Eusebius’ lost work against Porphyry – extant in 1838?

Eusebius’ refutation of Porphyry’s attack on the Christians is lost; but it seems it may not have been lost that long ago.

Does anyone know whether there are manuscripts still in Rodosto, a town 60 miles west of Istanbul and now known as Tekirdag? Or if not, where the mss of the expelled Greek community now are?

I ask because of references to manuscripts of Eusebius of Caesarea against Porphyry. There is a statement in Harnack’s edition of the fragments of Porphyry’s Against the Christians, p.30:

A listing of manuscripts in Rodosto, written between 1565 and 1575, on p.30b: Eusebiou tou Pamphilou Kata Porphuriou (s. Forster, De antiquitatibus et libris ms. Constantinopolitanis, Rostochii, 1877; cf. Neumann in Theol. Lit. Ztg. 1899, col. 299). In 1838 a great fire broke out in Rodosto.

It would be most interesting to know whether this ms. exists anywhere.   Does anyone know who would know?

I wonder if Forster and Neumann are online.

Harnack’s next paragraph continues with a statement that an ms. in the Iviron monastery on Mt. Athos, codex 1280 (s. XVII) which contains Eusebius, biblos peri ths euangekiwn diaphwnias; Eis thn prophhthn Hsaian logoi t konta [sic]; [Kata] Porphyriou logoi l’ [sic]; topikon logos a’ etc (see Meyer, Ztschr. fur. K.-Gesch. XI, p.156).

But this last is probably a red herring.  Long ago I scanned and translated MEYER, Ph., Der griechische Irenäus und der ganze Hegesippus im 17. Jahrhundert, Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte (1890) pp. 155-158 (English translation).

Iviron 1280 mainly contains church music, but at the end is a letter with a couple of pages containing merely a list of books, which mentions Hegesippus, Irenaeus, Methodius against Porphyry, plus Eusebius Against Porphyry and his Biblical Questions (diaphonias).

There are a number of these lists from the renaissance and later in existence. Nigel Wilson has written that at least some of them look like the productions of dealers in the East, intended to draw in the too eager western buyer in order to do a ‘bait-and-switch’ scam. One of them even looks like a deliberate joke.

Share

Jerome’s Commentarioli in Psalmos exists in English

An email from Andrew Eastbourne reveals that the Commentarioli does indeed exist in English already:

It looks like this Tractatus / Homily is in a FotC volume (The Homilies of Saint Jerome: 1-59 On the Psalms, translated by M. L. Ewald — “preview” at least in the US at http://books.google.com/books?id=2MBHW1WHAbsC ; in case it’s not available elsewhere, I’m attaching a screen cap) — and from “Quasten” it appears that Morin was basically convincing in arguing for Jerome’s authorship…

The screen grab of the portion we were discussing is here:

Jerome on Ps 1

Share

Thinking about Jerome’s “Commentarioli in Psalmos”

A look at the PDF of the Morin edition of this work by Jerome reveals 100 pages.  The comments are all fairly short.

I’ve been looking to see what translations exist.  An edition exists in the Corpus Christianorum from Brepols (CCSL 72, 100 euros), but since the editor given is Morin I suspect this is really a reprint.  A German translation does exist here, from 2005, which advertises itself as the first into a modern language.

Is there an English version?  Would one be interesting?

I’ve worked out that a page might be about 180 words, and the whole work perhaps 18,000, across 100 short pages.  The Latin is easy enough.  Perhaps I should commission a translation.

Share

A passage in Jerome on Revelation

A correspondent asked me for a translation of this:

Legimus in Apocalypsi Johannis (quod in istis provinciis non recipitur liber, tamen scire debemus quoniam in occidente omni, et in aliis Faenicis provinciis, et in AEgypto recipitur liber, et ecclesiasticus est: nam et veteres ecclesiastici viri, e quibus est Irenaeus, et Polycarpus, et Dionysius, et alii Romani interpretes, de quibus est et Cyprianus sanctus, recipiunt librum et interpretantur) legimus ergo ibi: eqs.

Which I rendered hastily as:

We read in the Apocalypse of John (which in those provinces is a book not received [as canonical], however we ought to understand that in all the west, and in the other Phoenician provinces, and in Egypt the book is received, and is a book of the church; for also ancient men of the church, among whom Irenaeus and Polycarp and Dionysius [of Alexandria] and other Roman expounders, also including St. Cyprian, receive the book and expound it) we read therefore there: …

Errors?  And … what is “Faenici”?

