Tag: Syriac

An opportunity to translate some of Severus Sebokht

Posted on by Roger Pearse

The Syriac scientist Severus Sebokht lived in the mid-7th century in Syria and was possibly the most learned man of his day.  He lived at the great monastery of Kinnesrin, which was noted for Greek studies.  He is the first western writer to refer to what we today call “arabic numerals”. 

Two works by him have been translated into French; On the astrolabe and On the constellations.  The French translation of the former was run into English, and I scanned that and placed it online.  I translated part of the latter and also placed that online.

I also dumped whatever information I had on him online here.

Most of his works have never been published.  A lot of them are to be found in a manuscript in the French National Library in Paris, ms. Syr. 346.  I obtained a PDF of a microfilm of this years ago.

I’ve had an offer today by a chap who is fluent in both Syriac and Arabic to translate some of it.  I think I’ll take him up on this!

Share

Eusebius in Syriac, in a literal German version

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Hunting around the web for Sickenberger’s publications on the catenas in Luke, I stumbled across a review of one of them — on the remains of the homilies of Titus of Bostra in the catenas — in the Catholic University Bulletin here.  The review does great credit to the periodical; but it also tells us about another publication in 1901.

Titus von Bostra, Studien zu dessen Lukashomelien, von Dr. Joseph Sickenberger. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1901. 8vo., pp. vii + 267.

Die Kirchengeschichte des Eusebius aus dem Syrischen uebersetzt von Eberhard Nestle. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1901. 8vo., pp.
x+296.

1. With much scholarly labor, critical acumen, and excellent method Dr. Sickenberger reconstructs what is practically an “editio princeps” of the extant fragments of the “Homilies” of Titus of Bostra on the Gospel of Saint Luke. This ancient bishop who flourished in the days of Julian the Apostate, is noted in the history of the time for his dignified answer to charges of sedition and disloyalty made against him by that emperor; also for four books against the Manichaeans that Saint Jerome (De vir., inl. c. 102) thought excellent: “fortes adversum Manichaeos scripsit libros.” Dr. Sickenberger has collected from the printed editions of the “Catenae Patrum,” and from many mannscript sources a great number of remnants of “Homilies” on St. Luke, that in all probability are the work of this bishop of Bostra. A compiler of such materials in the eleventh century got together as many as 3300 of them. Unless a Milan palimpsest, discovered by Mercati in 1898, contains some fragments of the original discourses, we have no other tradition of them than such as has come down to us through the collection of excerpts that mediaeval Greek theologians were wont to make of older patristic commentaries, notes, and expositions of a scriptural character. Most of the lengthy introduction of Dr. Sickenberger (pp. 1-145) is taken up with the study of several such collections or “Catenae” as they are usually called. In them he finds genuine remnants of the “Homilies” of this father, though not without a lengthy critical sifting and comparison of such scattered and disordered materials. These pages, that the author rightly calls a “schwierige Arbeit,” are no mean contribution to the growing literature on the “Catenae” themselves, and are an evidence of the genuine scholarly training to be had in the theological faculty of the University of Munich. Dr. Sickenberger has added to our knowledge of Titus of Bostra, by increasing his scientific usefulness, and by emphasizing the fact that these “Homilies” on Saint Luke, written after the work against the Manichaeans, have a decided anti-Manichaean air and trend, such as one might expect from a bishop of the Syrian borderland at this period. The sober, literal, objective character of his discourses shows him to be an Antiochene in his principles of scriptural interpretation. The material at hand is too disconnected to gather from it any conclusions concerning the canon and the authority of the scriptures in farther Syria toward the end of the fourth century, or to establish which recension of the gospels was used by Titus. His “Homilies” on Saint Luke were much used by later commentators on the Gospels, though his own compositions were, seemingly, quite original and independent. He is an Aristotelian, and opposes cold and severe logic to the fantastic allegorizing of the Manichaeans. Taken in connection with Lagarde’s edition (Berlin, 1859) of the complete text (in Syriac translation) of the four books against the Manichaeans, the treatise of Dr. Sickenberger and his edition of the homily-fragments on Luke give us the best assured texts of a writer concerning whom Saint Jerome says elsewhere (ep. 70) that one knew not which to admire most in him, “eruditionem saeculi an scientiam scripturarum.” Is it not rather bold to advance the death of Titus of Bostra to a possible 378, when the “sub Juliano et Joviano principibus” of Saint Jerome seems to indicate that his literary activity did not extend beyond 364, the date of Jovian’s death ? The phrase “moritur sub Valente” would, in this light, seem to indicate the death of Titus in the early part of the reign of Valens, i. e. between 365 and 370.

