while ago.

The political effect of the scandal has been to torpedo the whole “global warming” lobby in the United Kingdom.  An inquiry was held, and concluded that no-one at the centre did anything wrong (!), but this did nothing to alleviate a general impression that the unit had behaved fraudulently.

So who is being arrested now?  Well, not the dodgy-sounding scientists.  They did nothing wrong, we’re told.  No, the police are pursuing the bloggers — the people who reported on this, it seems, and took delivery of the “stolen” emails.  The Register has the details.

The question for me is not whether we agree with the climate change argument or not.  The issue that causes me to blog about this here is the free speech issue.  The police should not be doing this.  The bloggers did what journalists are supposed to do and revealed dirty-looking deeds by the establishment.  To silence them is what authoritarian regimes do.  How is this action in the public interest?

The need for a constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech in Britain has never been more obvious.

It would be interesting to know who, precisely, authorised this action.  But as with so many things in modern Britain, that particular piece of information is not being made available.

UPDATE: Updates about this at Watts up with that, including links to the Telegraph and Guardian.  A lot of people don’t like this one.  It’s beginning to look as if the US DOJ is the main mover in this.

Share

From my diary

Last night I completed the arduous task of manually correcting all the OCR’d pages of Ibn Abi Usaibia.  Not that it is perfect even now — optically correcting is an error-prone business.

Today I moved on to the next step — getting the text out of Abbyy Finereader 10, and into some format that can be edited for layout, etc.  This is proving rather trickier than it should.

To do the OCR, I divided the 1,000+ pages up into 27 projects, each of about 40 pages.  Since the manuscript is typescript, there is really no text formatting to retain — no italics, bold, etc — so simply exporting it as plain text in HTML format, using the Windows 1252 encoding, would seem to be the right choice.

Unfortunately projects 2 and 3 are refusing to do the export.  Attempts to do so bring up programme errors, complete with .cpp file and line number.  This sort of unreliability arrived with Finereader 10, and it is an unmitigated pain.  I can’t export as Word either.  Nor can I import the projects into Finereader 11 (a truly duff version, if ever I saw one, which will rarely import any project from a preceding version successfully).

I’ve managed to export the text as unicode text format, in a .txt file.  But naturally I am rather annoyed.  The projects show no special sign of corruption, although Finereader projects can become corrupt, mysteriously.

This is infuriating, and it undermines the point of using the software.  Investing weeks of work in editing something, only to find that you can’t get your work out very easily, is quite annoying.

Finereader 8 was rock-solid.  Finereader 9 had better recognition, but was less reliable.  And so it has gone on.

Abbyy need to invest some time in improving reliability, or they will lose their market.  People who use OCR software work hard.  They should be able to rely on the software not to crash.

UPDATE: I have now installed Microsoft FrontPage 2002.  I usually use FrontPage 2000 for general editing — it is curious how neither DreamWeaver nor ExpressionWeb has a decent WYSIWYG editor, almost 10 years on — but this can’t handle unicode characters.  FP2002 can; but for some reason you cannot run both on the same machine.  And, sure enough, FP2002 has silently deinstalled FP2000, drat it.

Fortunately FP2002 has created new .htm files for projects 02 and 03, by the simple process of pasting the unicode .txt files into them.

What I shall need to do now is think up a way to format 1000 pages of text in a satisfactory way.  Particularly now that FP2002 has uninstalled all my macros!

Share

Fleshpots of Egypt to be closed down as un-Islamic?

Interesting article in al-Ahram on 13/12/2011:

Salafist party vows to ban alcohol, beach tourism in Egypt

Unlike Muslim Brotherhood, Nour Party promises blanket-ban on alcohol and beach tourism in event it takes power following polls.

The Salafist Nour Party would enforce a ban on serving alcohol to foreigner nationals and Egyptian citizens alike if it came to power, party spokesman Nader Bakar told tourism-sector workers in Aswan on Monday.?

 Speaking at a public rally in the Upper Egyptian city’s Midan El-Mahatta, Bakar clarified that the party would only allow tourists to drink liquor they brought with them from abroad, and only in their hotel rooms.

He added that the party did not plan to set any restrictions on tourism related to Egyptian antiquities, such as the Great Pyramids of Giza and ancient Egyptian temples.

Bakar went on to say that the Nour Party would establish a chain of hotels that would function in compliance with Islamic Law, while banning beach tourism, which, he said, “induces vice.”

On Saturday, Mohamed Morsi, president of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party (FJP), told Ahram that his party, by contrast, did not plan on banning alcohol in hotels and at tourist resorts or, for that matter, prevent Egyptians from drinking liquor in their homes.