UPDATE:  Andrew Eastbourne writes:

That text of Jerome is in his (possibly inauthentic) “Tractatus” on Ps. 1, edited by Morin in the Anecdota Maredsolana vol. 3.2 (online at http://books.google.com/books?id=Qh0NAAAAIAAJ — easiest to find if you search in that volume for “legimus in Apocalypsi”) — oh, and Faenicis *is* simply “normal” medieval confusion of spelling for Phoenicis.  (ae / oe / e variation is very frequent in mss.)

I’ve also changed the translation as suggested in the comments!  The quote seems to be on p.5 of the text: just searching for “legimus in Apocalypsi” gives p.314 which is another quote.  The book is inaccessible outside the US, tho.  The reference is: 

Jerome, Commentarioli in Psalmos / Hieronymi, qui deperditi hactenus putabantur ; edidit, commentario critico instruxit, prolegomena et indices adjecit Germanus Morin. 1895, p. 5.

The faenicis has a note in Morin’s apparatus, “Faenicis] paenicis C 1 m: phaenicis A: phoenicis uC 2 m.”  The meaning of these glyphs is not apparent at first glance.

Share

Savile’s edition of Chrysostom

The text of the complete works of Chrysostom published by J.-P. Migne was a reprint of the Benedictine edition by Montfaucon of a century earlier.  Rather surprisingly, it does not contain all the material included in the 8-volume edition produced a century before that by Sir Henry Savile.  

I learn from Quasten’s Patrology 3 and also from the Clavis Patrum Graecorum 2 that some of the sermons of Severian of Gabala are only contained in Savile’s edition.

A kind reader has sent me PDF’s of Savile.  It’s rather daunting!  The lack of a Latin title is a clue; inside there is solely Greek.  There is an index at the end of volume 8, but it too is all in Greek.  In short, it is a rather tough proposition to find your way around! 

Fortunately the CPG gives page numbers for the sermons in question.

I’ve been working on transferring data and software to my new PC since Saturday, and I’m getting there.  But it is a wearisome business.  Windows 7 hasn’t attacked me yet, but give it time.

I’ve had another chunk of the Greek of Eusebius’ Quaestiones back from proof-reading.  I’ve also had a chunk of the Coptic back in English, although not in any useful format — the translator seems to have terrible trouble doing simple things with a computer, which is very, very wearing.  On a more positive note the translator of the Arabic bits is on course to complete those.

The translation with text of Origen’s Homilies on Ezechiel is progressing very well, and there is very little more to do.  The translator has worked very hard on this, and it shows.  It’s likely to be ready before the Eusebius, at current progress.  If it does appear first, I might send it out first, contrary to my original intention.

Share

Leontius of Byzantium, “Adversus fraudes Apollinistarum”

If you browse idly through Quasten’s Patrology volume 3, a little here and a little there — if you do this idly but often, you will acquire quite a fund of knowledge about the later Greek fathers, their lives, their quarrels, and their works; and about what editions and translations are commonly relied on for all these.

A couple of hours ago I found myself reading the entry on Apollinaris of Laodicea.  This learned man wrote a great many commentaries on Scripture.  More, he stood up to the Emperor Julian the Apostate.  The emperor passed a decree in 361 AD banning Christians from teaching the classics — effectively from teaching.  This was the first but by no means the last attempt to make sure Christians were uneducated in order to jeer at them for being uneducated.  A similar approach has been used by modern atheistic regimes, and demanded by modern atheists in democracies.  Apollinaris responded by recasting the bible in the forms of Greek dialogues and so on, to ensure that Christians could continue to acquire knowledge.  The early death of Julian after a reign of 18 months rendered the effort unnecessary.

Apollinaris was later condemned as a heretic for some christological mistakes.  His works were banned.  But they continued to circulate under other names, and some have reached us.