2. The oldest Greek manuscript of the Church History of Eusebius belongs, it is said, to the tenth century. In the Syriac version, first edited by Bedjan (1897) and then by Wright and McLean (1898), we have a very faithful rendering of the Greek original. Some think that the Syriac version was prepared by the order, or under the eye, of Eusebius himself. It was certainly in common use before the end of the fourth century. The manuscript tradition of this text is far older than that of the Greek original—the best of the three oldest Syriac manuscripts, that of Saint Petersburg, belongs to the year A. D. 462, and an Armenian translation of the same represents a Syriac text still a century older than that of Saint Petersburg. As the Kirchenvater-Commission proposes to publish a new edition of the Church History, it seemed desirable that a strictly literal translation into German of the Syriac version should be first prepared, as one of the necessary “subsidia” for that important enterprise. This has been done for the “Texte und Untersuchungen” by the distinguished Syriac scholar, Dr. Eberhard Nestle, of whose competency there can be no doubt. In the preface to his work he brings out, from more than one view-point, the possible utilities of the Syriac translation whose complete edition has been awaited from 1864, when Wright first made known a chapter of it in “Ancient Syriac Documents,” down to 1897 and 1898, when, simultaneously, Bedjan at Paris, and Wright-MacLean at London, gave to the world this very ancient specimen of learning and piety.

The existence of a very literal German translation of the Syriac version of Eusebius’ Church history was unknown to me until this point.  I wonder if it is online?

UPDATE: And it is, here.

Share

Palimpsest ms image of Severus of Antioch

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Over at Juan Garces blog, there are a couple of images of a page from a Syriac treatise by Severus of Antioch, Contra impium grammaticum, (=Against the impious John the Grammarian).  The treatise was composed in the early 6th century, and the argument forms part of the political arguments taking place in the Byzantine empire in the guise of religious disagreements.

The image is very nice, and shows a clear and readable Serto hand.  What is particularly interesting is that the parchment was itself second-hand when the ms. was written.  The previous text had been washed off, but not very well, and it is clearly visible in the areas not written over.  The text was a Greek bible in uncial.  Juan also shows a UV image which brings up the under-text very clearly.  The manuscript itself is one of those acquired in the 1840’s from the abbey of Deir el-Suryani (=monastery of the Syrians) in the Nitrian desert in Egypt.

I don’t know whether this work by Severus has ever been translated into English.  It would certainly be nice to have the whole ms. online, tho.

Share

Two more Syriac fragments of Eusebius “Gospel problems and solutions”

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Ishodad of Merv, in his commentaries on the gospels, quotes from Eusebius To Marinus.  The commentaries were printed by Gibson in 1911 with an English translation.  Vol. 1,  p. 143 contains the Eusebius, on Mark 15.  This is online in PDF here.  The Syriac text is in vol. 2, here.

The other passage appears in the letters of Severus of Antioch, published in Syriac with English translation by E. W. Brooks in the Patrologia Orientalis 14, p. 270 (of the PDF).  This is online here, and I transcribed the English here long ago.

The two passages seem to be on the same material.  Probably neither actually had a full text of Eusebius before him, but relied on excerpts.

Share

An email from Turkey

Posted on by Roger Pearse

I posted a query on the Hugoye list yesterday about the Seert manuscripts, and whether they might yet be found buried in boxes in the courtyard of the archiepiscopal residence.  Sadly no-one has replied, but I did get a private email from a chap with a Turkish name who has evidently been looking around the region for “art”.  He describes himself as an art historian, which I suspect means art dealer.

He sent me a photograph of a page of something — so badly out of focus that I couldn’t tell what — and asked if it was Syriac, and could I translate it for him (!).  Well, the few letters I could see did indeed look like Syriac.

