Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies (volume 20): 2017 9781463239978

Citation preview

HUGOYE JOURNAL OF SYRIAC STUDIES A Publication of Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute

Volume 20 2017

HUGOYE JOURNAL OF SYRIAC STUDIES A Publication of Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute GENERAL EDITOR George Anton Kiraz, Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute / Gorgias Press EDITORIAL COMMITTEE Adam Becker, New York University Sebastian P. Brock, University of Oxford Aaron Michael Butts, The Catholic University of America Jeff W. Childers, Abilene Christian University Muriel Debie, CNRS Paris Sidney Griffith, The Catholic University of America Amir Harrak, University of Toronto Susan Harvey, Brown University Mor Gregorios Y. Ibrahim, Mardin-Edessa Publishing House Andreas Juckel, University of Münster Hubert Kaufhold, Oriens Christianus Robert Kitchen, Knox-Metropolitan United Church Kathleen McVey, Princeton Theological Seminary Heleen Murre-van den Berg, Leiden University Wido T Van Peursen, The Peshitta Institute of Leiden University Lucas Van Rompay, Duke University Alison Salvesen, University of Oxford Hidemi Takahashi, University of Tokyo Jack Tannous, Princeton University BOOK REVIEW EDITOR Ute Possekel, Harvard Divinity School CONFERENCE REPORT EDITOR Jeanne-Nicole Saint-Laurent, Marquette University ASSISTANT EDITOR J. Edward Walters, Rochester College

HUGOYE: JOURNAL OF SYRIAC STUDIES (ISSN 1937-318X) Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies is a publication of BETH MARDUTHO: THE SYRIAC INSTITUTE. Copyright © 2017 by GORGIAS PRESS and BETH MARDUTHO: THE SYRIAC INSTITUTE. The Syriac word hugoye, plural of hugoyo, derives from the root hg
‘to think, meditate, study’; hence, hugoyo ‘study, meditation’. Recently, hugoye has been used for ‘academic studies’; hence, hugoye suryoye ‘Syriac Studies’. SUBSCRIPTIONS Subscription requests should be addressed to Gorgias Press, 954 River Road, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA. Subscriptions may be made online at http://www.gorgiaspress.com. Back issues are available. NOTE FOR CONTRIBUTORS Submission guidelines and instructions are found on the Hugoye web site at http://www.bethmardutho.org. NOTE TO PUBLISHERS Copies for review should be sent directly to the Book Review Editor at the following address: Ute Possekel, Hugoye Book Review Editor, Gordon College, Department of History, 255 Grapevine Road, Wenham, MA 01984. ADVERTISEMENTS Rates: $250 full page; includes a listing in all e-mail announcements for one year. To place ads, write to the subscription address above.

The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials.

TABLE OF CONTENTS HUGOYE 20.1 In Memoriam Mgr. Petros Yousif ................................................................................... 3 Alain Desreumaux Papers Patriarch Severos’ Letter on His Flight from Antioch in 518......... 25 Sebastian P. Brock New Textual Evidence for Jacob of Serugh’s Letters: An Analysis and Collation of Five Monastic Miscellanies ..................................... 51 Philip Michael Forness Date and Provenance of the Syriac Cave of Treasures: A Reappraisal............................................................................................. 129 Sergey Minov Ninth Century Syriac Exegete and Apologist: Moshe bar Kepha’s Commentary on Luke.......................................................................... 231 Abdul-Massih Saadi Bibliographies ....................................................................................... 257 Book Reviews ....................................................................................... 333

v

vi

Table of Contents

HUGOYE 20.2 Papers A Vernacular Aramaic Statement from the 10th Century History of Mosul by al-Azdī .................................................................................... 365 Amir Harrak Catalogues and the Poetics of Syriac Manuscript Cultures ........... 375 Kristian S. Heal Field Notes on Syriac Manuscripts I: Two Medical Manuscripts Digitized by the Hill Museum & Manuscript Library .................... 419 Grigory Kessel Bibliographies ....................................................................................... 435 Book Reviews ....................................................................................... 489

Volume 20 2017

Number 1

HUGOYE JOURNAL OF SYRIAC STUDIES A Publication of Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute

Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies, Vol. 20.1, 3-23 © 2017 by Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute and Gorgias Press

MGR. PETROS YOUSIF (4 JULY 1936 – 17 DECEMBER 2015) FROM KAREMLESH TO PARIS ALAIN DESREUMAUX SARCELLES, FRANCE

Photo credit: Mar-Thomas Parish at Sarcelles 3

4

In Memoriam: Petros Yousif

Last December marked the one year anniversary of the passing of Mgr. Petros Yousif at the age of seventy-nine. Following the tradition of his people, the Syriac community celebrates this annual anniversary, and it seems appropriate for the Hugoye community to join in this renewed commemoration. Petros Yousif was born in Karemlesh, near Mosul, on 4 July 1936, in a family of four children. His childhood was split between parish life and study, in which he showed his talent from an early age. Considering his entire career, it is fair to say that these two poles of activity dominated his life, fully dedicated to his Church, which he served with his study and his knowledge. In 1949, at the age of thirteen, he entered the Junior Seminary in Mosul, followed in 1953, at the age of seventeen, by his ecclesiastical studies in the Major Seminary in Rome, where he obtained the licentiate in philosophy at the Urbaniana University with the mention summa cum laude. He was ordained a priest in Rome on 22 December 1960. He continued his studies in Rome and obtained in 1961 the degree in Mariology at the Theological Faculty Marianum, again summa cum laude, and one year later, in 1962, the doctor’s degree in Liturgical Theology at the Urbaniana University, with the mention magna cum laude. With his scholarly training thus completed in Rome, his pastoral ministry subsequently came to fruition in the two countries where his people needed him: his native country of Iraq, the homeland of the Chaldean heritage, which he never ceased to serve and to make known, and then France, where a great number of his Chaldean brothers and sisters found refuge. Until the end of his life he maintained this double commitment, lived and treasured in light of his Roman education, which he enriched through additional training in Paris. It is truly remarkable how he always worked both as a pastor and as a scholar and teacher. He carried out the first part of his pastoral ministry in Iraq, first as the priest of the Chaldean Cathedral of Saint Meskinta in Mosul, with additional tasks as the Archbishop’s secretary,

In Memoriam: Petros Yousif

5

between 1963 and 1970, and as the spiritual director of the Chaldean Sisters of the Sacred Heart of Jesus in Mosul, from 1967 to 1973. At the same time he taught in French at the Major Seminary of St. John in Mosul (run by the Dominican Fathers) courses in liturgy and later in dogmatic theology. In addition, from 1968 to 1970 he taught upper-level French at the University of Mosul. The last three years of his Iraqi ministry, from 1970 to 1973, he worked as the priest of the new Chaldean parish of Saint Ephrem in Mosul. He was forced to leave Iraq apparently for reasons related to the regime of Saddam Hussein, even though he reacted with utter dismay when the latter was killed in atrocious circumstances. The second part of his pastoral ministry was dedicated to the Chaldean community in France, particularly in the Paris region where numerous Chaldean families from Turkey and Iraq found a new home. He first began, however, with a period of substantial university training in Paris. Between 1973 and 1985, when he was the chaplain of the community of Sisters of Our Lady of Sion in Grandbourg (Essone Department) as well as the chaplain and responsible for the training of catechists at the high school of Our Lady of Sion in Évry, he obtained, in 1974, the upper-level certificate for teaching French as a foreign language from the “Institut des professeurs de français à l’étranger” of the “Sorbonne Nouvelle” University in Paris, specializing in French language and civilization. In 1977, after having taken classes for two years as an “auditeur”, he was admitted as an “élève titulaire” in the Religious studies program of the “École pratique des hautes études, Ve Section (Sciences religieuses)”. At the same time, in 1977, he graduated with a degree in Biblical languages from the “Institut catholique” in Paris, including Aramaic, Biblical Hebrew, Biblical Greek, and Syriac, followed by an upper-level degree in Biblical studies from the same institution in 1978 (with the mention “Très Bien”). Finally, in 1979, he submitted his doctoral dissertation (3e cycle) in Catholic theology at the

6

In Memoriam: Petros Yousif

Catholic Theological Faculty of Strasbourg (with the mention “Très Bien”). Starting in 1981, Mgr. Yousif devoted himself to teaching in institutions of higher education. In 1981 he was appointed professor of Chaldean liturgy at the Pontifical Oriental Institute in Rome, where he taught in Italian and conducted a research seminar. In addition, he was invited to teach summer courses in English, at the Pontifical Institute of Catechesis in New York (1984 and 1985, on the Fathers of the East-Syriac Church) and at the Pontifical Oriental Institute of the SyroMalabar Christians in Vadavathoor, Kerala (1986, on the Eastern mystagogical catecheses and on the liturgical spirituality of the Church of the East, in particular Narsai). The second period of his pastoral ministry began in September 1987, when His Beatitude Raphael Bidawid appointed Mgr. Yousif to serve the Chaldean community of France in the capacity as Patriarchal Vicar for the Chaldeans in France, Rector of the Chaldean Mission in France, and parish priest of the church “Notre-Dame de Chaldée” in Paris. He took up residence in the Rue Pajol, near the North station, in a popular neighborhood with many migrant families from various countries of Africa and Asia – a neighborhood which recently has seen a large influx of homeless refugees. Neighboring a Hindu temple for Ganesh as well as a mosque, the Chaldean center includes a large space for the church. Mgr. Yousif himself oversaw the construction of the church “NotreDame de Chaldée,” making sure that the layout would meet the essential requirements of the Chaldean liturgy, in particular regarding the placement of the Bema. He was very proud of it. The premises also include parish spaces for living, administration, and meetings. Mgr. Yousif established a library devoted to the intellectual and spiritual heritage of the Syriac Churches, with liturgy very well represented. The library aims to be of interest to all the Syriac Churches and has publications in many different languages: Syriac, Sureth, Arabic, Latin, French, Italian, English, and Russian.

In Memoriam: Petros Yousif

7

Along with the pastoral tasks entrusted to him, Mgr. Yousif pursued his scholarly work in the service of the heritage of the East-Syriac Church and in particular of the Chaldean and Malabar liturgy. His publications are an eloquent testimony to his interest in the Syriac Fathers in general and to the importance he attached to making known in periodicals and encyclopedias the works of numerous authors, mainly authors and saintly figures of the East-Syriac tradition, primarily in order to highlight the significance of the Chaldean spirituality. Mgr. Yousif’s special expertise in the field of liturgy, which developed throughout his life, was put to the service of his Church. Starting in 1981, he was a consulting member of the special liturgical committee of the Roman Congregation for the Oriental Churches. Very appropriately he was appointed a member of the Chaldean liturgical committee in 1991, and later the chairman of the liturgical committee for the Syro-Malabar mass in Syriac. It is in the framework of these activities that he oversaw the publications of liturgical books, the Syro-Malabar Mass (2003 and 2008), the Chaldean Breviary (2007), and the Chaldean Missal (2007). In France he taught liturgy as professor of Eastern liturgies at the Institut catholique in Paris from 1992 to 2000. In his capacity as pastor, teacher, and scholar, Mgr. Yousif was extremely well qualified to represent the Chaldean Church in the dialogue and consultation with the other Churches. He took part in several sessions of the “Syriac Dialogue,” organized by Pro Oriente in Vienna and he participated as an expert member at the Synod of the Chaldean Church in Beirut in 1996 and in Rome in 2005. The theoretical and practical work of Mgr. Yousif is highly significant. Along with his specialized academic contributions, many of his translations and articles, in Arabic and in French, aim at a much wider audience. In his work on the East-Syriac liturgy, he always wanted to bring together the Chaldean and the Syro-Malabar rites and regularly collaborated with scholars from Kerala. Closely following the stream of scholarship in very detailed bibliographical surveys of the rite of the Church

8

In Memoriam: Petros Yousif

of the East (1983, 2006 and 2007 in Italian, 1990 in English – of which he was preparing an updated and expanded edition until shortly before his death), the liturgical foci of his research included the Mass (1984, 1993, 1995, 2001, 2006), the Anaphora (1993), the Eucharist (1977, 1980) and the Sacrament of Marriage (1986, 2003). Liturgical research topics obviously were very dear to him, as he returned to them several times, examining them in parallel in the texts of Ephrem: the Virgin Mary (1980, 1982, 1989), Christ (1996)  Christology (1997), the Economy of Salvation (1989), the Blood of Christ (1984, 1989)  and liturgical spirituality (1986, 1989). Already during his first pastoral period in Mosul, he had his heart set on explaining, in local Arabic periodicals, the date of Easter (1965), the Confession (1968), the Chaldean Mass (1970, 1995), the Anaphora of the Apostles (1996 in Japanese). His dissertation submitted in Strasbourg resulted in the publication of an important volume in the series “Orientalia Christiana Analecta” in 1984, L’eucharistie chez saint Éphrem, which has become a work of reference and of which the title nicely indicates the two major themes of Mgr. Yousif’s scholarly engagement: the theological thought of Mar Ephrem, on the one hand, and the liturgy, on the other. Of Mar Ephrem Mgr. Yousif strongly emphasized the theological depth. In addition, in this monograph as well as in two dozen research articles and half a dozen publications for a wider audience he highlighted Ephremian concepts that illuminate our reading of the deacon of Nisibis: his biblical typology and his exegesis (1976, 1980, 1982, 1986, 1988, 1990), the significance of the relationship between symbol and reality (1976, 1989), between Bible and nature (1978), the Christological expression in the liturgy (1977, 1979, 1981, 1987), divine grace and human freewill (1980), the theological controversies and apologetics (1980), history and eschatology (1982, 1984, 1985), the place of reason vs. faith (1983, 1985, 1986), the Virgin Mary (1980, 1982, 1985, 1989, 2005), the Eucharist (1980, 1982), Saint Thomas (1985), and sacrifice (1989).

In Memoriam: Petros Yousif

9

In his threefold life as pastor, teacher, and scholar, Mgr. Yousif did not spare himself. His health declined. The sad events in Iraq greatly affected him. When in 2008 France welcomed 500 Iraqi refugees, all of those living in shelters in the Paris region came almost every Sunday to “Notre-Dame de Chaldée” and they received assistance in every possible way. Mgr. Yousif gave them much of his time, and he allowed meetings to be held, and later French language courses to be taught, in the building of Rue Pajol. No one was ever sent away without help, and a sister from the community of Our Lady of Sion had to remind him that he needed to take the time to eat and to take rest. The death of Bishop Raho, whom he knew, and around the same time the death of a young Iraqi priest whom he had tutored in Rome, were very painful to him, but he kept his peace of mind. The concerns and anxieties of the different communities of Paris, in the suburbs and in the country side, in their diversity of origin and language, and with the complicated problems of their integration into French society, and the resulting internal social and political tensions did not spare him either. It is worth remembering the public homage that was paid to him at his funeral by one of the notables of Sarcelles: “In his capacity as pastor of the Chaldean community of Îlede-France for the last 28 years, he has given himself without reserve. All those who met him have a sweet memory of him. A man of God and a man of peace, who succeeded in keeping harmony and peace in the community. He was humble and unpretentious with people in all stations of life. He was grateful to God for this beautiful community until the last week of his life, when he regularly inquired after his faithful. His last piece of advice was to keep love and peace within this community.” From Karemlesh to Paris, by way of Rome, Mgr. Petros Yousif committed himself to being a servant of the Gospel in abiding faithfulness to the great East-Syriac tradition, which he has honored in his writings, made known in several languages, and celebrated in Iraq and in the West. This rich spiritual

10

In Memoriam: Petros Yousif

tradition will continue to nourish his Church and to guide it wherever it finds itself in a world that often fails to respect its children. (Translated from French by L. Van Rompay) BIBLIOGRAPHY OF PETROS YOUSIF Monographs 1984 1990 1990

L’eucharistie chez saint Éphrem de Nisibe (Orientalia Christiana Analecta 224), Roma, Pontificio Istituto Orientale, 1984. East Syrian Spirituality (Spirituality series 001), Roma, Center for Indian and Interreligious Studies, Bangalore, Dharmaram publ., 1990. A Classified Bibliography on the East Syrian Liturgy. La bibliographie classifiée de la liturgie syrienne orientale (in collaboration with P. Kannookadan), Roma, Mar Thoma Yogam, 1990.

Articles and Studies 1964

“Al-Mujizat ḥaqīqat am ša
waḍat ?” (Miracle, truth or prestidigitation?), Al-Fikr al-Massiḥī, La Pensée chrétienne, Mossoul-Baghdad, no 7, p. 16.

1965

“Tawḥīd īd al-Qiyāmah” (On the unification of the date of Easter), Al-Fikr al-Massiḥī, La Pensée chrétienne, Mossoul-Baghdad, no 15, p. 5-9.

1968

“Sirr al-Itirāf” (The sacrament of confession), Al-Fikr al-Massiḥī, La Pensée chrétienne, Mossoul-Baghdad, no 46, p. 20.

1970

“Al-Quddās al-Kaldānīy” (The Chaldean Mass), AlFikr al-Massiḥī, La Pensée chrétienne, Mossoul-Baghdad, no 60, p. 11-20.

1973

in collaboration with Faris al-Jarrah, “Arabic articles in Brief,” Bain al-Nahrain 1, p. 3-7.

In Memoriam: Petros Yousif

11

1976

“La Croix de Jésus et le Paradis d’Éden dans la typologie biblique de saint Éphrem,” Parole de l’Orient 6-7, 1975-1976, p. 29-48.

1976

art. “Danbo, Gibraïl (Gabriel),” in G. Pelliccia (ed.), Dizionnario Enciclopedico degli Istituti di Perfezione, vol. III, col. 383-384.

1976

“Al-Ramz wal-Wāqi fi Fikr mār Aphrām” (Symbol and reality in the thought of Mar Ephrem), Bain al-Nahrain 4, p. 165-170; 345-348.

1976

“'Al-Ābā’ as-Sūryān' fī Mu’tamar Oxford as-Sābi lidirāsāt ābā’ al-Kanīsat” (“The Syriac Fathers at the Seventh International Conference of Patristic Studies”), Bulletin of Syriac Academy 1, 1973, p. 333-344.

1977

“L’eucharistie et le Saint-Esprit d’après saint Éphrem de Nisibe,” in R. H. Fischer (ed.), A Tribute to Arthur Vööbus, Chicago, p. 235-246.

1977

“Al-Nadwa al-Tānīyah lil-dirāsāt as-sūriānīyah” (The second Symposium Syriacum), Bain al-Nahrain 5, p. 123-128.

1977

“Tatianos” (Tatien), Journal of the Syriac Academy 3, 1977, p. 147-164.

1978

“Symbolisme christologique dans la Bible et dans la nature chez saint Éphrem de Nisibe (De Virginitate 811 et les textes parallèles”), Parole de l’Orient 8, 19771978, p. 5-66.

1978

“Saint Ephrem on Symbols in Nature: Faith, the Trinity and the Cross (Hymns on Faith no 18),” Eastern Churches Review 10, p. 52-60.

1978

“Le symbolisme de la Croix dans la Nature chez saint Éphrem de Nisibe,” in Symposium Syriacum 1976, célébré du 13 au 17 Septembre 1976 au Centre Culturel “Les Fontaines” de Chantilly. Communications (OCA 205), Roma, Pontificio Istituto Orientale, p. 207-227.

12

In Memoriam: Petros Yousif

1979-1981 “Anāšīd fī Asrār Rabbinā l-Mār Aphrām. Madārīš al-Batūlīyah 8-11” (Hymns on the Mysteries of our Lord of Mar Éphrem: De Virginitate 8-11), Bain alNahrain 7, 1979, p. 163-181; 275-282; 9, 1981, p. 71-77. 1980

“La Vierge Marie et l’eucharistie chez saint Éphrem de Nisibe et dans la patristique syriaque antérieure,” in Marie et l’Eucharistie (Études mariales. Bulletin de la Société française d’études mariales 36-37), 1979-1980, p. 49-80.

1980

“Le repas fraternel ou l’agapê dans les memre sur la table attribués à saint Éphrem,” Parole de l’Orient 9, 1979-1980, p. 51-66.

1980

“Mār Aphrām aš-šāriḥ” (Mar Ephrem exegete), Journal of Iraqi Academy, Syriac Corporation V, Baghdad 19791980, p. 119-161.

1980

“Al-Ḥurrīyah al-Bašarīyah hasb mār Aphrām” (Human freewill according to Mar Ephrem), Qala Suryaya 23, 24, 25, août 1979 - avril 1980, p. 22-41.

1980

“Ormizda, Santo,” G. Pellicia and G. Rocca (eds.), Dizionnario Enciclopedico degli Istituti di Perfezione, vol. VI, col. 829-830.

1980

“Les controverses de saint Éphrem et l’eucharistie,” Euntes Docete 33, p. 405-426.

1981

Bibliografia della Messa Caldea, pro manuscripto, 22 p.

1982

“Histoire et temps dans la pensée de saint Éphrem de Nisibe,” Parole de l’Orient 10, 1981-1982, p. 3-35.

1982

Bibliografia sulla Messa Caldea, pro manuscripto, Roma, Pontificio Istituto Orientale, 1981-1982, 21 p.

1982

“Marie Mère du Christ dans la liturgie chaldéenne,” Marie dans la prière de l’Église. (Études mariales 39), p. 5785.

In Memoriam: Petros Yousif

13

1982

“Typologie und Eucharistie bei Ephräm dem Syrer und Thomas von Aquin,” in Margot Schmidt and Carl Friedrich Geyer (eds.), Typus, Symbol, Allegorie bei den östlichen Vätern und ihren Parallelen im Mittelalter (Eichstätter Beiträge 4), Regensburg, p. 75-107.

1983

“Approach to the Divine Realities in the thought of S. Ephrem of Nisibis,” in J. Madey and G. Kaniarakath, The Church I love. A Tribute to Rev. Placid J. Podipara, Kottayam, Ecumenical Biblical and Oriental Study Centre, p. 54-69.

1983

Bibliografia sulla Preghiera Liturgica del Rito Caldeo e Malabarese, Roma, Pontificio Istituto Orientale, 198219831, 39 p.; 20072, 53 p.

1983

Appunti sui Sacramenti, Roma, Pontificio Istituto Orientale, 19831; 2001-20022.

1984

“The Divine Liturgy according to the Rite of the Assyro-Chaldean Church,” in John Madey, The Eucharistic Liturgy in the Christian East, Paderborn, p. 175-237.

1984

“Il Sangue di Cristo e il Sangue dei Martiri nella Preghiera del Rito Caldeo,” F. Vattione (ed.), Atti della IV Settimana Sangue e Antropologia nella Liturgia 3, Roma, p. 1401-1418.

1984

“Esquisse sur le temps et les fins dernières chez saint Éphrem de Nisibe,” Euntes Docete 37, p. 403-426.

1985

“Foi et raison dans l’apologétique de saint Éphrem de Nisibe,” Parole de l’Orient 12, 1984-1985, p. 133-151.

1985

“Euntes, docete omnes gentes, baptizantes eos in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti (Mt 28, 19) nello Scholion di Teodoro Bar Koni (fine VIII sec.),” Portare Cristo all’Uomo. I. Dialogo (coll. Studia Urbaniana 22), Roma, Pontificia Università Urbaniana, 1985, p. 473489.

14

In Memoriam: Petros Yousif

1985

“Marie et les derniers temps chez saint Éphrem de Nisibe,” Marie et la fin des temps. II. Approche patristique (Études mariales 42), 1985, p. 29-55.

1986

“La célébration du mariage dans le rite chaldéen,” La celebrazione cristiana del Matrimonio: Simboli e Testi. Atti del IIo Congresso Internazionale di Liturgia. Roma, 27-31 Maggio, 1985 (Studia Anselmiana 93), Roma, 1986, p. 217-259.

1986

“Spiritualità della Liturgia Eucaristica nella Tradizione Caldea,” La Spiritualità delle Chiese Cristiane Orientali (Collana CBE 3), Roma, Centro Pro Unione, 1986, p. 77-89.

1986

“La version arabe de la troisième Démonstration d’Aphrahat sur le jeûne,” texte établi par Samir Khalil Samir; étude et traduction de Petros Yousif, in Actes du IIe Congrès International d’Études Arabes Chrétiennes (OCA 226), Roma, 1986, p. 31-66.

1986

“Il Patrimonio Culturale Greco secondo Taziano,” in M. Pazan and U. Cozzoli (eds.), L’eredità Classica nelle lingue Orientali (Acta Encyclopedica 5), Roma, 1986, p. 73-95.

1986

“Exégèse et typologie biblique chez saint Éphrem de Nisibe et chez saint Thomas d’Aquin,” Parole de l’Orient 13, 1986, p. 31-50.

1986

“Al-Īmān walAql hasb mār Aphrām” (Faith and Reason according to Mar Ephrem), Al-Liqa’ (Communio) 1, 1986, p. 52-61.

1987

“The Apostle Thomas on the Witness of St Ephrem of Nisibis,” in Ch. Payngott (ed.), Homage to Mar Cariattil Pioneer Malabar Ecumenist, Roma, 1987, p. 72-88.

1987

“Al-Tarājim al-Sūryānīyah lil-Kitāb al-Muqaddas” (The Arabic versions of the Bible), Al-Liqa’ 1, 1987, p. 5361.

In Memoriam: Petros Yousif

15

1987

“Il sangue del Costato del Salvatore in Sant’ Efrem di Nisibi,” Atti della V Settimana di Studi ‘Sangue e Antropologia: Riti e Culto’,” Roma, 1987, p. 985-1007.

1988

“Les formes littéraires du Commentaire du Diatessaron de saint Éphrem de Nisibe,” in H. J. W. Drijvers, R. Lavenant S.I., C. Molenberg and G. J. Reinink (eds.), IV Symposium Syriacum 1984. Literary Genres in Syriac Literature. Groningen-Oosterhesselen 10-12 Sept. (OCA 229), 1988, p. 83-92.

1988

art. “Sant’Ormizda. Congregazione Caldea di Ordo Antonianus S. Hormizdae Chaldaeorum. Al-Rahbanah al-Hurmizdiyyah hasb Qanun Mar Antonios,” Dizionnario Enciclopedico degli Istituti di Perfezione, vol. VIII, 1988, col. 931-933.

1988

“East Syrian Spirituality. Basic Elements and Orientations,” X. Koodapuzha (ed.), Oriental Churches. Theological Dimensions. International Theological Conference of the Catholic Oriental Churches (OIRSI Publication 114), Kottayam, p. 112-153.

1989

“Le sacrifice et l’offrande chez saint Éphrem de Nisibe,” Parole de l’Orient 15, 1988-1989, p. 21-40.

1989

“Marie et l’Économie divine dans l’Office chaldéen du mercredi: préliminaires liturgiques chaldéens,” L’histoire des croyants, mémoire vivante des hommes. Mélanges Charles Molette, Abbeville, 1989, p. 829-839.

1989

“La Vierge Marie et le disciple bien-aimé chez saint Éphrem de Nisibe,” OCP 55, 1989, p. 283-316.

1989

“Il Sangue eucaristico di Cristo: Simbolismo e Realismo secondo Sant’Efrem di Nisibi,” Atti della VI settimana di Studi ‘Sangue e Antropologia nella Teologia’, Roma 23-28 novembre 1987, Roma, 1989, p. 175-205.

16

In Memoriam: Petros Yousif

1989

“La presenza di Maria nelle liturgie: i Caldei o SiroOrientali: una Chiesa di Grandi evangelizzatori,” Madre de Dio, marzo 1989, p. 15-17.

1990

art. “Aphram (Mar),” in Encyclopaedia of Syriac Literature I, Baghdad, 1990, p. 161-168.

1990

“Traduzioni siriache di Teodoro di Mopsuestia,” in G. Fiaccadori (ed.), Autori Classici in lingue del Vicino e Medio Oriente, Roma, 1990, p. 141-162.

1990

“Exegetical Principles of St Ephraem of Nisibis,” in E. A. Livingstone (ed.), Studia Patristica XVIII.4, Kalamazoo-Leuven, 1990, p. 296-302.

1993

“Le lieu de la célébration de la Parole dans la liturgie chaldéenne,” Chronique d’Art Sacré 34, été 1993, p. 6-10. Reprinted in Célébrer 369, 2009, p. 44-47.

1993

“The Anaphora of Mar Theodore: East Syrian, Further Evidences,” in E. Carr et al. (eds.), Eulogema. Studies in honour of Robert Taft (Studia Anselmiana 110), Roma, 1993, p. 571-591.

1995

“Le déroulement de la messe chaldéenne,” in A. M Triacca and A. Pistoia (eds.), L’eucharistie: célébrations, rites, piétés. Conférences Saint-Serge, 41e Semaine d’études liturgiques, Paris 28 juin – 1er juillet 1994 (Ephemerides Liturgicae, Subsidia 79), Roma, Edizioni Liturgiche, 1995, p. 381-425.

1996

“Christus in der liturgischen Tradition der Kirche des Ostens” (trad. par Dietmar W. Winkler), Heiliger Dienst 4, 1996, p. 241-253.

1996

“Saint Joseph dans la piété des Chaldéens,” Cahiers de l’Oratoire de Saint-Joseph 1, Montréal, 1996, p. 83-97.

1996

“The Anaphora of the Apostles” (in Japanese), New Catholic Encyclopedia 1, Tokyo, 1996, p. 102-103.

In Memoriam: Petros Yousif

17

1997

“East Syrian Liturgy as an expression of christology. Christ in the liturgical tradition of the Church of the East,” Syriac Dialogue 2, Wien, Pro Oriente, 1997, p. 173-185.

1997

art. “Efrem di Nisibi,” in M. A. Triacca (ed.), Dizionario di Omeletica, Bergamo, Elledici, p. 429a-432b.

1997

“The Syriac Cultural Heritage: its Importance and Relevance,” in A. G. Kollamparampil and J. Perumthottam (eds.), Bride at the Feet of the Bridegroom: Studies in East Syrian Liturgical Law. A Tribute to Archbishop Mar Joseph Powathil (Catholic Theological Studies of India 1), Changanassery, 1997, p. 47-66.