A 6th century writer, Leontius of Byzantium, composed a work Adversus fraudes Apollinistarum.  This was designed to show that various works in circulation were not by people like Gregory Thaumaturgus, but in reality by banned Apollinarist authors.  Censorship of opinion had its natural consequence, that opinions circulated anonymously; and hate built on this the usual accusation of fraud.  It is hateful to ban a man from speaking his mind and then call him a forger when you force him to put his opinions forward under some form of camouflage.  In our politically correct days, we have lived to see the reappearance of this Byzantine tradition.

The work itself sounds more interesting than it is.  It appears in Migne, Patrologia Graeca, 86b, cols. 1947-1976.  It’s 15 columns of Greek (ignoring the parallel Latin translation), and would therefore cost $300 to translate.  I can find no evidence of a modern translation.

The work consists of a brief introductory paragraph, then the main body which consists entirely of excerpts from Apollinarists, each named and referenced; and then a final couple of paragraphs (1973C ff.) on the Apollinarist errors.

OF THE SAME LEONTIUS, AGAINST THOSE WHO BRING US MATERIAL BY APOLLINARIS, FALSELY INSCRIBED WITH THE NAME OF HOLY FATHERS.

Some from the heresy of Apollinaris or Eutyches or Dioscorus, when they wanted to advance their heresy, inscribed some works of Apollinaris as by Gregory Thaumaturgus, or Athanasius, or Julius,  in order to deceive the more naive.  And so they did.  For by the authority of these people who deserved trust they were able to take in  many people in the Catholic Church.  And you can obtain from many true believers the book of Apollinaris with the title h( kata meros pistis, … ascribed to Gregory; and some of his letters have been ascribed to Julius, and others of his orations or expositions on the incarnation have been ascribed to Athanasius.  Likewise ascribed is the expostion  agreeing with the exposition of the 318; not only this but others also.  However this will be made evident to you, and to anyone studious of the truth, from these things which we haveextracted from Apollinaris himself, or his disciples, one of whom is Valentinus.

Valentinus: a chapter of an Apollinarist Apology

“Against those who say that we say that the flesh is consubstantial with God”.

Master Apollinaris, from his letter to Serapion.

 Receive this letter, of your charity, sir, …

And so on it goes.  I can see why it has never received translation; but surely, all these works ought to be more accessible?

Share

Henry Savile and his edition of the works of Chrysostom

Looking at the Clavis Patrum Graecorum — a text that should certainly be online — we find that the works of Severian of Gabala appear in two main editions, under the name of Chrysostom.  There is the 1718-38 century edition of the works of Chrysostom by Montfaucon, the Benedictine editor in France.  This is what Migne reprinted.

But there is also an edition by Henry Savile, published at Eton, of all places, in 1612.  A couple of Severian’s sermons only appear in this edition.

I am impressed by the CPG, by the way.  It neatly clears up what exists for Severian, and where it may be found; in Greek, Latin, Syriac, Armenian.

Philip Schaff’s introduction to the works of Chrysostom in the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers edition is useful.  After discussing the marvellous labours of Montfaucon, he adds:

The edition of Sir Henry Savile (Provost of Eton), Etonae, 1612, in 8 vols. for., is less complete than the Benedictine edition, but gives a more correct Greek text (as was shown by F. Dübner from a collation of manuscripts) and valuable notes. Savile personally examined the libraries of Europe and spent £8,000 on his edition. His wife was so jealous of his devotion to Chrysostom that she threatened to burn his manuscripts.

Lady Savile was not the first wife to threaten her husband’s books, out of jealousy, as Reynolds and Wilson, Scribes and Scholars records.

But is the edition accessible?  Is it online?  It is, after all, a very old book, and the USA did not exist when it was published.  It is US libraries, after all, who have made Google Books and Archive.org what they are.

A search suggests that it might form part of “Early English Books Online”, a project which is not freely available.  UK taxpayers funded it, so naturally it has been placed under the control of a commercial company and only rich institutions are allowed to use it.  (It is depressing, sometimes, to see the combination of waste and greed and littleness of mind characteristic of British higher education).  You can’t even see if it is in there.

Does anyone have access to EEBO, and can check whether it is there?

Share

Severian of Gabala, Homily 3 on Genesis, chapter 5

I’ve translated roughly a little more of the French translation of Bareille of these sermons, which I increasingly find interesting.  I’m getting an idea of why Severian was such a popular preacher.  I really think that I will commission a translation of the homilies on Genesis by Severian (although I think I would use the best translator I know on them).