The Nour Party won 19 per cent of the vote in the first round of Egypt’s first post-Mubarak parliamentary polls late last month, while the FJP secured 37 per cent.

The Daily Mail article is here:

The end of Sharm el-Sheikh? Islamist parties call for ban on Westerners drinking, wearing bikinis and mixed bathing on Egyptian beaches.

  • 1.4m Brits head to Egypt every year on holiday – 70% of them to Red Sea beach resorts
  • Tourism down a third after violent unrest saw overthrow of former president Hosni Mubarak
  • Hardline Al-Nour party committed to imposing strict Islamic law in Egypt
  • Sharing of hotel rooms by unmarried couples could also be banned

Firstly, I don’t drink, have never worn a bikini, don’t use the pool, and, believe me, I won’t share a hotel room with anyone.  In Egypt a man needs dedicated toilet facilities 24/7.  Trust me on this.  All this is by way of indicating that I have no vested interest in the matter either way.

It may be that the views of al-Nour are really promulgated as a way to obtain power, rather than sincerely held.  If so, those policies will most certainly be put into effect, regardless of the damage to the tourism industry.  That ordinary Egyptians may starve will not weigh with those who gain power by it.  The examples of Gaddafi and Mugabe should indicate that.

The resorts on the Red Sea and Sinai are essentially isolated.  They are, in fact, places where tourists are farmed for money.   Luxor also is being transformed into a similar place.  There’s nothing wrong with that — it’s  good business.  It makes a lot of money.

But all this said, I have to say that I can, sort of, see al-Nour’s point of view.  Ordinary Egyptians have to work in these environments, because there is real poverty in Egypt.  Often young, surrounded by ready access to drink, and sometimes by lonely western divorcees and such like rough-trade, the result can be disastrous for young people.  So it must be, in all of these places where rich tourists are served in glittering hotels by poor locals.  A guidebook that I bought a couple of years ago highlighted the use of Egyptian toy-boys by western women — or perhaps the reverse.[1]

Egypt isn’t Ibiza.  It isn’t a booze destination.  The price of the stuff out there is enough to prevent that, while the fact that, a few years ago, some local Egyptian red wines were found to be poisonous should be enough to put anyone off.  I’ve known a female tour rep who wanted to “marry” an Egyptian.  No-one has attempted to entice me into casual sex out there in all my visits to Egypt, apart from one German girl who took me out to dinner (but I was too shy to realise what she wanted until afterwards).  Doubtless I am just so darned handsome that no-one thinks that I could possibly be available.  Yes, certainly, that must be it.  But no doubt there is some substance in the complaints.

As it stands the proposals would probably destroy the tourist industry.  The last thing anyone would want is bunches of Egyptian policemen inspecting you while you were on holiday to make sure you weren’t doing this and that or the other — and, no doubt, demanding bribes all the while.  It would be incredibly intrusive.  In Egypt, all too often, a law is passed merely to allow officials to make money by demanding bribes to ignore it.

I don’t quite know how this will play out.  Let us hope that normality returns to Egypt before long.

Share
  1. [1]The Rough Guide to Egypt, 7th ed., August 2007, p.337: ‘Over the past decade sex tourism has quietlt become a way of life in Luxor, a “hidden” industry that turns many of the stereotypes of the sex trade inside out.  Egyptian women and foreign heterosexual males are left on the sidelines as local men and boys get together with foreign women and gays in feluccas, bars and discos.  Thousands of women have holiday romances in Luxor every year and word  has got home, encouraging others to come.  The exchange of sex for cash usually occurs under the guise of true love, with misled women spending money on their boyfriends or “husbands” until their savings run out and the relationship hits the rocks — but enough foreigners blithely rent toyboys and settle into the scene for locals to make the point that neither side is innocent.  Morality aside, it isn’t just their money that the foreigners are risking or that Egyptians are bringing home to their families.  HIV now exists on both sides of the river and AIDS could easily spread fast if nothing is done.  Yet locals are in denial about the problem and tourists hardly aware that it exists.  There has, at least, been a crackdown on foreign paedophiles in 2006.’

I wish I were a German

Well, maybe I don’t.

But I’m still OCR’ing the annotations to Ibn Abi Usaibia — page 32 of the 62.  Those annotations mention translations of various Arabic works.  And, you guessed it, they were translated into German.

In fact they were translated into German yonks ago.   Back in the 19th century, to be specific.  Just imagine the quantity of useful stuff you could put online?

