Tag: Patristics

Translating from Arabic into Latin in Medieval Spain

Posted on by Roger Pearse

A really important blog post at Quodlibeta on a very neglected subject: how did Arabic scientific knowledge get into circulation in Latin in the Middle Ages?  Read it for yourself.  I have asked for a bibliography, as I certainly want to know more!

Readers of this blog will recall my posts on Galen and Hunain ibn Ishaq; how Greek scientific knowledge got into Arabic, by means of Christian translators, first into Syriac by people like Sergius of Reshaina and Job of Edessa, and then in the 10th century across into Arabic by people like Hunain ibn Ishaq.  But the Quodlibeta post continues this, in asking what happened next!

Share

The anathemas against Origen at the 2nd Council of Constantinople

Posted on by Roger Pearse

I’m going through my filing cabinet, turning photocopies into PDF’s and throwing away the paper.  While doing so, I’m coming across all sorts of things that I haven’t seen for years.  One of these is some pages of Norman Tanner’s edition of the Decrees of the ecumenical councils (1990).  This is the sort of thing that I dearly wish was online.  But a note in the preface caught my eye:

Our purpose in editing the texts has been to present all the decrees of the councils and only the decrees. For this reason some very important texts have had to be omitted, for example the anathemas against Origen formerly attributed (erroneously) to Constantinople II, or the charges on which pope Honorius was condemned (as these relate to the acts, not the decrees, of Constantinople III), or the profession of faith of pope Hormisdas which was a condition of admittance required of the council fathers at Constantinople IV, but does not appear to have been formally approved by the council.

Now I was under the impression, rightly or wrongly, that the Council of Constantinople held by Justinian had condemned Origenism, and perhaps anathematised Origen himself, depending on some text-critical questions.  To pronounce a man anathema 300 years after he died in the peace of the church, and died moreover from the effects of torture in confessing Christ, would be morally wrong of course.

Unfortunately I don’t have the relevant pages of Tanner, and I don’t know the facts.  Would someone better informed on this council than myself care to comment?

Share

Some answers on the confusing History of Abu al-Makarim / Abu Salih

Posted on by Roger Pearse

I’ve now read the article by Ugo Zanetti, “Abu-l Makarim et Abu Salih”, Bulletin de la societe d’archeologie copte 34 (1995), pp.85-138, which seems pretty thorough on all the confusing information around.  Rather than leave my questions hanging, I thought I would answer it myself for the benefit of those reading and not as obsessed as myself!

There are two, and only two manuscripts; Paris arabe 307, and Munich ar. 2570.  The latter once belonged to Girgis Filutaus (who was Rector of the Coptic Cathedral in Cairo), but arrived in Europe a couple of decades ago, in a very bad state.

Evetts published the Paris ms in 1898, with an English translation.  This is missing the introduction, but ends with a colophon.

Fr. Samuel published the Munich ms (then still in Egypt), and used a modern copy of the Paris ms. in the Coptic Museum.  His edition was in 4 parts, part 4 being indexes etc.  Part 1 and 3 were from the Munich ms; part 2 from the Paris ms, where he improves somewhat on Evetts edition.

Zanetti analysed the two mss codicologically and found that they were originally a single manuscript, which was dismembered centuries ago, before the Paris ms was bought in Egypt during the 17th century.  The Munich ms. is the start of the ms. and should be followed by the Paris ms.  So the correct order of the parts in Samuel should be part 1, part 3, and then part 2.  (Samuel was misled by the hand of the scribe, which changes part way through the ms and then changes back, and by the fact that he didn’t have access to more than photographs of the Paris ms.)

An English translation exists of part 1 (only) of Samuel’s edition.  This is

Bishop Samuel, “Abu al Makarem”. Trans<lated> by Mina al-Shamaa`.  Rev. by Mrs. Elizabeth (= “History of the Churches and Monasteries in Lower Egypt in the 13th century”), Cairo, Inst. des. Etudes Coptes (Anba Ruwais), 1992.

It also includes some maps and an index. A copy exists in the US Library of Congress.

So no translation exists of part 3 (i.e. the middle part of the work).

Share

Eusebius “Quaestiones” in Isidore of Pelusium

Posted on by Roger Pearse

The Differences in the Gospels and their Solutions by Eusebius of Caesarea is quoted all over the place.  One stray quotation appears in the letters of Isidore of Pelusium.  In the Migne edition this is book 2, letter 212, (PG 78, col. 651).  This letter consists entirely of a quotation from the Quaestiones Ad Marinum; how can we say that Jesus was dead for 3 days?  The text here is of course a corrective for that published by Mai, and I must send it to my translator.

Share

A better collection of all the fragments of Papias now online in English

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Tom Schmidt has had a real go at getting all the pieces of Papias together, including all the Greek, Latin, Armenian and Arabic pieces, and getting people to make translations.  The whole lot is here.  His notes  by each fragment are also very useful, particularly in the case of the more obscure fragments.  I think this must be the definitive collection for now.  Well done Tom!  The excellent Robert Bedrosian helped out with the Armenian.

A suggestion: it would be nice to have the original language for each fragment online as well, I think.

