Fr. Dale A. Johnson has made freely available online a Catalogue of the Syriac manuscripts of the library of the Greek Patriarchate of Jerusalem. It also describes his experiences in trying to gain access!
Category: Manuscripts
Mss from the Bibliothèque Orientale, Université Saint-Joseph, Beirut
A couple of weeks ago I decided that I needed to get reproductions of a few pages from some manuscripts which Georg Graf in Geschichte der christlichen arabischen Literatur mentions. These were in Beirut; i.e. at the Université Saint-Joseph, in the Bibliothèque Orientale. So I emailed them on bo@usj.edu.lb in English, apologised for my inability to write French and asked.
I got emails back very promptly from Dr May Semaan Seigneurie, the director of the library, first in French (which www.freetranslation.com could easily read) then in perfect English. The pages were available in PDF form if you want it (I did!). You had to pay in US dollars, either by bank-to-bank transfer (they supply a SWIFT code and an account number) or by a cheque that can be cashed in Lebanon.
I chose the former. I found that HSBC bank (who have branches in Lebanon) were particularly good for this transfer (although they charged me $42 for the privilege!) The money went through in 6 days, and I got an email telling me the CDROM will be in the post — sent by DHL, in fact.
I may draw up a list of manuscripts that I want and do a further order. It really is not too difficult to do, and the service is first-rate. Recommended.
Coptic Gospel of Judas – critical edition released
Well, I’ve just learned that the critical edition of the Coptic ‘Gospel of Judas’ has finally appeared. It came out very quietly over the summer, and it seems that hardly anyone noticed. If you want a copy, it’s very cheap indeed. It’s on Amazon here.
The volume also contains the other texts from Codex Tchacos. Long-term readers will remember the incredible story (here) of how a fourth century papyrus book was found under dubious circumstances, smuggled out of Egypt, bought and sold secretly, hidden in 1983 in a bank vault, sold to a dodgy dealer named Bruce Ferrini in the late 90’s, repossessed, and eventually published by National Geographic.
The edition contains all three texts found in the manuscript: the gospel of Judas, the letter of Peter to Philip and James, and the book of Allogenes.
Nothing whatever has been heard since of the other three manuscripts sold at the same time. Bits of the Coptic Exodus keep surfacing. The scholars entrusted with publishing the Greek mathematical treatise have done nothing further to publish it, as far as I know. The manuscript containing a Coptic text of Paul’s letters remains resolutely lost — or rather, lost as far as you or I know.
Damn all these secretive, self-serving papyrologists. How dare they play their little games with the heritage of all mankind?
Getting reproductions of Mss — the fight goes on
I feel like a challenge. So I’ve just emailed the Biblioteca Apostolica (or Vatican Library to you and me) and asked how I can get a print-off of some pages from one of their Arabic mss — Vat. ar. 158 (1357 AD), ff. 148r-157v. — containing the unpublished Explanation of the Nicene Creed by Abu al’Majd. That’s 18 bits of paper. I can’t see how that should cost more than a few dollars, even with postage. I’d prefer them to produce a PDF and email it, of course.
Their web page seems claustrophobic with talk of ‘rights’ and ‘fees’. It will be interesting to see how this enquiry is treated; as a chance to promote scholarship, or an opportunity to screw the stranger. Let’s hope the former!
Catalogues of Syriac manuscripts online
In Syriac studies, even a beginner will find himself consulting lists of manuscripts, as so much has never been published. William Wright’s Catalogue of Syriac Manuscripts in the British Museum (1870) remains a fundamental reference. From the Yahoo Hugoye-list I find that this is now online at archive.org: vol. 1; vol. 2; vol. 3.
The enormous BM (now British Library) collection mainly derives from the monastery of St. Mary Deipara (=Deir al-Suryani, Monastery of the Syrians) in the Nitrian desert. An account of how Archdeacon Henry Tattam bought most of them is here. Sadly the British Library is determined to keep its manuscripts offline; let’s hope a change of management will occur and we can see these treasures ourselves.
Kristian Heal has placed online further important catalogues:
[BERLIN]
E. Sachau, Verzeichniss der syrischen Handschriften der Königlichen Bibliothek zu Berlin (Die Handschriften-Verzeichnisse der Königlichen Bibliothek zu Berlin. 23) Berlin: A. Asher & co, 1899. 2 vols. xvi + viii + 943pp. + 3 pl.
Link: http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/CUA&CISOPTR=14392&REC=6
[FLORENCE]
S.E. Assemanus, Bibliothecae Mediceae Laurentianae et Palatinae Codicum MMS. Orientalium catalogus … S.E. Assemanus recensuit, digessit, notis illustravit, Antonio Francisco Gorio curante. Florence, 1742. pp. lxxii. 492. pl. XXVI.
Link: http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/CUA&CISOPTR=110651&REC=1
[LONDON British Museum]
G. Margoliouth, Descriptive List of Syriac and Karshunic Manuscripts in the British Museum acquired since 1873. London : British Museum [etc.], 1899 iv, 64 p.