Alternatively, I wish I could read German easily.  At least I could then use these translations.

Mind you, they say that the best way to learn a language is to have a girlfriend of that nationality.  I could probably cope with a German girlfriend.  So long as she looked something like this, perhaps?

Share

Another go at Severian of Gabala’s “De Pace”?

An email reached me today offering the chance to commission a translation of something from ancient or patristic Greek.  My mind was rather a blank — or I might have suggested letters of Isidore of Pelusium, or perhaps of John Chrysostom — and all I could think of was the sermon preached by Severian of Gabala after his reconciliation with John Chrysostom.

I posted about this here, and indeed once commissioned someone to have a go at it, but they vanished after a page or two.

The translator apparently did a translation of a work of Basil of Caesarea for an MPhil, so ought to be capable of doing it.  Let’s see!  I’ll release the output into the public domain and post it online, of course, if it all works out.

Share

The notes to Lothar Kopf’s translation of Ibn Abi Usaibia

I’ve completed the OCR of a dozen pages of the notes.  It is becoming clear to me that the notes are not by the translator, Lothar Kopf.

There has always been rather a mystery about the history of the typescript manuscript of the translation.  It was completed in 1956 by Lothar Kopf, as it says on the front page, under a US government programme which commissioned the translation from Israeli scholars.  The reason why the US government should do this is nowhere recorded, and it vanished from notice decades ago.

But the US Library of Medicine, where it currently resides, only accessioned it about 15 years later.  So where was it in the meantime?

The notes are typed on a different machine — explaining why Abbyy Finereader is handling them rather differently than all the preceding pages.  They are written by someone who is not very fluent in English.  At points the syntax breaks down altogether.  On the other hand the author displays considerable erudition in Arabic literature and the Western literature about it, mainly that published in German.  At the head of each page is a title in Hebrew.

But I have come across two entries so far, which are conclusive.

On p. 7 of the annotations is this entry:

2) On the medieval translations into European languages of this famous book see F. Rosenthal, Oriens, XIII-XIV, 1961, pp. 132 ff., with a list of the many quotations in our book, pp. 145-147.

While on p.10 we read:

Neither the Arabic text nor any translation was available in Jerusalem.

It would seem that the manuscript was originally completed without any serious annotation, and that someone based in Jerusalem, several years later, began to add his own notes to it.  He broke off after 60 pages, having only annotated a portion of the text.

At least some of the notes are well worth retaining, so I shall plod on with it.

Share

John the Lydian: December

Mischa Hooker has kindly translated for us all the section on December from John the Lydian, De Mensibus, book 4. The hand-written copy which alone preserves this work is, unfortunately, badly damaged in this section, leading to various restorations and gaps.

——–

[169]

153. December was so named as being itself the tenth [month] from March.

154.[1] …with harmony having been divided……everything and it is guarded……<the> experience[2] of <Phaeth>on and [170] the actions of the <wat>er <at the time of Deucali>on <h>int at <a certain image> of th<e passions that> have <become apparent in t>he universe. <But the Phoeni>cians have<a> somewhat different opinion about Cronus, by w<ay o>f homonymy, <or in accordance with> a certain a<llegor>y, as <one can determi>ne <from th>e second [book] of Phoenician [History] of Herennius Philo. And the history tea<ch>es that he also reigned o<ver> Libya <and> Sicily <and the western re>gions, <as> I related <earl>ier,[3] and that he founded a city, as Charax says—t<he one then ca>lled Cronia, but now Hierapolis, as Isigonus <On the Pal>ic Gods and Polemo and Aeschylus in his Aetna ha<ve taught, or as> Euhemerus’ <whol>e history, adorn<ed> with details, [says], setting o<ut cleverly> his spec<ulations>[4] about the so-called gods……hides <away>…<of al>l sor<ts>…divine; <so that also> P……[5] says <f>in<ely in h>is [work] On Dionysus that the <just among ki>ng<s and pri>ests were honored by <the> gods thems<elves> with equal honors and titles and thus <were called gods> in a <myth>ical manner, while the history <has b>een transmitted <in a> fic<tionalized form>.

But there are some who [171] say that Cron<us—or, b>y a ch<ange of letter, Ch>ronus [“time”]—was the child of Uranus [“sky / heavens”]; for indeed, time derives from the <movem>ent of the heavens. And in his temple, as Phyl<archus says in the> 17th [book] and Menander in <the> 1st [book], no woman or <dog o>r fl<y> would enter.