1998

articles (in Japanese) in New Catholic Encyclopedia 2, Tokyo, 1998: “Chaldean United Church,” p. 32-33; “Chaldean Church,” p. 33-35; “Propagation of Chaldean Church,” 35-36.

2000

articles in E. G. Farrugia (ed.), Dizionario Enciclopedico dell’Oriente Cristiano (DEOC), Roma, Pontificio Istituto Orientale, 2000: “Abraham bar Lipah Qatraya,” p. 4; “Abraham di Natpar,” p. 5; “Addai,” p. 9; “Addai (Didascalia),” p. 9; “Addai (Doctrina),” p. 10; “Addai et Mari. Anafora di,” p. 10; “Afraate,” p. 12; ”Cirillona,” p. 160-161; “Ciro di Edessa,” p. 161; “Efrem di Nisibi,” p. 264-266; “Elia III Abu Halim,” p. 266-267; “Emmanuel bar Shahhare,” p. 268-269; “Gabriele Qatraya,” p. 325; “Giorgio di Arbela, Pseudo,” p. 341; “Giovanni di Dalyatha,” p. 347; “Giuseppe Hazzaya,” p. 354; “Hudra,” p. 374-375; “Isacco di Ninive,” p. 395-396; “Isho bar Ali,” p. 398399; “Isho’dnah di Bassora,” p. 399; “Isho’yahb I di Arzun,” p. 399-400; “Isho’yahb II di Gdala,” p. 400; “Isho’yahb III di Adiabene, o il Grande,” p. 400-401; “Khayyat Abdisho,” p. 411; “Scher, Addai,” p. 673674.

18

In Memoriam: Petros Yousif

2001

“Parole et Silence chez saint Éphrem de Nisibe,” La Maison Dieu 226, 2001, p. 95-114.

2001

“The Divine Liturgy according to the rite of the Assyro-Chaldean Church,” Journal of Assyrian Academic Studies 15.2, 2001, p. 5-32.

2003

The Sacrament of Marriage in the tradition of the Church of the East,” Syriac Dialogue (Pro Oriente Wien) 5, 2003, p. 40-56.

2003

“Al-Tarājim al-Sūryanīyah lil-Kitāb al-Muqaddas” (The Syriac Translations of the Bible), Bain al-Nahrain 121122, p. 108-136.

2003

“Remembering Fr Joseph Habbi (1938-2000). A Biobibliographical Report,” OCP 69, 2003.

2005

art. “Syriaques (Versions). Bibliographie 1955-2000,” in Dictionnaire de la Bible. Supplément t. XIII, 2005, col. 828-875.

2005

“La Bellezza di Maria cantata da Efrem di Nisibi,” Theotokos: Ricerche interdisciplinari di Mariologia 13, 2005, p. 147-194.

2006

Appunti sulla Messa Caldea, 11e révision, Roma, Pontificio Istituto Orientale, 2006, 90 p.

2006

“Le déroulement de la messe chaldéenne,” in F. Cassingena and I. Jurazs, Les liturgies syriaques (Études syriaques 3), Paris, Geuthner, 2006, p. 59-99.

Liturgical editions 2003 2002 2007

Order of the Mysteries according to the use of the East Syrians of Malabar. Editio typica, préparée par P. Yousif and Charles Payngott, Roma, 2003. Breviarium iuxta ritum syrorum orientalium id est chaldaeorum, Roma, 2002. Missel chaldéen (en collaboration avec Mgrs S. Jammo and J. Isaac), 2007.

In Memoriam: Petros Yousif

2008

19

Order of the Holy Qurbana. Editio typica della Messa siromalabarese (Commissione liturgica della Congregazione Orientale), P. Yousif (dir.).

Translations 1961

Cantus Missae SS. “Apostolorum” juxta ritum Chaldaeorum transcripsit P. Youssif, Roma, Pontificio Istituto Orientale, 24 p.

1973

“Mā Baina al-Nahrain: 1. al- Uṣūr al-Qadīmat” (Mesopotamia. 1. The ancient periods), Bain al-Nahrain 1, 1973, p. 103-108; 191-200. traduction en arabe de l’article de H. G. Guteberk, “Mesopotamia,” in Encyclopedia Britannica, vol. 15, 1966, p. 203-205.

1973

“Mā Bain al-Nahrain: 1. al-ḥiqbat al-sasanīyat” (Mesopotamia. 1. The Sassanid period), Bain al-Nahrain 1, 1973, p. 333-344. traduction en arabe de l’article de H. G. Guteberk, “Mesopotamia,” in Encyclopedia Britannica, vol. 15, 1966, p. 206-208.

1989

Rituel du Mystère du saint Baptême selon la tradition de l’Église d’Orient (Assyrienne, chaldéenne, malabare) en collaboration avec Claude Robert, Mossul, 19671, Paris 19892.

1995

“The Order of the Sacrament of Marriage according to the Syro-Malankara Liturgy,” in Ch. Aerath, Liturgy and Ethos. A Study based on the Malankara Liturgy, Roma, 1995, p. 234-259.

1995

“Buddaqa Cristologiyyaia mšawtpa beth ʿEdta qatholiqi wʿedta athorayta d-Madenḥa” (Déclaration christologique commune de l’Église de l’Orient et de l’Église catholique), Istina 40, 1995, p. 230-239: traduction chaldéenne p. 232, 234, 236.

20

In Memoriam: Petros Yousif

1998

L’imposition de la main (ordination) sous-diaconale et diaconale selon le rite chaldéen, Bruxelles, 1998, p. 1-29.

1998

Mariage chaldéen. Le couronnement, 1998.

1999

L’imposition de la main (ordination) sacerdotale dans le rite chaldéen, Bruxelles, 1999.

2000

The Order of the Holy Qurbana in the East Syrian Tradition, avec J. Chittilapilly (ed.) Ernakulam, 2000.

2002

Liturgia dell’Ordinazione Sacerdotale secondo il Rito Caldeo, Roma, Pont. Collegio Urbano, 2002.

2004

Consécration de l’autel avec de l’huile selon le rite de l’Église d’Orient (Assyrienne, chaldéenne, malabare). Rituel composé par mar Isho’yahb d’Adiabène, catholicos patriarche, Paris, Mission chaldéenne, 2004.

2005

Messe de l’Église d’Orient (Assyrienne, chaldéenne, malabare), Paris, Œuvre d’Orient, 2005.

Reviews 1983

of Jacques Isaac, al-Quddās al-Kaldānīy. Dirāsah taqsīyah tahlilīyah. La messe chaldéenne. Étude historique, Bagdad, 1982, in OCP 49, 1983, p. 472-473.

1983

of Francis Asharya, Prayer with the Harp of the Spirit, vol. II. The Crown of the year, part I. Seasons of Annunciation, Nativity and Epiphany of our Lord, Vagamon, Kérala, 1982, in OCP 49, 1983, p. 218-220.

1984

of Sebastian P. Brock (ed.), Soghyatha Mghabbyatha (Select Dialogue Poems), Losser, 1982 in OCP 50, 1984, p. 248249.

1984

of Hanna P. J. Cheikho, Dialectique du langage sur Dieu. Lettre de Timothée Ier (728-823) à Serge. Étude, traduction et édition critique, Roma, Wiesbaden, O. Harrassowitz, 1983 in OCP 50, 1984, p. 492-495.

In Memoriam: Petros Yousif

21

1984

of Louis R. M. Sako, Lettre christologique du patriarche syrooriental Isho’yahb II de Gdala (628-646). Étude, traduction et édition critique, Roma, 1983, in OCP 50, 1984, p. 496499.

1985

of Sebastian P. Brock (ed.), Turgame Shta d-Qaddisha Mar Ya’qob da-Srug Malpana (Six Turgame of the Doctor Mar Jacob of Sarug), Glane/Losser, 1984 in OCP 51, 1985, p. 226.

1985

of Jean d’Apamée, Dialogues et traités, traduction française par R. Lavenant (Sources chrétiennes 311), Paris, 1984, in OCP 51, 1985, p. 228-229.

1985

of Michael Breydy, Kult, Dichtung und Musik bei den SyroMaroniten. Bd III. Rishaiqole. Die Leitstrophen der syroaramäischen Liturgien. Repertorium und Kommentar, Köln, in OCP 51, 1985, p. 453-455.

1985

of John Madey and George Kaniarakath (eds.), The Church I love. A tribute to Rev. G. Podipara CMI (EBOSC Publications 9 / Orientalia 2), Kottayam, 1984, in OCP 51, 1985, p. 477.

1985

of E. J. Manna, Chaldean Arabic Dictionary, reprinted with new appendix by R. J. Bidawid, Beyrouth, Babel Center Publications, 1975 et Al-Usūl al Jalīyah fi Naḥw al-Luġah al-Aramīyah (A Grammar of the Aramaic Language according to the Chaldean and Syriac Dialects), reprinted by R. J. Bidawid, Beyrouth, Babel Center Publications, 1975, in OCP 51, 1985, p. 251252.

1986

of A. Vattioni (ed.), Sangue e Antropologia nella Liturgia. Atti della 4a Settimana del Centro di Studi “Sanguis Christi”. Roma 21-26 nov. 1983, Roma, 1984, in OCP 52, 1986, p. 491-492.

1987

of Narsai de Nisibe, Cinq homélies sur les paraboles évangéliques. Introduction et traduction par E. Pataq-Siman, Paris, 1984, in OCP 52, 1987, p. 249.

22

In Memoriam: Petros Yousif

1996

of Majella Franzmann, The Odes of Solomon. An Analysis of the Poetical Structure and Form (Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus 20), Göttingen, 1991, in OCP 62, 1996, p. 238-240.

2010

of Herman Teule, Les Assyro-chaldéens (coll. Fils d’Abraham), Turnhout, 2010, in OCP 2010.

Supervision of dissertations and prefaces 2001

Arakiaraj SAVARIMUTHU, A Study of the Marriage Rites in the Roman, Chaldean and Indian Traditions. With proposal for a new Thamil Christian Marriage Rite in Thamilnadu in India (Rome, Pontificio Istituto Orientale, sept. 2001).

2002

Fadia Na’aum, Ritualità e Dramma della Settimana Santa nelle Chiese di Tradizione Siriaca (Roma, Pontificio Istituto Orientale, co-directed with prof. T. Lewicky, Univ. Pont. Salesiana).

2003

Sanaa HANA, Teologia e spiritualità dell’Ufficiatura Caldea Comune, Roma, p. xi-xii (Rome, Pontificio Istituto Orientale).

2003

Emmanuel KANIYAMPARAMPIL, The Spirit of Life. A study of the Holy Spirit in the Early Syriac Tradition (OIRSI 268), Kottayam, 2003 p. vii-viii (Paris, Institut catholique Avril 2001).

2006

Colette PASQUET, L’Homme image de Dieu, Seigneur de l’Univers. L’interprétation de Gn 1, 26 dans la tradition syriaque orientale (Paris, Institut catholique et SorbonneParis-IV, juin 2006).

2007

Francis Jiphy MEKKATHUKULAM, L’initiation chrétienne selon les Actes de Thomas (Paris, Institut catholique et Sorbonne Paris-IV, octobre 2007).

2010

Peter KANNAMPUZHA, Fraction and Consignation in the Syro-oriental Tradition (Paris, Institut catholique, janvier 2010).

In Memoriam: Petros Yousif

23

Ecclesiastical reports and homilies 1988

“Les Chaldéens,” Bulletin de l’Œuvre d’Orient 663, 1988, p. 161-164.

1989

“La Missione del Nuovo Patriarca di Babilonia dei Caldei. Amore e zelo per il suo gregge,” L’Osservatore Romano, Anno 129, no 267, vendredi 10 nov. 1989.

1992

“Un centre pour les Chaldéens à Paris,” Bulletin de l’Œuvre d’Orient 683, 1992, p. 345-346.

1993

“Situation et problèmes des Chaldéens dans leurs pays d’origine et dans la diaspora,” Bulletin de l’Œuvre d’Orient 685, 1992, p. 412-417; no 686, p. 446-449.

1995

Le patrimoine religieux et culturel des chaldéens,” Cahiers de la pastorale des migrants 42, 1995, p. 8-14.

1995

“Théologie et liturgie chaldéennes,” Cahiers de la pastorale des migrants 42, 1995, p. 57-62.

1998

“Les Églises assyro-chaldéennes,” Bulletin de l’Œuvre d’Orient 710, 1998, p. 782-785.

1998

“L’Église chaldéenne d’Irak,” Bulletin de l’Œuvre d’Orient 712, 1998, p. 845-849.

2002

“L’Épiphanie,” Homélie à Notre-Dame de Chaldée, Paris, 6 janvier 2002, Homélie radiodiffusée, Paris.

2004

“À Celui qui est Dieu, maître de l’univers, Père de Jésus et mon père,” in René Guitton (ed.), Lettres à Dieu, Paris, 2004, p. 350-354.

2008

Calendrier liturgique de l’Église d’Orient (quadrilingue: chaldéen, français, arabe et turc) et Lettre à mes paroissiens, Paris, Mission chaldéenne, 2008.

Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies, Vol. 20.1, 25-50 © 2017 by Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute and Gorgias Press

PATRIARCH SEVEROS’ LETTER ON HIS FLIGHT FROM ANTIOCH IN 518 SEBASTIAN P. BROCK UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD ABSTRACT In 1975 Arthur Vööbus drew attention to the existence of a Syriac translation of a letter by Patriarch Severos of Antioch in which he related details of his flight from Antioch in 518. The Syriac text has now been published by His Eminence Mar Hazail Soumi on the basis of five manuscripts, accompanied by an Introduction and French translation. In view of the interest of the document the present article offers an English translation of the Syriac text of the Letter, with some basic annotation. Attention had been drawn to the existence of Patriarch Severos’ Letter concerning the details of his flight from Antioch in the autumn of 518 by Arthur Vööbus in 1975.1 The manuscript upon which Vööbus based his information was Damascus, Syrian Orthodox Patriarchate, 12/18, the second volume of a vast twelfth-century collection of Lives of Saints,2 1 A. Vööbus, ‘Découverte d’une lettre de Sévère d’Antioche’, Revue des Études Byzantines 33 (1975), pp. 295-98. 2 The contents of this manuscript, and of its companion 12/17, are listed in Parole de l’Orient 19 (1994), pp. 608-14, (unfortunately some lines at

25

26

Sebastian P. Brock

among which rather incongruously this Letter of Severus featured (as no. 78 in the collection). Thanks to the kindness of the late Patriarch Yakub III (1957-80), I was able to photograph the text, along with a few other texts from this manuscript,3 on a visit to Damascus in 1972. Unfortunately, a considerable amount of the text was badly damaged or lost, and so it was clear that any publication of the text needed to await the discovery of other manuscripts with the Letter. It is to the great credit of His Eminence Mor Severios Hazail Soumi, the Syrian Orthodox Metropolitan of Belgium, France and Luxembourg, that he has located and collated four further manuscripts; this has enabled him to provide a good edition of the text, which has now been published together with annotated French translation, combined with an introduction describing the five manuscripts and their interrelationship. A short preface is provided by Marie-Joseph Pierre.4 Severos’ life is rather well documented; shortly after his death in 538 a biography was produced, attributed (probably wrongly) in the manuscripts to John of Beth Aphtonia.5 This biography was clearly a main source for the biographical poem by George, bishop of the Arabs,6 as well as for the Life attributed to Patriarch Athanasius of Antioch (595631) preserved in full only in Arabic and Ethiopic,7 and for the the end of the contents of 12/17 were lost in the printed text: thus, after 61:11, there should have been 61:12, Life of Ephrem). 3 One of these was published in my ‘A Syriac Life of Abel’, Le Muséon 87 (1974), pp. 467-92; some others have been lent to other scholars. 4 Severios Hazail Soumi, Saint Sévère le Grand, “La couronne des Syriaques”, Lettre sur son exil. Texte inédit, édition critique du texte syriaque et traduction française; Préface de Marie-Joseph Pierre, (Brussels: Éditions d’Antioche), 2016. 5 Edited, with French translation, by M. Kugener, Vie de Sévère par Jean de Beth Aphtonia (Patrologia Orientalis 2:3, Paris, 1904). English translation by B. Fitzgerald, in S.P. Brock and B. Fitzgerald, Two Early Lives of Severos, Patriarch of Antioch (Liverpool, 2013), pp. 101-39. 6 Ed. with English translation by K. McVey, George, Bishop of the Arabs, A Homily on the Blessed Mar Severus, Patriarch of Antioch (CSCO Scr. Syri 2167, Leuven, 1993). 7 Arabic: ed. Y.N. Youssef, The Arabic Life of Severus of Antioch attributed to Athanasius of Antioch, Patrologia Orientalis 49.4 (2004); and Ethiopic: ed.

Severos’ Letter on His Flight from Antioch

27

Syriac prose Life by Patriarch Quryaqos.8 At one point in the Life attributed to John of Beth Aphtonia there is a specific reference to Severos’ Letter on his flight:9 66. In a letter about the subject [sc. of his flight] which he wrote and sent to certain zealous people, Severos related and recorded precisely about his wondrous departure and the sufferings which befell him during, as well as the judgements of God which came about due to it. For his student years at the Law School in Berytus, his conversion to Christianity10 and baptism at the Shrine of St Leontios of Tripolis, and his subsequent career prior to his consecration as Patriarch of Antioch in 512, a fascinating account is given in an Apologia by his fellow student and friend, Zacharias Scholastikos;11 this is a work which was E.J. Goodspeed and W.E. Crum, The Conflict of Severus, Patriarch of Antioch, by Athanasius, Patrologia Orientalis 4.6 (1909). There are also fragments in Coptic. The attribution cannot be correct, and the work is clearly a later product of Egypt. 8 Unpublished; preserved in Chicago, Oriental Institute, A. 12,008. A. Vööbus, ‘Discovery of the Biography of Severus of Antioch by Quryaqos of Tagrit’, Rivista di studi byzantini e neoellenici NS 12/13 (1975/6), pp. 11724. 9 Ed. Kugener, Vie de Sévère, p. 164; English translation in Brock and Fitzgerald, Two Earlies Lives of Severos, p. 129. 10 His pagan origins were soon glossed over in both the biographical tradition and in the Syriac translation of his Homily 27 (available only in Jacob of Edessa’s revision, Patrologia Orientalis 36.4, 1974), given at the Shrine of St Leontios in 513; it is only in the Coptic translation that Severos’ original text is preserved, describing how he had earlier prayed to St Leontios ‘while I was still a Hellene’. For the Coptic text, see G. Garitte, ‘Textes rélatifs à s. Léonce de Tripoli, 2. L’homélie copte de Sévère d’Antioche’, Le Muséon 79 (1966), pp. 335-86; the relevant texts are translated into English in Brock and Fitzgerald, Two Early Lives of Severos, pp. 1-2. 11 Ed. with French translation, M.A. Kugener, Vie de Sévère par Zacharie le scholastique (Patrologia Orientalis 2:1; Pars, 1904). English translations by L. Ambjörn, The Life of Severus by Zachariah of Mytilene (Piscataway NJ, 2008),

28

Sebastian P. Brock

written to refute accusations, put out in a pamphlet in Constantinople, that Severos had been a partaker in certain magic and pagan practices while he was a student in Berytus. The course of Severos’ life during the years of his Patriarchate, resident in Antioch, is ably documented and studied by Frédéric Alpi in his La route royale: Sévère d’Antioche et les Églises de l’Orient (512-518).12 It was the death of the Emperor Anastasius on the 8th/9th July 518, and the succession of Justin I, with its change of ecclesiastical policy requiring acceptance of the Council of Chalcedon, that led to Severos’ departure from Antioch. According to the Syriac ‘Melkite Chronicle’ Severos at once addressed a libellus to the new emperor,13 but unfortunately this is lost; in any case it had no effect, for at a session of the Synodos endēmousa in Constantinople on 20th July Severos was condemned.14 Under normal circumstances he would have been sent into exile, but before this could happen Severos found it necessary to flee the city incognito by night. The reason for the dramatic nature of his flight from the city becomes clear from the account in Evagrius’ Ecclesiastical History:15

and by S.P. Brock in Brock and Fitzgerald, Two Early Lives of Severos, pp. 15100. 12 In the series Bibliothèque archéologique et historique, 188, of the Institut français du Proche-Orenrt (Beyrouth, 2009); see especially I, pp. 187-94 (the locations where he preached his Cathedral Homilies), and 21943 (outline of events). 13 Ed. A. de Halleux, ‘Une chronique Melkite abregée du ms. Sinaï Syr. 10’, Le Muséon 91 (1978), p. 35 (section 15), and earlier in his ‘Une notice syro-chalcédonienne sur Sévère d’Antioche’, Parole de l’Orient 6/7 (1975/6), pp. 461-77. 14 Acta Conciliorum Oecumenicorum (=ACO), ed. E. Schwartz, III, Collectio Sabbaitica (Berlin, 1940), pp. 72-6. This was followed by condemnations at synods in Jerusalem (6th August) and Tyre (16th September): see E. Schwartz, ACO III, pp. 77-80 (esp. p. 78, line 18) and 80-85 (esp. pp. 81, line 10, and 29). 15 IV.4; the translation here is from M. Whitby, The Ecclesiastical History of Evagrius Scholasticus (Liverpool, 2000), pp. 202-3. Severos’ flight by night and the hostility of Vitalian is also mentioned in Liberatus’ Breviarium, 19,

Severos’ Letter on His Flight from Antioch

29

In the first year of his reign Justin ordered that Severus be arrested and that he suffer the penalty of having his tongue cut out, as was rumoured by some, Irenaeus being entrusted with the deed; the latter was in charge of the east of the realm at the city of Antiochus. Severus, in writing to some Antiochenes and describing the manner of his flight, confirms that Irenaeus was entrusted with his detention; here he hurls the greatest reproaches at Irenaeus, since he had placed an extremely strict guard around him to prevent his escape from the city of Antiochus. There are some who say that Vitalian, who still appeared to be the prime influence with Justin, demanded the tongue of Severus, because in his writings Severus insulted him. Accordingly, he fled his own see in the month of Gorpiaeus, which the Roman tongue calls September, in the 567th year of the Era of Antioch. The second paragraph is almost certainly correct in assigning to Vitalian the orders the Severos’ tongue be cut out: on the occasion of Vitalian’s revolt against Anastasius (513515) Severos had written against Vitalian.16 Severos’ letter to ‘some Antiochenes’ is clearly the Letter published by Soumi and translated below; it also seems evident that Evagrius, who ed. E. Schwartz, ACO II.5, Collectio Sangermaniensis (Berlin, 1936), pp. 1334. 16 Severos’ Hymn 262 has the title ‘On Vitalian the tyrant, and on the victory of the Christ-loving Anastasius, the Emperor’: E.W. Brooks, James of Edessa. The Hymns of Severus of Antioch and Others, II (Patrologia Orientalis VII.5, repr. Turnhout, 1971), pp. 298-9. Ps.Zacharias Rhetor, Ecclesiastical History, VIII.2, likewise attributes the order to Vitalian; English translation in G. Greatrex, R.R. Phenix and C.B. Horn, The Chronicle of Pseudo-Zachariah Rhetor (Liverpool, 2011), pp. 282-3. On Vitalian, see Alpi, La route royale, II, p. 173 and J.R. Martindale, Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, II, (Cambridge, 1980), pp. 1171-6.

30

Sebastian P. Brock

completed his work in 593/4, had seen the letter (still in its Greek original, of course), despite the fact that at the Synod of Constantinople in 536 all Severos’ writings were condemned to be burnt.17 Severos’ Letter, written from Egypt, was addressed to a friend, or friends, presumably still in Antioch, who had evidently provided the Patriarch with a sum of money which had proven invaluable in paying for his travel by ship to Cyprus (13). As Soumi rightly points out,18 his Letter was intended to serve not only ‘une plaidoire contre ses adversaires’, who no doubt accused him of having abandoned his flock (21), but also ‘une forme de consolation personelle’, reflecting on various providential outcomes that occurred during his flight. At several points in the course of his annotation, Soumi suggests that Severos provided deliberate hints that his flight followed the course of the Passion narrative in the Gospels. Although here and there Severos may well have had particular Gospel verses in mind in the way he describes events, it seems very unlikely that he has actually constructed his narrative modelled on the Triduum.19

17 At the fifth session, on 4th June; see E. Schwartz, ACO, III, pp. 27119; this was followed by Justinian’s Constitutio/Diataxis against Anthimos and Severos on 6th August: (ACO, III, pp. 119-23, esp. p. 121, lines 25-9): ‘Let nothing said or written by Severos remain with any Christian, and let any books they possess be burnt - if they do not want to put themselves into danger; let nothing of his in future be copied by anyone’. The punishment for infringement was amputation of the hand. For a helpful guide to the documentation, see F.G.B. Millar, ‘Rome, Constantinople and the Near Eastern Church under Justinian: Two Synods of CE 536’, Journal of Roman Studies 98 (2008), pp. 62-82, esp. table on pp. 72-74. 18 P. 16. 19 Thus, whereas the ‘Saturday of Rest’ fits nicely with 3, the chronology of Gethsemane and the Resurrection do not: Severos’ ‘garden’ (2) was in the small hours of the Saturday, and his final escape by boat was on the Monday evening.

Severos’ Letter on His Flight from Antioch

31

THE CHRONOLOGY AND COURSE OF SEVEROS’ FLIGHT Day 1: After Vespers Severos, dressed as an ordinary monk, and two companions leave Antioch in the direction of Seleucia, walking all night and reaching outskirts in the early morning of Day 2 (specified as Saturday in 3); they lie low all day, trying at the same time to find a ship, by which they could sail off that night; this proves not possible, so when ‘two parts of the night’ had passed they set off by foot. On Day 3 (specified as a Sunday in 5), they reach the Orontes and cross it in a boat that had seen better days. They arrive at a village called TWPYWN, Topion/Touphion, evidently close to the sea since it is described as a watering place for shipping. Their aim is to get to Bytyllion, (presumably with the intention of finding a ship going to Egypt). Since there was no coastal path (the steep slopes of Mount Kasios/Jebel al-Aqra evidently blocked off any coastal path), they needed to take a boat. After temporarily hiding in a cave, a small ship with people from Rhodes providentially turns up and takes them to a point a little before Bytyllion, where they hide in a cave and learn from scouts that their pursuers were already there searching for them in Bytyllion (7). Guided by some monks sent by the priest of a monastery in Bytyllion they climb up high on the mountain. ‘Towards the tenth or eleventh hour of the day’ (9), another monk brings food, before which they celebrate a Presanctified Liturgy. After sunset they descend to the vicinity of the monastery, but as their pursuers were still active in the region, they have to climb another steep mountain (10). Day 4 was spent moving from one cave to another (11). Having contacted some Egyptian ship-owners through intermediaries they make their descent down a ravine to the rocky coast, where a small boat conveys them to the ship. Since the ship’s captain was sailing to Cilicia, in order to take on board a cargo of amphorae (13), Severos and his companions disembarked when they reached Cyprus (16), where they spent some days before sailing on to Egypt (17). No details are given of this, but once in Egypt he specifies that

32

Sebastian P. Brock

‘we passed on to the upper parts of Egypt’, no doubt because it was too dangerous for him to remain in Alexandria, whither their ship was presumably going. THE DATE OF SEVEROS’ FLIGHT Two different dates for Severos’ flight are to be found in three of the five manuscripts (for these, see below): in two, C and E, both hagiographical collections, the date given is 25th September, in the year 829 of Alexander (i.e. 518), while in A, a homiliary, a note says that ‘he was chased out of his throne’ on Friday 12th September. The Syriac Chronicle ad annum 724 offers yet a third date, 29th September,20 which is also the date given for Severos’ arrival in Egypt in the Arabic and Ethiopic Synaxaria.21 From the Letter itself we learn that Severos left after Vespers on what will have been a Friday evening (but liturgically, already a Saturday), with an intermediary day before a Sunday when they celebrated the Presanctified Liturgy.22 Since Easter in 518 fell on 15th April23, the 12th September that year will have fallen on a Wednesday, the 25th on a Tuesday, and the 29th on a Saturday – only the last of which fits the days of the week implied by the Letter (taking Vespers on the Friday as being already, from the liturgical standpoint, the beginning of Saturday). Since the Chronicle ad annum 724 probably dates 20 Chronica Minora, II, ed. E.W. Brooks (CSCO Scr. Syri 3-4), pp. 148 (text), 111 (tr.): ‘he was driven out on 29th Illul’. 21 Ed. R. Basset, Synaxaire arabe Jacobite (rédaction copte), Patrologia Orientalis 1 (1907), 2nd Babeh (= 29 Sept), pp. 313-4, ‘On this day the illustrious Severos, patriarch of Antioch, came to Egypt’; the passage goes on to say that this was in the time of Anastasius (!), but in the parallel entry in the Ethiopian Synaxarion, ed. G. Colin, Le synaxaire éthiopien. Le mois de Teqemt, Patrologia Orientalis 44.1 (1988), p. 8, the emperor’s name is given as Justinian (in fact, Justin). Curiously the reverse of this confusion is found in the Life attributed to Athanasius at section 120 of Youssef’s edition, where the Arabic has Justinian, but the Ethiopic Anastasius. 22 The chronology of the flight, day by day, is helpfully set out in Soumi, Saint Sévère le Grand, pp. 106-13. 23 Thus according to the table in V. Grumel, La chronologie (Paris, 1958), p. 244.

