Thoughts on Antiquity, Patristics, putting things online, information access, and more
Origen’s 10th homily on Ezekiel (out of 14) is pretty much done, a bit of discussion aside.
Better yet, I have received the Arabic transcription and English translation of three treatises from Sbath’s collection of Arabic Christian theological material. These are #17, #18 and #19. All look very good, and one at least will bear posting here when I’ve paid for it. All are concerned with the truth of Christianity, ca. 900 AD.
It never rains but it pours. Today, in my inbox I find:
It is nice to see all these projects coming along, tho! I’ve asked the Eusebius translator to look over the Chrysostom sample. The other two translators are well known to me for the quality of their work.
A customer for my CDROM of the Fathers wrote to ask if I had a PDF of vol. 2 of Cyril’s Commentary on John, since I had scanned it for my site. Luckily for him I had the chance to look, and found the images first shot.
I’ve now uploaded a searchable PDF of this volume to Archive.org. It’s here:
http://www.archive.org/details/CyrilOfAlexandriaCommentaryOnJohnVolume2Tr.T.Randell
(Or will be in a few minutes)
This was the final volume in the Oxford Movement Library of the Fathers series of translations. The series began in 1838. By 1880 E.B.Pusey was dead, and the movement was history. Yet, somehow, this one last volume appeared, in 1885. It wasn’t published by Parker of Oxford, and it wasn’t edited by Pusey; but the title-page was uniform with it. The last few volumes were unnumbered.
By this time the Ante-Nicene Fathers series was 20 years old. Most collections of the Library of the Fathers were obsolete. Very few of them indeed ever acquired this last, final volume. I obtained this one through the courtesy of Glasgow University Library, who benevolently photocopied it and posted it to me. May their name be ever remembered; for I doubt any other copy of this very, very uncommon book, is ever likely to get scanned.
Volume 1 of the Commentary contained books 1-5. It was translated by Phillip E. Pusey, the crippled son of old Pusey, who predeceased his father. P.E.Pusey edited Cyril’s works, and his editions still have value. But as a translator he was useless, tending to transliterate the Greek. A vicious review, which I have never been able to locate, halted his efforts and he never proceeded further with Cyril on John. The otherwise unknown T. Randell did this volume, and made a nice job of it. It’s far easier to read than vol. 1! It covers books 6-12, although some of those books are lost and only catena fragments were available.
There’s quite a lot of Orthodox interest in this text. Let’s hope this helps make it more available.
PDF’s are such a blessing. I’ve been looking at the PDF of volume 1 of the Mingana collection of Syriac manuscripts in Birmingham. How quickly we take these for granted! Once, just to consult such a volume, would have meant a day off work, a 60 mile journey, and being robbed blind for copies — if I was even allowed copied. That was the situation, only five years ago. Not now!
This will be a dull post, I fear. Because I ordered some photos of manuscripts in the collection, but no longer remember what was so precious in them! This post is my journey of discovery.
On p.599 of the PDF (col. 1197 of the book), there is listed the various snippets of Eusebius in various manuscripts. In July 2008 I went through these, and ordered the following from the Mingana:
Ms. Mingana Syr. 332 Folios 1-9a Eusebius Ms. Mingana Syr. 480 Folios 29a-31b Eusebius Ms. Mingana Syr. 589 Folios 1-6a Eusebius
Time to refresh my memory on these!
First I’m opening the Mingana catalogue in Adobe Acrobat and running an OCR on the file to create scannable text. I only wish Adobe used some decent OCR software. Come on chaps, talk to Abbyy!
OK. On p. 308 of the PDF (col. 616) we find ms. 332. On ff.6b-7a there are quotations on the genealogy of Jesus, from Ephraim, Eusebius of Caesarea, and Philoxenus. Wonder why I ordered as far as 9a.
On p. 432 of the PDF (col. 863) is ms. 480. Ff. 29a-31b consist of tables to show that there is no contradiction between the two genealogies of Jesus in Matthew and Luke. The first table is from Severus of Antioch; the others from Ephraim, Eusebius and Philoxenus. Not sure why I thought this stuff was worthwhile, now.
On p. 562 of the PDF (col. 1125) is ms. 589.
Fascinating stuff… or not. This is what so manuscripts consist of, tho; pages of short, dubious-looking texts.
The upshot is that there is unlikely to be much here to impact on my Eusebius project. Wonder what the “short treatise on chronology is”? I might toss that over to my translator and ask.