Such thin<gs, th>en, have <been said> by “those outside”;

[6] <but the sacred> account[7] runs as follows, verbatim—for <I w>ill addu<ce> the very words of the <gre>at Proclus:[8]

And Cronus <indeed>, being fourth, <both> receives the scepter of his father <by force> and hands it on to his <child> under <comp>ulsion, according to the outward appea<rance> of the myth. And the myth-writers [9] appear to have taken the cause of <this sor>t of verbal elaboration from the particular character<istics of the g>od. For he is the leader of the Titan<ic> or<der>, on account of his separative [faculty] and <the> highest of intel<lectual> [entities], among which difference shone forth—and for this reason <they say that he> both receive<s> and gives kingship, as <the power> that struggles in a warlike and <forcible> manner <to add> the second things to the fir<st>.[10] For the ge<nus> of difference is truly ill-dispo<sed and> anti-social, <as> Plato says.[11] Hence indeed <the son is said> to separate <himself> from the father, and <the s>on [is said] to seize his <rule in turn>, [172] <for>cing <the> harmony <toward> both on account of the particular Titan<ic> nature.[12]

Such things he too wrote in his <ex>planation of the sacred m<yths>.

At the new moon [13] of the month, they would refr<ain from [eating] cab>bage and would <pr>ay to Poseidon and Aphrodite and Amphitrite, <and> f<urthermore the> powers[14] [would pray] to Cronus on behalf of <the> coming winter—<and> lik<ewise> also to Tyche [i.e., Fortune] the Overseer, to Sophrosyne [“moderation / self-control”], and to Eros, whom the myth-writers consider to be the child of Z<ephyrus the gi>ant, as Eurytus the Laced<aemonian l>yric poet says. He begins thus: “Eros, of delightful appearance.”[15] And Plato in the Symposium says that at the birth of Aphrodite, Penia [“poverty”] came up and plotted in secret against Porus [“resources”], who was drunk on nectar, and in this manner Eros was conceived.[16] O<n this basis> the great Moses speaks allegorically about the generation of mankind.

On this day, Varro says that the Hyades set and [it is] w<inte>r from this point on.

155. On the next day, Eudoxus predicts the rising of Sagittarius, and the winter / storm.

And they would also celebrate the festival called Agonalia [17] in honor of Helios Daphnêphoros and Genarchês,[18] just as at Athens the rites at the Daphnephoria [were celebrated].[19] On this [day] also the festival <they> called <“Septi>mundius” was celebrated—that is, the circuit around [173] the ci<ty, since> the walls of Rome were spread <over seven h>ills. <And> the name<s> of the<se> are: <Pa>latium, Esquilium, Tarpeium, Aventinum, Tibu<rtium, Pra>en<es>tium, Viminalium. But <among> the ancients, [they were named] differently, as follows: Aven<t>inus, Caelius, <Esq>uilius, Capitolinus, Velinensius, Qui<rina>lius, Pala<tinus>.

156. On the third day before the Nones of Decem<ber> is a <day> without work, on which Euc<te>mon s<ays> the Dog [i.e., Canis Major] rises and <the wint>er be<gi>ns.

And a chariot-race was held, at which abom<inable [?]>[20]

157. The dipundii, meaning “new soldiers,” whom the Italians also call tirones from the fact that they serve because of their need for sustenance. [21] And they called them dipundii from their having been recently summoned to military service; for [it is] not [the case]…and they called them <dipun>dii from the fact that they endured military service, and were content with [wages of] just two coins—for the Romans customarily called two obols a dipundius.[22]

158. The Romans customarily divided their citizenry into three [groups] and distinguished those who were suitable for arms, those [who were suitable] for farming, and those [who were suitable] for hunting; and the season of winter brings an end to these [pursuits]. For in it, neither do they arm themselves, nor do they practice farming, because of the season’s cold and the shortness of the days—and hence in the old days they named it bruma, meaning “short day.” And Brumalia means “winter festivals”; [23] so at that time, until the Waxing of the Light,[24] ceasing from work, the Romans would greet each other with words of good omen at night, saying in their ancestral tongue, “Vives annos“—that is, “Live for years.”[25] And the farming people would slaughter pigs for the worship of Cronus and Demeter[26]—and hence even now the “Pig-Slaughter” is observed in December. And the vine-dressers would sacrifice goats in honor of Dionysus—for the goat is an enemy of the vine; and they would skin them, fill the skin-bags with air and jump on them.[27] And the civic officials would also [offer as] the firstfruits of the collected harvest wine and olive oil, grain and honey and as many [products] of trees as endure and are preserved—they would make loaves without water and they would bring [all] these things to the priests of the [Great] Mother.[28] And this sort of custom is still observed even now; and in November and December, until the “Waxing of the Light,” they bring [these] things to the priests. For the [custom] of greeting [people] by name at the Brumalia is rather recent; and, the truth [is],[29] they call them “Cronian festivals”[30]—and because of this the Church turns away[31] from them. And they take place at night, because Cronus is in darkness, having been sent to Tartarus by Zeus—and they mysteriously signify[32] the grain, from its being sown in the ground and thereafter not being seen. And this is quite true, as has been said: The attention to [these] things goes on at night, such that finally, in truth, the Brumalia are festivals of the subterranean daemones.