Severos’ Letter on His Flight from Antioch

33

from not long after its terminal date, this means that it is the earliest witness to any date, and so it is perhaps not so surprising that it alone should have preserved the correct date. The transfer of this date to Severos’ arrival in Egypt would be an understandable alteration on the part of Severos’ adherents in Egypt. The mention of Friday in manuscript A of the Letter could also be a correct reminiscence of the day of the week by the secular calendar, according to which the Vespers, after which he left Antioch, would still have been on the Friday. * Since the Letter is of considerable interest from various different points of view, an English translation, with only light annotation, is provided below. The manuscripts upon which Soumi based his text are as follows: 1. Damascus, Syrian Orthodox Patriarchate, 12/13 (‘A’), dated August AG 1342 = AD 1031.24 This is a vast Homiliary with works by Jacob of Serugh and Ephrem. The Letter of Severos features as no. 34 (between two verse homilies by Jacob of Serugh). It was copied at the Monastery of the XL Martyrs, on the Dry River, by the priest monk Abraham from Melitene. 2. Damascus, Syrian Orthodox Patriarchate, 12/14 (‘B’).25 11th century. Another vast Homiliary with very similar contents as 12/13. The Letter of Severos features as no. 34 (between the same two verse homilies by Jacob of Serugh). Perhaps copied by the same scribe. 24 Soumi, pp. 20-31; for this manuscript, see also A. Vööbus, Handschriftliche Überlieferung der Memre-Dichtung des Ja‘qob von Serug (CSCO Subsidia 39-40; 1973), I, pp. 138-41, II, pp. 124-133; F.Y. Dolabany (ed. G.Y. Ibrahim), Catalogue of Syriac Manuscripts in Za‘faran Monastery (Dairo dMor Hananyo) (Damascus, 1994), pp. 59-71; I.E. Barsaum, Deyrulzafaran Manuscripts (Damascus, 2008), pp. 256-82. 25 Soumi, pp. 31-44; on this manuscript see also Vööbus, Handschriftliche Überlieferung, I, 141-3, II, 134-149; Dolabany, Catalogue, pp. 72-87; Barsaum, Deyrulzafaran Manuscripts, pp. 283-309.

34

Sebastian P. Brock

3. Damascus, Syrian Orthodox Patriarchate, 12/18 (‘C’).26 12th /13th century (terminus post quem 1185). The second of two manuscripts containing a very large collection of Lives of Saints. The Letter of Severos features as no. 78:28 (between the Life of Abhai and that of Jacob of Serugh). 4. Mardin, Church of the XL Martyrs, ms 134 (‘D’).27 Dated 1733. A collection of memre, mostly by Jacob of Serugh, among which Severos’ Letter features as no. 36; copied in Deir al-Za‘faran by the monk Abdelnur. 5. Mardin, Church of the XL Martyrs, ms 256 (‘E’).28 1665. A collection of Lives of the Saints. Severos’ Letter features as no. 25; copied by the priest Yeshu‘ in a village near Mardin.29 TRANSLATION ABD Next, the Letter of the blessed Mar Severos, the Patriarch, which he wrote to one of the faithful brethren in Antioch, in which he informs about his departure, in persecution, from his see. It is suitable to be read on the day of his Commemoration.

26 Soumi, pp. 44-53; for the contents of the manuscript, see note 2; also Dolabany, Catalogue, pp. 104-12; Barsaum, Deyrulzafaran Manuscripts, pp. 358-78. 27 Soumi, pp.53-54; see also Vööbus, Handschrifliche Überlieferung, I, pp. 152-54, II, pp. 176-81; Dolabany, Catalogue, pp. 245-50; 1733 is the date given by Barsaum; Vööbus gives 1728. In the Hill Museum Manuscript Library (HMML) this manuscript is catalogued as CFMM00134. 28 Soumi, pp. 54-5; HMML manuscript CFMM00256.

29

Soumi, p.55, also mentions, but does not use, a further manuscript, Hah, Church of St Sergius and St Bacchus, of the 16th/17th century, containing memre by Jacob of Serugh.

Severos’ Letter on His Flight from Antioch

35

CE Next, the letter that was sent by the holy Mar Severos, Patriarch of Antioch of Syria, when he was chased by the wicked Chalcedonians. 1.
As a result of pressing matters, I thought it (right) to inform your Christ-loving excellency30 in brief, as far as possible, of our situation, and through you as mediary those who are concerned with our salvation because of our common Hope, (our) great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ. That I should be silent about, and not divulge the acts of divine assistance which were extended also to those who are unworthy such as myself, I very rightly considered that this would not escape from the blame of ingratitude. For when I learnt accurately and saw with (my) very eyes what was pleasing to those who were seized with pity, because of my insignificant self, for the faithful populace and for every rank of men and women – people who had been purchased by the honoured Blood of Him who takes away the sin of the world31 - I thought it conformed well with the divine laws which bid that ‘when they persecute you from this city, flee to another’32 that I should depart and be outside of the episcopacy, - as it seems to those who judge things such as these in a fleshly way; for spiritually, no one has the authority to remove this from me apart from God who from the beginning granted me this (office). Because of this, I was also held worthy to suffer on behalf of the orthodox faith. It is from heaven that I have a powerful warrant, and one over which no one at all from those on earth has any control. 30 The term naṣiḥuta used here implies that the recipient was a highranking layman. 31 John 1:29. 32 Matt. 10:23.

36

Sebastian P. Brock

2.
When we considered (what was) the best plan, and that flight was imposed with no other course, one day after the service of Vespers, without making any change in my normal practice or showing any signs of haste or commotion, after dismissing everyone as usual, I dealt with some correspondence and did some other things which cunningly eluded any suspicion of what I intended, I put on the habit of chaste monks of Syria, including the philosophical33 covering of the head, which is generally worn by those who let their hair grow. I descended without fear, trusting in the Lord, while the person with me was making use of the same garb, while the other person left with us was a monk of Syria: maybe what occurred in this way indicated the number of the Holy Trinity who protected us and brought us out (of the city) without harm, without our being recognized at the closed gates of the (city) wall, or anywhere else. I was giving praise in myself using as a form of prayer the song of praise of the holy Moses, who gave praise with Miriam his sister,34 when (God) had caused Israel to cross the Red Sea. Having thus walked the entire night on foot,35 towards morning we descended to the town of Seleucia,36 without knowing where we were going. But with Christ’s (help) and in faith using Him as our guide, He showed us a tomb edifice in which a chaste monk resided, and we stayed with him. Before we had found That is, monastic. For the monastic life as one of philosophy, see A.M. Malingrey, ‘Philosophia’. Étude d’un groupe de mots dans la littérature grecque, des Préscratiques ai IVe siècle après J-C (Paris, 1961), p. 272. 34 Exod. 15. 35 Perhaps a reminiscence of Exod. 14:20. 36 The port of Antioch, some 25 kms from Antioch; later in the sixth century it became silted up, perhaps after the great earthquake of 526. Concerning it, but at an earlier period, see D. von Berchem, ‘Le port de Séleucie di Piérie’, Bonner Jahrbücher 185 (1985), 47-87; still informative is V. Chapot, ‘Séleucie de Piérie’, Mémoires de la societé nationale des antiquaries de France VII.6 (1906), pp. 149-226. 33

Severos’ Letter on His Flight from Antioch

37

this man who received us, (as) I was saying, I had gone down to a garden,37 and I was sitting down under some trees, afraid lest the time of night would come to an end, as God who is not false knows, that night, so to speak, seemed to me to prolong itself in some manner. 3.
But, not to speak at length, having spent the day of Saturday there, and having talked to various sea captains through the mediation of some people who were able to carry out this service in a faithful way, our hopes were to set sail the following night. We also hoped that God would assist us in this. 4.
I do now know how the God-loving Isidore, bishop of Qenneshrin,38 and others with him, as I learnt, were searching for us, acting badly, inviting both for us and for themselves trouble - as the outcome demonstrated: for those who were sent by the people who took no pity in our flight, in order to hunt us down, arrested them and kept them under guard; they also gave orders that the boats should not sail by sea. As a result, those who had ministered (to our needs) were also afraid and did not even have the confidence to convey an answer (apokrisis) to us. 5.
Consequently, as for us, two parts of the night had passed and we had cut off all hope of sailing. We then put our hope in our feet – though primarily, in God. We travelled walking fast, having those chaste monks who had received (us) show us the way. As we thought about it we were much afraid lest, when we were beside the Orontes, it also being Sunday, we would not find a boat (kerkouros) to take us across, but He who provides a means to those without any means, anticipated in His Conceivably Severos intends an allusion to Gethsemane, Matt. 26:36 and parallels. 38 Isidore, bishop of Chalcis, is mentioned by Severos in Select Letters I.12 and I.14, ed. and translated by E.W. Brooks, The Sixth Book of the Select Letters of Severus, I (text)-II (translation), (London, 1903; repr. Farnborough, 1969). Cf. Alpi, La route royale, II, pp. 97, 137; Honigmann, Évêques, p. 28. 37

38

Sebastian P. Brock

mercies those who are weak, as it is written,39 for He prepared, as if by order, that an old boat should turn up, for the most part in bad condition so that it let in water. Once it had been baled, we got in and crossed over. 6.
Afterwards, we learnt that the people who were tracking us had, at that same moment (that we were crossing) by that boat, embarked on a ship at sea, in pursuit after (us) with great diligence in order to carry out the threat of the man who had given (them) the orders. As for us, after we had crossed the river, thanks to divine concern, and having been strengthened in (our) hope, we travelled on, taking especial care. When we arrived at a certain village by the sea, called ṬWPYWN40 by the local inhabitants - it was a place from which those who were sailing were in the habit of filling up with water - we hastened on to reach a place called Bytyllion.41 Because we could not make use (of Ps. 78(79):8; cf. III Macc. 2:20. Topion, Touphion? Perhaps the village Miyadun/Meydan on the south bank of the Orontes: see Soumi, p.93, note 35. According to Strabo XVI.2.7, the name of the Orontes was originally Typhon, which seems to have been partly preserved in the name of the village here. Miyadun is approximately 6 kms south of Seleucia. 41 The manuscripts ABD here have BYṬ’LYWN (Bitalion), but CE have BYṬWLYWN (so also ABD in 7 and 8), representing Bityl(l)ion, closer to the Greek name, Bytyllion, mentioned in Malalas, XI.3, ‘Bytyllion, which was a natural harbour, near Seleucia’. The presence of a harbour explains why they were trying to reach Bytyllion. Soumi, pp. 93-4, note 36, identifies Bytyllion with Qarabjaq, located a few kilometres south of Miyadun on Map IX in R. Dussaud, Topographie historique de la Syrie antique et médiévale (Paris, 1927), facing p. 424, where it is described as a ‘port’. No such village is to be found on the French 1:200,000 maps (the basis for GSGS 4195) at that point (almost exactly 36 degrees N), and the topography implied by Severus’ Letter would seem to suit the point further south where a wadi enters the sea separating Mount Kasios from Antikasios (the present border between Syria and Turkey); see the sketch map, fig. 1. A naval chart would no doubt resolve the matter, but none was available to me for this sensitive area. In any case the Letter rules out the older 39 40

Severos’ Letter on His Flight from Antioch

39

travel) by foot, there being no path any longer, it had to be reached by sea.42 We hid for a short while in a cave, peering out to see if a ship from somewhere could be seen. None was to be seen anywhere, which greatly increased our anxiety, all the more so since we had been seen by some village people who were from the town of Seleucia and who had scrutinised us carefully. 7.
But He who, in accordance with what the prophet Isaiah said, ‘gives patience to the weak-spirited and life to those who are shattered in heart’,43 and says of the person who is compassionately chastised by Him, ‘I have caused him a little grief and smitten him, and I have turned away my face from him and he was grieved and proceeded gloomily on his ways. I saw his ways and I healed him and comforted him, giving him true consolation’:44 (God) provided that a small ship should turn up with people from Rhodes,45 who were wanting (to take on) water from the place just mentioned. Having embarked on it, we set sail, and a little before reaching Bytyllion we disembarked from the boat and hid in a cave. God having put the idea in our mind, despite our insignificance, we sent on ahead some of those who were guiding us on the way, people who had also received us in Seleucia. They set off and found in suggestion that Bytyllion should be identified as Al-Mina, on the Orontes: see the discussion in T. Vorderstrasse, Al-Mina. A Port of Antioch from Late Antiquity to the End of the Ottomans (Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten te Leiden, CIV; Leiden, 2005), p. 43 (I thank Natalija Ristovska for this reference). 42 The steep slopes of Mount Kasios block off any viable track along the coast, starting from about 2 kms south of Miyadun. 43 Isai. 57:15 (LXX). 44 Isai. 57:17-18 (LXX); the Syriac translation is close to, but not identical with, the Syrohexapla. 45 Rhodes played an important part in sea trade; see P. Arnaud, Les routes de la navigation antique. Itinéraires en Méditerranée (Paris, 2005), p. 219, with map on p. 212.

40

Sebastian P. Brock

Bytyllion servants of Irenaeus,46 a man strong in his intention of going against piety; these men were searching out and looking for our tracks all over the place. The forcefulness of the order (they had received) - or rather, the man’s cruelty and harshness - had not just entrusted those from the (governmental) ranks,47 but also despicable people, to search out their prey with great labour, even in the holy monastery in Bytyllion as well, to the extent that they did not only search out the sacred vessels which should not be touched by unholy hands, but they also audaciously opened the chests of sacerdotal vest-ments to investigate whether I was hidden inside them. Likewise with the boats moored there, in the course of their investigation they boarded them all to search diligently everything in them. Then they turned to a drinking bout of wine! 8.
Once the men who had been sent on ahead by us had witnessed with their own eyes this spectacle that demonstrated the ferocity of these men, they came back and disclosed the situation. The God-fearing priest in Bytyllion, into whose heart God had cast merciful compassion and kindness, sent (us) one of his disciples – all of whom were used to wandering about 46 The Comes Orientis. He had been ordered by Vitalian, Severos’s bitter enemy, to arrest Severos and have him mutilated; cf. Evagrius, Ecclesiastical History IV, 4 (see the passage quoted in the Introduction); Martindale, Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, II, p. 625 (under Irenaeus 6); Alpi, La route royale, II, p. 136. The ‘servants of Irenaeus’ may well have included the topotērētēs Calliopios who, according to the heading of Severus’ Hymn 273 (Patrologia Orientalis 7, pp. 309-10), had gone in pursuit of him; for Calliopios, see Alpi, La route royale, I, p. 127, II, p. 120. 47 Taxis (ṭksys). The term is often found with reference to the those in government service, and in particular to the entourage of higher secular authorities (for these, see especially Alpi, La route royale, I, pp. 117-28); compare, for example, the Syro-Roman Lawbook, 9 ‘The Law instructs those serving as soldiers or in another taxis subject to the Realm not to act as epitropoi or curatores of orphans’: ed. W. Selb and H. Kaufhold, Das syrischrömische Rechtsbuch, II (Vienna, 2002), pp. 36-7.

Severos’ Letter on His Flight from Antioch

41

on the mountains. He reached us in the cave by the sea-shore, travelling through high up and trackless places, and disclosed to us all these things of which we were not aware: how great was the anger of the man who had given the orders, and of those who were carrying out the bidding of high authority to hunt down those who had done no wrong, but wrong had been done to us, all of which we conceded to them without any trouble.48 (The disciple) immed-iately took me and those with me - who were greatly worn out, by way of ravines, running torrents and pathless precipices, taking us up to the tops of the mountain: because of the difficulty of the path we had to use our hands as well as feet. He told us to sit down by a very large rock and wait in stillness. He had not finished speaking - as the saying goes - when those wanting to hunt us down filled up the sea-shore, shouting out in the caves and yelling among the rocks, turning over every stone so as not to miss what was their concern. When they came to Topion and learnt from some people that we had been seen there, they turned back, sailing by sea, running around as it were in circles; they were also searching out in the caves. Once they had gone a little distance, we got up from beside the rock, and another chaste monk was sent to look after us by the God-fearing priest in Bytyllion, and we travelled along another ravine that was difficult for walking. The ascent was not free of numerous dangers: if a single footstep slipped there was every likelihood that one would end up falling from a precipice. Although my feet and those of my companions were badly battered, because of the dire situation in which we were, we were not aware of the buffetings. We were climbing up in haste, while God - in accordance with what is written -

48

Translation uncertain: both the syntax and sense are unclear.

42

Sebastian P. Brock

provided ‘courage to the weak-kneed and gave support to our feeble state’.49 9.
Once we had ascended to such a great height, which could not be seen at all by the eyes of those who were chasing after us, we sat down under some dense trees to escape from the heat of the sun. Towards the tenth or eleventh hour of the day the God-fearing priest in Bytyllion sent another of his disciples to bring us food, consisting of grapes and bread. In thanksgiving to God we stood for prayer, and since we were carrying the Holy Mysteries, - for this was the only thing we had taken from our holy church, (carrying it) in a wooden box - (using) the Gospel prayer, addressing the Father in heaven, we cried out ‘lead us not into trial, but deliver us from the Evil One’,50 supplementing it with the other (usual words), before partaking of the Holy Mysteries.51 In this way we were all at once nourished by food which had not been prepared beforehand. 10.
After sunset we were constrained to descend the mountain from the other side that faces the monastery; we did so amidst all sorts of dangers, with feet that were not experienced in toil and hesitant.52 Then, once our Lord had given us strength, a lamp shone out from heaven - I mean the moon, and He conveyed us without harm to the threshing floor situated above the monastery. We stayed there for a little time, but learnt Job 4:4 LXX; cf. Isai. 35:3, Hebr. 12:12. Matt. 6:13. 51 For the history of the Presanctified Liturgy, see S. Alexopoulos, The Presanctified Liturgy in the Byzantine Rite (Leuven, 2009). In Syriac there is a specific service attributed to Severus, preserved in a number of tenth/eleventh-century manuscripts (e.g. British Library, Add. 14.493, 14,496, 14,525 etc); it was edited (from Add.14,495) by M. Rajji, ‘Une Anaphore syriaque de Sévère d’Antioche pour la messe des présanctifiés’, Revue de l’Orient chrétien 21 (1918/19), pp. 25-39. See also H.W. Codrington, ‘The Syrian Liturgies of the Presanctified’, Journal of Theological Studies 4 (1902/3), pp. 69-82. 52 Lit. ‘held back’. 49 50

Severos’ Letter on His Flight from Antioch

43

that those chasing after us had come again in their search. Since the location was not safe (for us) we crossed to another mountain: it was only experience that showed us that it was traversable; otherwise for those who just saw it, without experiencing it, it seemed completely impassable. 11.
So as not to relate every detail - which would bring the description to an extent that had no end - we spent the whole of that night and the whole of the next day passing on painfully from one cave to another. (Once) there, when we had spoken with someone from the Egyptian sea-captains who had come up, we made an agreement with him. When it was evening we descended from that summit, travel-ling along the entire ravine, we reached the rocks that are battered by the waters of the sea. By means of a small boat we embarked on the ship, having given many grateful farewell greetings to the God-fearing priest in Bytyllion and to his chaste disciples. After God, we considered53 him the cause for our deliverance: He (the priest) had effected everything for us with good will and with great and indescribable care. 12.
For this reason we urge you, and those who are like you, to show honour in a hidden way to this man, offering fruits to his monastery, and show him by actions that he has bestowed a gift, not only on us, but on the Church of the faithful. 13.
As to what occurred on the boat, if we wanted to relate everything in turn, we would make the narrative not a little long. We made use of the same bread and cooked food as the sailors: these were so stale and old that many people would not even be able to set their eyes on them; nor were they free of maggots and other such abhorrence. These men, as God can testify, did us The text has  ‘and we confined’; the translation presupposes a correction to . 53

44

Sebastian P. Brock

great kindness, and there are all sorts of reasons for gratitude to God. The captain (nauklēros)54 wanted to go to Cilicia, and from there load the boat with amphorae of wine. For our safe-keeping we were compelled to pay the full cost of the ship, gladly doing so, thanks to your donation (lit. blessing), which truly proved to be the salvation of myself and of those (with me) – and this was (at a time) when I was aiming at selfdeprivation,55 as you will recall; and not even when you were forcing (it on me) was I inclined to take anything! 14.
Also it seems to me good that I should not leave it out, for when there was a single ship travelling after us, and those sailing with us supposed it had been dispatched by the people chasing us, I said gladly and wholeheartedly, ‘Henceforth I will not make mention of (the possibility) that I might be seized by the hands of (my) opponents: henceforth the fact that I have escaped from the Christ-loving city of the people of Antioch, in order that (the city) might not suffer, because of my insignificant self, in any unendurable ways, either in the form of bloodshed, or from all that follows on from such things’. 15.
Also while on that mountain we had exercised a love of toil with (our) hurried walking, not for any other reason except so that Irenaeus should not suppose that he – who was hunting those who trusted in the Lord being a man who had grown up in every way opposed to God, - as a result of this should justify himself and utter the words set down in the prophet Malachi, as though (spoken) in the person of wicked men, that In 3 and 11 the term used is alpara; according to L. Casson, The Ancient Mariners (London, 1959), p. 267, naukleros is the term for the ship owner. 55 For the Syriac term msarrquta, see my ‘Radical renunciation. The ideal of msarrquta’, in R. Darling Young and M.J. Blanchard (eds), To Train his Soul in Books. Syriac Asceticism in Early Christianity (Washington DC, 2011), pp. 122-33. 54

Severos’ Letter on His Flight from Antioch

45

‘everyone who does evil is fine in the eyes of the Lord, and he is pleased with them, and he is not a God of righteousness’.56 16.
But I will keep silent, for even though the ship was empty, not having any cargo, because inexperience upsets onlookers, making them ready to examine the reason (for everything) carefully57, and how we were not even freed from the fear of sea-pirates, especially when we came towards the island of Cyprus, where we spent some days when there was a storm, and (so) through God’s providence we were saved from strong gales and the turbulent waves; and in this way we sailed unharmed, (God’s) mighty and heavenly hand being sufficient for us. 17.
The fact that we had also made ready to go to another destination, Egypt, (God’s hand) conveyed us to a different place, as being beneficial, so that we might be recognised by those for whom this was right, and that we might be concealed from those for whom it was not right that we should be recognised. And from there we passed on to the unknown upper regions of Egypt. In this way with God’s assistance our concern and wish was that we should not provide anyone at all with an awareness of our being in the country. 18.
As for you who hold the orthodox faith, may the Lord be your shepherd and preserve you from association58 with heretics and from destructive corruption, so that, being pure in conduct and in confession of God you may stand before the unerring tribunal (of) Christ. 19.
For those who chased after us did us more benefit than harm: only, if it is right that we should speak the truth, the harm that they did to you, (also affected) us. For Mal. 2:17. Translation uncertain: both the syntax and the sense are unclear. 58 This seems to be the sense; the text has   evidently in the sense (not otherwise attested) similar to that of Acts 1:4 (Harklean)  
. 56 57

46

Sebastian P. Brock

who is so hard-hearted (adamantinos) so as not to feel pain and suffering with the Church, and at the splitting up of the body of Christ. 20.
Also in these things it is painful for us, being unbearably cut up in the feelings of (our) mind, just as the prophet Jeremiah says: we are not distant from favourable hope,59 for we are confident that if the End is not near for this world to be delivered up because of the outpouring of the wrath of the heretics, by all means He who guards Israel is awake and does not sleep.60 For God is zealous and a God of retributions, as the divine Scripture says somewhere.61 21.
If someone lays blame on our flight, he also sharpens his tongue against those who are in a (perfectly) good situation: let him understand that the prophet Elijah fled in fear of the threats of Jezebel;62 likewise the apostle Paul was dispatched in a basket from the (city) wall in Damascus,63 as he himself said when he sent message to the Corinthians. I keep silent how Jesus, God our Saviour, fled from among those stoning him, being eager to kill him64 - he who was in absolutely no need of flight, being someone who could not be seized; but he thus left for us an example with people like these. 22.
This has been set down briefly in writing, in the form of a letter, as a record. They can give you, who are wise in the Lord, many reasons from the God-inspired Scriptures also to stop up that most impudent mouth. These are things you are aware of, and it would be superfluous to mention. Cf. perhaps Jer. 29:11, 31:17 (rather than 2:37 and 23:23, as Soumi suggests). 60 Ps. 120(121):4. 61 Exod. 20:5, Deut. 5:9. 62 I Kings 19:3. 63 Acts 9:25, II Cor. 11:33. 64 John 8:59. 59

Severos’ Letter on His Flight from Antioch

47

23.
For as for all those who were wanting me to remain in Antioch, when they saw the embittered nature of the pursuit, and how we were going to be handed over, as it were without any trial, into the hands of enemies, they turned round and sang another song, urging me to flee from harm and from manifest death. 24.
I greet you in the Lord: by ‘you’, I mean the Church and all who belong to Christ. Let anyone who does not love our Lord be anathema. For it is good that I should bring to an end this letter with an apostolic conclusion. Ended is the Letter of the holy Mar Severos concerning his persecution; in it there are 382 pethgame.65 CE: The flight of Mar Severos, due to persecution, from the city of Antioch, that is, his apostolic throne, took place on the twentyfifth of September, in the year 829 of Alexander. Ended is the Letter of the holy Mar Severos concerning his persecution. May his prayer be with us, amen. Gloss in A: The blessed Severus was chased out of his throne six years after his consecration (cheirotoneia), on Friday the twelfth of September, in the 12th Indiction, in the year 829 of Alexander. He died after he had been in exile for 23 years, on Saturday, the 8th February. May his commemoration be for blessings, and his prayer be for the scribe and the readers, amen.

65 Mention of the number of pethgome is normally confined to Biblical and certain authoritative Patristic works, evidently intended as a guarantee that the full text had been copied.

48

Sebastian P. Brock

INDEXES (a) Names Antioch 14, 23 Bytyllion 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 Cilicia 13 Corinthians 21 Cyprus 16 Damascus 21 Egypt 17 Egyptian 11 Elijah 21 Irenaeus, comes orientis 7 Isaiah 7 Isidore, bp 4 Israel 20 Jeremiah 20 Jezebel 21 Malachi 15 Miriam 2 Moses 2 Orontes 5 Paul 21 Qenneshrin 4 Red Sea 2 Rhodes 7 Seleucia 2, 6 Syria 2 Topion 6, 8

Severos’ Letter on His Flight from Antioch

(b) Biblical references Exod. 15 20:5 Deut. 5:9 I Kings 19:3 Ps. 78(79):8 120(121): 4 Job 4:4 Is. 35:3 57:15 57:17-18 Jer. 29:11 31:17 Mal. 2:17 III Macc. 2:20 Matt. 6:13 10:23 John 1:29 8:59 Acts 9:25 II Cor. 11:33 Heb. 12:12

2 20 20 21 5 20 8 8 7 7 20 20 15 5 9 1 1 21 21 21 8

49

50

Sebastian P. Brock

Fig. 1: North West Syria: Severos’ flight from Antioch

Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies, Vol. 20.1, 51-128 © 2016 by Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute and Gorgias Press

NEW TEXTUAL EVIDENCE FOR JACOB OF SERUGH’S LETTERS: AN ANALYSIS AND COLLATION OF FIVE MONASTIC MISCELLANIES* PHILIP MICHAEL FORNESS GOETHE-UNIVERSITÄT FRANKFURT ABSTRACT: Jacob of Serugh’s letters have received increasing attention as sources for late antique Christianity in the Roman Near East. Although a reliable critical edition appeared in 1937, new manuscript witnesses and the transmission of the corpus await further study. This article focuses on the new textual evidence in five manuscripts that date to the second millennium. These manuscripts reveal a distinct line of transmission of the letters among Syriac Orthodox monastic communities. Four appendices provide an updated list of Syriac manuscripts, identify Arabic translations of the letters, collate new textual evidence, and highlight the correlation among monastic manuscripts.

*

The research for this article was partially funded through a Katharine F. Pantzer Jr. Fellowship in Descriptive Bibliography at the Houghton Library of Harvard University. This article benefitted greatly from the feedback of the anonymous peer reviewers. I am grateful to Grigory Kessel and Dina Boero for helping me access some of the manuscripts. 51

52

Philip Michael Forness

INTRODUCTION The value of Jacob of Serugh’s (451–521) letters for understanding late antique Christianity has become apparent. Studies on the emergence of the Syriac Orthodox Church,1 the veneration of saints,2 and Jacob’s connections to larger debates over Christology have all used this corpus.3 His letters have also contributed to regional studies on South Arabia,4 Mount Sinai,5 and Armenia.6 Scholars fortunately have accessed this corpus through the reliable critical edition of Gunnar Olinder, published in 1937.7 Complete or nearly complete translations

1

Volker L. Menze, Justinian and the Making of the Syriac Orthodox Church, Oxford Early Christian Studies (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 50n193; 54; 113n449; 127–128; Volker L. Menze, “Jacob of Sarug, John of Tella and Paul of Edessa: Ecclesiastical Politics in Osrhoene 519–522,” in Malphono w-Rabo d-Malphone: Studies in Honor of Sebastian P. Brock, ed. George Anton Kiraz, Gorgias Eastern Christian Studies 3 (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2008), 424; Fergus Millar, “The Evolution of the Syrian Orthodox Church in the Pre-Islamic Period: From Greek to Syriac?,” Journal of Early Christian Studies 21, no. 1 (2013): 60–62. 2 Dina Boero, “Symeon and the Making of the Stylite: The Construction of Sanctity in Late Antique Syria” (Ph.D. diss., University of Southern California, 2015), 339–341. 3 Philip Michael Forness, “Preaching and Religious Debate: Jacob of Serugh and the Promotion of His Christology in the Roman Near East” (Ph.D. diss., Princeton Theological Seminary, 2016), 110–169. 4 George Hatke, “Africans in Arabia Felix: Aksumite Relations with Ḥimyar in the Sixth Century C.E.” (Ph.D. diss., Princeton University, 2011), 69–70, 113–114. 5 Kevin Thomas van Bladel, “Jacob of Sarug, Letter VII, To The Monks of Sinai,” in History and Hagiography from the Late Antique Sinai, ed. Daniel F. Caner, Translated Texts for Historians 53 (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2010), 242–245. 6 Nina G. Garsoïan, L’église arménienne et le grand schisme d’orient, CSCO 574, Subsidia 100 (Leuven: Peeters, 1999), 179–180, 191. 7 Gunnar Olinder, ed., Iacobi Sarugensis epistulae quotquot supersunt, CSCO 110, Scriptores Syri 57 (Leuven: Peeters, 1937).