I’ve asked him for a better image.

Share

The lost manuscripts of Seert – a clue?

Posted on by Roger Pearse

The revival of interest in Syriac before the first world war led to the establishment of the American mission at Urmia, and also transformed some of the clergy in that region of the Turkish Empire into scholars, publishing previously unknown material in western journals.  Foremost among these was Addai Scher, Archbishop of Seert.  He gathered a considerable collection of manuscripts, a few of which he sent to Paris. 

Among his discoveries was a jewel; a Syriac translation of Theodore of Mopsuestia’s De incarnatione.  This work had been lost, but was a critical factor in the disputes in the 5th century.

Everyone knows of the massacres of Armenians by the Turkish forces — mostly Kurds — during WW1.  Less well known are the similar massacres of Syriac-speaking Christians during the same period of 1915.  Addai Scher was dragged out and shot by Turkish irregulars, and most of his library was lost, including De incarnatione.

But I have been reading an article by William Macomber SJ, in which an interesting footnote appears.  It seems that a servant of Dr Scher has told various people that a number of books were buried in cases and leather bags in the courtyard.  Travellers in 1966 confirmed that the courtyard level had risen quite a bit.  The episcopal residence had been turned into a school.

I wonder if anyone has gone and investigated? 

Here are Macomber’s words:

Two apparently independent witnesses, one at ‘Aqra that was interviewed by Jules Leroy, Les manuscrits syriaques a peintures conserves dans les bibliotheques d’Europe et d’Orient (Institut Francais d’Archeologie de Beyrouth, Bibliotheque Archeologique et Historique, t. LXXVII), Paris 1964, p. 212 n. 3, and the other in Beirut, a former servant of Archbishop Scher, whose witness has been related to me by friends in Baghdad, have reported that at least some of the manuscripts of this library were buried in wooden cases and leathern sacks in the courtyard of the residence. The servant indicates the precise location of the burial, before the door of the residence that led into the courtyard. Travellers to Seert (Siirt) report that the Turkish government has turned the residence into a school for children and that the original level of the eourtyard has been considerably raised. Even if the story of the servant be true, therefore, it is quite possible that the hiding place of the manuscripts has already been discovered. Nonetheless, the importance of the coUection was so great, containing, as it did, the only known copy of the De incarnatione of Theodore of Mopsuestia, that it would seem a great pity if steps were not taken to obtain permission from the Turkish authoritiers to excavate the site. The sight of the work of excavation, moreover, might persuade citizens of Seert who may happen to have acquired some of the manuscripts to declare themselves, at least secretly, in the hope of making a profitable sale.

Share

A 7th century Syriac mathematician

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Before the first world war there was a flourishing of interest in Syriac studies among oriental Christians.  Patriarch Aphram I Barsoum wrote in Arabic a patrology of their works, referenced mainly from manuscripts then existing in Eastern libraries.  This was published but inaccessible by reason of language.  However a few years ago the excellent Matti Moosa translated it into English, and it is available from Gorgias Press under the title of The scattered pearls.  For people interested in Syriac, it is a wonderful resource.  I went and bought a copy, which says something.

It seems that a doctoral student really is going to have a go at some of the works of Severus Sebokht.  This made me look up the entry in Barsoum’s work.  It’s quite impressive, and accessible to few.  This is what Barsoum has to say:

94. Severus Sabukht (d. 667)

Severus was a skillful and famous doctor, a mathematician, a philosopher, nay the first scholar of the church who explored the obscurities of astronomical and natural sciences. He was born at Nisibin in the last quarter of the seventh century, became a monk and was educated in the Monastery of Qenneshrin, where he also acquired that knowledge of Greek and Syriac language and literature and of the Persian language, which made him the goal of seekers of knowledge. He was one of the prominent scholars who was graduated from this famous school, in which he also spent his life teaching philosophy, theology and mathematics, besides the writings of all the Syrian scholars. He was most prominent in astronomy and even excelled the Greeks in this field.1 Many pupils studied under him, the most famous of whom were the Patriarch Athanasius II and Jacob of Edessa. In 638, Severus was consecrated a bishop of the city of Qenneshrin, or, as it was said, of his monastery. He died in 667 at an advanced age. He was assigned the twentieth of July (or according to another calendar the eleventh of September) as the festival day of his commemoration. In the latter calendar, he was called “Severus the Mathematician.”