Link: http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/CUA&CISOPTR=10442&REC=7
[VATICAN]
J.S. Assemanus, Bibliotheca orientalis Clementino-Vaticana, in qua manuscriptos codices Syriacos, Arabicos, Persicos, Turcicos, Hebraicos, Samaritanos, Armenicos, AEthiopicos, Graecos, AEgyptiacos, Ibericos & Malabaricos … Bibliothecae Vaticanae addictos recensuit, digessit, et genuina scripta a spuriis secrevit, addita singulorum auctorum vita, Joseph Simonius Assemanus. 3 tom. [t. 1. De scriptoribus syris orthodoxis — t. 2. De scriptoribus syris monophysitis — t. 3. pars prima. De scriptoribus syris Nestorianis — t. 3. pars secunda. De Syris Nestorianis] Rome, 1719-28.
Link: http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/CUA&CISOPTR=115117&REC=3
J.S. Assemanus, Bibliothecae Apostolicae Vaticanae codicum manuscriptorum catalogus, in tres partes distributus, in quarum prima orientales, in altera Graeci, in tertia Latini, Italici aliorumque Europaeorum idiomatum codices Stephanus Evodius Assemanus … et Joseph Simonius Assemanus … recensuerunt digesserunt animadversionibusque illustrarunt. pt. 1. tom. 2-3. [vol. 2: Codices chaldaicos sive syriacos.–vol. 3: Reliquos codices chaldaicos sive syriacos.] Rome, 1758-59. xxiv + 556pp.; 587pp.
Link: http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/CUA&CISOPTR=101968&REC=4
A. Mai, Scriptorum veterum nova collectio e Vaticanis codicibus edita ab Angelo Maio, vol. 5. Rome 1831. pp.1-82, 243-248.
Link: http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/CUA&CISOPTR=97662&REC=2
Let’s take the opportunity to thank him for this marvellous piece of work, and marvel at what the web is beginning to offer us all.
Bodmer mss 14/15 (P75) sold to private collectors, bought by Vatican
There have been some posts in the PAPY-L list alluding to the fact that back in November the Bodmer Foundation in Geneva sold two of its priceless papyrus codexes in order to raise funds. The two were mss. 14 and 15, which together are numbered p75 date from the early 3rd century, and contain the gospels of Luke and John. They were sold to a ‘private collector’; a term that brings sweat to the brow of anyone who followed the Gospel of Judas saga. Fortunately the Vatican Library stepped in and bought them in March with the assistance of some folks in Alabama. Some details here.
This sort of thing makes everyone nervous. I infer from it that the Bodmer foundation is not financially stable, and therefore that this will happen again. I would myself feel much less nervous if these manuscripts had been digitally photographed and were freely accessible online. While they are not, this sort of thing is bad news.
This week also the National Library of Scotland suffered an accident with its sprinkler system, soaking various parts of the collection, although apparently without permanent loss. I don’t know the NLS policy on digital photography, but again this highlights how vulnerable our great collections are.
Problems with the Mingana manuscripts at Birmingham
While at the garden party at the Patristics conference in Oxford, I got talking with someone and the subject of the Mingana manuscripts at Birmingham came up. This collection of Syriac, Arabic and other oriental manuscripts was the property of Alphone Mingana, who left it to the university.
My friend was complaining about difficulty getting a reproduction of one manuscript. I myself have had the same experience. It is nearly impossible to get a copy of any manuscript in that collection; and for a daft reason. The university authorities have signed an exclusive deal with a continental firm to produce micro-fiche of them all. This has been done — but now you can only obtain copies of the fiches from this company.
And they price very, very high. A complete set goes for tens of thousands of pounds. There is no easy way to order individual manuscripts. My own enquiry was ignored. And… what on earth are most of us going to do with fiche anyway? I don’t have a microfiche reader; does anyone? In the age of PDF’s, why are we messing around with microfiche?
Some time back I made a vain attempt to obtain a copy of Thomas of Edessa On the epiphany from their collection. I communicated with the library, who made sorrowful noises and expressed their inability to help me. In the end I went without. My friend at the conference likewise was trying to do without, since he could not afford the extraordinary fees for these low-quality inconvenient reproductions.
Birmingham university needs to get its act together. I suspect that if I looked at the terms of the Mingana bequest, I would find that they are in breach of it. I can’t believe for a moment that Mingana left his manuscipts so that copies could NOT be obtained. After all, there is little practical difference between the current situation and an outright ban. The catalogue of these manuscripts, needless to say, is out of print and impossible to find anyway.
Has anyone ever managed to get a copy of a manuscript in the Mingana collection?
Update: I’m now trying again for Ms. 142. I’ve emailed IDC, who own the microfiche and want 19,000 euros for a complete set (!). Let’s see if I get any reply.
Update 27th August: No reply from IDC. Hmm.