New Textual Evidence for Jacob’s Letters

53

into German,8 Arabic,9 French,10 and Italian have also appeared.11 Yet no study of the manuscript transmission exists, and additional manuscript witnesses have come to light since Olinder’s edition.12 This article analyzes new textual evidence in order to highlight a neglected aspect of the transmission of this corpus. A set of five manuscripts illuminate the circulation of Jacob of Serugh’s letters in monastic circles. The five manuscripts analyzed and collated here are: Birmingham, Selly Oak Colleges, Mingana syr. 331 (= Mingana Syr. 331) and 410 (= Mingana Syr. 410), Cambridge, MA, Harvard University, Houghton Library, Syr. 48 (= Harvard Syr. 48) and Syr. 108, folder 18 (= Harvard Syr. 108/18), and Mardin, Church of the Forty Martyrs, 420 (= CFMM 420). Each takes the form of a monastic miscellany, that is, a collection of abbreviated or

8

Severin Matthias Grill, trans., Jakob von Sarug: Ausgewählte Briefe, 3 vols., Heiligenkreuzer Studien 17 (Heiligenkreuz: Heiligenkreuzer Verlag, 1971–1972). Grill omits most of Letters 14–17, as they had already been translated into French in the nineteenth century. See Jean-Pierre Paulin Martin, “Lettres de Jacques de Saroug aux moines du Couvent de Mar Bassus, et à Paul d’Edesse, relevées et traduites,” Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 30 (1876): 217–275; Grill, Ausgewählte Briefe, 2:14–16. 9 Behnam M. Boulos Sony, trans., Rasā
il Mār Yaqūb al-surūji al-malfān, 2 vols., Mawsūat uẓamā al-masīḥīyyah fī al-tārīḵ: dirāsāt mutaḵaṣṣiṣah 3– 4 (Dekwaneh, Lebanon: Manšūrāt al-markaz al-raawī lil-ab ḥāṯ wal-dirāsāt, 1995). 10 Micheline Albert, trans., Les lettres de Jacques de Saroug, Patrimoine Syriaque 3 (Kaslik, Lebanon: Parole de l’Orient, 2004). 11 Behnam M. Boulos Sony, trans., Lettere di Giacomo vescovo di Sarug, 451–521 a.d. (Rome: Guaraldi, 2008). 12 Olinder had intended to produce a Latin translation and two companion volumes to his edition, as noted in Gunnar Olinder, The Letters of Jacob of Sarug: Comments on an Edition, Lunds Universitets Årsskrift, n.f., avd. 1, 34.1 (Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup, 1939), 3. He published the first companion volume with brief textual comments and corrections in 1939, but he never completed the translation or second volume.

54

Philip Michael Forness

excerpted monastic literary texts.13 Around one hundred thirty such miscellanies survive in Syriac manuscripts. Most of them come from the Syriac Orthodox tradition.14 The first part of this article summarizes all additional manuscript witnesses to Jacob of Serugh’s letters to highlight their circulation among monastic communities. The second part identifies how the collation of these manuscripts reveals the monastic transmission and use of Jacob’s letters. These manuscripts provide evidence for the widespread and distinct transmission of Jacob of Serugh’s letters among monastic communities. They thereby suggest profitable avenues of research for uncovering both the monastic content and the later reception of these letters. Four appendices make available new textual evidence for Jacob of Serugh’s letters. Appendix 1 provides an updated list of all manuscripts known to contain the letters in Syriac along 13

For a recent summary of the tradition with prospects for future research, see Grigory Kessel, “Syriac Monastic Miscellanies,” in Comparative Oriental Manuscript Studies: An Introduction, ed. Alessandro Bausi (Hamburg: Tredition, 2015), 411–412. On collections of extracts in Syriac manuscripts in general, see Kristian S. Heal, “Five Kinds of Rewriting: Appropriation, Influence and the Manuscript History of Early Syriac Literature,” Journal for the Canadian Society for Syriac Studies 15 (2015): 55–56. Previous research on Syriac monastic miscellanies is slim. Kessel notes three facsimile reproductions, six discussions of individual miscellanies, and three articles that take a broader methodological approach. A fourth category of studies on the circulation of texts within monastic miscellanies would include several more articles: Sebastian P. Brock, “Stomathalassa, Dandamis and Secundus in a Syriac Monastic Anthology,” in After Bardaisan: Studies on Continuity and Change in Syriac Christianity in Honour of Professor Han J. W. Drijvers, ed. G. J. Reinink and A. C. Klugkist, Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 89 (Leuven: Uitgeverij Peeters en Departement Oosterse Studies, 1999), 35–50; Grigory Kessel, “Letter of Thomas the Monk: A Study of the Syriac Text and Its Author,” The Journal of Eastern Christian Studies 41 (2009): 43–100; Grigory Kessel, “A Previously Unknown Reattributed Fragment from Mēmrā 16 of the Book of Steps,” in Breaking the Mind. New Studies in the Syriac “Book of Steps,” ed. Kristian S. Heal and Robert Kitchen (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 2014), 53–71. 14 Kessel, “Syriac Monastic Miscellanies,” 412.

New Textual Evidence for Jacob’s Letters

55

with bibliographic references to descriptions of their contents. Appendix 2 identifies the letters translated into Arabic and lists the manuscripts that preserve them. Appendix 3 presents the collation of the letters found in Mingana Syr. 331, Mingana Syr. 410, Harvard Syr. 48, Harvard Syr. 108/18, and CFMM 420. The collation is organized according to the text in Olinder so that it may serve as a resource for others working closely with the text of the letters. Appendix 4 summarizes numerically the correlation between these five manuscripts and other manuscripts that transmit Jacob’s letters. Additional Manuscript Witnesses to Jacob of Serugh’s Letters New textual evidence for Jacob of Serugh’s letters can enhance our understanding of the circulation of this corpus. The additional manuscript witnesses form three categories: (1) manuscripts from the first millennium, (2) monastic miscellanies from the second millennium, and (3) Arabic collections. This article collates and focuses on the second group. But a review of all the new evidence provides a fuller picture of the circulation of this collection. Appendices 1 and 2 summarize this information. Manuscripts from the First Millennium The first category consists of two manuscripts from the first millennium. Sebastian Brock and Lucas Van Rompay’s recent catalogue of Deir al-Surian identifies extracts from three of Jacob’s letters in Wadi al-Natrun, Deir al-Surian, Syr. 28A and a complete letter in Syr. 29.15 Wadi al-Natrun, Deir al-Surian, Syr. 28A dates to the sixth or seventh century and “is a huge collection of patristic passages, along with extracts from historical works, canonical collections, and biblical verses in 15 Sebastian P. Brock and Lucas Van Rompay, Catalogue of the Syriac Manuscripts and Fragments in the Library of Deir al-Surian, Wadi al-Natrun (Egypt), Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 227 (Leuven: Peeters, 2014), 187, 192–193, 217–218.

56

Philip Michael Forness

support of the Syriac-Orthodox cause.”16 Three extracts of Jacob of Serugh’s letters appear in this extensive collection: “to prostitutes who became nuns” (Letter 37),17 “to a monk” (Letter 1), and “to the Christians of Nagran, forced by the Jews to deny Christ” (Letter 19).18 The titles assigned to the first two letters emphasize their relevance to monastic concerns. This is especially significant for Letter 1, as other manuscripts provide titles that emphasize the recipient, namely, the controversial figure Stephen bar Sudaili (6th century).19 Letter 37 appears in a section of its own in the collection. But Letter 1 and Letter 19 are both included in a lengthy section of the manuscript entitled: “Extracts of admonition from the Holy Scriptures and from the blessed Fathers, (extracts) that are full of good hope for the sinner.”20 The extract from Letter 19 features an extended discussion of Christology from a miaphysite perspective.21 Yet the producers of this manuscript chose to emphasize the situation of the Christians of Nagran in its title, perhaps to fit the theme of hope. The extracts and framing of the letters in this manuscript show that Jacob’s epistolary 16

Ibid., 178.   (the translation comes from  Ibid., 187: !SQ4$  !S4? Q? Brock and Van Rompay). 18 The extract of Letter 37 appears on fol. 33v–35r; the extract of Letter 1 appears on fol. 68v–69r; and the extract of Letter 19 appears on fol. 73v– 75v. The Syriac text is not provided for the latter two letters. Thus, I have depended on the English translations in ibid., 192–193. 19 On the other titles given to this letter, see Olinder, Epistulae, CSCO 110, Scriptores Syri 57:2; 2n3. On Stephen and his reception in the Syriac tradition, see Lucas Van Rompay, “Sṭephanos bar Ṣudayli,” in Gorgias Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Syriac Heritage, ed. Sebastian P. Brock et al. (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2011), 384–385. 20  Brock and Van Rompay, Catalogue, 188: A< !+@3O< L+CH     41.9 $0 "O$B A4:< 4C- !*# AQ# 3+0 .? 3 41- ;E +9 
S@P .OIE. The colophon appears on Harvard Syr.  V:47? 4?+3 /
M# 48, fol. 295r. 34 On this monastery, see George Anton Kiraz, “al-Zafarān, Dayr,” in Gorgias Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Syriac Heritage, ed. Sebastian P. Brock et al. (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2011), 449. 35 Cambridge, MA, Harvard Univeristy, Houghton Library, Syr. 48, fol.    42v ( @H "P A< : ?,- !S4&O&UP ;E); 55v. 36 The history of the identification of the letters in this mansucript is complex. Lewis Titterton had composed a catalogue of these manuscripts as a doctoral dissertation in 1925 and identified both of the letters in Harvard Syr. 48: Lewis H. Titterton, “The Syriac Manuscripts in the Semitic Museum of Harvard University” (Ph.D. diss., not submitted, Harvard University, 1925), 85–86. Yet he never submitted the dissertation and did not pursue further research on Syriac manuscripts. The witnesses to these letters were thus unknown to Olinder when he produced his edition. James Clemons did not note either of these letters in his description of this manuscript in 1966 (see manuscript number 81, in James T. Clemons, “A Checklist of Syriac Manuscripts in the United States and Canada,” Orientalia Christiana Periodica 32 [1966]: 239). Moshe Goshen-Gottstein published a catalogue of the library in 1979 and noted one of the letters in this manuscript (Moshe H. Goshen-Gottstein, Syriac Manuscripts in the Harvard College Library: A Catalogue, Harvard Semitic Studies 23 [Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1979], 57). J. F. Coakley’s most recent online catalogue likewise only notes one letter in Harvard Syr. 48 (J. F. Coakley, “Houghton Library MSS Syriac,” accessed January 13, 2017, http://hcl.harvard.edu/libraries/houghton/collections/early_manuscripts /bibliographies/Syriac.cfm).

62

Philip Michael Forness

letters in Jacob’s corpus to be relevant additions to the collections they were forming. Harvard Syr. 108/18 consists of six paper folios. The folios are all pierced on one side, and some folios have additional sheets pasted on top of them. The manuscript contains ten texts. Six are extracts from Jacob of Serugh’s letters.37 The others are an extract from the Book of Steps and texts attributed to Gregory Thaumaturgus (c. 213–c. 270), Nilus of Ancyra, and Ephrem the Syrian (c. 306–373). These works often appear in monastic miscellanies.38 I have identified three comparable hands that would suggest a date for this manuscript of the fifteenth or sixteenth century.39 The fragmentary nature of this manuscript results in the lack of individual titles for most of these letters. Yet this fragmentary manuscript contains the third largest collection of Jacob’s letters in a manuscript. Portions of the following letters appear: to Stephen bar Sudaili (Letter 1), to Paul the monk (Letter 11), to the monks of the monastery of Mar Bassus (Letter 17), on the repentance of the soul (Letter 28), to a monk with hallucinations (Letter 38), and to Daniel the Solitary (Letter 39).40 The portion of Letter 17 in 37

Previous descriptions of this manuscript have noted only one letter in this collection: Titterton, “Syriac Manuscripts,” 213; Clemons, “Checklist,” 125 (this manuscript is 139.4); Coakley, “Houghton Library MSS Syriac.” But Goshen-Gottstein, Syriac Manuscripts, 81, suggests that the manuscript contains one of Jacob’s homilies. 38 The circulation of a fragment from Homily 16 from the Book of Steps in other monastic miscellanies serves as a good indication of the general content of this manuscript: Kessel, “Fragment from Mēmrā 16.” 39 See the hands of the main text in Baghdad, Syrian Catholic Archdiocese of Baghdad, 133; Mardin, Church of the Forty Martyrs, 420; and Mardin, Church of the Forty Martyrs, 469. 40 The letters appear on the following folios: Letter 1 (fol. 6v–r), 11 (fol. 2r), 17 (fol. 1r), 28 (fol. 3r), 38 (fol. 3r–5v), and 39 (fol. 2r–2v). The manuscript only preserves titles or final titles for two of these letters. Letter 17 has the final title: “Ended is the Faith of Mar Jacob” ( !+@=3 S=:P +MF3 O<) (Cambridge, MA, Harvard University, Houghton Library, 108, folder 18, fol. 1r). Letter 38 has a partial title: “Next, the letter of holy…  false…” ( @H (...) Q3(L !O& ) (fol. 3r). The fragmentary title

New Textual Evidence for Jacob’s Letters

63

this collection has a Christological focus and will be discussed below. But the other five letters have clear monastic themes that mark this manuscript as a monastic miscellany. CFMM 420 has a very similar hand to Harvard Syr. 108/18 and also contains several of the same short texts.41 It consists of four smaller manuscripts that date from the 1460s to 1474 or 1475 based on their colophons.42 The first part (fol. 1r–20v) contains introductory material and a portion of The Spiritual Ship by a monastic leader from Ṭur ʿAbdin named Masʿud (1430/1431–1509?).43 The second part (fol. 21r–91r) consists of extracts from monastic writings, including the same extract of Jacob of Serugh’s Letter 17 included in Harvard Syr. 108/18. In addition to the selection from Letter 17, this part of the manuscript includes extracts from works attributed to Philoxenos of Mabbug, Abraham of Nathpar, Isaiah of Scetis, Evagrius Ponticus, Gregory of Nazianzos (329/330–c. 390), Ephrem the Syrian, and Jacob of Serugh (a metrical, perhaps homiletical extract). The third part (fol. 91v–249r) features ascetical treatises and extracts attributed to Isaac of Nineveh, John of Apamea, Evagrius Ponticus, Ephrem the Syrian, Thomas the Monk, and Makarios the Great. It also contains narratives of the lives of several ascetic thinkers. The fourth and final part (fol. 250r–276v) contains the Book of Hierotheos. The inclusion of Masʿud’s writing and the proximity of the of Letter 38 would seem to be related to the title for this letter in Cambridge, MA, Harvard University, Houghton Library, Syr. 48. 41 The extract from Homily 16 of the Book of Steps and Ephrem the Syrian, Excerpt on Paradise appear on CFMM 420, fol. 234v–235r. 42 On the description of this manuscript, see Yuḥanon Dolabany, Catalogue of Syriac Manuscripts in the Zafaran Monastery, ed. Gregorios Yuḥanon Ibrahim (Damascus: Sidawi Printing House, 1994), 67–76; Adam Carter McCollum, “CFMM 00420,” Hill Museum & Manuscript Library: Legacy Catalog (OLIVER), accessed February 1, 2017, http://www.vhmml.us/research2014/catalog/detail.asp?MSID=132268. 43 On Masud, see H. G. B. Teule, “Masūd of Ṭur Abdin,” in Gorgias Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Syriac Heritage, ed. Sebastian P. Brock et al. (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2011), 279–280.

64

Philip Michael Forness

composition of this manuscript to his lifetime suggest the origins of this manuscript in Ṭur ʿAbdin at the end of the fifteenth century. These five manuscripts represent a broader trend in the circulation of Jacob of Serugh’s letters. Aside from the two manuscripts that preserve large collections of the corpus from late antiquity, the letters circulated independently or in small collections. The majority of the manuscripts that preserve Jacob of Serugh’s letters take the form of monastic miscellanies. The five monastic miscellanies examined here all come from the Syriac Orthodox tradition and date between the early fourteenth and late eighteenth centuries. All appear to have originated either in Ṭur ʿAbdin or just west of it near Mardin. They exhibit different types of collections. Three of the collections feature primarily early Christian authors (Mingana Syr. 410, Harvard Syr. 48, Harvard Syr. 108/18), while two also include monastic authors from the later Syriac tradition (Mingana Syr. 331, CFMM 420). There are various connections among the specific texts that they transmit, but no manuscript depends on another. The diversity of the collections and the individual character of each manuscript match wider trends regarding the phenomenon of monastic miscellanies.44 Nine different letters circulated as part of these collections. As the following section will suggest, the collation of these texts reveals even more precise connections to patterns in the transmission of texts in monastic miscellanies. Arabic Translations and Collections of the Letters The third set includes four manuscripts and a printed book that feature Arabic translations of three of Jacob of Serugh’s letters. The manuscripts and book that contain Jacob’s letters all come from Egypt and all consist of extensive collections of Jacob’s 44

Kessel, “Syriac Monastic Miscellanies,” 413: “Almost every Syriac monastic miscellany has its own content that is not mirrored in any other miscellany.”

New Textual Evidence for Jacob’s Letters

65

homilies.45 At least three of these manuscripts and the book contain three letters: to Stephen bar Sudaili (Letter 1), on the repentance of the soul (Letter 28), and to a friend (Letter 43). Letters 1 and 28 circulated together in two monastic miscellanies: London, British Library, Add. 17262 from the twelfth-century and Harvard Syr. 108/18 from the fifteenth or sixteenth century.46 Likewise, there is only one manuscript witness to the Syriac text of Letter 43. This manuscript—Berlin, Staatsbibliothek, Sachau 111—dates to before the year 1379, also includes Letter 28, and takes the form of a monastic miscellany.47 Only a close analysis of the Arabic translation with the Syriac text would confirm or disprove a relationship between the Arabic translation and the versions of these letters found in monastic miscellanies. But it seems plausible that the letters came into Arabic through such a collection. The four manuscripts and the book that contain Arabic translations of the letters represent a different aspect of the reception of Jacob of Serugh’s letters. They divide into three different groups. First, two of the manuscripts feature eighteen homilies by Jacob of Serugh accompanied by two or three letters.48 Wadi al-Natrun, Dayr Abu Maqar, 335 dates to 1784 and contains all three of the letters.49 Cairo, Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate, Theol. 157 dates to the eighteenth century and 45

On the transmission of the Arabic translation of Jacob’s homilies in collections of the Coptic Church, see Aaron Michael Butts, “The Christian Arabic Transmission of Jacob of Serugh (d. 521): The Sammlungen,” Journal for the Canadian Society for Syriac Studies 16 (2016): 39–59. 46 William Wright, Catalogue of Syriac Manuscripts in the British Museum Acquired since the Year 1838 (London, 1870–1872), 2:867–873. 47 Berlin, Staatsbibliothek, Sachau 111 (Eduard Sachau, Verzeichniss der syrischen Handschriften, Die Handschriften-verzeichnisse der königlichen Bibliothek zu Berlin 23 [Berlin, 1899], 2:646–654 [No. 199]). 48 Butts, “The Christian Arabic Transmission,” 42, notes the correspondence between these two manuscripts. 49 Ugo Zanetti, Les manuscrits de Dair Abû Maqâr: Inventaire, Cahiers d’Orientalisme 11 (Geneva: P. Cramer, 1986), 48–49, identifies the works in this manuscript according to their location in Athanāsiyūs. He notes each of these three letters.

66

Philip Michael Forness

includes two of the letters.50 Second, the book and one manuscript include Arabic translations of fifty-five homilies by Jacob, the three letters, and a homily by Ephrem the Syrian (falsely ascribed to Jacob). Mīkhāīl Athanāsiyūs published a book in 1905 with this collection based on an unidentified manuscript.51 The same collection also appears in Wadi alNatrun, Dayr al-Baramus, 2/38, which dates to 1853.52 Third, one manuscript—Cairo, Coptic Museum, Lit. 113—dates to 1871 and consists of thirty homilies along with the three letters.53 The circulation of the Arabic translation of Jacob’s letters thus took place in the context of larger collections of his works. It is possible that the Syriac base texts for the translations came from monastic miscellanies. But their 50

I have not been able to consult this manuscript or determine the contents from its catalogue entries. This manuscript is also identified as Graf 462 and Simaika 314. In two places, Graf indicates that letters appear in this manuscript: “Suivent les lettres du même auteur, ff. 190v–201v” (Georg Graf, Catalogue de manuscrits arabes chrétiens conservés au Caire, Studi e Testi 63 [Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1934], 174); “Zwei Briefe: Kairo 462, ff. 190v–210v” (Georg Graf, Geschichte der christlichen arabischen Literatur, Studi e Testi 118, 133, 146, 147, 172 [Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1944–1953], 1:452). 51 Letter 43 appears on Mīkhāīl Athanāsiyūs, ed., Kitāb mayāmir ay mawāiẓ al-sarūjī (Cairo: Maṭbaat Miṣr bil-Fajjālah, 1905), 357–362; Letter 1 on ibid., 389–393; and Letter 28 on ibid., 393–394. 52 See Khalil Alwan, ed., Jacques de Saroug: Quatre homélies métriques sur la création, trans. Khalil Alwan, CSCO 508–509, Scriptores Syri 214–215 (Leuven: Peeters, 1989), CSCO 508, Scriptores Syri 214:xi-xii. Butts, “The Christian Arabic Transmission,” 43, pointed me to this source. 53 Letter 43 appears on fol. 174v–177v; Letter 28 on fol. 177v–178v; and Letter 1 on fol. 178v–180v. This manuscript is also identified as Graf 98 and Simaika 283, and it appears in roll A20, item 2 in the Brigham Young University microfilm collection. For a description of the manuscript, see Graf, Catalogue, 37; Marcus Simaika, Catalogue of the Coptic and Arabic Manuscripts in the Coptic Museum, the Patriarchate, the Principal Churches of Cairo and Alexandria and the Monasteries of Egypt (Cairo: Government Press, 1939– 1942), 1:127; William F. Macomber, Final Inventory of the Microfilmed Manuscripts of the Coptic Museum, Old Cairo, Egypt (Provo, UT: Brigham Young University, 1995), A20-2.

New Textual Evidence for Jacob’s Letters

67

circulation in manuscripts organized around Jacob’s authorship points to a different reception in the Coptic church.54 Summary Attention to each of the three sets of new manuscripts offers several vantage points into the reception of Jacob of Serugh’s letters. The two early manuscripts reveal two periods of interest in Jacob as a figure and an author. They show the reshaping of Jacob of Serugh’s letters to fit the particular needs and interests of communities. Each exhibits interest in his monastic thought contained within the letters. The presence of his writings in monastic miscellanies from the second millennium represents another aspect of the reception of this corpus within the Syriac Orthodox tradition. The translation of his letters into Arabic and the presence of these texts in collections of his writings demonstrates his importance in the Coptic Orthodox tradition from the eighteenth to the twentieth centuries. The following section takes a closer look at the second set of manuscripts as evidence for the circulation of his letters among Syriac monastic communities. ANALYSIS OF THE TRANSMISSION AND COLLATION OF THE LETTERS The collation of the witnesses to Jacob of Serugh’s letters found in five monastic miscellanies offers several avenues for understanding the circulation of this corpus among monastic communities. This section divides into two parts. The first part discusses the correspondence among manuscripts that contain monastic miscellanies demonstrated through the collation of these manuscripts. The second part examines several practices of integrating texts into monastic miscellanies that emerge 54

For an exploration of the Coptic Arabic collections of Jacob’s works, see Butts, “The Christian Arabic Transmission.” One Sahidic Coptic translation of a homily by Jacob of Serugh has recently been discovered in two manuscripts: Alin Suciu, “The Sahidic Version of Jacob of Serugh’s Memrā on the Ascension of Christ,” Le Muséon 128, no. 1–2 (2015): 49–83.

68

Philip Michael Forness

from the collation. Appendix 3 makes the full collation available as a tool for further research on this corpus. Appendix 4 provides of tabular summary of the variants shared among manuscripts. The analysis of the collation results not only in a fuller understanding of the distinct transmission of Jacob of Serugh’s letters among monastic communities but also the processes by which Syriac communities modified these texts to meet their interests. Textual Relationships among Monastic Miscellanies The majority of the manuscripts that transmit Jacob of Serugh’s letters take the form of monastic miscellanies. The largest two collections of his letters come from late antiquity. London, British Library, Add. 14587 dates to 603 and contains Letters 1–37. This manuscript serves as the base text for most of Olinder’s edition. London, British Library, Add. 17163 comes from the seventh century and contains twelve of Jacob’s letters. Ten of these are also found in British Library, Add. 14587, but the manuscript includes two additional letters (Letters 38–39). In the Syriac tradition in general, such collections of the corpora of individual authors become much less frequent after the first millennium.55 Harvard Syr. 108/18 contains the third largest collection with its six distinct letters in the context of a monastic miscellany. Nearly all of the remaining manuscripts that transmit Jacob’s letters take the form of monastic miscellanies and transmit between one and four letters. The collation of new textual evidence demonstrates close connections among the text of the letters contained in these monastic miscellanies. 55

See, for example, Sebastian P. Brock, “The Transmission of Ephrem’s Madrashe in the Syriac Liturgical Tradition,” Studia Patristica 33 (1997): 490–505; Sebastian P. Brock, “Without Mushê of Nisibis, Where Would We Be?,” Journal of Eastern Christian Studies 56, no. 1 (2004): 15–24; Aaron Michael Butts, “Manuscript Transmission as Reception History: The Case of Ephrem the Syrian (d. 373),” Journal of Early Christian Studies, forthcoming.

New Textual Evidence for Jacob’s Letters

69

Letter 40 appears in three of the five monastic miscellanies collated in this article. Olinder based his edition of Letter 40 on London, British Library, Add. 14577 which features a monastic miscellany and dates to the ninth century.56 He collated this text against another monastic miscellany: London, British Library, Rich. 7190 (= BL Rich. 7190) which dates to the twelfth century.57 Mingana Syr. 331, Mingana Syr. 410, and Harvard Syr. 48 all include this letter in its entirety and suggest a much wider circulation. Each manuscript has a significant number of unique variants. But the manuscripts do share variants with each other and some reasonably strong connections appear. For example, Mingana Syr. 331 and Harvard Syr. 48 share fifteen variants, while Harvard Syr. 48 and BL Rich. 7190 have sixteen in common. The presence of Letter 40 in three of these five manuscripts greatly increases the known witnesses to this text and emphasizes the distinct transmission of this corpus in monastic miscellanies. The collation also helps identify textual relationships with the letters in other monastic miscellanies. London, British Library, Add. 17262 (= BL Add. 17262) dates to the twelfth century and contains a collection of monastic writings of around twenty authors.58 Four of Jacob of Serugh’s letters (Letters 1, 25, 28, and 38) appear on fol. 112–121v of this manuscript alongside three of his homilies with monastic themes.59 This manuscript shares variant readings with both of the Harvard manuscripts. The version of Letter 1 found in Harvard Syr. 108/18, contains a total of 75 variant readings. It shares two-thirds of these variant readings with BL Add. 17262 (50 out of 75). The portion of Letter 28 preserved in Harvard 56

Wright, Syriac Manuscripts in the British Museum, 2:784–788. F. Rosen and J. Forshall, Catalogus codicum manuscriptorum orientalium qui in Museo Britannico asservantur, pars prima, codices syriacos et carshunicos amplectens (London, 1838), 77–83; Wright, Syriac Manuscripts in the British Museum, 3:1206. 58 Wright, Syriac Manuscripts in the British Museum, 2:867–873. 59 The three homilies are his two Homilies on the Solitaries (beginning on fols. 213v and 217v) and his Homily on Julian Saba (beginning on fol. 230v). 57

70

Philip Michael Forness

Syr. 108/18, is too short for firm conclusions.60 For Letter 38, Harvard Syr. 108/18 shares roughly one-third of its variant readings with BL Add. 17262 (42 out of 125), but 17 of these appear in all of the other manuscripts. Harvard Syr. 48 also preserves Letter 38 and exhibits a very strong relationship to BL Add. 17262. Of the 309 variant readings found in Harvard Syr. 48 for Letter 38, 214 appear in other manuscripts. Fifty of these 214 appear in the rest of the manuscripts that were not used for the base text. Nearly all (146 out of 164) of the remaining variants also appear in BL Add. 17262. The similar variant readings found in Harvard Syr. 48, Harvard Syr. 108/18, and BL Add. 17262 suggest a close relationship among these manuscripts. Berlin, Staatsbibliothek, Sachau 352 (= Berlin Sachau 352) dates to the thirteenth century and includes a monastic miscellany. Three of Jacob of Serugh’s letters (Letters 11, 27, and 39) appear on fol. 110r–113v. Two of these letters also appear in Harvard Syr. 108/18. Of the extant portion of Letter 11 in Harvard Syr. 108/18, roughly half (9 out of 20) of the variants match the text in Berlin Sachau 352. A similar relationship between these two manuscripts can be discerned through the text of Letter 39. Roughly two-thirds (19 out of 29) of the variant readings found in Harvard Syr. 108/18 also appear in Berlin Sachau 352. The correlation of these variant readings in both Letters 11 and 39 suggests a strong connection between Harvard Syr. 108/18 and Berlin Sachau 352. The monastic miscellanies collated in this article offer new textual evidence for nine of Jacob of Serugh’s letters. The shared variants among these manuscripts and with other monastic miscellanies suggest a distinct transmission of the letters among monastic communities that is not dependent on earlier copies of the letters. The collation also shows the variability among individual witnesses. These characteristics 60

There does not appear to be a distinct connection between BL Add. 17262 and Mingana Syr. 410. These two manuscripts share a total of eight variants out of the fifty-one variants noted in Mingana Syr. 410.