From the writings of Severus, which cover the fields of theology, philosophy and mathematics, very few have come down to us.

Of his theological writings the following survive:

1.  a treatise on the weeks of Daniel;

2.  an extract on the date of the birth of Our Lord in flesh and in what Greek year he was born;

3.  two letters in seven pages to Sergius, abbot of the Monastery of Khanushia in Sinjar, containing a commentary on the two discourses of Gregory Nazianzen on the Son and the Holy Spirit. In these letters, the name of the author (Severus) was ascribed to his native home Nisibin, which misled Chabot, who thought they belonged to a bishop of Nisibin who was Severus’ namesake.2

His philosophical writings are:

4.  a short treatise on the Analytica Posteriora of Aristotle written in 638 of which only three pages remain;3

5.  extracts in three chapters from his treatise on Hermeneutics,

6.  a letter to his friend Jonas the periodeutes (visiting cleric), explaining some points in the Rhetorica of Aristotle;4

    1 Baumstark, p. 246.
    2 See the three folios in the Brit. Mus. MS. 14547, ninth century.
    3 Brit. Mus. MSS. 17156 and 14460. Also, the Chaldean Library in Mosul MS. 35, sixteenth century, and Cambridge MS. 3287, eighteenth century.
    4 Brit. Mus. MS. 17156, Cambridge MS. 2812, nineteenth century, Dayr al-Sayyida MS. 50. 

7.  a treatise he wrote for some of those who love knowledge, explaining some logical points which had been mentioned in his former letter to Jonas to whom he sent a copy of this treatise;

8.  a letter to the priest Ithalaha, who became a bishop of Nineveh on certain terms in the treatise, De Interpretatione and on arithmetic, surveying, astronomy and music, making the remark that he had written to him a year ago, explaining some canons of the saintly fathers and also praising him because he had sent him copies of the letters of Gregory and Basilius.1

Of his astronomical works we have:

9.  a magnificent treatise on the astrolabe in fifty-two pages, translated into French and published by Nau in 1899;2

10.  a treatise on the signs of the Zodiac, which he wrote in the year 659 or 660, of which only eighteen chapters remain. These chapters were published by Sachau in 1870.3 A few samples of these works exist in a manuscript at the British Museum, such as the habitable and inhabitable portions of the earth, the condition of those living in all its sphere—above and below the measurement of the heaven and the earth and the space between them—and whether the sun moves under or over the earth in the celestial sphere. To this treatise he added in the year 665 from nineteen to twenty-seven answers to astronomical, mathematical and cosmographical questions at the request of the periodeutes Basil of Cyprus.4 This is probably the same treatise which Bar Hebraeus alluded to in his book, Ascent of the Mind;

11.  a letter in eighteen pages addressed to the same Basil on the fourteenth of the lunar month of April 556, about fixing the exact date of Easter;5

    1 Brit. Mus. MS. 14660, ninth-tenth centuries, and Mosul MS. 35.
    2 Paris MS. 346 dated 1309 in the handwriting of the priest Yeshu` Kilo; Berlin MS. 186 in the handwriting of the metropolitan Moses of Tyre dated 1556. For the French translation of Sabukht’s treatise on the astrolabe see F. Nau, “Le traite sur l’astrolabe plan de Severe Sabokt,” Journal Asiatique IX serie, t. XIII, 1899: 56-101 and 238-303. (tr.)
    3 Sachau, Inedita Syriaca, 127-134.
    4 Brit. Mus. MS. 14538, tenth century, and Paris MS. 346.
    5 Berlin MS. 186. [The date 556 should be 665. (tr.)]