Very pleased indeed to get the last fragment of Eusebius’ Tough questions on the gospels in English. It has been incredibly hard to find people who (a) know enough Syriac to translate this and (b) will actually do it. This translator is my fourth attempt! I had to pay a premium price, and it does hurt, but it was worth it. He’s now going to look over the fragments done by others, and revise and bring it all into line. But this is another step forward, and a very welcome one. I shall be very glad to see the back of the Syriac fragments.
I also have some manuscript fragments, which I need to look up again and pass to him. More later on this. Today seems to be a day when *everyone* has written to me.
It’s just as well I’m at home this week, recovering from a vicious virus, or I wouldn’t be able to respond to it all.
Oh, and Origen, Homily 9 on Ezekiel, is now done as well. Only five to go!
Somewhere I read that book 2, letter 212 of Isidore of Pelusium was an unacknowledged copy of part of Eusebius Ad Marinum. This would make it valuable as a witness to the text of the latter. But I sent the text to the translator today. He has just informed me that in fact it takes rather a different approach to the same bible difficulty — how is Jesus dead for 3 days — and is not part of the Eusebius text. We’ll translate it anyway, but I need to go back and find out who said that it was.
1245 (IV.59) TO POLYCHRONIOS
Since you ask me in your letter: For what reason was it that “God gave them over to an intelligence without judgement” [Rom. 1:28-29] ? I will answer: If you read the next bit, you will understand and you will have no more uncertainty. In fact it reads: “Filled with every kind of injustice”; so, after indicating vice in general, he then goes in detail through the species of vices. So if He has given over people who were, not about to be filled with vice, but already filled with it, he’d have been talking nonsense.
If this isn’t clear to you, although actually it is clear, I will try to give a clearer interpretation of this.
(Paul) did not say: “When they were given over…, they were filled…”, nor: “They were given over… in order to be filled…”, but: ‘(already) filled, he gave over them’, i.e.: he abandoned those who deprived themselves of his help, as a general abandons soldiers who, disobeying his orders, are beaten by their own fault, by depriving themselves of his power. Because those who, of themselves, allowed themselves to be filled with every kind of vice, he rightly gave them over and abandoned: he did not make them “an intelligence without judgement”, but he let them run off.
Our bibles render “an intelligence without judgement” as “a depraved mind”. God does not throw us into depravity; He lets us run into it, if we are determined to do so. A further snippet makes up the next letter:
1246 (V.26) TO THE SAME
Just as the quality of the site of a city is closely related to the quality of the climate [of the location], in the same way for hearts, a good disposition to virtue helps the divine alliance along.
In other words, if you are naturally virtuous, this will help lead you into a relationship with Christ. Well, maybe; but I’m not at all sure that the apostles would have agreed. Won’t the naturally virtuous tend to be proud, like the Pharisee? Pride obstructs the recognition of sin, and so prevents repentance and conversion at all.
I got quite cross on my Oxford visit during August, because although I located a volume of excerpts, with a fragment of Eusebius, I was unable to obtain a reproduction thanks to the greed of Bodleian staff. A price of 29p for a black-and-white photo is not bad; but a price of £3.87 per greyscale (just a setting change on the same camera, which costs no more to take) is ridiculous, and a price of £17.20 for colour (ditto) is obscene.
Indeed I wrote there and then an email of protest to the head of imaging services, a certain James Allan. The professionalism and customer-focus of the Bodleian and that particular bureaucrat may be judged by his failure to even acknowledge it. As a result, I failed to note here the details of what I actually want to get; and have had to scrabble around for details of it again!
The book is volume 1 of a two volume anthology (Graeco-Lat. patrum bibliothecae novum Auctarium) of extracts starting with works by Asterius of Amasea from various unspecified manuscripts, edited by Francois Combefis: S. Patris nostri Asterii Amaseae episcopi, aliorum plurium… Ecclesiae graecae patrum… orationes & homiliae / opera ac studio R.P.Fr. Francisci Combefis. Published: Parisiis : sumptibus Antonii Bertier, 1648. The Bodleian shelfmark was R 6.16, 15 Jur. There is also a copy in Birmingham ML Special Collections, shelfmark “r f BR 62”.
The portion I want consists of columns 779-791. This is Greek text with facing Latin translation. I noted when I saw it to emphasise that the Greek text was really important, because the binding might work against me!
I also wanted some introductory matter. There were two title pages; then a letter Illustrissimo Franciae… covering 4 pages, and a single page headed Candido Lectori, which alone gave information about sources. The elderly paper means that at least a grey-scale image will be necessary.