Share

A dull post on a catena published by Combefis

Posted on by Roger Pearse

One of the problems for the Eusebius project is the quantity of materials of this work preserved in catenas.  Claudio Zamagni, in his excellent thesis, listed quite a few.  I’ve tried to track these down, but one has defeated me.  It was edited by F. Combefis, and on p.200 of Z’s thesis is listed so:

S. patris nostri Asterii Amaseae episcopi aliorumque plurimum … [=Graecolat. Patrum bibliothecae novum auctarium… 1], Parisiis 1648 [779-790]

A search in COPAC reveals a number of copies of this work in UK research libraries, mostly in the north of England.  Some of the cataloguing is splendid:

Title details: S. Patris Nostri Asterij Amaseæ Episcopi, aliorumque plurium dissertissimorum Ecclesiæ Græcæ patrum ac tractatorum lectæ nouæ eruditissimæque : cum pari pietate orationes & homiliæ: in Dominicas praesertim, sanctissimaeque Dei Genitricis solennitates. / Opera ac studio R.P. Fr. Francisca Combefis …
[ S. Patris Nostri Asterij Amaseæ Episcopi, aliorumqve plvrivm dissertissimorvm Ecclesiæ Græcæ patrvm ac tractatorum lectæ nouæ eruditissimæque ]
Series: Græcolat. Patrum Bibliothecæ nouum auctarium. ; t.1 (Graeco-Latine Patrum Bibliothecae novum auctuarium ; t.1)
Published: Parisiis, : Sumptibus Antonij Bertier … , M. DC. XLVIII..
Physical desc.: [12] p., 1774 columns, [22] p. ; fol.
Notes: Title page printed in red and black, with engraved vignette. Woodcut initials. Includes index. Full contents given in Darling, James. Cyclopaedia bibliographica. London, 1845. Greek text with parallel Latin translation.
Other names: Asterius, of Amasea, Saint, ca. 350-ca. 410; Combefis, François, 1605-1679, [editor.]; Bertier, Antoine, 1610?-1678, [publisher.]
Related item: Referenced by: Brunet, II, 646; Referenced by: CLC, II, C1567
Language: Ancient Greek (to 1453) ; Latin

I wonder what the Cyclopaedia bibliographica is, that has a full description of this?

It seems that the work appeared in two volumes, and this was vol. 1.  The text is printed and numbered in columns, rather than in pages, so 779-790 is probably the columns.  I note that there is one in Birmingham Special collections, under the somewhat gnomic shelfmark: ML Spec.Coll – r f BR 62.  It might be easiest to order copies of those pages from them, since they are a  helpful lot.

But what prompted the search was a vague memory that copies existed in Oxford.  And so they do; mostly in college libraries:

Queen’s College Upper Library, 60.F.11
Balliol College Library, Special Collections, 0125 s.a.02 A
Christ Church Library, Special Collections, Allestree B.4.1
Keble College Library, Special Collections, TE F.2.2b

It would have been far too convenient had my own college been one of them!  But a further search reveals a copy in the Bodleian:

Main author: Graeco-Latini patres.
Title details: Græcolat. patrum bibliothecæ novum auctarium (operâ F. Combefis). Tomus duplex.
Published: Par. 1648
Physical desc.: (fol.)
Other names: Combefis, François, [ed.]
Bodleian Library Bookstack R 6.16, 15 Jur.

And this I hope to inspect on Thursday.  Whether the Bodleian will allow me copies remains to be seen.

But I do feel I want to examine the book.  I shall want to see whatever information he gives on the manuscripts used.  This will be scanty, at that date, but all the same I want whatever there is.  To do so I will need to hunt through the volume.  And anyway, isn’t it pleasant to do so?

Share

Dionysius Bar Salibi’s “Commentary on the Gospels”, Papias and Eusebius

Posted on by Roger Pearse

The massive commentary on the Gospels of the 13th century Syriac writer Dionysius Bar Salibi has never been translated into English.  But at one point it looked as if it might be.  An Irish scholar named Dudley Loftus made use of a manuscript in Trinity College, Dublin, and made a Latin translation of the whole thing.  This still exists, in manuscript, and I have seen it in the Bodleian, among the mss. of Dr. John Fell, where it is numbered #6 and #7.  The ms is crumbling, and probably unphotographed; of course I wasn’t allowed to take a copy.

But it seems that Loftus found that he could not publish his translation.  Instead he made an English version of extracts, which he did publish as “A clear and learned explication of the history of our blessed Saviour Jesus Christ: taken out of above thirty Greek, Syriack, and other oriental authors: by Dionysius Syrus, … and faithfully translated by D. Loftus. / [by] DIONYSIUS BAR SALIBI, Bishop of Amadia ; Loftus, Dudley ; JESUS CHRIST. (1695)”

This contains some interesting material.  It contains a passage from Papias, which my friend Tom Schmidt is going to blog about.  But while looking for this, I also found a quotation from Eusebius!  The work is really something of a catena, and thus the statement of Eusebius about how the Lord was dead for 3 days appears in it, on p.58.

Eusebius; Mathew by way of Exposition adds after this, of the Evening of the Sabbath the dawning of the Firstday of the Week, denoting the Hour and time of the Night after the Sabbath, which was when the First day of the Week dawned. ‘Tis true, Mathew wrote in the Hebrew, and he who Translated the Scripture into the Greek Language, rendered the Dawning of tbe Day, the Evening of the Sabbath; and Mathew, by the Evening, means the whole Length and Evening af the Night; as John calls the passing away, or the least Part of the Night, Day; and therefore adds, whilest it was yet dark, least it should be thought, that he spoke of the Morning; so Mathew also, when he said, the Evening of the Sabbath, lest Men might think it was spoken of the Evening Season, he adds, When the First day of the Week began to dawn.

I suspect this is more the sense of Eusebius’ thought than his words; it will be interesting to see, when the Syriac fragments are properly published, how this compares.

Share

More on remacle.org

Posted on by Roger Pearse

The excellent Marc Szwajcer of remacle.org has left a note on this blog here, to which I have responded by email.  I have already highlighted this massive French site of classical, patristric and Syriac texts in translation.  It seems that Marc is also translating material himself, and uploading it, which is wonderful.

Share