12.  three letters, also to Basil, on the science of history, contained in the British Museum manuscript;1

13.  he translated from the Persian into Syriac an abridged exposition of Aristotle’s Interpretatione which had been translated from the original Greek to Persian by Paul the Persian for King Khosrau I,2 to which the monk Severus added the fifth treatise of Aristotle on logic;

14. the translation of Ptolemy’s Tetrapillon on the composition of mathematical speech as is confirmed by an established historical tradition.3

Both Wright and Duval, quoting Assemani, who quoted al-Duwayhi, have erroneously ascribed to him a liturgy in the name of Severus of Qenneshrin, which, in fact, belongs to Severus, bishop of Samosata and abbot of Qenneshrin as has been already mentioned.4

    1 Brit. Mus. MS. 17156.
    2 Dayr al-Sayyida MS. 50.
    3 Paris MS. 346.
    4 Wright, A Short History of Syriac Literature, p. 139, citing Assemani B. O., 2: 463. (tr.)
Share

Someone to work on Severus Sebokht?

Posted on by Roger Pearse

The 7th century Syriac father Severus Sebokht has left several scientific and philosophical works behind.  I grew interested in him, enough to acquire a PDF of the main manuscript of his mostly unpublished works, but other things supervened and I never pursued the matter.  There are several unpublished letters in the ms. (BNF Syriac 346), one of which is the earliest mention of what we now call Arabic numbers in the west.  The letter has never been translated, tho.

David Bertaina has posted on the Hugoye list a query about him.  Apparently he has a post-grad. student who read mathematics, and is interested in having a go at his works.  This is very good news, if so, and I have written to encourage him and offer support.

Share

The evil bishop of Amida, Abraham bar Kaili

Posted on by Roger Pearse

My queries about the Chronicle of Zuqnin led me to read the translation of the Third Part of the Chronicle by Witold  Witakowski.  This covers the period from the reign of Anastasius (ca. 500) to the end of the century. 

In the Byzantine empire no political dissent was permitted.  The emperor was absolute, and he made all the decisions.  Dissent was a capital offence.  But a certain amount of religious disagreement was permitted.  Human nature being what it is, this ensured that all the political disagreements of the empire expressed themselves in theological language and debased theology to the service of personal ambition.   Those doing this were mostly Greeks, and they did it in the language of Aristotle.  They also discovered that, while agora-democracy was illegal, they were allowed to get together in church councils and vote each other into exile, much as they had ostracised each other a millenium earlier.

The long disagreements between Alexandria and the rest of the empire came to a head at Chalcedon in 451.  But this merely served to ensure half a century of violent disagreements.  The emperor Zeno had tacitly abandoned the council in his Henotikon, and Anastasius followed him in a policy of supporting the status quo — no Chalcedonians disturbing the peace in monophysite regions, no monophysites doing the same in Chalcedonian regions.  The position was weakened by the fact that Constantinople was Chalcedonian, while the emperor was clearly not.

The succession of Justin, a Chalcedonian, led immediately to persecution of the monophysites, and this continued under Justinian, although the latter’s wife Theodora was a  monophysite and protected them to some extent.  The Chronicle of Zuqnin quotes verbatim from the lost Second Part of the Ecclesiastical History of John of Ephesus, who witnessed what went on.  The story starts in 527 AD, when the Patriarch Ephrem appointed a man named Abraham bar Kaili as bishop of Amida, in the monophysite area.

In Amid a man by the name of Abraham, a cleric of that church, became bishop. He was called Bar Kaili and (although) his family came from Tella he arrived in (Amid) from Antioch. Then Satan possessed him totally, and he devoted himself to violent persecution without mercy, to pillage and the destruction of people’s souls more than his earlier and more recent predecessors. This villain used (all means) including the killing, crucifixion and burning of believers in a barbarous and cruel way, without mercy. Impudently he plotted by every means foul ruses for the destruction of people—tortures, cruel scourging and pernicious confinement in prison, both in the tribunal building and in the deepest pit which was in the prison, into which murderers and others sentenced to death were thrown and where they were executed, after which their bodies were secretly removed and cast in desolate graves, like those of dumb animals.

In order to deceive the Amidenes’ keen ardour for the true faith he pretended to them that he would not preach (the doctrine of) the Council. But during the time of the dux Thomas, a Goth who was the dux at that time, he gave orders to bring and crucify four persons at every single gate. They hung on their crosses till the evening. As next day the commemoration of the blessed Mother of God was to be celebrated outside the northern gate of Amid, the wicked bishop rode out to celebrate it. When he saw the bodies hanging on the crosses he forbade them to be taken down until it was necessary because of the smell of corruption. (Only) then would he let them to be taken down and buried.