[175]

159. The natural [philosophers] say that at one time, before the “setting in order,” this universe was formless [33] matter—and hence the philosophers call matter Hades[34] and Tartarus—in that it is disturbed [tarattomenên] and unstable by nature on account of its formlessness. And [they say] it is timeless, but not without a beginning, and nonetheless [it is] originated[35] and caused;[36] from eternity waiting for the empowerment of <the> Father himself, having received by his will an existence that is wholly timeless. Hence, the Chaldaean names matter “Father-originated” in the Oracles; and it is worth hearing how Iamblichus speaks [of it] in the first [book] of his Chaldaica:[37]

On the one hand, matter is eternal, because it subsists along with the absolute first causes from eternity, and it has its existence among them and with them. On the other hand, it never stands on its own, because it has been set firmly among the common [things] in accordance with the same-named and unitary power. And it is not incomplete and limitless, but rather shares in a certain perfection, since nothing proceeds from the paternal triad incomplete, and it is led forward of itself into [its] perfection and limit. So then, when the basic elements[38] had been brought forth in this way after it [i.e., matter in general], but nevertheless were in a state of confusion, the Demiurge, taking up all that was then without order, not at rest, but moving unharmoniously, brought it into order, according to the Timaeus.[39] But when the elements were separated—the fire shining above on account of its natural lightness, the water falling to the depths because of its natural heaviness—then the myth-makers put Cronus in Tartarus, as [if to say that] when the fire went up the water [176] lurked in the hiding-places of the earth. And yet they say that he is the father of Zeus, because of his watery nature, which is known to tradition as the eldest of all the elements, according to the poet, who says: “Ocean, the origin of the gods, and mother Tethys.”[40] And they named the water “Tethys” similarly, from the fact that it naturally lies bounded by the dry earth on the one hand, and by the thick air on the other.

And thus the natural [philosophers spoke] about Cronus.

But we nevertheless find that he is also described in books as the child of Uranus, as being the rain-storm that is born from the air; hence, he is called hyetos [“rain”], as though [to say] hyios [“son”], or because after the heavens, there is the cold zone, and then the warm [zone]. And concerning the imprisonment of Cronus in Tartarus, Ammonius says that Cronus is the mind, or rather the soul—for [these are] not the same thing—while Zeus is generation / birth; and that before generation / birth, the soul has been confined in the body, and thus also the body is named demas, as the equivalent of desmos [“bond / imprisonment”]. And the “cutting off” [of Uranus’ genitals] is the last [step (?)], and is generative and productive of everything; such is the nature of the genitals. Cronus, the father of the Cronian nature, cast these down so that the heavens’ power of eternity would subsist also in the sea, that is, in the sublunar world (which indeed has been likened to the unstable and much-twisting [nature] of the sea), “where [there are] murder and ill-will and the other kinds of death.”[41]

Such things the Greeks [say].

160. Dionysus is the spirit [pneuma], that is, the warmth, that arose from the fire, and hence he was called Fire-born and Thigh-bred and Male-female by the Greeks,[42] since [177] they were unaware of the philosophical treatment regarding him and of what he actually was. For [as “Fire-born”] he is the warm spirit that from every sowing of every living, spiritual creature is inserted at the same time for the production of the life and growth of all things that are in the world. And he was called “Thigh-bred” because in the membranes and the genital parts and the veins that are in the thighs, this sort of material has been given a home in every living creature—and from this everything has taken solid form. And he was termed “Male-female” because of the fact that male-and-female sowings result in two, the male and the female natures, and it is not possible for one thing to be engendered from another, if [the two] do not come together. And the things fashioned by this [pneuma / Dionysus] will produce the living creatures. They have surmised that he is dissolved and is regenerated, because also the things engendered by him are likewise incessantly consumed and again brought to life.