5. Let us now ask where the sun goes down, and where, during the night, it purses its course?  According to our adversaries, under the land; and we who look at the sky as a tent, what is our feeling on this?  Look and see, I beg you, whether we are in error, or whether the truth of our opinion appears clearly, and whether reality is in agreement with our hypothesis. 

Imagine that above your head a pavilion has been set up.  East would be there, north here, south there and west there.  When the sun has left the East and starts to set, it will not set under the land; but crossing the limits of the sky, it traverses the northern areas where it is hidden by a kind of wall from our gaze, the upper waters concealing his journey from us; and, after having traversed these areas, it returns to the East. 

And where is the proof of this assertion?  In Ecclesiastes, an authentic and not interpolated work of Solomon: “The sun rises and the sun sets,” it is written there;  “while rising, it moves towards its setting, then it turns to the north;  it turns, it turns, and it rises again in its place.”  Eccl., i, 5.  Otherwise it is during the winter that you will note this southward journey of the sun, and its movement in the direction of the north; then, it does not rise in the centre of the East, it inclines towards the south, and, following a shorter route, it makes the day shorter; once it has set, it continues its circular direction, and the nights then are longer. 

We all know, my brothers, that the sun always does not start at the same point.  How then do the days become shorter?  Because the sun, to rise, moves from the south; then, from where it rises, it follows an oblique path, and from this comes the brevity of the days.   As it sets in the extremity of the west, it must necessarily traverse during the night the west, north, all of the east, to arrive on the edge of the south; from which inevitably follows the length of the night.  When the distance traversed and the speed of travel are the same, the nights then are equal to the days.  After that, it moves northwards as during the winter it had moved south; it rises in the northern heights and makes the day longer;  on the other hand the curve which it must follow during the night being shorter, the nights also become shorter. 

This is not what the Greeks have taught us:  they do not want these teachings, and they claim that the sun and the stars continue their course beneath the land.  But no, the Scripture, this divine mistress, the Scripture leads us and dispenses her light to us. 

Thus the Lord has made the sun, a torch which never weakens; he made the moon, whose glory shines and fades alternately.  The work reveals the workman.  The workman never knows failure, the work is also eternal.  The moon does not lose its light, it is concealed only to our eyes, a faithful image of mortal men. 

Think of the centuries that have passed since its appearance!  And yet, when the moon is new, we say:  The moon is born today.  Why this language?  Because we see a figure of our corporeal life there.  The moon is born, grows, reaches its apogee, only to then decrease, diminish and disappear:  and we also, we are born, we grow, we arrive at our apogee; then we fade, we decline, we age and we disappear in death.  But, just as the moon reappears then, we also will come back to life and another life is reserved for us.  This is why the Saviour, to teach us that, following the example of our birth on earth, a new birth awaits us beyond the tomb, expresses himself in these terms:  “When the Son of man comes at the time of the new Genesis.”  Matth. xix, 28. 

So the moon guarantees the resurrection to us.  What! she says to us, you see me disappearing to reappear, and you lose all hope?  Wasn’t the sun itself created for us, as well as the moon, and all creatures?  What does not promise us our resurrection?  Isn’t the night the image of death?  When darkness covers our bodies, you recognize nobody any more.  Often it happens that you touch with your hand the face of someone sleeping, and you do not know whose face this is, whose is that one; and you ask, so that the voice allows you to recognize those whom the darkness conceals from you.  So in the same way as the night hides the features of everyone, and as we do not recognize one another any more, when we are all together; in the same way death destroyed the human form and prevents us recognizing them any more. 

Walk through the tombs, look at the skulls which they contain; do you recognize to which people they belonged?  He knows who formed them; He who delivered these bodies to dissolution knows from where they came.  And you do not admire the creative power of the Lord?  There is a multitude of men, and none is exactly the same as any other.  You could traverse the ends of the universe in vain, you would not find two men who resembled each other exactly; and, when you believe you have found such, there would be presented in the eyes or the nose a difference which would justify this astonishing truth. Two children come out of the same place at the same time, and their resemblance is imperfect.  

Share

Severian of Gabala on Genesis, sermon 2, chapter 3

I was browsing the Bareille French translation of Severian’s homilies, and came across this interesting passage.  But I can’t work out which bits of the bible he is quoting — not even when a ‘reference’ is given!