New Textual Evidence for Jacob’s Letters

71

represent general observations on the circulation of texts in Syriac monastic miscellanies.61 Adapting Texts for Monastic Miscellanies The collation also reveals practices by which the communities that produced these collections adapted the texts in order to fit their interests. The new textual evidence suggests three different practices that these communities undertook. First, the text of Letter 17 preserved in Harvard Syr. 108/18 and CFMM 420 serves as an example of extracting and repurposing a text. Second, the combination of Letters 38 and 22 in Mingana Syr. 331 shows how two texts could be combined to form an entirely new text. Third, the text of Letter 42 in Mingana Syr. 331 permits a view into the process of abridging a text. Each of these practices made these texts serviceable for the monastic context and represents an aspect of their transmission. The text of Letter 17 found in Harvard Syr. 108/18 and CFMM 420 provides an intriguing example of the transmission of the letters. Olinder’s edition of this text is based on the two large late antique collections of the letters. None of the variants that appear in Harvard Syr. 108/18 or CFMM 420 correspond to the variants noted by Olinder. But, almost all (12 out of 13) of the variants found in Harvard Syr. 108/18 also appear in the selection of this letter found in CFMM 420. In addition to this textual correspondence, the title of the text in CFMM 420 and the final title of the text in Harvard Syr. 108/18 match. The title in CFMM 420 is “The Faith of Mar Jacob, the Teacher, of Batnae of Serugh” ( A@1# @I:< +MF3 O< !+@=3

OB), while the final title in Harvard Syr. 108/18 is “Ended is the Faith of Mar Jacob” ( +MF3 O< !+@=3 S=:P). As noted above, both of these manuscripts also date to the fifteenth or sixteenth century. Given this close correlation, it seems likely that an excerpt from Jacob of Serugh’s Letter 17 circulated independently under the title of “The Faith of Mar 61

On the circulation of texts in these collections, see Kessel, “Letter of Thomas the Monk”; Kessel, “Fragment from Mēmrā 16.”

72

Philip Michael Forness

Jacob, the Teacher, of Batnae of Serugh.”62 The individual or individuals who extracted this text from the letter separated it from its original context as a part of Jacob’s extended correspondence with the monastery of Mar Bassus outside of Antioch (Letters 13–17). They gave the text a new title that obscured its origin in a letter and marked it as a new genre. This extract from Letter 17 became a short confession of faith attributed to Jacob in its transmission in monastic miscellanies. Mingana Syr. 331 combines two formerly independent texts to create an entirely new text. The text of Letter 38 in this manuscript begins with an extended title that describes the contents of the original letter. The text of the beginning of this letter follows the title, but it then abruptly switches to the middle of the text of Letter 22 without notice. The sequence of text is as follows, with a forward slash marking the transition from the text of Letter 38 to that of Letter 22: “For the activities of the world are great snares. / The repentance of that one who is taken captive by the sin unto death which is the transgression of the commandment….”63 The combination of these texts does not preserve a logical sequence of thought. Indeed, the phrase “the repentance of the one who is taken captive…” is the object of a verb in the full text of Letter 22 rather than a subject of an incomplete sentence as in the present manuscript.64 Within this manuscript, extracts from two of Jacob of Serugh’s letters have combined to form an entirely new text. The combination of these two texts seems to be 62

Wadi al-Natrun, Deir al-Surian 29, fol. 56r does contain a text called “The Demonstration of Mar Jacob, the Teacher” ( O< Q3(L !S3+- @I:< +MF3), but its text does not correspond to the ending of Letter 17. It does not seem to correspond directly to the text from any one of Jacob’s letters, although it bears similarities with his language in parts of several letters. 63 Birmingham, Selly Oak Colleges, Mingana 331, fol. 117v: +?  O4&  !+$3 . #T +? .H   V=:E  +@4@E !*1.# (-S<  
. ?(L+H O$E S3 !+<. This corresponds to Olinder, Epistulae, CSCO 110, Scriptores Syri 57:270, 13–15; 158, 14–15. 64 Jacob of Serugh, Letters 15 (ibid., CSCO 110, Scriptores Syri 57:158).

New Textual Evidence for Jacob’s Letters

73

accidental, as the title given to the letter only corresponds to the small portion of Letter 38 in the combined text. But the phenomenon of inserting foreign texts and combining one or more texts—both deliberately and coincidentally—is a known feature of the transmission of texts in monastic miscellanies.65 The text of Letter 42 in Mingana Syr. 331 attests to another practice used to form texts in monastic miscellanies. This manuscript does not preserve the entirety of this letter as found in the other manuscript witness. Additionally, the extract in Mingana Syr. 331 features seven omissions of one or more lines of the text that appears in Olinder’s edition. One of these omissions seems to be a scribal error due to the repetition of words (homoioteleuton).66 But the scribe takes care to note each of the other six omissions. A punctuation mark of two full stops (..) notes the location of five of these omissions.67 The scribe indicates the sixth omission even more clearly by adding the word “et cetera” followed by two full stops (.. 6OP).68 I have not discovered a relationship between these omissions that explain the copyist’s decisions to omit these passages. But the text of this letter demonstrates that the original copyist of this letter knew of a lengthier version of this letter and deliberately chose to omit portions of the text. The practices of extracting, combining, and abridging texts in these manuscripts meet expectations for the transmission of texts within monastic miscellanies. These manuscripts emphasize the authorship of these letters by Jacob of Serugh as a prominent thinker in the Syriac Orthodox tradition. Yet the practices that they undertook to modify these letters does 65

See the discussion of Recension III of a letter attributed to Thomas the Monk in Kessel, “Letter of Thomas the Monk,” 59–60. 66 Birmingham, Selly Oak Colleges, Mingana 331, fol. 114r omits Olinder, Epistulae, CSCO 110, Scriptores Syri 57:300, 17–19. The first word  , and the text starts again with !SQI@9  . missing is !SQI? 67 As noted in the collation below, these omissions begin at ibid., CSCO 110, Scriptores Syri 57:297, 28; 300, 27; 301, 5; 301, 19; 301, 22. 68 This omission appears begins at ibid., CSCO 110, Scriptores Syri 57:300, 5.

74

Philip Michael Forness

not indicate that the producers of the monastic miscellanies valued these texts as letters. Indeed, the reframing of Letter 17 as a confession of faith suggests that the genre of letters did not matter as much as the content. They chose to modify and adapt these letters to fit the themes relevant to monastic life and the faith of the Syriac Orthodox Church. Summary The collation of the letters in the five monastic miscellanies offers insight into the transmission of Jacob of Serugh’s letters. The variant readings in these new manuscript witnesses show connections among the new manuscripts themselves as well as to other monastic miscellanies. They thus attest to the distinct transmission of the letters in monastic miscellanies. The collation also reveals distinct practices that affected the text of Jacob’s letters in monastic miscellanies. The communities that produced these manuscripts extracted a portion of a letter and repurposed it as a confession of faith, combined two letters to form a new text, and abridged a text. These manuscripts thus provide an important testimony to the manner in which Jacob’s letters were transmitted among monastic communities in the second millennium. CONCLUSION The textual evidence for Jacob of Serugh’s letters witnesses to their reception in monastic communities. The two manuscripts from the Mingana collection, two Harvard manuscripts, and the manuscript from the Church of the Forty Martyrs in Mardin evidence the circulation, copying, and independent transmission of these letters within monastic communities from the fourteenth through eighteenth centuries in the Syriac Orthodox tradition. Arabic translations of the letters found use from the eighteenth through twentieth centuries among Coptic communities. This article has explored what the new textual evidence for Jacob of Serugh’s letters reveals about the circulation, transmission, and use of his epistolary corpus.

New Textual Evidence for Jacob’s Letters

75

These manuscripts uncover a distinct textual tradition and reception of Jacob’s letters within monastic circles. These communities recognized the relevance of Jacob’s monastic thought within his letters. They then adapted the letters to fit the genre of monastic miscellanies and to meet their own interests. This study has argued that the textual history of these letters offers not only a better understanding of the texts themselves but of the communities that produced, used, and transmitted his letters. We will profitably engage Jacob’s letters as sources for late antique monastic thought and as texts that circulated among monastic communities from late antiquity into the modern period.

76

Philip Michael Forness

APPENDIX 1: UPDATED LIST OF THE SYRIAC MANUSCRIPTS OF JACOB OF SERUGH’S LETTERS This list is largely based on that given in Olinder and specifies the sigla he used for the manuscripts in his edition.70 Additions include page references to manuscript catalogues and references to new manuscript evidence for the letters. Abbreviations are as follows: Assemani

Assemani, Stephen Evodius, and Joseph Simonius Assemani. Bibliothecae apostolicae vaticanae codicum manuscriptorum catalogus. 3 vols. Rome, 1758–1759.

Brock – Van Rompay Brock, Sebastian P., and Lucas Van Rompay. Catalogue of the Syriac Manuscripts and Fragments in the Library of Deir al-Surian, Wadi al-Natrun (Egypt). Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 227. Leuven: Peeters, 2014. Dolabany

Dolabany, Yuḥanon. Catalogue of Syriac Manuscripts in the Zaʿfaran Monastery. Edited by Gregorios Yuḥanon Ibrahim. Damascus: Sidawi Printing House, 1994.

HMML

Hill Museum & Manuscript Library.

Mingana

Mingana, Alphonse. Catalogue of the Mingana Collection of Manuscripts. 3 vols. Cambridge: W. Heffer, 1933–1939.

70

Ibid., iii–v.

New Textual Evidence for Jacob’s Letters

Rosen – Forshall

77

Rosen, F., and J. Forshall. Catalogus codicum manuscriptorum orientalium qui in Museo Britannico asservantur, pars prima, codices syriacos et carshunicos amplectens. London, 1838.

Sachau

Sachau, Eduard. Verzeichniss der syrischen Handschriften. 2 vols. Die Handschriftenverzeichnisse der königlichen Bibliothek zu Berlin 23. Berlin, 1899.

Wright

Wright, William. Catalogue of Syriac Manuscripts in the British Museum Acquired since the Year 1838. 3 vols. London, 1870–1872.

List of the Syriac Manuscripts of Jacob of Serugh’s Letters Siglum Manuscript

Letter(s)

Date

A

1–37

603

B C D E F G H I

London, British Library, Add. 14587, fol. 1r–104r London, British Library, Add. 17163, fol. 1r–48v

Catalogue Description(s) Wright, 2:517–524 (no. 672) Wright, 2:524–526 (no. 673)

16–18, 2– 7th 5, 1, 38– 39, 22–23 London, British Library, 28 7th/8th Wright, 2:738–740 Add. 14531, fol. 118r–119r (no. 769) London, British Library, 40 9th Wright, 2:784–788 Add. 14577, fol. 98r–v (no. 793) London, British Library, 37 6th/7th Wright, 2:683–684 (no. 747) Add. 14607, fol. 98v–101v 22 6th/7th Wright, 2:696–701 London, British Library, Add. 14612, fol. 84v, 87v– (no. 753) 91r London, British Library, 11, 41 823 Wright, 2:762–766 Add. 14623, fol. 12v–13v (no. 781) London, British Library, 38 10th Wright, 2:833–834 Add. 14637, fol. 37v–40v (no. 818) 18, 34, 19 10th London, British Library, Wright, 2:828–831 Add. 14726, fol. 4r–9r, (no. 815) 13r–19v

78

Philip Michael Forness

J

London, British Library, Add. 14729, fol. 116v– 123v London, British Library, Add. 14733, fol. 68r–70r London, British Library, Add. 17166, fol. 35r–39r London, British Library, Add. 17185, fol. 58v–62r London, British Library, Add. 17193, fol. 98v–99r London, British Library, Add. 17206, fol. 54r–59r London, British Library, Add. 17262, fol. 112r– 121v London, British Library, Add. 18814, fol. 128v– 141v London, British Library, Rich. 7190, fol. 187r–188r

K L M N O P Q R

22

12th/ 13th

Wright, 2:873–874 (no. 838)

14

1199

38

6th

42

10th/ 11th 874

Wright, 3:1139– 1140 (no. 961) Wright, 2:658–660 (no. 737) Wright, 2:838–840 (no. 822) Wright, 2:989– 1002 (no. 861) Wright, 2:859–860 (no. 831) Wright, 2:867–873 (no. 837)

1 28 38, 28, 1, 25

11th/ 12th 12th

38, 22, 25 9th 40

Wright, 2:793–796 (no. 797)

12th

Rosen – Forshall, 77–83 (no. 49); Wright, 3:1206 (App. A, no. 49) Rome, Vatican Library, Sir. 13, 1 before Assemani, 3:49– 107, fol. 55r–59r 8th 61 Rome, Vatican Library, Sir. 22 692 Assemani, 3:71– 109, fol. 56v–65r 76 Rome, Vatican Library, Sir. 38, 25, 22, 1222 Assemani, 3:156– 126, fol. 384v–391v 28 178 Rome, Vatican Library, Sir. 19 7th/8th Assemani, 3:213– 135, fol. 93r–100r 216 Berlin, Staatsbibliothek, 43, 28 before Sachau, 2:646–654 Sachau 111, fol. 115r–122r 1379 (No. 199) Berlin, Staatsbibliothek, 11, 39, 27 13th Sachau, 2:638–646 Sachau 352, fol. 110r–113v (No. 198) Zurich, Zentralbibliothek, 38, 25, 28 882 Various71 Or. 69 (olim), fol. 17v–20r,

S T U V W X Z

71

Karl W. Hiersemann, Katalog 487: Manuscripte vom Mittelalter bis zum XVI. Jahrhundert (Leipzig, 1921), 66–67 (no. 255b); Karl W. Hiersemann, Katalog 500: Orientalische Manuskripte: Arabische, syrische, griechische, armenische, persische Handschriften des 7.–18. Jahrhunderts (Leipzig, 1922), 6–7 (no. 3); Parke-Bernet Galleries, Illuminated and Other IX-XVIII Century Manuscripts, Sale Number 1013 (New York: Parke-Bernet Galleries, 1948), 100–101 (no.

New Textual Evidence for Jacob’s Letters

NEW NEW NEW

NEW

NEW NEW NEW

60r–61r (Codex Syriacus Secundus) Birmingham, Selly Oak Colleges, Mingana syr. 331, fol. 112v–114v, 116r–119v Birmingham, Selly Oak Colleges, Mingana syr. 410, fol. 57r–61r Cambridge, MA, Harvard University, Houghton Library, Syr. 48, fol. 42v– 46v, 55v–56v Cambridge, MA, Harvard University, Houghton Library, Syr. 108, folder 18, fol. 1r, 2r–6v Mardin, Church of the Forty Martyrs, 420, fol. 21r Wadi al-Natrun, Deir alSurian, Syr. 28A, fol. 33v– 35r, 68v–69r, 73v–75v Wadi al-Natrun, Deir alSurian, Syr. 29, fol. 127v– 128v.

42, 40, 38, 1573 22

79

Mingana, 1:610– 616

28, 40

c. 1300 Mingana, 1:732– 735

38, 40

1796/ Various72 1797

17, 11, 39, 15th/ 28, 38, 1 16th 17 37, 1, 19 27

Various73

late Dolabany 67–76; 15th HMML74 6th/7th Brock – Van Rompay, 178–208 (9th/ Brock – Van 10th)75 Rompay, 212–219

300); Christie, Manson & Woods International, The History of the Book: The Cornelius J. Hauck Collection of the Cincinnati Museum Center (New York: Christie’s, 2006), 72–74 (no. 79). This manuscript was sold in 2006 by Christie’s, and its current location is unknown. A facsimile of this manuscript also exists: Werner Strothmann, ed., Codex Syriacus secundus: Bibel-Palimpsest aus d. 6./7. Jh. (Katalog Hiersemann 500/3), Göttinger Orientforschungen, Syriaca 13 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1977). 72 Titterton, “Syriac Manuscripts,” 82–88; Clemons, “Checklist,” 239 (no. 81); Goshen-Gottstein, Syriac Manuscripts, 57; Coakley, “Houghton Library MSS Syriac.” 73 Titterton, “Syriac Manuscripts,” 213; Clemons, “Checklist,” 245 (no. 139.4); Goshen-Gottstein, Syriac Manuscripts, 80–81; Coakley, “Houghton Library MSS Syriac.” 74 McCollum, “CFMM 00420.” 75 The manuscript itself dates to the sixth or seventh century. But Jacob’s letter was added to this manuscript in the ninth or tenth century.

80

Philip Michael Forness

APPENDIX 2: ARABIC TRANSLATIONS OF JACOB OF SERUGH’S LETTERS

AND

MANUSCRIPTS

This appendix lists the letters of Jacob of Serugh translated into Arabic and the manuscripts that contain them. Titles and incipits, based on the published edition and one manuscript, are provided for future identification. I was able to consult only one of the four manuscripts that contains his letters. For the others, I am dependent on catalogue entries or other descriptions. Abbreviations are as follows: Alwan

Alwan, Khalil, ed. Jacques de Saroug: Quatre homélies métriques sur la création. Translated by Khalil Alwan. CSCO 508–509, Scriptores Syri 214–215. Leuven: Peeters, 1989.

Athanāsiyūs

Athanāsiyūs, Mīkhāīl, ed. Kitāb mayāmir ay mawāʿiẓ al-sarūjī. Cairo: Maṭbaʿat Miṣr bilFajjālah, 1905.

BYU

Inventory Numbers of the Brigham Young University Microfilmed Manuscripts.

Graf, Catalogue

Graf, Georg. Catalogue de manuscrits arabes chrétiens conservés au Caire. Studi e Testi 63. Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1934.

Graf, Geschichte

Graf, Georg. Geschichte der christlichen arabischen Literatur. 5 vols. Studi e Testi 118, 133, 146, 147, 172. Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1944–1953.

Macomber

Macomber, William F. Final Inventory of the Microfilmed Manuscripts of the Coptic Museum, Old Cairo, Egypt. 4 vols. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University, 1995.

New Textual Evidence for Jacob’s Letters

81

Simaika

Simaika, Marcus. Catalogue of the Coptic and Arabic Manuscripts in the Coptic Museum, the Patriarchate, the Principal Churches of Cairo and Alexandria and the Monasteries of Egypt. 2 vols. Cairo: Government Press, 1939–1942.

Zanetti

Zanetti, Ugo. Les manuscrits de Dair Abû Maqâr: Inventaire. Geneva: P. Cramer, 1986.

Arabic Translations of Jacob of Serugh’s Letters Letter 1 (Athanāsiyūs 389–393; Cairo, Coptic Museum, Lit. 133, fol. 178v–180v) Athanāsiyūs: *(

( ""
"*" Lit. 133: *(

( ""
"
 INCIPIT: ‫ لك ان تسعى باعمال البر‬76‫ايھا المحب ﷲ حسن‬ TITLE:

Letter 28 (Athanāsiyūs 393–394; Cairo, Coptic Museum, Lit. 133, fol. 177v–178v) Athanāsiyūs:  
&

)
&$
*(
(
* Lit. 133: *
 
%

)

INCIPIT: )$*
*
!
'
) "
"
TITLE:

Letter 43 (Athanāsiyūs 357–362; Cairo, Coptic Museum, Lit. 133, fol. 174v–177v) TITLE:

Athanāsiyūs: Lit. 133:

INCIPIT:

76

Athanāsiyūs #] Lit. 113 $

‫رسالة تحريض على التوبة الى رجل‬ ‫كبير معروف بالخطايا ليقيمه‬ &"(*
%

)
 *
$*
($
!$
#
)$*


82

Philip Michael Forness

List of the Arabic Manuscripts of Jacob of Serugh’s Letters Manuscript

Letters

Date

Catalogue Description(s)

Cairo, Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate, Theol. 157 (Graf 462, Simaika 314), fol. 190v–201v

(two letters)

18th

Graf, Catalogue, 174; Graf, Geschichte, 1:452; Simaika, 2:132

Cairo, Coptic Museum, Lit. 113 (Graf 98, Simaika 283, BYU CCM A20-2), 174v–180v

1, 28, 43

1871

Graf, Catalogue, 37; Graf, Geschichte, 1:447; Simaika 1:127; Macomber, 1:A20-2

Wadi al-Natrun, Dayr Abu Maqar, 335 Wadi al-Natrun, Dayr alBaramus, 2/38

1, 28, 43

1784

Zanetti, 48–49

1, 28, 43

1853

Alwan, CSCO 508, Scriptores Syri 214:xixii

New Textual Evidence for Jacob’s Letters

APPENDIX 3: COLLATION EVIDENCE

OF

THE

83

NEW TEXTUAL

The collation of the textual evidence for the letters of Jacob of Serugh preserved in five manuscripts (Mingana Syr. 331, Mingana Syr. 410, Harvard Syr. 48, Harvard Syr. 108/18, and CFMM 420) is presented below. For each variant reading, the tables note the page and line number(s) in Olinder’s critical edition, the reading of the printed text in the edition, the variant in the manuscript, the folio number(s) on which this variant appears, other manuscripts that contain this variant, and the footnote in which Olinder describes other evidence for the particular variant. Olinder provides a brief description of the types of variants recorded in his edition: “I have not noted many variants of the codices which pertain to mere orthography, unless they relate to Greek words.”77 I have followed a somewhat different principle, noting any variants that feature a difference in the consonantal text. I also note variants of diacritical points when they indicate change of gender or number. There are a number of variants that I do not note. I have not noted locations where the only difference between the printed text and manuscript is an added space (e.g.,  V9/ V:H; O4& /O4'?). I have also not noted the absence of seyame, when the grammar would otherwise indicate that the word is plural (e.g., # A49 ). A few abbreviations appear in the collation below. I adopt Olinder’s use of “Cet.” to indicate that the rest of the manuscripts preserve this reading. I also use “om.” when a word or phrase is omitted. The sigla for the manuscripts are Olinder’s and can be found in Appendix 1 above.

77

Olinder, Epistulae, vi: “Nonnullas variationes codicum, quae ad meram orthographiam pertinent, non notavi nisi cum ad verba graeca attinent.”

84

Philip Michael Forness

Letter 1: Variant Readings in Harvard Syr. 108/18 Olinder Text 4, 21

Variant OL

4, 23


/:H

4, 24


"O&

5, 3


!+7:
9

5, 7 5, 9-10 5, 10 5, 12 5, 13

S3 4:0OE
5@?S4C6
"U4B
O&S
1!0LI >16  (=:0 %1:6 ; ed. WATT 1978, fr. 51, pp. 71 [Syr.], 61 [tr.]. 65 About Philoxenus’ polemic against this group, see WATT 1978, p. 11* [tr.]. 66 See LEBON 1909, pp. 489-500. 67 Hom. #101; ed. GUIDI 1929, p. 270. 68 On Timothy’s anti-Eutychian polemic, see GRILLMEIER & HAINTHALER 1996, pp. 18-23. For Severus, see Contra additiones Juliani 42; ed. HESPEL 1968, pp. 160 [Syr.], 135 [tr.]. 69 Cf. Ps.-Zacharias, Chron. IX.9; ed. BROOKS 1919-1924, v. 2, p. 101 [Syr.]. 64

146

Sergey Minov

decade of the sixth century. Accordingly, the appearance of this doctrine in CT could well be used to argue in favor of the beginning of the sixth century as a terminus post quem for the composition. There is another tradition used by the author of CT that supports the suggestion of the first decades of the sixth century as the terminus post quem for our work. It comes from CT XXXV.18-21, where we find the following account of the building activities of King Solomon: And when Solomon was passing the outskirts of the mountain of Seir, he found there the altars that Pirzaki, and Pirzami, and Yozdakar had built. These were they whom Nimrod the giant sent to Balaam, the priest of the mountain, because he heard that he was familiar with the signs of the Zodiac. And when they were passing the outskirts of the mountain of Seir, they built there altars to the sun. And when Solomon saw it, he built there Heliopolis, the city of the Sun.70 The story is attested in all manuscripts of CT and, thus, should be considered as part of the original work. It is quoted here according to the Western recension, because there are several reasons to think that it reflects more faithfully the legend’s version as it appeared in the original text of CT. First of all, the Western recension and some Eastern manuscripts preserved the correct name of the city – “Heliopolis” (A17E(70), while OrM has “Hierapolis” (A16(EL0), which is an obvious mistake, since it does not fit the following etymological explanation – the “city of the sun” (N:M P=0%9)

 70 Oca – >9 ,4M . 56'9 L1C? (- 26(FN (:17M %3
;C7 (6 L!=#

L:< %M >16 .L3 (0 29LE 23LE = P7B   26(FN >0L!B %3 .M(7: ,N*P9  (7B D:M 8.9 .(- L9(3
A17E(70S6 >9 = (:17M )* %3 .N:N6 P7B >9 .L1C? (
.N:M P=0%9

Date and Provenance of the Cave of Treasures

147

that appears in both recensions.71 Similarly, the two envoys of the Eastern recension are clearly a result of corruption of the three envoys of the Western recension. Also, according to the Western recension, the three envoys sent by Nimrod built “altars” (P7B ), while in OrM only one “altar” (%* P7B) is mentioned. The plural form agrees better with the other version of this legend. The earliest dated appearance of the tradition about the building activity of Solomon in Heliopolis-Baalbek comes from the two sixth century Syriac works – the Chronicle of Pseudo-Zachariah of Mytilene (VIII.4)72 and the History of John of Ephesus as preserved in the Chronicle of Zuqnin (Book 3).73 The crucial element that allows us to regard CT XXXV.18-21 as another variant of the legend found in these two sources is the connection between Solomon and Heliopolis. Taking all this into account we may conclude that neither the Chronicle of Pseudo-Zachariah nor the History of John of Ephesus should be regarded as direct sources of the story in CT. While it is clear that the author of CT built his narrative using an already existing tradition about Solomon and Heliopolis similar to those found in the two other works, it is impossible to establish his source with any accuracy. Most likely, it was an oral tradition that was further reworked in order to fit the narrative framework of CT.74 What is significant for the dating of CT is that we seem to have the terminus post quem for the origin of the tradition connecting Solomon and Heliopolis. The necessary information comes from the so-called Oracle of Baalbek, an anonymous apocalyptic composition written in Greek. As the editor of the text, Paul J. Alexander, has shown, this text was composed between the years 502 and 506 by an unknown Christian author, on the basis of an older apocalyptic text, the 71 Several mss. of the Eastern group also have readings close to the Western recension – OrC: 26(F70; OrD: A16(F70. 72 See ed. BROOKS 1919-1924, v. 2, pp. 75-76. 73 See ed. CHABOT 1927-1933, v. 2, pp. 129-131. 74 For a detailed discussion of this tradition, see MINOV 2010.

148

Sergey Minov

Theodosian Sybil.75 Of particular importance for us is Alexander’s convincing argument that the Oracle was written in Baalbek. This conclusion is based on the author’s intimate knowledge of the city and the area close to it, as well as on some elements of local patriotism exhibited in his work. At one particular moment, the Oracle speaks about the construction of pagan temples in Heliopolis that should take place in the Seleucid and Roman periods and is ascribed to the particular monarchs: In the fifth generation three kings will arise, Antiochus, Tiberius and Gaius And they will build up the temples of Heliopolis and the altars of Lebanon (ἀνοικοδομήσουσι τὰ ἱερὰ Ἡλίου πόλεως καὶ τοὺς βωμοὺς τοῦ Λιβάνου); and the shrines of that city are very large and shapely beyond any (other) temple in the inhabited world.76 The most important aspect of this account for my argument is that there is no mention of Solomon in connection with the building of the Heliopolitan temples in the Oracle. This is remarkable if we take into consideration the fact that its author, although a Christian, openly takes pride in the grandeur and beauty of the pagan monuments and is otherwise prone to indulge in local patriotism.77 It seems highly unlikely that the author of the Oracle would miss such an opportunity to glorify his native city if he knew about Solomon’s connection to Heliopolis. Accordingly, the most reasonable explanation of this silence is that the tradition came into existence only after the time of the Oracle’s composition, i.e. the first decade of the sixth century. Additional support for this claim is provided by On the date and provenance of this work, see ALEXANDER 1967, pp. 41-47. 76 Ed. ALEXANDER 1967, p. 13, ln. 76-80 [Gr.], p. 25 [tr.]. 77 Cf. his assignment of a particular (positive) role in the final eschatological scenario to the “king from Heliopolis”; ed. ALEXANDER 1967, p. 21, ln. 205-208 [Gr.], p. 29 [tr.]. 75

Date and Provenance of the Cave of Treasures

149

the fact that a connection between Solomon and Heliopolis appears for the first time in Syriac sources beginning in the second half of the sixth century – Pseudo-Zachariah and John of Ephesus. Therefore, we may suggest that the author of CT, who made use of this tradition, could not have composed his work earlier than the second decade of the sixth century. Finally, it should be pointed out that there exists an additional avenue for future research on the date and milieu of CT, which is based on linguistic profiling of the work. This approach would entail an assessment of the vocabulary used by the author of CT and its further comparison with that of other Syriac writers. I was not able to pursue this line of research, because it should be based on a new critical edition of CT, which would take into account all its textual witnesses, and would also require a comprehensive and searchable digital corpus of Syriac texts from Late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages that does not exist at the present moment.78 There are, however, several preliminary observations, derived from the pioneering work of Sebastian Brock on the diachronic aspects of Syriac word formation,79 that testify to the possible usefulness of this approach. For instance, the adjective 1$9 (CT V.8) in the Eastern recension of CT; BROCK 2008, p. 557.

150

Sergey Minov

2. THE MILIEU OF CT As stated above, I am not going to deal with the theory of the Urschatzhöhle proposed first by Albrecht Götze and expanded by Su-Min Ri. It has already been convincingly refuted by Clemens Leonhard, and even more arguments against it could easily be added. Accordingly, there is no need to discuss here the hypothesis of Jewish-Christian origins of CT, as it is closely linked to this theory and is supported mostly by the scholars who accept the very early dating of CT.81 Given the modern state of knowledge of Jewish-Christianity, there is nothing at all in the theological and socio-cultural outlook of our author that might be regarded as sufficient basis for making such a claim. In fact, it seems that the proponents of a Jewish-Christian background for CT fell into the trap of the archaizing tendency and anti-Graeco-Roman cultural agenda that constitute literary strategies pursued consciously by the work’s author.82 Putting aside the theory of Jewish-Christian origins, the most widely held opinion on the origins of CT is that it was produced in an East-Syrian milieu. This hypothesis was first set forth by Götze, who suggested an East-Syrian provenance for the editor of CT, while proposing the sixth century as the time of the work’s “final redaction”.83 This opinion was adopted later on by many scholars and until now is, arguably, the most prevalent point of view on the origins of this composition.84 This theory, however, has its weak points. In what follows I will examine in detail the arguments supporting the theory of EastSyrian origins of CT. After that I shall bring into consideration additional evidence that makes it possible to argue in favor of a West-Syrian provenance for the work.