161. The circle is the most perfect of shapes. Hence, the Egyptians, when they depict the world, inscribe a round, air-like and fiery circle, and a serpent with a hawk’s form stretched out in the middle of it as the connective Agathos Daimon. And the whole shape is like our T [theta].[43]

162. The number eight is feminine and unbounded and imperfect. Hence it is also called alitomênos [“missing-the-month”][44] by Nicomachus.[45] For the eight-month period is manifestly not in proportional relationship with any of the harmonics; hence, the eight-month-old [fetuses] are not brought to perfection. For, being between the perfection-bringing numbers [i.e., 7 and 9],[46] it is itself found to be imperfect. For since it partakes in every material power, it has been allotted the powers concerned with matter.

——

[1] The damaged opening of this section must have introduced an association between December and Cronus and the symbolic significance of Cronus; the “homonymy” mentioned early on in the surviving portion would seem to have been that between Gk. kronos (the god’s name) and chronos (“time”).
[2] Gk. pathos, sometimes to be translated “passion” (as later in this sentence).
[3] Cf. De Mensibus 4.71: “And Crates says that Cronus reigned over Sicily and Italy and most of Libya, harshly…”
[4] Gk. theôria.
[5] Hase suggested “Plutarch” as a supplement here; Wuensch guesses “Polycharmus,” and cites FGH 4:480.
[6] In Christian authors, this expression is frequently used to refer to pagans; here, however, it seems to refer to run-of-the mill historians, as opposed to esoteric philosophers like Proclus, who is quoted next.
[7] Gk. hieros logos.
[8] For this quotation, which is not verbally identical to any extant passage of Proclus, cf. Proclus, Comm. in Platonis Timaeum 3.169; Comm. in Platonis Timaeum 3.188; and especially Comm in Platonis Cratylum 149. Wuensch cites Theologia Platonica p. 258C.
[9] Gk. mythikoi.
[10] Alternatively, “<to urge on> the second things against the fir<st>.”
[11] Plato, Laws 3 [701c].
[12] Further “separating” his kingdom from that of his father: In Platonis Timaeum 2.225.
[13] I.e., the first day of the month (from the terminology strictly proper to a lunar calendar).
[14] “Powers” (dynameis) could be a reference to military “forces.”
[15] Gk. agalmoeidês, which could also mean “of glorious appearance” or “statue-like”; Wolff emended to aglaomeidês, “brightly smiling.”
[16] Symposium 203b.
[17] Cf. Warde Fowler, Roman Festivals, p. 280-82. This word or related words are associated with various days in the calendar, including Dec. 11 (in conjunction with Septimontia).
[18] That is, “the Sun Laurel-Bearer and Ancestor.” This may be a reference to Sol Indigetes; but Wissowa, Religion und Kultus, p. 372, does not try to identify the old Roman god involved here. Cf. also Diodorus Siculus, 37.11, for an oath of allegiance at the time of the Social War, sworn by “Helius Genarchês.”
[19] A Daphnephoria is attested in Boeotia (Proclus [probably different from the Neoplatonist philosopher quoted by John Lydus earlier] in Photius, Bibliotheca 239 [p. 321b Bekker]), but the epithet Daphnêphoros for Apollo is found more widely.
[20] The remains of a word here could point to an original meaning “deprecatory (prayers / rites).”
[21] The explanation perhaps depends on a connection with the Greek verb teirô, “to distress or weaken”; or the Latin tero, “to wear down / away.”
[22] Cf. OLD s.v. dupondius, meaning “two asses (small copper coins).” The transference of the term to new military recruits does not appear to be attested in Latin.
[23] Gk. Βρουμάλια δὲ οἱονεὶ χειμεριναὶ ἑορταί; alternatively, “…[function] as winter festivals,” but οἱονεί introduces the significance of a term just before, with bruma.
[24] Gk. τὰ Αὐξιφωτία, presumably referring to 25 Dec., as (e.g.) in the “Calendar of Antiochus” the date is marked: ἡλίου γενέθλιον· αὔξει φῶς. For the phrase, cf. also Cosmas of Jerusalem, Comm. in S. Greg. Naz. carm. [PG 38:464].
[25] Lit., “you will live for years.”
[26] I.e., Saturn and Ops, who were considered husband and wife, and whose festivals were associated at this time of year; some further considered them the equivalents of Heaven and Earth (Macrobius, Sat. 1.10).
[27] Cf. askoliasmos / Askolia, the name for such an “event” at the Rural Dionysia.
[28] I.e., the Magna Mater (Cybele) (?).
[29] Gk. τὸ…ἀληθέστερον; lit., “the truer [thing]” / “the quite true [thing].”
[30] I.e., Saturnian festivals (Saturnalia).
[31] Gk. ἀποτρέπεται; alternatively, “turning [people] away from them.”
[32] Gk. αἰνίττονται.
[33] Gk. aneideos.
[34] Gk. (H)aidês, which was often interpreted as being derived from a negative prefix (a-/an-) plus the root id– meaning “to see,” like the word aneideos.
[35] Gk. genêtos.
[36] Gk. aitiatos.
[37] I.e., his commentary on the Chaldaean Oracles.
[38] Gk. stoicheia.
[39] Cf. Plato, Tim. 30a.
[40] Hom., Il. 14.201.
[41] Empedocles, fr. 221.
[42] The epithets in Greek are Pyritokos, Mêtrotraphês, and Arsenothêlys.
[43] Cf. Herennius Philo, fr. 9 [= Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 1.10.51].
[44] The image relates to a foetus which has not yet reached full gestation.
[45] Cf. Ps.-Nicomachus, Theologumena Arithmeticae p. 55 Ast = Ps.-Iamblichus, Theologumena Arithmeticae, p. 74 De Falco.
[46] Cf. Ps.-Nicom., Theol. Arithm., pp. 42, 58 = Ps.-Iambl., Theol. Arithm., p. 55, 78 De Falco.