Now to find someone who will sell me copies at a reasonable price!
I’ve had an email from Charles Sullivan, another patristic enthusiast, who has dedicated the last 20 years to going through Migne and locating every possible reference in the fathers to speaking in tongues. He’s been translating them, and intends to publish A history of the gift of tongues, once he’s worked over all the texts. It was an email from him concerning Origen on 1 Corinthians that led me to look into this obscure text last week.
I asked him how he went about his search. The answer was interesting enough that I thought I would reproduce it:
This whole project began in the 1980s before the internet took off and before I had kids and needed to concentrate solely on making money for 20 years. During this time, I recreationally began to visually scan every page of MPG until volume 135, looking especially in the Latin text for key words. When I found some semblance of key words, I photocopied the pages to translate later. With Latin authors I haven’t been so detailed but I have used MPL and whatever other sources I can find. The resources in Latin are much easier to find and access than the Greek Fathers, so this part has not been much of a problem. Secondly, I went through them all, prioritizing and eliminating pages for translation. Third, because the internet was so young and flaky at the time, I built my own dictionary, grammar and bibliographical database in Filemaker to resource all my finds and keep up with everything. I still use this. After these steps, I translate the pertinent passages.
My approach to translating is published on Scribd,
http://www.scribd.com/doc/8484290/Translation-Tips-on-the-Greek-Church-Fathers… I felt initially overwhelmed at the task of translating the Greek Church Fathers and understanding how MPG works. I don’t feel that way anymore, but it was painful. This was overcome in large part due to the help of Perseus, Google and many websites willing to publish manuscripts, texts and resources on the web. If these were not available, people like myself could not accomplish anything within this realm.
I am looking forward to the day when the open-source internet phenomenon, which has opened up the Jewish community and their ancient texts, will meander down into the vestibules of the Christian community.
The excellent translation tips I have remarked on before. I also asked him who he was aiming his book at. His reply was probably too modest:
It is for an academic audience who has a little, but not a great knowledge of Church Fathers and possess a good knowledge of the controversial Biblical texts.
A 2,500 word or so summary will be available for free on the internet. The final book will be available for purchase on the ScribD website. I am not sure what to do with the print rights yet. Still too busy translating though I can feel that I am getting very close. Chrysostom and John of Damascus are the only big translations left for me to do.
I think that there can be little doubt that Dr. Sullivan is a hero; someone who is doing something truly original, at a very serious level. I particularly admire anyone who takes the PG, volume by volume, and works through it.
I hope that he will allow me to see a draft when it is ready. It seems to me that we’re actually looking at a source book, or something like that, which deserves formal academic publication. Comments on this, and also on any parallel work that’s been done, would be most welcome.
Editions of the fragments of Origen’s commentaries on Ephesians and 1 Corinthians were published from the catenas in early issues of the Journal of Theological Studies. Unfortunately the editors chose not to include translations, thereby guaranteeing oblivion to their work.
In JTS 10 C. H. Turner commented on some of the newly published texts:
Certain it is that these commentaries [on Ephesians and 1 Corinthians] contain many interesting things which appear so far to have escaped the notice of Church historians. A reference to the inconsistencies between the duty of a Christian and the duty of a soldier (on I Cor. v I I) has escaped even Harnack’s encyclopaedic knowledge of early Christian literature. The summary of the Eucharistic service as the ‘invocation of the name of God and of Christ and of the Holy Spirit over the elements (on I Cor. vii 5) is absent from Mr Brightman’s collection of liturgical passages from the Egyptian fathers. And I myself, when writing on Patristic commentaries on St Paul (in the supplementary volume to Hastings’s Dictionary of the Bible p. 489), ought to have cited Origen’s distinct allusions to a predecessor or predecessors in the exegesis of the same epistle: … (on I Cor. vii 24), … (on I Cor. ix 20).
Note further the information about Ophites (on xii 3), about Montanists (on xiv 34), about heretics who used the Creed (on xv 20), about parts of the Old Testament unsuitable for Church lessons (on xiv 7, 8), about a Pauline citation found in Aquila and the other interpreters but not in the LXX text (on xiv 21 ), about Apollos being bishop of Corinth (on xvi 12).
Any fragments of the original Greek of Origen’s work on the New Testament are worth all that we can devote to them of loving and patient study.
They do sound interesting, don’t they! If I didn’t have so much on the go already, I might be tempted to commission a translation.