See GÖTZE 1922, p. 91; RI 2000, pp. 577-582. See on this MINOV 2013a, p. 321. 83 See GÖTZE 1922, pp. 90-91. 84 Cf. VOSTÉ 1939, p. 80, n. 1; DENIS 2000, v. 1, p. 31; TOEPEL 2006a, pp. 6-7. 81 82

Date and Provenance of the Cave of Treasures

151

2.1. East-Syrian features in CT The main support for the proponents of the theory of EastSyrian provenance of CT comes from the explicit antiMiaphysite statements found in the two passages of the Eastern recension – CT XXI.19 and XXIX.10. The longer of these passages, CT XXI.19, is found in the section retelling the story of Noah’s drunkenness and cursing of Canaan. After a typological interpretation of the patriarch’s lapse–based on Psalm 78:65–which likens Noah’s drunken posture to that of Jesus on the cross, the following aside remark is found: Let the heretics who say “God was crucified” be silent. Here he (i.e. David) calls him “Lord,” even as Peter the Apostle said, “this Jesus, whom you crucified, has God made Lord and Messiah.” He did not say “God,” but “Lord,” thus announcing the union of the two hypostases that were united in one sonship.85 A similar, although shorter, polemical statement appears later on, in CT XXIX.10, where the typological explanation of the lamb on the tree in the story of Isaac’s sacrifice (Gen 22:13) as a symbol of crucified Jesus is accompanied by the following explanation: Let the mouths of the heretics be stopped who in their madness ascribe passibility to the Eternal Being.86 These passages attack some unidentified “heretics” that, supposedly, ascribe to the Divine Nature the capability of suffering. One immediately recognizes in them the accusation 85 OrA – .'0LI 0L9 3 .GI  '6 >0L9 J1-Q (7N< (N0 9  P0

152

Sergey Minov

of theopaschism, a stock argument from the arsenal of antiMiaphysite polemic employed by East-Syrian polemicists. 87 Both of these passages should thus be taken as expressions of mainstream East-Syrian theology, all the more so, given the appearance of the Christological formula of “the two qnōmē united in one sonship” in CT XXI.19. Now the question arises whether this polemic should be regarded as authentic, i.e. belonging to the original stratum of CT, or as later additions. There are several reasons that lead me to prefer the latter option. The secondary nature of these sections is more obvious in the case of the first passage, CT XXI.19. First of all, it does not fit well within its literary unit, since it breaks the flow of the narrative, where the call to wake up addressed to God in the quotation from Psalm 78:65 would be followed immediately by Noah’s awakening from his sleep. Moreover, it goes against the general habit of the use of Scriptural quotations by CT’s author, who as a rule does not pile them one upon another in order to make his point. A second suspicious feature of the first passage is the use of of the “two qnōmē” Christological language, a distinctive attribute of EastSyrian Christology. The problem with this formula in CT is that it entered the stock of East-Syrian Christological terminology relatively late, during the first half of the seventh century.88 The first official adoption of the language of “the two qnōmē united in one parṣōpā of sonship” comes from the profession of faith offered by the East-Syrian bishops to the Shah Khusrau II in the year 612.89 However, even after that it took some time and effort on the side of the hierarchy of the Church of the East to overcome resistance to this new formula and promulgate it among the wide masses of believers. This fact, taken together with the generally non-sophisticated and archaizing theological language of CT as well as our tentative dating of this work, would put its author rather ahead of his time. See CHEDIATH 1982, pp. 71-75. See on this, REININK 2009, pp. 219-221. 89 See ed. CHABOT 1902, pp. 564-567 [Syr.], 581-584 [tr.]. 87 88

Date and Provenance of the Cave of Treasures

153

The case of the second anti-Miaphysite invective, CT XXIX.10, is even more revealing, as it provides us with a fascinating opportunity to observe how CT’s text in the EastSyrian milieu underwent the process of gradual theological adjustment. This verse comes from the section dealing with the life of Abraham. It is situated within the passage that offers a typological interpretation of Isaac’s sacrifice. In order to facilitate understanding of the following textual elucidations, I offer in the table below a synopsis of this verse in its immediate context that includes three main East-Syrian versions and one representative of the West-Syrian recension.90 XXIX.8

OrF There Abraham brought up Isaac for a burnt offering. And he saw the Cross of Christ, and the redemption of our forefather Adam.

OrA And there Abraham brought up Isaac his son for a burnt offering. And he saw the Cross, and Christ, and the redemption of our forefather Adam.

OrM And there Abraham brought up Isaac for a burnt offering. And he saw the Cross of his redemption, and the redemption of our forefather Adam.

Ocd And there Abraham brought up Isaac for a burnt offering. And he saw the Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ and the redemption of Adam.

90 In the following discussion of CT XXIX.10 I am much indebted to LEONHARD 2004.

154

Sergey Minov

XXIX.9

That tree of the Cross of Christ appeared to Abraham, (and) the lamb (was) the mystery of the killing of our Redeemer.

The tree was a type of the Cross of Christ our Lord, and the lamb in its branches was the mystery of the manhood of the Onlybegotten Word.

That tree was a type of the Cross of Christ our Lord.

XXIX.10

Apostle Paul said that “Christ served circumcision”. He did not say that “he was circumcised,” but – “he served.”91

And, because of this, Paul cried out and said that “If they had only known, they would not crucified the Lord of glory.” Let the mouths of the heretics be stopped

And, because of this, I proclaim Our Lord. And apostle Paul, who takes pleasure in His humanity, cried out and said that “If they had only known,

91

And the sacrifice of Isaac was a prefiguration of the killing of our Lord. And the tree of the lamb was declaring the Living Cross, upon which the Lamb of Life was sacrificed. And the True Lamb appeared to Abraham, the mystery of the killing of our Redeemer. For Paul, apostle and blessed one, said that “Christ, your God, served circumcision.”94

)# L9 L1# S6 . )# +1N9 O:M +17M (6(E L9 .O:M S6 +1N9 94 '6 +1N9  )# O:M = (- +17M (76(E L1# L9 .570

Date and Provenance of the Cave of Treasures who in their madness ascribe passibility to the Eternal Being.92

XXIX.11

When Christ was eight days old, Joseph, the betrothed of Mary, rose up to circumcise him according to the Law. And he circumcised him

When Christ was eight days old, Joseph, the betrothed of Mary, rose up to circumcise the child according to the Law. And he circumcised

they would crucified the Lord of glory.” Paul, the servant of God

apostle, said this in the beginning of the letter. And not like say the wicked Cyril and accursed Severus, who ascribe passibility to the Eternal Being.93 When Christ was eight days old, Joseph, the betrothed of Mary, rose up to circumcise the child according to the Law. And he circumcised

155

And when Christ was eight days old Joseph rose up and circumcised him according to the Law.


P*(!M L9 (6

>1B%0 (6 L9 CI (6(E  8.9 8B N*  (1=N >17C9 J1-Q  '9(E L3P@< .

>1FI .;7B >9  P0  93 . (N1.17* %3 L1# (6 .19 S9 '=E >9   %+ ; OrMH –

>1.17*  %+ L1# (6 .19 S9 '=E >9  .  97 Ocabcd – >1.17* %3 .19 S9 '=E >9  . 98 Aḥob’s scholia on the Gospel of John survived partially in the Ethiopic exegetical tradition. For this particular tradition, see COWLEY 1980, p. 337. 99 See ed. GIBSON 1911-1916, v. 3, p.  [Syr.], v. 1, p. 278 [tr.]. 100 Ed. BROCK 1986, §40, pp. 389 [Syr.], 393 [tr.]. 101 Comm. in Ioan. XII – λόγχῃ διανύττουσι τὴν πλευρὰν, ἡ δὲ μεμιγμένον ὕδατι τὸ αἷμα διέβλυσε; ed. PUSEY 1872, v. 3, p. 103.

162

Sergey Minov

issuing from Jesus’ side that “the glorious stream was mixed of blood and water”.102 At the present stage, there is no secure way to establish on a purely textual level, which of these two readings is original. However, it is important to stress at this point that because these readings correspond to the respective theological agendas of the transmitters of the two recensions of our work, one should refrain from summoning them as witnesses to the confessional profile of the original stratum of CT. Traditions of this sort should thus be regarded as additions. Concerning theologically charged passages in CT, only those of them should be used for passing judgment on the character of the original text that would conform to the criterion of dissimilarity, i.e. when East-Syrian traditions would appear in the manuscripts of the Western recension or vice versa. In light of the previous analysis of the explicit East-Syrian traditions in CT, it became clear that they cannot serve as a proof of the work’s East-Syrian provenance and that new criteria for establishing the confessional affiliation of the proto-text, from which both the West- and East-Syrian recensions derive should be established. I believe that the safest avenue for such an enterprise would be to take into consideration only those traditions that (a) are attested in the manuscripts of both recensions, or (b) conform to the criterion of dissimilarity. Let us turn, first, to the latter criterion. The most striking example of dissimilarity is presented by the appearance of the idiosyncratic radical Miaphysite tradition on the circumcision of Jesus in the Eastern recension (CT XXIX.11; XLVI.16-18), including its best textual witnesses – OrF and OrA. The importance of this tradition for understanding the process of textual growth of CT cannot be overestimated. I will not repeat here everything that has already been said above, but will underscore only some implications this fact has for
 S9% ; ed. BEDJAN 1905-1910, P+!N9 'E  G0L* 19 v. 3, p. 240, ln. 15. 102

Date and Provenance of the Cave of Treasures

163

reconstruction of CT’s ideological background. The presence of this exclusively Miaphysite material in the Eastern recension cannot be explained as an isolated case of later textual addition, since it is attested in all manuscripts of this recension. Accordingly, we must assume that it was present in the lost prototype from which all East-Syrian manuscripts are ultimately derived. This gives us a serious reason to challenge the consensus regarding the East-Syrian origins of CT. In fact, some scholars have already opted in favor of a West-Syrian provenance for this work. Ernest Budge was the first to raise such a possibility. In the introduction to his English translation of CT, he states that “the writer was certainly a Syrian Jacobite who was proud of his native language”.103 As an illustration of his thesis, Budge points out several examples where the author of CT affirms the priority of the Syriac language (i.e. CT XXIV.9-11; LIII.2526). However, as important as they are for understanding the cultural background of CT, these passages by themselves can hardly be given the weight of definitive proof when it comes to the confessional profile of its author, since the priority of the Syriac language was evoked not only by the West-Syrians but also by some Antiochene and East-Syrian authors.104 To that one might add a recent contribution of Sebastian Brock, who in his review of Alexander Toepel’s book on CT has pointed out several instances of West-Syrian traditions that appear in the work.105 Besides the identification of the spirit of Genesis 1:2 with the Holy Spirit, which I shall discuss in greater detail below, Brock mentions two other cases: (a) the appearance in CT V.8 (OrM) of a strikingly West-Syrian incarnational formula, i.e. the phrase P6 P! >$9; (b) a peculiar syntactic form ('6 LE), typical for the West Syrian translation technique, that is used in CT III.3 (OrM) in 103 104

BUDGE 1927, p. 22. For a detailed discussion of this subject, see MINOV 2013b, pp. 165-

184. 105

See BROCK 2008, p. 557.

164

Sergey Minov

order to describe Satan’s separation from God. While both these cases conform to the aforementioned criterion of dissimilarity, since both of them appear in the manuscripts of the Eastern recension, their absence from the best Eastern textual witness, i.e. OrA, prevents us from giving too much weight to them. Now that the implausibility of the theory of CT’s EastSyrian origins has become evident and the possibility of a West-Syrian provenance has emerged, I would like to discuss several additional considerations that can assist us in developing a consistent and satisfactory theory of the work’s confessional milieu. In what follows, I would like to propose two arguments that enhance even further the theory of WestSyrian origins of CT, one that is based on its exegetical affinity, and another based on the history of the work’s reception. 2.2. The exegetical affinity of CT In order to discern the confessional profile of CT’s author it may be worth exploring the exegetical background of his work. Since the main task of our author was to rewrite the biblical narrative by adapting it to the new circumstances, it comes as no surprise that he did not carry it out in a vacuum, but relied upon a previous tradition of scriptural exegesis. Taking this into consideration, one may attempt to uncover and analyze those exegetical traditions that he inherited from his predecessors. I believe that careful examination of such embedded exegetical material offers an additional avenue for establishing the author’s confessional milieu and allows us to situate him within the West- or East-Syrian tradition of exegesis. First, it should be noted that some of the exegetical traditions used by the author of CT belong to the earlier stratum of Syriac tradition. For example, the symbolic interpretation of Paradise as the Church (CT III.17) is found already in the writings of Ephrem.106 Likewise, Ephrem, or one 106 Cf. De Parad. 6.7.1; 6.8.1; De virgin. 4.14; cf. also Odes of Solomon 11:16-19.

Date and Provenance of the Cave of Treasures

165

of his immediate disciples, interprets Leah and Rachel as symbols of the Old and New Covenant in a way similar to CT XXXI.26-28. 107 The interpretation of Jacob’s ladder (Gen 28:12) as the symbol of the Cross (CT XXXI.17-19) appears in Aphrahat (Dem. IV.5). All these traditions comprise a common pool of exegetical lore that was shared by the authors belonging to the West-Syrian as well as East-Syrian traditions and, thus, cannot serve as markers of our author’s exegetical background. However, there is a sufficient number of exegetical traditions in CT that are not attested in the works of fourthcentury Syriac writers, but entered Syriac-speaking milieu later. Many of these have parallels in the works composed in Greek and Syriac during the fifth and sixth centuries. In what follows I offer an examination of several cases, when exegetical traditions embedded by the author of CT into his narrative demonstrate his distance from the East-Syrian and closeness to the West-Syrian exegetical tradition. a) Genesis 1:2 – the “spirit of God”

In the first chapter of CT, which retells the biblical story of creation, the following description of the activity of the Holy Spirit is presented (CT I.4-7): And on the first day of the week the Holy Spirit, one of the persons of the Trinity, hovered over the waters, and through its hovering thereof over the face of the waters, the waters were blessed so that they might become producers of offspring, and they became hot, and all natures of the waters glowed with heat, and the leaven of creation was united to them. As the mother-bird makes warm her young by the protective hovering of her wings, so that the young birds inside the eggs are formed through 107

Cf. Commentary on the Diatessaron III.17.

166

Sergey Minov

the warmth of her heat, likewise when the Spirit, the Paraclete, hovered over the waters, the leaven of the breath of life was united to them through the activity of the Holy Spirit.108 One aspect of this account that is of particular interest to us is that the “spirit of God” (Heb ‫ ;רוּ ַח ֱא לֺהִם‬Peshitta '*  '6 ) of Genesis 1:2 is explicitly identified here with the Holy Spirit, i.e. one of the persons of the Trinity. This identification appears in all manuscripts of the Eastern recension as well as in some Western manuscripts (Ocd). 109 Accordingly, this exegetical tradition should be considered as part of the original stratum of CT. Genesis 1:2 had a rich history of interpretation among Syrians.110 One of the earliest attestations of the “spirit of God” of this verse to be identified with the Holy Spirit comes from the Acts of Thomas (3rd c.). In the fourth act of the Acts (§39), “the Holy Spirit that hovers over all created things” is evoked in the Trinitarian doxology that concludes the apostle’s prayer.111 As has been pointed out by scholars, it seems very likely that this description presents an allusion to Genesis 1:2.112 One author whose work might serve as a source for this tradition in CT, is Basil of Caesarea. In the Homilies on Hexaemeron, Basil explicitly identifies the “spirit” of Genesis 1:2 with the Holy Spirit:

 OrA – S9(=I >9 %* M (I *  G* !N %+ '   2E  8B (0P16

 .0L0P9 '=9

(
9 RJB >9  (1* 50; ed. BEDJAN 1905-1910, v. 1, p. 157; tr. BROCK 1970, p. 117. 181 Ed. ALAND & JUCKEL 1995, p. 222. 179 180

186

Sergey Minov

predilection on the side of the Harklean version for translating the adjective ἀσθενής or derivatives of the verb ἀσθενέω using the adjective S71+9, in distinction from the Old Syriac and Peshitta versions that prefer the adjective '0L3 in most of these cases.182 The appearance of this tradition may serve as an additional corroboration of the West-Syrian background of CT. However, its possible relevance for dating our work is more problematic. This is mainly due to the fact that the Harklean version of the New Testament, produced by Thomas of Harkel in the year 615-616, presents a revision of the Philoxenian version, made in the years 507-508 by the chorepiscopus Polycarp at the request of Philoxenus of Mabbug. 183 Unfortunately the Philoxenian version is now almost entirely lost, so that it is impossible to establish with a sufficient degree of certainty whether our expression belongs to the original Philoxenian stratum or was introduced later by Thomas of Harkel. e) Adam-Christ typology

In CT XLVIII.12-30 we are presented with an account where a detailed correspondence is established between the events that took place in the first, second, third, sixth, and ninth hours of the Friday of Jesus’ Passion and the same hours of the life of Adam and Eve.184 Although no exact parallel to the unique scheme drawn in CT XLVIII.12-30 has been found so far, it is significant that there are two instances of a very close exegetical approach to the passion of Jesus being applied in the Commentary on Matthew 182 Cf. Mt 25:39,43,44, 26:41; Mk 6:56, 14:38; Lk 4:40, 9:2; Jn 5:7, 6:2, 11:1,3,6. In the whole Peshitta corpus S71+9 is used to translate ἀσθενής only twice – in 1Thes 5:14, 1Pet 3:7. Cf. also Lk 5:15, 13:11,12, Jn 5:5, 11:4, where Harklean uses (71+9 in order to translate the noun ἀσθένεια, in distinction from Peshitta that uses < (3. 183 See on this BROCK 1981. 184 The scriptural basis for these speculations is provided by such passages as Mt 27:45-46, Mk 15:25,33-34, Lk 23:44-46, Jn 19:14.

Date and Provenance of the Cave of Treasures

187

by Philoxenus of Mabbug, 185 as well as in a short tractate ascribed to Basil of Caesarea preserved in Armenian, which is dated to the fifth or sixth century.186 Below I compare the three variants of correspondence between the life of Adam and passion of Christ in a synoptic form that allows us to observe similarities and differences between them. CT 30

XLVIII.12- Philoxenus Mabbug

1st hour ~ God created Adam // Christ received spittle from the sons of Adam

of Arm. PseudoBasil

1st hour ~ God created Adam //

1st hour ~ God created Adam // Christ was put into chains

2nd hour ~ the naming of the wild animals by Adam // the gathering of the Jews against Christ 3rd hour ~ the crown of glory is placed on the head of Adam // the crown of thorns is placed on the head of Christ

3rd hour ~ Adam and Eve entered the garden and received the commandment // the crucifixion of Christ.

6th hour ~ Eve goes up to the tree of knowledge // Christ ascends

6th hour ~ the eating of the fruit // the darkening of the luminaries

185

31 [tr.].

6th hour ~ the eating of the fruit // the darkening of the luminaries &

Fragm. 33 (on Mt 27:45-53); ed. WATT 1978, pp. 35-36 [Syr.], 30-

186 Published and translated into French by VAN ESBROECK 1987, pp. 385-387.

188 the Cross, the tree of life ~ Eve gives Adam “the fruit of the gall of death” // Christ is given vinegar and gall 9th hour ~ Adam descends to the earth’s abyss from the height of Paradise // Christ descends from the height of the Cross to Sheol to free the dead ancestors

Sergey Minov “ordeal of the taste” (i.e. vinegar and gall)

9th hour ~ the departure from Paradise // the death of Christ and liberation of the prophets from Sheol

The closest similarities between the three schemes are found in the sixth hour for CT and Philoxenus, and in the first and ninth hours for CT and Pseudo-Basil. However, it does not seem possible to establish a direct literary relationship between these three versions.187 In my opinion, the fact that CT presents us with the longest and most detailed scheme should be taken as evidence for the later origins of this version in relation to the two others. Yet, it has to be stressed that all three typological schemes are based on the same hermeneutic principle of chronological correspondence between the life of Adam and the passion of Christ. Once more, the only close parallels to the first part of the typological scheme found in CT XLVIII.12-30 are provided by the Miaphysite sources: Philoxenus and the Pseudo-Basilian tractate that was composed by an author who belonged to the so-called “Aaronite” fraction of the Armenian Julianist movement.188 It should be noted that there are several EastSyrian authors who also speak about an Adam-Christ 187 Contra VAN ESBROECK 1987, p. 388, who claims that Pseudo-Basil was dependent on CT. 188 See VAN ESBROECK 1987, pp. 388-390.

Date and Provenance of the Cave of Treasures

189

typological link in connection with the sixth and ninth hours of Jesus’ Passion,189 but none of them does so for the first and third hours like Philoxenus and Pseudo-Basil. That the typological correspondence between the events of Jesus’ Passion and Adam’s life was deeply rooted in the West-Syrian theological tradition can also be seen from the poetical compositions known as sedrē, a distinctive liturgical genre attested since the first half of the seventh century. There are at least two texts of this kind (Sedrā for the Three Hours of the Friday and Sedrā for the Nine Hours of the Good Friday) that draw close parallels between the details of Jesus’ suffering on the Cross and the events of Adam’s life in a manner very similar to CT.190 It is remarkable that in the former poem the events in the life of Adam and Jesus that take place at the first and second hours correspond exactly to those found in CT. 191 Unfortunately, since both these works are still unpublished, nothing certain can be said about their relation to CT. In order to understand better the exegetical background of the author of CT in his use of this typological scheme, let us examine the hermeneutical principle that underlies it. In a concise form it is formulated by the author himself when he addresses his readers with the following direct remark in CT XLIX.1 – “And know that Christ became like Adam in everything”.192 That this saying was not merely a lip-service on the side of our author is corroborated by several examples of the use of Adam-Christ typology in his work.193

189 Cf. Cyrus of Edessa, Explanation of the Passion VI.6 (ed. MACOMBER 1974, p. 89 [Syr.], p. 77 [tr.]); Cosmas Indicopleustes, Topographia Christiana II.94-95 (ed. WOLSKA-CONUS 1968-1973, v. 1, pp. 412-415); John bar Penkāyē, Chronicle XI (ed. MINGANA 1908, v. 2, p. 52*). 190 See THEKEPARAMPIL 1983, pp. 331-332. 191 See THEKEPARAMPIL 1983, p. 332. 192 OrA –  S6 [*]2N9 29  %:74 

. 193 Cf. CT II.15-16; V.1, 11-12, 17; VI.17-18. For analysis of this typology in CT, see SIMON 1970, pp. 67-70; VOGL 1979; THEKEPARAMPIL 1983.

190

Sergey Minov

The connection between Adam and Christ goes back to the New Testament itself, to the Pauline notion of Christ as the second Adam (cf. Rom 5:12-19; 1 Cor 15:21-22,45-47). In later Christian theology and exegesis this idea was further developed and became an important Christological motif.194 However, while as a theological motif the Adam-Christ typology was shared by virtually all streams of “orthodox” Christianity in antiquity, one can observe a marked difference when it comes to its use as a hermeneutical key for understanding Biblical text. And here a significant difference could be found between the approaches of the Antiochene and Alexandrian schools. When we turn to the exegetes of the Antiochene school, it becomes apparent that this hermeneutical principle was fundamentally alien to them, and they apply it on a much more modest scale than Alexandrian and West-Syrian authors. This agrees well with a well-known general tendency on the side of the Antiochene exegetes to exhibit a certain restraint in applying Christological typology to interpretation of the Old Testament. Manlio Simonetti characterizes this tendency, while speaking about Theodore of Mopsuestia, as the “drastic reduction of the Christological interpretation of the OT”.195 Thus, no symbolic or typological exegesis in connection with Adam appears in those fragments of Theodore’s Commentary on Genesis that survived in Syriac translation where the first chapters of Genesis are covered. 196 Furthermore, it comes almost as a surprise that no Adam-Christ typology is employed in Theodore’s Commentary on John, where even the Pauline idea of Jesus as the second Adam is reduced to a barest possible minimum.197 It is true that in his Commentary on Romans Theodore does mention Paul’s statement about Adam as the “type of the one who was to come” (τύπος τοῦ μέλλοντος) from On these developments, see SIMON 1970. SIMONETTI 2004, p. 820. 196 Published by SACHAU 1869; TONNEAU 1953; JANSMA 1962. Some of these passages are translated in MCLEOD 2009, pp. 86-94. 197 See VOSTÉ 1940. 194 195

Date and Provenance of the Cave of Treasures

191

Romans 5:14, while explaining it as “what happens to Adam typifies what will come to pass in regards to Christ”. 198 However this Pauline idea seems to remain marginal for Theodore and bears no hermeneutical consequences for the way he is dealing with the Old and New Testament. Later on, Theodoret of Cyrus does not resort to Christological typology in his Questions on the Octateuch, not even in the sections that cover the story of Adam and Eve. It is also barely present in his commentary on Paul’s letters, save the inevitable exception of Romans 5:14-15. When we turn to such an author as Narsai, the same tendency can be observed: although the Pauline concept of Christ as the “second Adam” (>0  ) plays a prominent role in his Christological thought,199 the Adam-Christ typology does not serve him as an important hermeneutical tool in dealing with the Old Testament. Likewise, Narsai avoids general statements about correspondences between Adam and Christ like the ones in the West-Syrian authors quoted above. Now, in a striking contrast with this restrained attitude to the Adam-Christ typology among the Antiochenes, one observes a pronounced predilection for its use as an exegetical tool among the Alexandrian theologians and interpreters. The central figure in that respect is Cyril of Alexandria. The crucial role of this typology for Cyril’s thought has been stressed by Robert Wilken, who notices that in comparison with the earlier tradition, “for Cyril the Adam-Christ typology plays an even more decisive role, for it is both a key theological concept and a versatile and plastic exegetical key”.200 This Cyrillian emphasis on Adam-Christ typology was continued and developed even further in the later West-Syrian exegetical tradition. The idea of total correspondence between Adam and Christ is well attested among the West-Syrian ἐγένετο δὲ τὰ κατὰ τὸν Ἀδὰμ τύπος τῶν κατὰ Χριστόν; ed. STAAB 1933, p. 119; tr. MCLEOD 2009, p. 91. 199 For examples and discussion, see MCLEOD 1979, pp. 22-29. Cf. also Homilies on Creation III.295; ed. GIGNOUX 1968, p. 602. 200 WILKEN 1966, p. 142. 198

192

Sergey Minov

authors of the fifth and sixth centuries. For example, it is reiterated over and over again in the writings of Jacob of Serug: The dispensation of the whole way of the Son of God / from the beginning was delineated by His Father in Adam and his household.201 In all that concerns him Adam the older represented His images, / that is to say, the image and figure of His grace in their ways.202 God had painted Adam and his household according to His Only-begotten (Son), / so that the image of His Son shall be over His creatures.203 And he painted in Adam the whole image of the crucifixion.204 Another West-Syrian writer, the unknown author of the soghitha On the Mother of God, makes a similar claim – “In everything related to the first Adam the Adam from above has been demonstrated”. 205 Although this work is ascribed to Ephrem, its later (probably 6th c.) West-Syrian origins are betrayed by the use of the epithet “mother of God” ( %70 '6 and '6 '9) in relation to Mary.206
Homilies on Creation I.57-58: :'6 L '*  '73

(9   (* 19%I   >0'74 ; ed. BECK 1959, p. 193 [Syr.]. 206 Cf. IBID., p. 194, #18, 20, p. 197, #41, p. 199, #50. 201

Date and Provenance of the Cave of Treasures

193

All these observations concerning the profound interest in the Adam-Christ typology exhibited by the author of CT lead us to the conclusion that in this aspect he stands much closer to the Alexandrian and, by extension, West-Syrian exegetical tradition, than to the Antiochene and East-Syrian. f) CT and Ḥenana of Adiabene

The conspicuous discrepancy between the extensive use of the Adam-Christ typology in CT and its modest place in the EastSyrian exegetical tradition that was developed under the heavy influence of Theodore of Mopsuestia presents a considerable difficulty for those scholars who claim East-Syrian origins for CT. Recently, Alexander Toepel has tried to break out of this conundrum by suggesting that our work originated in the circle of Ḥenana of Adiabene, a famous East-Syrian theologian and exegete who was active during the second half of the sixth century.207 In this section I would like to subject this hypothesis to a closer scrutiny. Ḥenana was appointed as the head of the academy of Nisibis soon after the year 571. As a result of his unconventional position on Christology, as well as various innovations in the area of biblical exegesis, he soon became one of the most controversial figures in the history of EastSyrian scholasticism.208 Concerning his scriptural hermeneutics, it is known that Ḥenana tried to challenge the exclusive role taken in the EastSyrian scholarly curriculum by the writings of Theodore of Mopsuestia with their stress on the literary meaning of texts and to make it more open to typological and allegorical exegesis, while drawing his inspiration primarily from Origen and John Chrysostom. This greater openness of Ḥenana to figurative exegesis leads Toepel to suggest a connection between his approach to See TOEPEL 2006a, pp. 247-248. The most comprehensible account of Ḥenana’s academic career as well as his exegetical activity is provided by VÖÖBUS 1965, pp. 234-317. 207 208

194

Sergey Minov

Scripture and that of the author of CT. However, no examples of an exegetical problem that would be treated in a similar way by these two authors are brought forward to substantiate this claim. Indeed, it is difficult to support as well as to refute Toepel’s suggestion, since the lion’s share of Ḥenana’s œuvre is lost due to the strong resistance to his unorthodox views by the mainstream of the East-Syrian scholarly tradition. Unfortunately, only several liturgical treatises authored by him have survived in full.209 With regard to our subject, especially regrettable is the loss of Ḥenana’s Commentary on Genesis, mentioned in the catalogue of ‘Abdīšō‘ of Nisibis. 210 Only systematic comparison of this work with CT would provide a definite answer to the question. However, notwithstanding the scarcity of available material from Ḥenana’s pen, there are several instances when the preservation of his opinions by the later East-Syrian exegetical tradition allows us to compare his exegetical approach with that of CT and, thus, to assess the probability of the scenario proposed by Toepel. One such case is the way the two authors understand the  ) of “great dragons” (MT ‫ ;הַתַּ נִּינִם ַה ְגּדֺלִים‬Peshitta   Q =19).263 It is also noteworthy that George of Pisidia, a seventh-century Constantinopolitan poet who accompanied the emperor Heraclius during his counter-offensive against the Persians launched in the year 615 finds it necessary to attack “the error of Phantasiasts” (τῶν Φαντασιαστῶν ... τὴν πλάνην) in the poem describing this campaign.264 Another remarkable aspect of CT that connects this work with the West-Syrian milieu of Sasanian Mesopotamia is the peculiar polemical tradition found in CT XXX.12-13.265 In this passage our author reproaches some unidentified “simpletons”  (-(0 ) for believing that the biblical Melchizedek was not a human being, but God, based on his description in Hebrews 260 That seems to be true in the case of the views regarding Jesus’ circumcision that were current among Armenian Julianists. See on this KOFSKY 2013, p. 278. 261 Ed. CHABOT 1927-1933, v. 2, p. 124; tr. H ARRAK 1999, p. 122. 262 Ed. BROOKS 1907, p. 67 [Syr.]. 263 Ed. VAN ROEY 1975-1976, pp. 218-219. 264 Expeditio Persica I.149; ed. PERTUSI 1959, p. 91. 265 This tradition is attested in the manuscripts OrAF of the Eastern and all manuscripts of the Western recension and, thus, should be regarded as an integral part of the original stratum of CT.