Share

On the right use of the Fathers 1

In the summer I witnessed a scene at the Oxford Patristics Conference, at a session for evangelicals, of some confusion of mind about just how Christians today should make use of the Fathers.  At the time I said that I thought someone needed to write something about this.  I thought that I would start to think about this issue here.

When I encounter people who are interested in the Fathers, most of them fall into two groups, holding quite different views about how we should look at the Fathers.  The first of these views we might call the “secular view”; the second the “catholic view”.  What is missing from this, of course, is what might once have been called the “protestant view”.

The secular view is simple enough.  Christianity, it believes, is not true.  The bible is not true and the account that it gives of Christian origins is not true.  The preaching of Jesus of Nazareth is not true, in its most essential parts; those whom he instructed were likewise wrong in the key points that they preached; and the teaching of the New Testament, that Christ died for our sins and rose again from the dead, is not true either.  Likewise it believes that the early Christians were similarly wrong; that the writers of that group were mistaken about the matters of most interest to them; and that the Fathers are merely the most outstanding examples of a group which is throughly mistaken.  I do not speak here of atheists, as such; so much as normal unbelievers of our day.

It is perfectly possible to hold these views, and still find early Christian history interesting, and to look at the works of all these writers — I mean the Fathers — as being historically interesting.  This approach is the one adopted by unbelievers who, for some reason, find themselves working in this field.

The Catholic view is not quite so simple.  Obviously the bible is true, and the Christian teaching is true.  But what about the writers after the New Testament?

The Catholic view, as I understand it, is that a select group of these writers are to some extent inspired, in a similar but lesser way than the bible; or rather, are a witness to the teaching of God the Holy Spirit.  Others are less reliable, being merely human; others still are plain mistaken.  The “select group” alone truly deserve the name of “Fathers of the Church”, although the term is used more loosely than that.

Which of the early Christian writers comprise the “select group”?  For this, I turn to volume 1 of Johannes Quasten’s Patrology.

Patrology is that part of the history of Christian literature which deals with the theological authors of Christian antiquity. It comprises both the orthodox and the heretical writers, although it treats with preference those authors who represent the traditional ecclesiastical doctrine, the so-called Fathers and Doctors of the Church. Thus, Patrology can be defined as the science of the Fathers of the Church. It includes, in the West, all Christian authors up to Gregory the Great (d. 604) or Isidore of Seville (d. 636), and, in the East, it extends usually to John Damascene (d. 749)·[1]

We are accustomed to call the authors of early Christian writings ‘Fathers of the Church’. In ancient times the word ‘Father’ was applied to a teacher; for in biblical and early Christian usage, teachers are the fathers of their students. …

In Christian antiquity, the teaching office was the bishop’s. Thus the title ‘Father’ was first applied to him. Doctrinal controversies of the fourth century brought about further development. The use of the term ‘Father’ became more comprehensive; it was now extended to ecclesiastical writers in so far as they were accepted as representatives of the tradition of the Church. Thus St. Augustine numbers St. Jerome among the witnesses to the traditional doctrine of original sin, although he was not a bishop…

Vincent of Lerins, in his Commonitory of 434 applies the term ‘Father’ to all ecclesiastical writers without distinction of hierarchical grade:

If some new question should arise on which no such decision has been given, they should then have recourse to the opinions of the holy Fathers, of those, at least, who, each in his own time and place, remaining in the unity of communion and the faith, were accepted as approved masters; and whatsoever these may be found to have held, with one mind and one consent, this ought to be accounted the true and catholic doctrine ofth.e Church, without any doubt or scruple (Chapter 41). — Nothing ought to be believed by posterity save what the sacred antiquity of the holy Fathers consentient in Christ has held (Chapter 43) .