Also when he learned that there was an uprising (and the people) were shouting these words, “Behold! the new martyrs by the hand of the Christians have appeared! So why do the Christians blame any longer the pagan judges who did that, when now they themselves, like those, do (the same)”, he tormented men and women because they had stood up against him when he demanded that they should accept the Council of Chalcedon.

And all these things (happened) in our presence and we saw it with our (own) eyes.

First he expelled and ousted (the monks from) all the holy monasteries in the vicinity of the city, and then from the whole country around it. Also he made a list of the quarters, mansions and houses of the city, of men and women, each one by his name. He demanded that they be entered on to the church register and that they receive communion, even babes, and not only those which had been born but also those which had not yet been born. He demanded that the women should be registered so that when they had given birth, they should bring the (babes) to be baptized. If it happened that a new-born child died or (that a babe) was miscarried, unless clergy came to see it, the family of the dead babe which had not been brought to be baptized was in danger. And these evil deeds, that is pillaging and destruction, were done not only in this city but in all the country around it and in the (whole) diocese of Amid.

On the holy martyr Cyrus.

Here is (something) most terrible, grievous and cruel: (the story of) a priest whose name was Cyrus, from the village of Ligin, who was seized and required to receive communion. When he refused, he was brought to the city before the bishop. He violently shouted at him in indignation saying:

“Why do you not receive communion?”

And he answered:

“You make your communion repugnant to me and I cannot partake of it, for communion given by force is not a communion.”

Then (the bishop) swore:

“You will not leave here, but you will take communion.”

(Cyrus also) swore:

“I will never accept the forced communion from you.”

Then the bishop had the Eucharist brought and gave orders to hold the priest, to fill a spoon (with the Eucharist) and to put it into his mouth. (But) as he shut his mouth they could not insert the spoon into it. Then the bishop gave orders to bring a whip, to stick its handle into (the priest’s) mouth and in this way to get the spoon (also) into his mouth. They held his teeth apart (so forcefully) that they were nearly pulled out. With the handle (of the whip) inserted in his mouth he mumbled, not being able to move his tongue nor to speak normally to them. He swore saying:

“By Christ’s truth, if you put the Eucharist into my mouth, I will spit it out upon your faces.”

Thus in bitter wrath and threatening (him) with death they inserted the spoon to one side of the whip and poured the Eucharist into his mouth. But he blew and ejected it from his mouth. Accordingly they called him “the Spitter”.

When Bar Kaili saw what that priest did, he used it as a pretext to kill him which had been his intention (in the first place). As the others perished by his hand so he would cause also (the priest) to perish. Intoxicated with the ferocity and cruelty of Satan, who “was a murderer from the beginning”, he promptly gave orders to carry wood and fire to the tetrapylon (187) in the city and (there) to burn the priest. It was the Wednesday of fasting in Holy Week. So he had the priest put in [the tetrapylon] and wood gathered there from the vicinity. They set him on fire and burned him. (The people of) the city wailed and wept at this horrible and heart-rending sight, as they watched a man burning and dense smoke rising as from dumb and irrational beasts (being burnt). This was a hideous and inhuman deed, which, with all its ferocity, stupidity and obduracy of heart, (only) dumb beasts can inflict on each other. All (the people of) the city were so agitated and shocked at the evil deed of burning that priest in (such) iniquity and wickedness that they thought to burn Bar Kaili, doing to him the same thing that he had displayed by burning that priest. There were (however) some nobles of the city (who) out of fear of the emperor restrained them from doing so. Many people however separated themselves from (Bar Kaili) regarding him as a murderer and a Jew, and they ceased (to receive) communion from him.

(Bar Kaili) being afraid lest the matter become known to the emperor and lest he sentence him to be burnt as he himself had burned (a man), in anticipation he wrote falsely and informed (the emperor) that a certain priest had trampled the Eucharist with his feet, and because of this had been burned. Thus he managed to deceive (the emperor) and to cause the murder to pass (without consequences).