208

Sergey Minov

7:3 as one “having neither beginning of days nor end of life”. It is apparent from this description that the author of CT polemicizes here against the heterodox group known in the heresiographical sources of Late Antiquity under the name of “Melchizedekians”. Attested as early as the third century, these Christians apparently regarded Melchizedek as a divine mediator figure, if one can trust the reports of their hostile adversaries.266 At some point this teaching made its appearance in Syria, where its earliest mention is connected with the name of certain John of Apamea, who was active during the fifth or early sixth century.267 Of particular relevance for our discussion is the evidence provided by several Miaphysite sources, from which one infers that the Melchizedekians were present in Sasanian Mesopotamia during the sixth century and, moreover, were a cause for concern for the West-Syrians in this region. The most important of these sources is the letter of Sergius I to the West-Syrian bishops of Persia, mentioned above. In the second question of this letter, the patriarch deals with the canonical problem of receiving those who turn back from the  heresy of “Melchizedekians” (=1I )479 ), characterized as those who hold the opinion that “Melchizedek is the Son of God” ('6 L (0  )1479).268 To that, one may add the evidence of the encyclical letter sent by the Armenian Catholicos Komitas to the West-Syrian bishops of the Sasanian empire in the second decade of the seventh century, in which the heresy of Melchizedekians, who “called Melchizedek God,” is anathematized.269 The resurgence of Melchizedekian heresy in the late antique Near East during the sixth century finds an additional confirmation in the Chronicle of Zuqnin. While describing the ecclesiastical crisis that took place in Ethiopia, 266 Cf. Hippolytus, Ref. VII.36.1; Epiphanius, Panar. IV.55.1-9. For more information on this group, see BARDY 1928; STORK 1928. 267 See VAN REETH 2000. 268 Ed. VAN ROEY 1975-1976, p. 220. 269 See the French translation in VAN ESBROECK 2001, p. 169.

Date and Provenance of the Cave of Treasures

209

Ḥimyar and “India” due to Justinian’s refusal to appoint nonChalcedonian bishops there, the historiographer relates: Thus because of the lack of a bishop, there too another heresy was born. And the error [of the Melchizedekites, who presumptuously] claimed that Melchizedek himself was the Christ, established itself.270 The residual traces of the radical Miaphysite Christology and the polemic against the Melchizedekians in CT, as well as serious engagement with Judaism and Zoroastrianism, allow us to situate its author and his Syriac-speaking community within the multi-confessional milieu of Northern Mesopotamia, where such diverse religious groups as the East-Syrians, WestSyrians of Severian and Julianist persuasion, Melchizedekians, Jews and Zoroastrians, lived alongside each other during the late Sasanian period. Although we do not have enough information to establish with greater certainty the geographical context of our author, one can imagine it to be much like the region of Sinǧār Mountains, where most of these groups were represented during the sixth and seventh centuries. BIBLIOGRAPHY Aland, B. and A. K. Juckel. Das Neue Testament in syrischer Überlieferung. Bd. II: Die Paulinischen Briefe, Tl. 2: 2. Korintherbrief, Galaterbrief, Epheserbrief, Philipperbrief und Kolosserbrief. Arbeiten zur neutestamentlichen Textforschung 23. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1995. Albert, M. Jacques de Saroug. Homélies contre les Juifs: édition critique du texte syriaque inédit, traduction française, introduction et notes. Patrologia Orientalis 38.1. Turnhout: Brepols, 1976.

270 Ed. CHABOT 1927-1933, v. 2, p. 112; tr. HARRAK 1999, p. 115. It has been suggested by Witold Witakowski, that the author of the Chronicle derived this information from the Church History of John of Ephesus; see WITAKOWSKI 1991, p. 266.

210

Sergey Minov

Alexander, P. J. “Medieval Apocalypses as Historical Sources.” American Historical Review 73:4 (1968): 997-1018. Alexander, P. J. The Oracle of Baalbek: The Tiburtine Sibyl in Greek Dress. Dumbarton Oaks Studies 10. Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Center for Byzantine Studies, 1967. Alwan, K. Jacques de Saroug. Quatre homélies métriques sur la Création. CSCO 508-509, Syr. 214-215. Louvain: Peeters, 1989. Alwan, K. “L’homme, était-il mortel ou immortel avant le péché pour Jacques de Saroug?”. Orientalia Christiana Periodica 55:1 (1989): 5-31. Aly, W. “Prokopius von Gaza.” In Paulys Real-Encyclopädie der Classischen Altertumswissenschaft. Neue Bearbeitung, vol. 23.1 [45], 259-73. Stuttgart: A. Druckenmüller, 1957. Amar, J. P. The Syriac Vita Tradition of Ephrem the Syrian. CSCO 629-630, Syr. 242-243. 2 vols. Louvain: Peeters, 2011. Amirav, H. Rhetoric and Tradition: John Chrysostom on Noah and the Flood. Traditio Exegetica Graeca 12. Louvain: Peeters, 2003. Assemani, J. S. Bibliotheca orientalis Clementino-Vaticana. 3 vols. Roma: Typis Sacrae Congregationis de Propaganda Fide, 1719-1728. Bamberger, J. Die Litteratur der Adambücher und die haggadischen Elemente in der syrischen Schatzhöhle. Aschaffenburg: C. Krebs, 1901. Bardy, G. “Melchisédéciens.” In Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, vol. 10, 513-16. Paris: Letouzey et Ané, 1928. Baumstark, A. Geschichte der syrischen Literatur, mit Ausschluss der christlich-palästinensischen Texte. Bonn: A. Marcus und E. Weber, 1922. Beck, E. Des heiligen Ephraem des Syrers Hymnen de Nativitate (Epiphania). CSCO 186-187, Syr. 82-83. 2 vols. Louvain: Secrétariat du CorpusSCO, 1959. Becker, A. H. Fear of God and the Beginning of Wisdom: The School of Nisibis and the Development of Scholastic Culture in Late

Date and Provenance of the Cave of Treasures

211

Antique Mesopotamia. Divinations. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2006. Bedjan, P. Homiliae selectae Mar-Jacobi Sarugensis. 5 vols Paris: Otto Harrassowitz, 1905-1910. Beulay, R. “Quelques axes de l’enseignement de Denys l’Aréopagite chez les mystiques syro-orientaux, et leur continuité possible en mystique musulmane.” In Les Syriaques transmetteurs de civilisations. L’expérience du Bilad elShâm à l’époque omeyyade, ed. R. J. Mouawad. Patrimoine Syriaque, Actes du Colloque IX, 97-106. Antélias, Liban: Centre d’Études et de Recherches Orientales, 2005. Bevan, G. A., and P. T. R. Gray. “The Trial of Eutyches: A New Interpretation.” Byzantinische Zeitschrift 101:2 (2008): 617-57. Bezold, C. Die Schatzhöhle, Syrisch und Deutsch herausgegeben. 2 vols. Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs, 1883, 1888. Brisson, J.-P. Hilaire de Poitiers. Traité des mystères. Sources chrétiennes 19. Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1947. Brock, S. P. “The Baptist’s Diet in Syriac Sources.” Oriens Christianus 54 (1970): 113-24. Brock, S. P. “The Resolution of the Philoxenian/Harklean Problem.” In New Testament Textual Criticism: Its Significance for Exegesis. Essays in Honour of Bruce M. Metzger, ed. E. J. Epp and G. D. Fee, 325-43. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981. Brock, S. P. “Syriac Views of Emergent Islam.” In Studies on the First Century of Islamic Society, ed. G. H. A. Juynboll. Papers on Islamic History 5, 9-21, 199-203. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1982a. Brock, S. P. “Clothing Metaphors as a Means of Theological Expression in Syriac Tradition.” In Typus, Symbol, Allegorie bei den östlichen Vätern und ihren Parallelen im Mittelalter: Internationales Kolloquium, Eichstätt 1981, ed. M. Schmidt and C. F. Geyer. Eichstätter Beiträge 4, 11-38. Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet, 1982b.

212

Sergey Minov

Brock, S. P. “An Early Syriac Commentary on the Liturgy.” Journal of Theological Studies NS 37:2 (1986): 387-403. Brock, S. P. “Diachronic Aspects of Syriac Word Formation: An Aid for Dating Anonymous Texts.” In V Symposium Syriacum, 1988: Katholieke Universiteit, Leuven, 29-31 août 1988, ed. R. Lavenant. Orientalia Christiana Analecta 236, 321-30. Roma: Pontificium Institutum Studiorum Orientalium, 1990. Brock, S. P. “The ruaḥ elōhīm of Gen 1,2 and its Reception History in the Syriac Tradition.” In Lectures et relectures de la Bible: Festschrift P.-M. Bogaert, ed. J.-M. Auwers and A. Wénin. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 144, 327-49. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1999. Brock, S. P. “Some Diachronic Features of Classical Syriac.” In Hamlet on a Hill: Semitic and Greek Studies Presented to Professor T. Muraoka on the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday, ed. M. F. J. Baasten and W. T. van Peursen. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 118, 95-111. Leuven: Peeters, 2003. Brock, S. P. “[Review of:] A. Toepel, Die Adam- und SethLegenden im syrischen Buch der Schatzhöhle. Eine quellenkritische Untersuchung (CSCO 618, Subs. 119; Louvain: Peeters, 2006).” Orientalia Christiana Periodica 74:2 (2008): 554-57. Brock, S. P. “A Criterion for Dating Undated Syriac Texts: The Evidence from Adjectival Forms in -aya.” Parole de l’Orient 36 (2010): 111-24. Brooks, E. W. A Collection of Letters of Severus of Antioch from Numerous Syriac Manuscripts. Patrologia Orientalis 12.2, 14.1. 2 vols. Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1915, 1920. Brooks, E. W. Historia ecclesiastica Zachariae Rhetori vulgo adscripta. CSCO Syr. III.5-6. 4 vols Louvain: Typographeo Reipublicae, 1919, 1921, 1924. Brooks, E. W. John of Ephesus. Lives of the Eastern Saints. Patrologia Orientalis 17.1, 18.4, 19.2. 3 vols Paris: FirminDidot, 1923-1925.

Date and Provenance of the Cave of Treasures

213

Brooks, E. W. Vitae virorum apud Monophysitas celeberrimorum. Pars prima. CSCO Syr. III.25 [7-8]. 2 vols. Paris: Typographeo Reipublicae, 1907. Louvain: Imprimerie Orientaliste, 1955. Budge, E. A. W. The Book of the Cave of Treasures. London: The Religious Tract Society, 1927. Canellis, A. S. Hieronymi Presbyteri Opera. Pars III: Opera Polemica, 4: Altercatio Luciferiani et Orthodoxi. Corpus Christianorum Series Latina 79B. Turnhout: Brepols, 2000. Carr, S. J. Thomae Edesseni Tractatus de Nativitate Domini Nostri Christi. Roma: Typis R. Academiae Lynceorum, 1898. Carrara, P. “Severo di Antiochia nelle catene esegetiche alla Genesi.” Sileno: Rivista di studi classici e cristiani 14:1-2 (1988): 171-78. Chabot, J. B. Synodicon orientale ou recueil de synodes nestoriens. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1902. Chabot, J. B. Incerti auctoris Chronicon Pseudo-Dionysianum vulgo dictum. CSCO 91, 104, Syr. III.1-2 [43, 53]. 2 vols. Paris: Typographeo Reipublicae, 1927, 1933. Chediath, G. The Christology of Mar Babai the Great. Oriental Institute of Religious Studies India 49. Kottayam, Kerala: Oriental Institute of Religious Studies, 1982. Clarke, E. G. The Selected Questions of Ishō bar Nūn on the Pentateuch. Studia Post-Biblica 5. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1962. Cowley, R. W. “Scholia of Ahob of Qatar on St. John’s Gospel and the Pauline Epistles.” Le Muséon 93:3-4 (1980): 329-43. Cowley, R. W. Ethiopian Biblical Interpretation: A Study in Exegetical Tradition and Hermeneutics. University of Cambridge Oriental Publications 38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. Crouzel, H., and M. Simonetti. Origène. Traité des Principes. Livres I et II. Sources chrétiennes 252-253. 2 vols. Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1978.

214

Sergey Minov

de Halleux, A. Martyrius (Sahdona). Œuvres spirituelles, II. Livre de la perfection, 2me partie (ch. 1-7). CSCO 214-215, Syr. 90-91. 2 vols. Louvain: Secrétariat du CorpusSCO, 1961. de Halleux, A. Philoxène de Mabbog. Sa vie, ses écrits, sa théologie. Universitas Catholica Louvaniensis, Dissertationes ad gradum magistri in Facultate Theologica vel in Facultate Iuris Canonici consequendum conscriptae III.8. Louvain: Imprimerie orientaliste, 1963. Deconinck, J. Essai sur la chaîne de l’Octateuque avec une édition des commentaires de Diodore de Tarse qui s’y trouvent contenus. Bibliothèque de l’École des hautes études IV, Sciences historiques et philologiques 195. Paris: H. Champion, 1912. Denis, A. M. Introduction à la littérature religieuse judéo-hellénistique. 2 vols. Turnhout: Brepols, 2000. Devreesse, R. Le commentaire de Théodore de Mopsueste sur les Psaumes. I–LXXX. Studi e Testi 93. Città del Vaticano: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1939. Diercks, G. F. Sancti Cypriani episcopi opera. Pars III, 2: Epistularium 58-81. Corpus Christianorum Series Latina 3C. Turnhout: Brepols, 1996. Donna, R. B. Saint Cyprian. Letters (1-81). The Fathers of the Church: A New Translation 51. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1964. Draguet, R. Julien d’Halicarnasse et sa controverse avec Sévère d’Antioche sur l’incorruptibilité du corps du Christ. Études d’histoire littéraire et doctrinale, suivie des fragments dogmatiques de Julien. Universitas Catholica Lovaniensis, Dissertationes ad gradum magistri in Facultate Theologica consequendum conscriptae II, 12. Louvain: P. Smeesters, 1924. Draguet, R. “La christologie d’Eutychès d’après les actes du synode de Flavien (448).” Byzantion 6 (1931): 441-57.

Date and Provenance of the Cave of Treasures

215

Duval, R. La littérature syriaque. Bibliothèque de l’enseignement de l’histoire ecclésiastique. Anciennes littératures chrétiennes 2. 3rd ed. Paris: V. Lecoffre, 1907. Ebied, R. Y., and L. R. Wickham. “A Collection of Unpublished Syriac Letters of Timothy Aelurus.” Journal of Theological Studies NS 21:2 (1970): 321-69. Eisenhofer, L. Procopius von Gaza. Eine literarhistorische Studie. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 1897. Ewald, M. L. The Homilies of Saint Jerome. The Fathers of the Church: A New Translation 48, 57. 2 vols. Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 19641966. Fiey, J.-M. “Jean de Dailam et l’imbroglio de ses fondations.” Proche-Orient Chrétien 10 (1960): 195-211. Fiey, J.-M. “Īšō‘yaw le Grand. Vie du catholicos nestorien Īšō‘yaw III d’Adiabène (580–659).” Orientalia Christiana Periodica 35 (1969): 305-333; 36 (1970): 5-46. Fiey, J.-M. Jalons pour une histoire de l’Église en Iraq. CSCO 310, Subs. 36. Louvain: Secrétariat du CorpusSCO, 1970. Fiey, J.-M. “Les diocèses du “Maphrianat” syrien, 629–1860.” Parole de l’Orient 5 (1974): 133-64, 331-93; 8 (1977-78), 347378. Forshall, J., and F. Rosen. Catalogus codicum manuscriptorum orientalium qui in Museo Britannico asservantur. Pars prima: codices syriacos et carshunicos amplectens. London: Curatores Musei Britannici, 1838. Freese, J. H. The Library of Photius. Translations of Christian Literature, Series I: Greek Texts. London: SPCK, 1920. Frishman, J. The Ways and Means of the Divine Economy: An Edition, Translation and Study of Six Biblical Homilies by Narsai. Ph.D. dissertation, Universiteit Leiden, 1992. Furlani, G. “A Cosmological Tract by Pseudo-Dionysius in the Syriac Language.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1917): 245-72.

216

Sergey Minov

Gero, S. “The Legend of the Fourth Son of Noah.” Harvard Theological Review 73:1-2 (1980): 321-30. Gibson, M. D. The Commentaries of Isho‘dad of Merv, Bishop of Hadatha (c. 850 A.D.), in Syriac and English. Horae Semiticae 5-7. 5 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1911, 1916. Giet, S. Basile de Césarée. Homélies sur l’Hexaéméron. Sources Chrétiennes 26. Paris: Cerf, 1950. Gignoux, P. Homélies de Narsaï sur la création. Patrologia Orientalis 34.3-4. Turnhout: Brepols, 1968. Götze, A. Die Schatzhöhle: Überlieferung und Quellen. Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische Klasse 4. Heidelberg: Carl Winter, 1922. Götze, A. “Die Nachwirkung der Schatzhöhle.” Zeitschrift für Semitistik 2 (1923): 51-94; 3 (1924), 53-71, 153-177. Greer, R. A. The Captain of our Salvation: A Study in the Patristic Exegesis of Hebrews. Beiträge sur Geschichte der biblischen Exegese 15. Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1973. Greisiger, L. “Ein nubischer Erlöser-König: Kūš in syrischen Apokalypsen des 7. Jahrhunderts.” In Der christliche Orient und seine Umwelt. Gesammelte Studien zu Ehren Jürgen Tubachs anläßlich seines 60. Geburtstages, ed. G. S. Vashalomidze and L. Greisiger. Studies in Oriental Religions 56, 189-213. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2007. Griffith, S. H. The Church in the Shadow of the Mosque: Christians and Muslims in the World of Islam. Jews, Christians, and Muslims from the Ancient to the Modern World. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007. Grillmeier, A. Christ in Christian Tradition. Vol. 2: From the Council of Chalcedon (451) to Gregory the Great (590-604). Part Four: The Church of Alexandria with Nubia and Ethiopia after 451. London: A.R. Mowbray & Co., 1996. Grillmeier, A., and T. Hainthaler. Christ in Christian Tradition. Vol. 2: From the Council of Chalcedon (451) to Gregory the Great

Date and Provenance of the Cave of Treasures

217

(590–604). Part 2: The Church of Constantinople in the Sixth Century. London: A.R. Mowbray & Co., 1995. Guidi, I. Les Homiliae Cathedrales de Sévère d’Antioch: traduction syriaque de Jacques d’Édesse (suite). Homélies XCIX à CIII. Patrologia Orientalis 22.2 [108]. Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1929. Guidi, I. “Mosè di Aghel e Simeone Abbate.” Atti della Reale Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Serie Quarta: Rendiconti publicati per cura dei segretari 2 (1886): 397-416, 545-57. Hainthaler, T. “Die “antiochenische Schule” und theologische Schulen im Bereich des antiochenischen Patriarchats.” In Jesus der Christus im Glauben der Kirche. Bd. 2.3: Die Kirchen von Jerusalem und Antiochien nach 451 bis 600, ed. A. Grillmeier and T. Hainthaler, 227-61. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 2002. Hainthaler, T. “Thomas of Edessa, Causa de Nativitate: Some Considerations.” Parole de l’Orient 31 (2006): 63-85. Harrak, A. The Chronicle of Zuqnīn, Parts III and IV: A.D. 488– 775. Mediaeval Sources in Translation 36. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1999. Heal, K. S. “Corpora, eLibraries, and Databases: Locating Syriac Studies in the 21st Century.” Hugoye 15:1 (2012): 6578. Henry, R. Photius. Bibliothèque. Collection byzantine. 8 vols. Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1959-1977. Hespel, R. Sévère d’Antioche. La polémique antijulianiste, II.A: Le Contra additiones Juliani. CSCO 295-296, Syr. 124-125. 2 vols. Louvain: Secrétariat du CorpusSCO, 1968. Hespel, R. Sévère d’Antioche. La polémique antijulianiste, II.B: L’Adversus apologiam Juliani. CSCO 301-302, Syr. 126-127. 2 vols. Louvain: Secrétariat du CorpusSCO, 1969. Honigmann, E. Pierre l’Ibérien et les écrits du Pseudo-Denys l’Aréopagite. Mémoires de l’Académie Royale de Belgique 48.3. Bruxelles: Palais des Académies, 1952.

218

Sergey Minov

Horn, C. B., and R. R. Phenix, Jr. John Rufus. The Lives of Peter the Iberian, Theodosius of Jerusalem, and the Monk Romanus. SBL Writings from the Greco-Roman World 24. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008. Hornus, J.-M. “Le Corpus dionysien en syriaque.” Parole de l’Orient 1:1 (1970): 69-93. Hutter, M. “Shirin, Nestorianer und Monophysiten. Königliche Kirchenpolitik in späten Sasanidenreich.” In Symposium Syriacum VII: Uppsala University, Department of Asian and African Languages, 11–14 August 1996, ed. R. Lavenant. Orientalia Christiana Analecta 256, 373-86. Roma: Pontificio Istituto Orientale, 1998. Jackson, B. St. Basil. Letters and Select Works. A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church II.8. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1895. Jansma, T. “Investigations into the Early Syrian Fathers on Genesis: An Approach to the Exegesis of the Nestorian Church and to the Comparison of Nestorian and Jewish Exegesis.” Oudtestamentische Studien 12 (1958): 69-181. Jansma, T. “L’Hexaméron de Jacques de Sarûg.” L’Orient Syrien 4 (1959): 3-42, 129-62, 253-84. Jansma, T. “Une homélie anonyme sur la chute d’Adam.” L’Orient Syrien 5 (1960): 159-82, 253-92. Jansma, T. “Théodore de Mopsueste, Interprétation du livre de la Genèse: Fragments de la version syriaque (B.M. Add. 17,189, fol. 17-21).” Le Muséon 75:1-2 (1962): 63-92. Jansma, T. ““And the Spirit of God Moved upon the Face of the Waters”: Some Remarks on the Syro-Hexaplaric Reading of Gen. I 2.” Vetus Testamentum 20:1 (1970): 16-24. Kelhoffer, J. A. The Diet of John the Baptist: “Locusts and Wild Honey” in Synoptic and Patristic Interpretation. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 176. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005. Kerrigan, A. St. Cyril of Alexandria: Interpreter of the Old Testament. Analecta Biblica 2. Roma: Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1952.

Date and Provenance of the Cave of Treasures

219

Kettenhofen, E. “Deportations, ii. In the Parthian and Sasanian Periods.” In Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. E. Yarshater, vol. 7, 297-308. London: Routledge, 1996. Kinzig, W. Asterius. Psalmenhomilien. Bibliothek der griechischen Literatur 56-57. Stuttgart: A. Hiersemann, 2002. Kofsky, A. “Julianism after Julian of Halicarnassus.” In Between Personal and Institutional Religion: Self, Doctrine, and Practice in Late Antique Eastern Christianity, ed. B. Bitton-Ashkelony and L. Perrone. Cultural Encounters in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages 15, 251-294. Turnhout: Brepols, 2013. Krivov, М. V. “Откровение Псевдо-Мефодия Патарского как отражение народных взглядов на арабское нашествие.” Византийский временник 44 (1983): 215-21. Kronholm, T. Motifs from Genesis 1–11 in the Genuine Hymns of Ephrem the Syrian, with Particular Reference to the Influence of Jewish Exegetical Traditions. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1978. Kugener, M.-A. “Un traité astronomique et météorologique syriaque attribué à Denis l’Aréopagite.” In Actes du XIVe Congrès international des orientalistes, Alger 1905. IIe partie: Section II (Langues sémitiques), 137-98. Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1907. Labourt, J. Le christianisme dans l’empire perse sous la dynastie sassanide (224–632). Bibliothèque de l’enseignement de l’histoire ecclésiastique 11. Paris: V. Lecoffre, 1904. Lebon, J. Le monophysisme sévérien. Étude historique, littéraire et théologique sur la résistance monophysite au Concile de Chalcédoine jusqu’à la constitution de l’église jacobite. Universitas Catholica Lovaniensis, Dissertationes ad gradum doctoris in Facultate Theologica consequendum conscriptae II.4. Louvain: J. Van Linthout, 1909. Lebon, J. Severi Antiocheni liber contra impium Grammaticum. CSCO Syr. IV.4-6. 6 vols Louvain: Typographeo Marcelli Istas, 1929-1938.

220

Sergey Minov

Leonhard, C. “Observations on the Date of the Syriac Cave of Treasures.” In The World of the Aramaeans III: Studies in Language and Literature in Honour of Paul-Eugène Dion, ed. P. M. M. Daviau et alii. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement Series 326, 255-93. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001. Leonhard, C. “Die Beschneidung Christi in der syrischen Schatzhöhle. Beobachtungen zu Datierung und Überlieferung des Werks.” In Syriaca II. Beiträge zum 3. deutschen Syrologen-Symposium in Vierzehnheiligen 2002, ed. M. Tamcke. Studien zur orientalischen Kirchengeschichte 33, 11-28. Münster: LIT, 2004. Limor, O. “Christian Sacred Space and the Jew.” In From Witness to Witchcraft: Jews and Judaism in Medieval Christian Thought, ed. J. Cohen. Wolfenbütteler Mittelalter-Studien 11, 55-77. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 1996. Maas, M. Exegesis and Empire in the Early Byzantine Mediterranean: Junillus Africanus and the Instituta Regularia Divinae Legis. Studien und Texte zu Antike und Christentum 17. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003. Macina, R. “L’homme à l’école de Dieu. D’Antioche à Nisibe: profil herméneutique, théologique et kérygmatique du mouvement scoliaste nestorien.” Proche-Orient Chrétien 32 (1982): 86-124, 263-301; 33 (1983), 39-103. Macomber, W. F. “The Theological Synthesis of Cyrus of Edessa, an East Syrian Theologian of the Mid-Sixth Century.” Orientalia Christiana Periodica 30 (1964): 5-38, 363-84. Macomber, W. F. Six Explanations of the Liturgical Feasts by Cyrus of Edessa, an East Syrian Theologian of the Mid Sixth Century. CSCO 355-356, Syr. 155-156. 2 vols. Louvain: Secrétariat du CorpusSCO, 1974. McLeod, F. G. Narsai’s Metrical Homilies on the Nativity, Epiphany, Passion, Resurrection and Ascension: Critical Edition of Syriac

Date and Provenance of the Cave of Treasures

221

Text. Patrologia Orientalis 40.1 [182]. Turnhout: Brepols, 1979. McLeod, F. G. Theodore of Mopsuestia. The Early Church Fathers. London: Routledge, 2009. McVey, K. E. Ephrem the Syrian. Hymns on the Nativity, Hymns against Julian, Hymns on Virginity and on the Symbols of the Lord. The Classics of Western Spirituality. New York: Paulist Press, 1989. Metzler, K. Prokop von Gaza. Eclogarum in libros historicos Veteris Testamenti epitome. Teil 1: Der Genesiskommentar (Die Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten Jahrhunderte, Neue Folge 22; Berlin / New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2015). Mingana, A. Narsai doctoris syri homiliae et carmina. 2 vols. Mosul: Typis Fratrum Praedicatorum, 1905. Mingana, A. Sources syriaques. Vol. 1: Mšiḥa-Zkha (texte et traduction); Bar-Penkayé (texte). Leipzig: Otto Harrassowitz, 1908. Minov, S. “The Story of Solomon’s Palace at Heliopolis.” Le Muséon 123:1-2 (2010): 61-89. Minov, S., Syriac Christian Identity in Late Sasanian Mesopotamia: The Cave of Treasures in Context. Ph.D. dissertation, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2013a. Minov, S. “The Cave of Treasures and the Formation of Syriac Christian Identity in Late Antique Mesopotamia: Between Tradition and Innovation.” In Between Personal and Institutional Religion: Self, Doctrine, and Practice in Late Antique Eastern Christianity, ed. B. Bitton-Ashkelony and L. Perrone. Cultural Encounters in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages 15, 155-194. Turnhout: Brepols, 2013b. Minov, S. “Dynamics of Christian Acculturation in the Sasanian Empire: Some Iranian Motifs in the Cave of Treasures.” In Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians: Religious Dynamics in a Sasanian Context, ed. G. Herman. Judaism in Context 17, 159-212. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2014.