Today only those are to be regarded as ‘Fathers of the Church’ who combine these four necessary qualifications: orthodoxy of doctrine, holiness of life, ecclesiastical approval, and antiquity. All other theological writers are known as “ecclesiae scriptores” or “scriptores ecclesiastici”, a term whIch St. Jerome coined (De viris Ill., Prol.; Ep. 112, 3). The title ‘Doctor of the Church’ is not identical with ‘Father of the Church’, because some of those known as Doctors of the Church lack the distinction of ‘antiquity’,…

Although the Fathers of the Church hold an important position in the history of Hellenistic and Roman literature, their authority in the Catholic Church is based on entirely different grounds. It is the ecclesiastical doctrine of Tradition as a source of faith which makes the writings and opinions of the Fathers so important. The Church regards the “unanimis consensus patrum” as infallible, if it concerns the interpretation of Scripture (Vatic. sess. 3, c. 2).[2]

These select writers all express views which shaped the subsequent course of church history in the middle ages, and created medieval Catholicism.  They treat the church itself as a possible source of authority, and are “ecclesiastical” in a way that few modern Christians are.

The attitude of Catholics towards the other early Christian writers is to treat them as interesting but not authoritative.  This is close to what we might call the “protestant view”.  Unfortunately no-one today uses the term “protestant” for themselves; today those who are the intellectual heirs of the protest of the evangelical princes at the Reformation are generally known as simply Christians or (under protest) Evangelicals.  I will use the former term, although I am well aware that some Catholics are Christians.

Christians believe that the bible is true, and that the teaching of Christ and his apostles is true.  But few Christians know much about Christian writers after the New Testament.  Those who do take the line that all of these writers were fallible human beings, and that they could be unduly influenced by the times in which they lived, just as we are.  They broadly accept the Nicene creed, and have no ideological objection to Chalcedon, because  they don’t really know much about it, and are not disposed to disagree with something handed down which does not seem obviously wrong.

But they do believe that God acts in history.  They do believe that Christians today are working with the Holy Spirit, and that, therefore, Christians of past times were doing so likewise.  While wary of anything like a cult of “Saints”, people like John Wesley or C. S. Lewis or Martin Luther will receive interest and approval, albeit not unqualified.  To the extent that Christians are aware of the early Christian writers, they will read them primarily for historical interest, as the “secular view” people do, but also looking for signs of spiritual kinship, as Catholics do.  They will find fewer links than Catholics do, however, because most of the surviving patristic literature exists precisely because it was copied by Catholics.  But they will tend to feel that these are brothers in Christ living in past times.

This approach is very similar to the attitude that Catholics take to early Christian writers who are not in the magic circle, who are not Doctors or Fathers of the Church.  It is, in truth, a halfway house between the “secular view” and the “catholic view”, as might be expected, although rather closer to the latter.  But always there is awareness that “Churchianity” can eclipse the message of the Gospel.

I confess that it seems an entirely wholesome way to look at things to me!

Share
  1. [1]Vol. 1, p.1
  2. [2]Quasten vol. 1, p.9-11.

Ibn Abi Usaibia update

I’ve just finished proofing the OCR for page 900.  I think there is only another 50 pages to go.  There may be some pages of footnotes after that, but not very many.

UPDATE: Page 946 complete, which is the end of the main text, although it ends suddenly and without any colophon which makes me suspicious that we don’t have it all.  There are 62 pages of notes to follow, which seem to annotate the first 100 pages of the text.  I’ll start in on these.

UPDATE: The notes pages are proving very difficult to proof.  Not sure why.  Drat!

UPDATE: I think I’ve got it, by setting the text box zoom size in Abbyy Finereader 10 to rather smaller than I was using before, and the text font size somewhat larger.  Why I should need to do this, for what is essentially the same images, I don’t know.

I’ve done a couple of pages.  Let’s hope it will be possible to tie these notes back to the main text.  Interestingly it looks as if Kopf, the translator, made pencil alterations to quite a few of the notes.  Unfortunately they are almost entirely illegible.

Share