That we have not deviated from the truth, nor misrepresented it in what we have described, the Lord is our witness and all the contemporaries of that wicked and ferocious deed. This evil became known all over the East and West, and everybody was horrified by what was done by people wearing the robes of priesthood but far removed from its virtues.

(187) A monumental gate-like construction with four entrances built in Roman cities on the cross of the main streets. The best example in the East is the Great Tetrapylon in Palmyra (3rd c. A.D.).

Bar Kaili had, of course, no more religion in him than a plank of wood.  He was a hatchet-man, chosen precisely for his lack of conscience and in the knowledge that  his violence would be exercised on the dissenting population, in order to force them to conform.

The wicked bishop is a constant figure down the centuries.  James of Edessa describes such folk very accurately in his damaged Chronicle:

But the bishops who had swerved from [the faith, since] they were [not accepted] by the churches, and they would not endure their [communion], not considering their folly, — — —  — — —  — — — [out of] desire of power made use of worldly authorities and [the sword of tyranny — — — — ] to get possession of churches and sees [and the flock — — — — which] was purchased with the blood of Christ.

It might be supposed that such actions would not happen today.  A look at the accounts of the behaviour of bishops in the Episcopal Church of the USA on VirtueOnline reveals precisely the same behaviour.  In the USA they cannot murder and torture.  But the law allows them to seize churches which they did not build from those who did, expell the congregations, and sell the property for their own profit; and they are doing this all over the USA.  The church is pursuing just such a policy against dissenters now.

Perhaps it is something about episcopacy as an institution.  It is depressing to see, nevertheless.

Share

More from the Chronicle of Zuqnin

Posted on by Roger Pearse

A couple of days ago I wrote a post on this 8th century Syriac world chronicle.  Someone was suggesting that it is one of the earlier Christian referrences to Mohammed, although this looks doubtful.

Part IV, which starts just before the Moslem period, is online with French translation here:

http://books.google.com/books?id=s5UWAAAAIAAJ

although unless you’re in the US, Google show you only the snippet view. p.4-5 of the French mention Mohammed, although this can hardly be an early mention. (p. 51 of the PDF).  Here’s the opening section of part IV of the Chronicle of Zuqnin, from the French of Chabot.  The dates are in Years of the Greeks (Anno Graecorum), but Chabot has added AD to them.

This chronicle begins with the origin of the world and runs until the birth of Abraham and the kingdom of Ninus who founded Nineveh and reigned fifty-two years. But the patriarch Abraham was born in the forty-second year of the reign of Ninus, according to the testimony of Eusebius from whom we have borrowed the materials of this history until the times of the faithful Emperor Constantine.

From that time, until Theodosius the Younger, we followed the Novatian Socrates.

From the Emperor Theodosius to Justinian, that is to say until the year 885 of the Greeks, we have been guided by John, bishop of Asia.

From that time until the year in which we are now, that is to say the year 1086 of Alexander, 158 of the Hegira, we have found no-one who, like the ancient writers, has carefully described the history and the cruel disasters that occurred in the time of our fathers or our own, including the storm of tribulation that we have suffered because of our sins when we were delivered into the hands of the Assyrians and Barbarians.

However, to preserve the memory of those calamitous times and the cruel affliction that the earth has suffered today from the Assyrians – whom the prophet means when he says: “Assyria is the rod of my fury, the stick of my indignation is in their hands, I will send them to a deceiving nation and give them orders affecting the people of my vengeance,”– we have made known the rod, the stick of the Lord, which he has delivered to Assur to punish the earth, and which has even appeared in the sky for several days. Perhaps those who come after us will tremble, will fear the Lord, and walk before him in justice, lest they themselves come as we are into the hands of this rapacious wolf.

It is written: “Tell your son,” and again: “Ask your father and he shall teach you; ask your ancestors and they will tell you.” Now, after we travelled through many countries and did not find an accurate history of events but only the annotation of some particular facts, we formed the plan to unite in order in one book the things we have learned from elderly eyewitnesses or which we have seen ourselves. Whoever finds [this book] and looks with contempt should know that these so various events did not take place in one place or in one kingdom, nor in a single region. If then he meets another chronicle that does not agree with this, let him remember that earlier writers themselves do not agree among themselves, but one minimises, another exaggerates, one writing on ecclesiastical history, another on other topics.