Philip of Side
Last weekend I located a copy of Henry Dodwell’s Dissertationes in Irenaeum (1689) which apparently contains the only publication of some bits of Philip of Side’s lost 5th century Ecclesiastical History, with a Latin translation and commentary. This reproduces a bit of Codex Bodl. Barrocianus 142 (14-15th century), which the Bodleian catalogue reveals to contain various church history texts, complete or excerpted. This bit is a list of leaders of the school at Alexandria, beginning with Athenagoras (writing “before Celsus”) down to Philip’s own time. The excerptor isn’t very accurate in what he says about Eusebius, so probably is no better on Philip. De Boor apparently published other fragments in TU, but I was unable to get these.
I learn also from Bruce Lincoln, Thomas-Gospel and Thomas-Community: A new approach to a familiar text. Novum Testamentum 19.1 (1977) p.69 n. 15 that the Coptic Gospel of “Thomas is mentioned by Hippolytus, Origen, Eusebius, Cyril of Jerusalem and Philip Sidetes.” (Although this may not be coptic Thomas, except in Hippolytus), but no ref. for Philip is given. It would be nice to collect all the Philip material.
I did consider getting a photograph of folio 216 recto and verso from the Bodleian, but the urge went away after I found that each photograph would cost $30, and was hedged round with further legally-dubious demands for money if anyone else saw it.
Nestorius, The Bazaar of Heracleides — now online
I hope that I may be forgiven for a small announcement. Nestorius wrote in exile in his own defence. Since his books were ordered to be burned, and his name used in much the same way as moderns use accusations of ‘racist’ — to shut down discussion — he was obliged to circulate it under the name of Heracleides of Damas. It’s quite hard going, but since it has survived to our own day, people may like to know that the English translation is now online here. I have also translated some material about the manuscript find from the French edition and translation.
In some ways the story is familiar. A single manuscript had survived. A copy was taken “in secret”, since the owner clearly didn’t want copies made. The single manuscript was, it turns out, destroyed in WW1. Fortunately the owner’s wish to prevent copying did not lead to the loss of the text. Other texts extant in Syriac in 1914 were not so lucky, as I have remarked before. But what is it about people who own manuscripts that makes them so desperate to prevent the text circulating?
Medieval manuscripts for sale – part 2: “no, we won’t photograph our collection”
Well! It looks as if the Karlsruhe state library may really have to hand over 2,500 manuscripts (including some papyri) to the Counts of Baden. There is much scaremongering going on online (e.g. in the PAPY-L list) about what happens, how many books are involved, books being sold, “broken up”, etc. None of the mss seem to be online, and lots — they’re very shy about saying what — are unphotographed.
What can we do? Well, I have been emailing the library, and suggesting that they get a bunch of volunteers in to take photos of the lot with digital cameras, or as much as can be done in the time. After all, if the library doesn’t put the interests of scholarship first — which is access and preservation — then it doesn’t deserve to have the books.
The responses have been interesting, but negative. Apparently, despite all the scaremongering, the library still can’t face the idea of scholars taking photographs. This is very odd indeed; surely books at risk should be photographed?
Even more interesting was the response of a certain poster from Heidelberg University on the PAPY-L list, which I will quote as it probably reflects very accurately just why many state-funded libraries have obstructed public access to images of mss online:
“…I want to stress that I would not appreciate either having anyone here who seemingly does not realise that certain differences between original and copy still exist, but who is interested only in taking pictures of our collection and distributing them all over the world just as he likes it.”
I admit that, in my innocent way, I rather thought that getting the public looking at images of books all around the world was what state-funded libraries were for. It makes one realise how far many libraries have to go. We live in a world in which google book is freely available to Americans, yet here we have people actively hostile to the idea.
“… To put it briefly, I am not in any way willing to accept either this attitude nor that of our government. … Any do-it-yourself attempts of this sort do not appear to be very helpful at this point because they almost seem to condone the selling.”
I worry about this, whether the attitude behind this is that the manuscripts belong to the institution, not the public. I myself have more manuscripts online at my website than the Karlsruhe library. Anyone who wants to work with them can. The world has not ended. The trouble is that very few people care much about mouldly old books. Unless we publicise them, no-one will. That’s part of the reason that the problem has arisen — the politicians do not care about a collection of books.
Collections should not be broken up. The bureaucrats may be wrong-headed about digital photography — although I bet they all own digital cameras, and I bet more than a few of the staff have snapped pages for their own use. But in fighting against an indifferent legislature handing over a collection to be auctioned, aren’t they serving us all? Perhaps: if it were not that they were so determined that this collection would be of so very little service to the world. Then again, if they had spent more time serving the public, perhaps the law-makers of Baden would have a better idea of how the public benefits from keeping the collection together.
I’m ambivalent, not least because there is no material known to me at Karlsruhe that is relevant to my research interests (attempts to find out what the collection contains have been ignored). It doesn’t matter to me who owns manuscripts, so long as they are safe, recorded and accessible to the public. But is the public interest served by breaking up this collection? Surely it would be better to simply get rid of the obscurantist staff, and keep the books together?
It will be most interesting to see what happens. If only we had a handlist of the books, online!