3.  “But, the land was invisible.”  What does it mean, invisible?  I have heard several of our holy fathers saying:  The land was invisible, because it was hidden under water. Many opinions can be extremely religious without being true for all that.  The three friends of Job, for example, seeing him surrounded with trials, condemned this holy man:  in their opinion, he had deserved his unhappy fate.  If you had not oppressed widows, they said to him, if you had not fleeced orphans, the Lord would not have treated you in this manner. Being unaware of the intentions of God, they condemned Job and said that his sufferings were deserved, not wanting to show God acting wrongfully.  Well!  although they were supporting the cause of God, God still blamed them and said to them:  “Why didn’t you speak justly about my servant?”  Job, XLII, 7. Their sentiment was inspired by piety; but nevertheless it was not right.  What now does the text before us mean:  “The earth was invisible and without beauty?” The interpreters have given a clear explanation of it.  The earth, they say, is called invisible, not because it was not seen, but because it was stripped of any ornament.  It had as yet neither the glory of its flowers, nor the crown of its fruits, nor the variety of its ornaments, nor its belt of rivers and fountains; it was invisible, not having been endowed yet with its marvellous fruitfulness.  The Scripture has said of one of its heroes:  “Isn’t this he who struck the visible Egyptian?”  II Reg., XXIII, 21. So are there invisible men?  No; but that was useful to direct our attention:  it is in an analogous sense that the earth is said to be invisible.

Interesting attitude to the Fathers: “it may be pious, but that does not mean it is right”!

“The land was invisible” is merely a different version of Genesis 1:1, The earth was without form and void; Augustine quotes Terra autem erat invisibilis et incomposita et tenebrae erant super abyssum, as does Tertullian in De Baptismo 3.

Share

Armenian sermons of Severian of Gabala … or Eusebius of Emesa?

In a post a few days ago I mentioned that I had discovered an English translation of a sermon by Severian of Gabala on the sufferings and death of our Lord, and placed it online.  The sermon was translated from an 1827 publication of sermons in Armenian — probably from the parallel Latin text, rather than the Armenian, I fancy! — and I have since discovered the book online here.  I also noted that the sermon was not listed among the works of Severian in the Clavis Patrum Graecorum.

While I was scanning the text, I came across  various examples of allegorical interpretation.  This is not quite what I associate with Severian.  Looking at the table of contents in the Armenian, at the end around p. 449, I am struck by the vagueness of the titles.  Severian is called bishop of Emesa, for instance.  15 sermons are edited.  Here are the last three:

  • XIII.  B. Severiani Episcopi in Ficulneam arefactam. – 415
  • XIV.  B. Emesensis Episcopi in Passionem Christi – 429
  • XV. B. Eusebii (lege, Seberiani) Episcopi in idem mysterium (de Juda traditore) – 443

The last entry is the most interesting: “Of the blessed Bishop Eusebius (read: Severian) on the same mystery (of Judas the traitor)”.  The lege is added by the modern editor, of course.  But should we agree?  Or do the last two sermons both truly belong to Eusebius of Emesa (d. 359)?

Eusebius of Emesa is listed in CPG 2, nos 3525-3543.  #3525 is a list of sermons extant in Latin translation and discovered in the Codex Trecensis which also preserves works of Tertullian and was unknown until a century ago.  Among these is De arbore fici; we might wonder whether ‘Severian’ XIII is the same work.

Listed in #3531 is “Armenian sermons”.  These have been edited by N. Akinian, Die Reden des Bischofs Eusebius von Emesa, in Handes Amsorya 70 (1956), 71 (1957) and 72 (1958).  This is a collection of homilies under the name of Eusebius of Emesa.  The first eight are by Eusebius; the other five are by Severian of Gabala (CPG 4185, 4202, 4210, 4246, 4248)!  Sermon 2 is De passione Christi (Akinian, l.c. 70, pp.385-416) — is this our baby?  Well, no.

Because sermon 5 De passione, ed. vol. 71, p.357-80, is listed in the CPG as being the same as the sermon XIV of Aucher, starting on p.428, and continuing as Aucher’s sermon XV.  And fragments of it are indeed found in the Butyaert Latin text.

I will therefore update the page I uploaded with the necessary details.

Share