It matters little to wise and God-fearing men [to know] whether an event happened a year or two earlier or later, but it suffices to know the punishments of past generations so as to distance themselves from inequity for fear of attracting the same troubles.

Take care of yourself and fear the Lord your God, lest he send these afflictions on you.

We will begin in the year 898.

Year 898, the emperor Justinian died and Justinian IV reigned with Tiberius Caesar.

Year 901 (589-590), Justinian died and Tiberius reigned alone.

Year 902 (590-591), the holy patriarch of Antioch, Peter, died.

Year 905 (593-594), Tiberius died. He had for successor Maurice, who reigned eight years.

Year 912 (600-601), in the middle of the day there was great darkness: the stars rose and appeared as during the night. They remained around three hours, after which the darkness disappeared and the day shone as before. – This year Maurice died. Another Maurice and Theodosius reigned for twelve years.

Year 914 (602-003), Narses, the general of the Persians, captured Edessa. After entering the city, he had the bishop Severus seized and stoned, who died in his surplice.

Year 915(603-604), holy Athanasius was made patriarch of Antioch.

Year 916 (604•605), Edessa was taken.

Year 923 (611-612), Maurice was put to death with Theodosius, his son, and Phocas reigned eight years.

Year 928 (616-617). The emperor Phocas ordered that all the Jews living under his dominion should receive baptism. He sent the prefect George to Jerusalem and into all of Palestine to constrain them to receive baptism. The latter came down [into the country] and gathered all the Jews of Jerusalem and its environs. The principals among them came into his presence. He challenged them, “Are you the servants of the emperor?” – “Yes”, they replied. He responded, “The lord of the earth has ordered that you should be baptised.” – They kept silent and didn’t reply a word. The prefect demanded of them, “Why don’t you say anything ?” One of the principals among them, named Jonas, replied, “We will consent to do everything that the lord of the earth has ordered ; but the present thing we cannot do, because the time of holy baptism has still not come.” The prefect, hearing these words, went into a violent rage; he got up, struck Jonas in the face, and said to him, “If you are servants, why don’t you obey your master?” Then he ordered them to be baptised and forced them all, willing or not, to receive baptism.

At that time James the Jew, Athanasius, patriarch of Antioch, John, bishop of the Arabs, Simeon, [bishop] of Harran, and Cyriacus [bishop] of Amida, were famous.

Year 932(620-621) The Arabs captured Palestine and [the whole region] as far as the great river Euphrates. The Romans retreated and passed into the eastern region of the Euphrates, of which the Arabs also made themselves masters.

These had as their first king one of them named Mohammed, whom they called the Prophet, because he had diverted them from various religions, had taught the existence of one God, Creator of the Universe and given them laws, when they were addicted to the worship of demons and the worship of idols, especially trees. Because he taught them the unity of God, under his leadership they triumphed over the Romans, and as he gave them laws according to their desires, they called him Prophet and Messenger of God also. The people were very sensual and carnal. They despised and rejected any legislation that did not aim at the satisfaction of their desires, that they had been given by either Mohammad or any other God-fearing man, but they received ones that were to the satisfaction of their will and their desires, even when it was imposed upon them by the vilest of them. They said: “It has been established by the Prophet and Messenger of God,” and even “So God commanded him. ”

Mohammed governed them for seven years.

Year 933 (621-622), the emperor of the Romans, Phocas, died, and Heraclius reigned in his place for thirty-one years.

Year 934 (622-623), Mar Cyriacus, bishop of Amida, died, he had Mar Thomas for successor.

Year 937 (625-626), the stars of the sky spun about and headed northwards, like ????. They gave the Romans a terrible omen of defeat and the invasion of their lands by the Arabs, which in fact came about very shortly afterwards, and without delay.

Year 938 (626-627), the king of the Arabs died, i.e. their prophet, Mohammed, and Abubekr reigned over them for five years.

Year 940 (628), the emperor of the Romans, Heraclius, began to construct the great church of Amida.

Share