222

Sergey Minov

Moberg, A. The Book of the Himyarites: Fragments of a Hitherto Unknown Syriac Work. Acta Regiae Societatis Humaniorum Litterarum Lundensis 7. Lund: C.W.K. Gleerup, 1924. Morin, G. S. Hieronymi Presbyteri Opera. Pars II: Opera Homiletica. Corpus Christianorum Series Latina 78. Turnhout: Brepols, 1958. Morony, M. G. “Population Transfers between Sasanian Iran and the Byzantine Empire.” In La Persia e Bisanzio. Atti del Convegno internazionale (Roma, 14-18 ottobre 2002). Atti dei Convegni Lincei 201, 161-79. Roma: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei / Istituto italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente, 2004. Morony, M. G. Iraq after the Muslim Conquest. Princeton Studies on the Near East. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1984. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2005. Musurillo, H., and B. Grillet. Jean Chrysostome. La virginité. Sources chretiennes 125. Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1966. Nöldeke, T. “[Review of :] C. Bezold, Die Schatzhöhle aus dem syrischen Texte dreier unedirten Handschriften ins Deutsche übersetzt und mit Anmerkungen versehen. 2 vols. (Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs, 1883, 1888).” In Literarisches Zentralblatt für Deutschland 8 (1888): 233-236. Norris, R. A. Manhood and Christ: A Study in the Christology of Theodore of Mopsuestia. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1963. Olivier, J.-M. Diodori Tarsensis Commentarii in Psalmos. Vol. 1: Commentarii in Psalmos I–L. Corpus Christianorum Series Graeca 6. Turnhout: Brepols, 1980. Parisot, J. Aphraatis Sapientis Persae Demonstrationes. Patrologia Syriaca 1.1. Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1894. Pertusi, A. Giorgio di Pisidia. Poemi. I. Panegirici epici. Studia patristica et byzantina 7. Ettal: Buch-Kunstverlag, 1959. Petit, F. La chaîne sur la Genèse. Édition intégrale I: chapitres 1 à 3. Traditio Exegetica Graeca 1. Louvain: Peeters, 1991.

Date and Provenance of the Cave of Treasures

223

Petit, F. La chaîne sur la Genèse. Édition intégrale II: chapitres 4 à 11. Traditio Exegetica Graeca 2. Louvain: Peeters, 1993. Petit, F., L. van Rompay, and J. J. S. Weitenberg. Eusèbe d’Émèse. Commentaire de la Genèse: Texte arménien de l’édition de Venise (1980), fragments grecs et syriaques, avec traductions. Traditio Exegetica Graeca 15. Louvain: Peeters, 2011. Petruccione, J. F., and R. C. Hill. Theodoret of Cyrus. The Questions on the Octateuch. Library of Early Christianity 1-2. 2 vols. Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2007. Possekel, U. “Julianism in Syriac Christianity.” In Orientalia Christiana: Festschrift für Hubert Kaufhold zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. P. Bruns and H.O. Luthe, 437-457. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2013. Pusey, P. E. Sancti patris nostri Cyrilli archiepiscopi Alexandrini in D. Joannis evangelium. 3 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1872. Reinink, G. J. Die syrische Apokalypse des Pseudo-Methodius. CSCO 540-541, Syr. 220-221. 2 vols. Louvain: Peeters, 1993. Reinink, G. J. “Ps.-Methodius: A Concept of History in Response to the Rise of Islam.” In The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East, I: Problems in the Literary Source Material, ed. A. Cameron and L. I. Conrad. Studies in Late Antiquity and Early Islam 1, 149-87. Princeton: Darwin Press, 1992. Reinink, G. J. “Paideia: God’s Design in World History according to the East Syrian Monk John bar Penkaye.” In The Medieval Chronicle II: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on the Medieval Chronicle, Driebergen/Utrecht, 16-21 July 1999, ed. E. Kooper. Costerus 144, 190-98. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2002. Reinink, G. J. “Alexander the Great in Seventh-Century Syriac ‘Apocalyptic’ Texts.” Byzantinorossica 2 (2003): 150-78. Reinink, G. J. “From Apocalyptics to Apologetics: Early Syriac Reactions to Islam.” In Endzeiten: Eschatologie in den monotheistischen Weltreligionen, ed. W. Brandes and F.

224

Sergey Minov

Schmieder. Millennium-Studien 16, 75-87. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2008. Reinink, G. J. “Tradition and the Formation of the ‘Nestorian’ Identity in Sixth- to Seventh-Century Iraq.” Church History and Religious Culture 89:1-3 (2009): 217-50. Ri, S.-M. La Caverne des Trésors: les deux recensions syriaques. CSCO 486-487, Syr. 207-208. 2 vols. Louvain: Peeters, 1987. Ri, S.-M. “La Caverne des Trésors et Mar Éphrem.” In Symposium Syriacum VII: Uppsala University, Department of Asian and African Languages, 11–14 August 1996, ed. R. Lavenant. Orientalia Christiana Analecta 256, 71-83. Rome: Pontificio Istituto Orientale, 1998. Ri, S.-M. Commentaire de la Caverne des Trésors: étude sur l’histoire du texte et de ses sources. CSCO 581, Subs. 103. Louvain: Peeters, 2000. Rilliet, F. Jacques de Saroug. Six homélies festales en prose. Patrologia Orientalis 43.4. Turnhout: Brepols, 1986. Rorem, P., and J. C. Lamoreaux. John of Scythopolis and the Dionysian Corpus: Annotating the Areopagite. Oxford Early Christian Studies. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998. Sachau, E. Theodori Mopsuesteni fragmenta syriaca e codicibus Musei Britannici Nitriacis edidit atque in latinum sermonem vertit. Leipzig: W. Engelmann, 1869. Sanders, J. C. J. Ibn aṭ-Ṭaiyib. Commentaire sur la Genèse. CSCO 274-275, Arab. 24-25. 2 vols. Louvain: Secrétariat du CorpusSCO, 1967. Schaff, P. St. Augustin. The Writings against the Manichæans, and against the Donatists. A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church 4. Buffalo: The Christian Literature Company, 1887. Scher, A. Mar Barhadbšabba ‘Arbaya, évêque de Halwan (VIe siècle). Cause de la fondation des écoles. Patrologia Orientalis 4.4 [18]. Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1908.

Date and Provenance of the Cave of Treasures

225

Scher, A. Histoire nestorienne (Chronique de Séert). Patrologia Orientalis 4.3 [17], 5.2 [22], 7.2 [32], 13.4 [65]. 4 vols Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1908, 1909, 1910, 1918. Scher, A. Theodorus bar Kōnī. Liber Scholiorum. CSCO Syr. II.6566. 2 vols. Paris: Typographeo Reipublicae, 1910, 1912. Scher, A. Traités d’Išaï le docteur et de Hnana d’Adiabène sur les Martyrs, le Vendredi d’or et les Rogations suivis de la Confession de foi à réciter par les évêques avant l’ordination. Patrologia Orientalis 7.1. Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1911. Schwartz, E., and J. Straub. Acta conciliorum oecumenicorum. 14 vols. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1914-1984. Sherwood, P. “Sergius of Reshaina and the Syriac Versions of the Pseudo-Denis.” Sacris Erudiri 4 (1952): 174-84. Shore, S. R. John Chrysostom. On Virginity; Against Remarriage. Studies in Women and Religion 9. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 1983. Simon, M. “Adam et la rédemption dans la perspective de l’Église ancienne.” In Types of Redemption: Contributions to the Theme of the Study-Conference Held at Jerusalem 14th to 19th July 1968, ed. R. J. Z. Werblowsky and C. J. Bleeker. Studies in the History of Religions 18, 62-71. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1970. Simonetti, M. “Theodore of Mopsuestia (CA. 350–428).” In Handbook of Patristic Exegesis: The Bible in Ancient Christianity, ed. C. Kannengiesser, vol. 2, 799-828. Leiden: Brill, 2004. Staab, K. Pauluskommentare aus der griechischen Kirche aus Katenenhandschriften gesammelt und herausgegeben. Neutestamentliche Abhandlungen 15. Münster: Aschendorff, 1933. Stork, H. Die sogenannten Melchisedekianer, mit Untersuchung ihrer Quellen auf Gedankengehalt und dogmengeschichtliche Entwicklung. Forschungen zur Geschichte des neutestamentliche Kanons und der altkirchlichen Literatur 8, Historische Studien zum Hebräerbrief 2. Leipzig: D. Werner Scholl, 1928.

226

Sergey Minov

Taylor, D. G. K. “The Psalm Commentary of Daniel of Salah and the Formation of Sixth-Century Syrian Orthodox Identity.” Church History and Religious Culture 89:1-3 (2009): 65-92. ter Haar Romeny, R. B. A Syrian in Greek Dress: The Use of Greek, Hebrew, and Syriac Biblical Texts in Eusebius of Emesa’s Commentary on Genesis. Traditio Exegetica Graeca 6. Louvain: Peeters, 1997. ter Haar Romeny, R. B. “Procopius of Gaza and his Library.” In From Rome to Constantinople: Studies in Honour of Averil Cameron, ed. H. Amirav and R. B. ter Haar Romeny. Late Antique History and Religion 1, 173-90. Leuven: Peeters, 2007. Thekeparampil, J. “Adam-Christus in den Passionssedre und in der Schatzhöhle.” In IIIo Symposium Syriacum, 1980: Les contacts du monde syriaque avec les autres cultures (Goslar 7–11 Septembre 1980), ed. R. Lavenant. Orientalia Christiana Analecta 221, 323-232. Roma: Pontificium Institutum Studiorum Orientalium, 1983. Thomson, R. W. The Syriac Version of the Hexaemeron by Basil of Caesarea. CSCO 550-551, Syr. 222-223. 2 vols. Leuven: Peeters, 1995. Toepel, A. Die Adam- und Seth-Legenden im syrischen Buch der Schatzhöhle. Eine quellenkritische Untersuchung. CSCO 618, Subs. 119. Louvain: Peeters, 2006a. Toepel, A. “Yonton Revisited: A Case Study in the Reception of Hellenistic Science within Early Judaism.” Harvard Theological Review 99:3 (2006b): 235-45. Tonneau, R. M. Sancti Ephraem Syri in Genesim et in Exodum commentarii. CSCO 152-153, Syr. 71-72. 2 vols. Louvain: L. Durbecq, 1955. Tonneau, R. M. “Théodore de Mopsueste. Interpretation (du livre) de la Genèse (Vat. Syr. 120, ff. I–V).” Le Muséon 66:1-2 (1953): 45-64.

Date and Provenance of the Cave of Treasures

227

Tubach, J. “Seth and the Sethites in Early Syriac Literature.” In Eve’s Children: The Biblical Stories Retold and Interpreted in Jewish and Christian Traditions, ed. G. P. Luttikhuizen. Themes in Biblical Narrative, Jewish and Christian Traditions 5, 187-201. Leiden: Brill, 2003. van Esbroeck, M. “Une lettre de Dorothée, comte de Palestine, à Marcel et Mâri en 452.” Analecta Bollandiana 104:1-2 (1986): 145-58. van Esbroeck, M. “Un court traité pseudo-Basilien de mouvance aaronite conservé en arménien.” Le Muséon 100:3-4 (1987): 385-95. van Esbroeck, M. “Peter the Iberian and Dionysius the Areopagite: Honigmann’s Thesis Revisited.” Orientalia Christiana Periodica 59 (1993): 217-27. van Esbroeck, M. “Invention de reliques comme attribut impérial: la tunique du Christ à Moscou et son symbolisme.” In Roma fuori di Roma: istituzioni e immagini (Roma, 21 aprile 1985), ed. P. Catalano. Da Roma alla Terza Roma: documenti e studi, Studi 5, 225-43. Roma: Università degli studi “La Sapienza”, 1994. van Esbroeck, M. “L’encyclique de Komitas et la réponse de Mar Maroutha (617).” Oriens Christianus 85 (2001): 162-75. van Reeth, J. M. F. “Melchisédech, le roi qui n’a pas d’âge, et son grand interprète Jean d’Apamée.” In Vieillesse, Sagesse et Tradition dans les civilisations orientales. Acta Orientalia Belgica 13, 135-50. Bruxelles: Société Belge d’Études Orientales, 2000. van Roey, A. “Une lettre du patriarche Jacobite Serge I (557– 561).” Parole de l’Orient 6-7 (1975-1976): 213-27. van Rompay, L. Le commentaire sur Genèse–Exode 9,32 du manuscrit (olim) Diyarbakir 22. CSCO 483-484, Syr. 205-206. 2 vols. Louvain: Peeters, 1986. van Rompay, L. “L’informateur syrien de Basile de Césarée. À propos de Genèse 1,2.” Orientalia Christiana Periodica 58 (1992): 245-51.

228

Sergey Minov

van Rompay, L. “The Christian Syriac Tradition of Interpretation.” In Hebrew Bible / Old Testament: The History of Its Interpretation. Vol. I: From the Beginnings to the Middle Ages (Until 1300). Part 1: Antiquity, ed. M. Sæbø, 612-641. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1996. Vaschalde, A. A. Philoxeni Mabbugensis tractatus tres de Trinitate et Incarnatione. CSCO Syr. II.27 [9-10]. 2 vols. Paris: Typographeo Reipublicae, 1907. Vaschalde, A. A. Babai Magni Liber de Unione. CSCO Syr. II.61. 2 vols. Louvain: Secrétariat du CorpusSCO, 1915. Vasiliev, A. A. Justin the First: An Introduction to the Epoch of Justinian the Great. Dumbarton Oaks Studies 1. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1950. Vogl, A. “Adam – Messias in der Schatzhöhle.” Ostkirchliche Studien 28:2-3 (1979): 183-85. Vööbus, A. The Statutes of the School of Nisibis. Papers of the Estonian Theological Society in Exile 12. Stockholm: Estonian Theological Society in Exile, 1962. Vööbus, A. History of the School of Nisibis. CSCO 266, Subs. 26. Louvain: Secrétariat du CorpusSCO, 1965. Vosté, J. M. “Catalogue des manuscrits syro-chaldéens conservés dans la bibliothèque de l’archevêché chaldéen de Kerkouk (Iraq).” Orientalia Christiana Periodica 5 (1939): 72-102. Vosté, J. M. Theodori Mopsuesteni Commentarius in Evangelium Iohannis Apostoli. CSCO 115-116, Syr. 62-63. 2 vols. Louvain: Secrétariat du CorpusSCO, 1940. Vosté, J. M., and C. van den Eynde. Commentaire d’Išo‘dad de Merv sur l’Ancien Testament, I: Genèse. CSCO 126, Syr. 67. Louvain: L. Durbecq, 1950. Watt, J. W. Philoxenus of Mabbug. Fragments of the Commentary on Matthew and Luke. CSCO 392-393, Syr. 171-172. 2 vols. Louvain: Secrétariat du CorpusSCO, 1978.

Date and Provenance of the Cave of Treasures

229

Wilken, R. L. “Exegesis and the History of Theology: Reflections on the Adam-Christ Typology in Cyril of Alexandria.” Church History 35:2 (1966): 139-56. Witakowski, W. “The Magi in Syriac Tradition.” In Malphono wRabo d-Malphone: Studies in Honor of Sebastian P. Brock, ed. G. A. Kiraz. Gorgias Eastern Christian Studies 3, 809-43. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2008. Witakowski, W. “Sources of Pseudo-Dionysius for the Third Part of his Chronicle.” Orientalia Suecana 40 (1991): 252-75. Wolska, W. La Topographie chrétienne de Cosmas Indicopleustès: theologie et science au VIe siècle. Bibliothèque Byzantine, Études 3. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1962. Wolska-Conus, W. Cosmas Indicopleustès. Topographie chrétienne. Sources chrétiennes 141, 159, 197. 3 vols. Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1968-1973. Wood, P. ‘We Have No King But Christ’: Christian Political Thought in Greater Syria on the Eve of the Arab Conquest (c. 400–585). Oxford Studies in Byzantium. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. Wright, W. Catalogue of Syriac Manuscripts in the British Museum, Acquired since the Year 1838. 3 vols. London: Trustees of the British Museum, 1870-1872. Wright, W. Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles, Edited from Syriac Manuscripts in the British Museum and Other Libraries. 2 vols. London: Williams and Norgate, 1871. Zaharopoulos, D. Z. Theodore of Mopsuestia on the Bible: A Study of his Old Testament Exegesis. Theological Inquiries. New York: Paulist Press, 1989. Zycha, I. Sancti Aureli Augustini De utilitate credendi, De duabus animabus, Contra Fortunatum, Contra Adimantum, Contra epistulam fundamenti, Contra Faustum. Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum 25.6.1. Vindobonae: F. Tempsky, 1891.

Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies, Vol. 20.1, 231-256 © 2017 by Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute and Gorgias Press

NINTH CENTURY SYRIAC EXEGETE AND APOLOGIST: MOSHE BAR KEPHA’S COMMENTARY ON LUKE ABDUL-MASSIH SAADI BAYLOR UNIVERSITY ABSTRACTS Moshe Bar Kepha, as a churchman, exegete and apologist, lived in the time and place of the most troubled center of the Abbasid Empire, witnessing the consequences of its policies upon the Christian communities. The most daring policy was the Islamization policy of Caliph al-Mutawakkil (d. 861), under which Christianity was not merely assailed as a false faith, but also as a social evil. In addition to paying Jizyah, this caliph further humiliated the Christians by imposing on them harsher rules which came to be known as “cUmar Conditions.” It was in the context of enduring the Islamization policy and in the context of open and receptive relationships among Christians of different traditions that Moshe Bar Kepha ministered, taught, and wrote his Commentary on the Gospel of Luke. In fact, he produced a masterpiece of an inclusive (ecumenical) theological approach, and with apologetic tendency responding to Muslims.

231

232

Abdul-Massih Saadi

Through examples from his Commentary, I will illuminate Moshe Bar Kepha’s position on various theological topics. He presented them in a harmonious way, stressing the essential unity among all Christians. At the same time, by means of instructing his Christian community, Moshe Bar Kepha responded to Muslims’ challenge to the Christian faith.

INTRODUCTION In the second half of the 9th century, the Syriac Christian communities were shaken by the radical shift of the social and religious policies of the Abbasid Empire brought by the 10th Caliph, al-Mutawakkil (847-861), and the continuation of these policies through his successors.1 As these new policies were implemented, Islamic authorities severely oppressed Muctazilites, Christians, and other religious groups.2 Along with many Christians, Moshe Bar Kepha suffered under the new policies, which severely harassed the Christian communities: economically, socially, physically, psychologically, and religiously.3 1 Moshe Bar Kepha was contemporary to six of al-Mutawakkil’s successors: al-Muntasir (861-862), al-Mustacin (862-866), al-Muctaz (866869), al-Muhtadi (869-870), al-Muctamid (870-892), al-Muctadid (892-902), and al-Muktafi (902-908). 2 A. Abuna, The History of the Eastern Syriac Church [ ‫تاريخ الكنيسة السريانية‬ ‫ ]الشرقية‬Vol. 2 (Beirut: Dar al-Mashriq, 1993), 173-8. 3 Mari and Saliba, the thirteenth century East Syriac historians, bitterly complained about al-Mutawakkil’s polices, saying: “He had subjugated the scholars and the writers of his time and diminished their honor, and made science and its seekers his enemy. Moreover, he killed many authors and confiscated their properties and destroyed their homes. Thus, the people of Dhimmi [Christians] suffered a great deal of afflictions, harms, and humiliation by forcing them to change their clothes, and through destruction of their churches and cemeteries, leveling it with the earth… Furthermore, in all places, he ordered the humiliation of Nasareh [Christians], and to make them wear blue robes.” See H. Gismondi, ed., Maris Amri et Slibae, De Patriachis Nestorianorum Commentaria (Rome: Excudebat de Luigi, 1899) 79. B. Holmberg argues for an earlier date of this work by a different author. The new author is cAmr Ibn Matta, who is

Moshe Bar Kepha’s Commentary on Luke

233

The pessimistic outlook of Christians at this time was clearly reflected by the contemporary East Syriac apologist, Yuhanna b. Masawayeh. Yuhanna cried, “Nowadays, Christ himself would become Muslim under the pressure of al-Mutawakkil.”4 Al-Mutawakkil's rules, which he ascribed to cUmar (the second Rashidite Caliph, d. 644), and which became known as the “Covenant of cUmar,” or the “Conditions of cUmar,” greatly restricted the freedom of Christians.5 Among other restrictions, the Conditions forbade Christians from criticizing Islam on pain of death.6 Furthermore, al-Mutawakkil imposed psychological pressure on both lay and learned Christians by recruiting Muslim writers to humiliate the Christians, especially in the eyes of the Muslim populace, and to challenge Christian

responsible for the first seven-chapter Work in the early 11th century; the other five-chapter work authored by Saliba Ibn Yuhanna in the 14th century; Mari Ibn Sulayman is just a “continuer” author, who added more material related to the 14th century. See B. Holmberg, “A Reconsideration of the Kitāb al-Magdal,” Parole de l’Orient 18 (1993): 255-273, esp. 268. 4 Nizanr Riza, ed., Iwan al-Anbaa fi Tabaqat al-Atibaa [ ‫عيون الأنباء في طبقات‬ ‫( ]الأطباء‬Beirut: Dar Maktabat al-Hayat, 1965) 250. 5 J. Fiey details the “Umar Conditions” imposed by al-Mutawakkil, and discusses their humiliating impact on the Christians. See J. Fiey, Ahwal AlNasara [‫ ]أحوال النصارى في خلافة بني عباس‬Trans. Husni Zinah (Beirut: Oriental Library, 1990), 141-2; Chrétiens Syriaques Sous Les Abbasides surtout à Bagdad (749-1258), CSCO 420, Subs. 59 (Louvain: Secrétariat du CorpusSCO, 1980) 87-90; see also, A. S. Tritton, The Caliphs and their Non-Muslim Subjects, a
Critical Study of the Covenant of cUmar (London: Oxford University Press, 1930). 6 The Covenant of cUmar states: “If any of you says of the Prophet, of God's book or his religion what is unfitting, he is debarred from the protection of God, the Commander of the Faithful, and all Muslims; the security on which was given is annulled.” See A. Tritton, The Caliphs and their Non-Muslim Subjects, 12.

234

Abdul-Massih Saadi

teachings.7 As a result of this policy, many priests, bishops and theologians were imprisoned and many suffered silently.8 In such strained circumstances, the Christian communities, with no capacity to respond to these policies, endured their fate, but they dealt internally with their religious differences in harmonious ways. It would seem that this more cordial relationship between Christian communities was partially in reaction to the aggressive Islamization policy of al-Mutawakkil. The Muslims always viewed the differences among Christians as an obvious sign of the incredulity of Christian faith, as they invoked their scripture saying, “We caused among them [Christians] animosity and hatred until the Day of Resurrection.”9 Muslim debaters often highlighted this topic in their refutation of the Christian faith.10 They also frequently 7 Al-Jahiz explains that his Letters against Christians were in response to al-Mutawakkil’s request. See A. Harun, ed., Rasail al-Jahiz [‫ ]رسائل الجاحظ‬Vol. 3, (Cairo: al-Hangi, 1979), 303-351, esp. 303. Likewise, cAli Ibn Rabban alTabari, the East Syriac physician, converted to Islam and responded to alMutawakkil’s command, wrote a treatise against Christians entitled, al-Radd c ala al-Nasara or “Refutation of the Christians;” see A. Nuweihed, ed., Kitab al-din wal-dawla [‫]كتاب الدين والدولة‬, (Beirut: Dar al-Afaq al-Jadida, 1979), 34-36; A. Mingana, trans., The Book of Religion and Empire (Manchester, LongmansGreen, 1922), 2-5. 8 S. Moffett, A History of Christianity in Asia, Vol. 1 (New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 1992) 357-9. 9 Surat al-Mā'idah, 5: 14 reads: ‫ظا ِمما‬ َّ ًّ ‫ين قَالُوا إِنَّا ن ََصا َرى أَخَ ْذنَا ِميثَا َق ُه ْم َف َن ُسوا َح‬ َ ‫َو ِم َن الَّ ِذ‬ .‫“ ُذك ُِّروا بِ ِه َفأَ ْغ َر ْي َنا َب ْي َن ُه ُم الْ َعد ََاو َة َوالْ َبغ َْض َاء إِلَى َي ْو ِم الْ ِق َيا َم ِة َو َس ْو َف ُي َن ِّب ُئ ُه ُم اللَّ ُه بِ َما كَانُوا َي ْص َن ُعو َن‬And from those who say, ‘We are Christians’ We took their covenant; but they forgot a portion of that of which they were reminded. So we caused among them animosity and hatred until the Day of Resurrection. And Allah is going to inform them about what they used to do.” 10 For example, the contemporary al-Jahiz (d. 869) declared: “Even if one were to exert every effort, and summon all his intellectual resources for understanding their teaching concerning Christ, he would still fail to comprehend the nature of Christianity, especially its doctrine of the Divinity. How can you understand that, for if you asked about Christ to two Nestorians, sons of the same father and mother, the answer of the first one would contradict the answer of his brother. This holds true also of the Melchites and Jacobites.” See Al-Jahiz, 333-334.

Moshe Bar Kepha’s Commentary on Luke

235

criticized Christian doctrines, including the divinity of Jesus, the Trinity, the Incarnation, the integrity of the Bible, free will, and the concept of Paradise. By way of instructing his community, Moshe Bar Kepha writes and elaborates on these topics, focusing on the divinity of Christ in his Commentary on the Gospel of Luke,11 but only to conclude that Christians are in agreement with all points that define the Christian faith. At the same time, he opportunely uses these same topics to clarify the differences between believers and Muslims. But unlike the Muslims, who aim to undermine the Christian faith and gain converts, the restricted Moshe Bar Kepha aims to protect his Christian community by way of instructing them with biblical responses to the Muslims’ objections. It was in the context of enduring the Islamization policy of al-Mutawakkil and in the context of open and receptive relationships among Christians of different traditions that Moshe Bar Kepha, the Syriac Orthodox bishop, ministered to his community and wrote his Commentary on the Gospel of Luke. His Commentary models an ecumenical and theological approach, especially the Christology, along with apologetic concern with Islam.12 WRITING STRATEGY AND LITERARY GENRE Moshe Bar Kepha’s writing strategy is characterized by his even-handed treatment of the theology of various Syriac traditions, namely, the East Syriac (Nestorians), the Syriac Melkites (Chalcedonians), the Syriac Maronites, and the West 11 A. Saadi, “Moshe Bar Kepha’s Commentary on Luke: A Ninth Century Apology.” Ph.D. dissertation, Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago, 1999. The Commentary survived in a single manuscript, now located in Mardin, at the Church of the Holy Martyrs, under number 102; an edition and translation by the present author is in press. 12 J. Reller, in his introduction, briefly referred to Moshe Bar Kepha’s apologetic tendency responding to Muslims; however, Reller did not elaborate on the topic, nor did he give examples. See J. Reller, Mose bar Kepha und seine Paulinenauslegung (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1994).

236

Abdul-Massih Saadi

Syriac (Jacobites). Throughout his Commentary, Moshe Bar Kepha avoids the controversial watchwords of Christology, such as one or two Nature (s), one or two Hypostasis (-es), one or two Will(s), etc. In fact, on many topics, Moshe Bar Kepha resorts to the early Syriac theological theme, namely, “the divine mystery,” propagated by St. Ephrem,13 and the “incomprehensibility of the Word of God” in order to foster harmony among diverse Christians.14 Under the theme of “the divine mystery,” he discusses the various and diverse views among Christian traditions, even within the same tradition, but only to conclude that these differences point to the common belief in the Godhead of Christ, the Word of God.15 By following this strategy, Moshe Bar Kepha aims at presenting an easy, accessible, acceptable and uniform Christian teaching for the instruction of the Christian communities in the face of Islamization policies. Additionally, Moshe Bar Kepha employs the term “heretics” ostensibly to refer to ancient, nonS. Brock and G. Kiraz, Ephrem the Syrian: Select Poems (Provo: Brigham Young University Press, 2006), 16-17; D. Taylor, “The Syriac Tradition,” The First Christian Theologians: An Introduction to Theology in the Early Church, edited by G. R. Evans, 206ff. (Malden/ Oxford/ Victoria: Blackwell, 2004). 14 D. Bundy argues that the common principles of early Syriac authors were the Scriptures as a source of knowing the divine revelation, the perfect life style, the free will, and the inability of language to express the divine truth. See D. Bundy, “Criteria for Being ‘in communione’ in the Early Syriac Church,” Augustinianum 25:3 (1985): 597-608. 15 Moshe Bar Kepha followed a trend of Syriac literature that focuses on biblical and theological themes that instruct all Christian communities, avoiding details of Christological doctrines. In a more direct way, the 11th 12th century West Syriac apologist, Arfadi, after naming all diverse Christian denominations, stated that “all agree in confessing both the divinity and humanity of Christ our Lord.” See G. Troupeau, “'Le livre de l’unanimité de la foi de  Alī ibn Dāwud al-Arfādī,” Melto 5:2 (1969): 210-211. Likewise, Bar Hebraeus (1286), confirmed that the theological differences among Christians are insubstantial. He concluded, saying: “Thus I discovered, that all Christian peoples, notwithstanding their differences, are in concord with each other.” See P. Bedjan, ed., Liber columbae seu Directorium monachorum Gregorii Barhebraei (Paris / Leipzig: Otto Harrassowitz, 1898) 577-8; English trans., A. Wensinck, Bar Hebraeus's Book of the Dove together with some Chapters from his Ethicon (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1919) 60. 13

Moshe Bar Kepha’s Commentary on Luke

237

canonical Christian teaching, which had mostly ceased to exist, yet surreptitiously he uses it to refer to Muslims. Like many Christian apologists, he did not use the term “Islam” or “Muslims” in his writings.16 In fact, Islam was clearly viewed as “heresy” by Christian communities over a century before the time of Moshe Bar Kepha. John of Damascus (d. 753) dedicated a chapter of his work De Haeresibus to “the heresy of the Ishmaelites (Muslims)”.17 In effect, by the ninth century, the Christian apologists had perceived Muslims’ beliefs as akin to that of the Jews,18 to some Judeo-Christian heresies, or to Marcionites, Manicheans, Arians,19 and some ancient pagans.20 By employing this strategy, Moshe Bar Kepha has two goals in mind: First, to respond to the Muslims’ challenges without Most of the Christian apologists referred to Muslims in different terms rather than naming them explicitly. See S. Griffith, “Chapter Ten of the Scholion: Theodore Bar Kônî’s Apology for Christianity,” Orientalia Christiana Periodica 47 (1981): 168. 17 According to John of Damascus, Mameth formed a heresy of his own after supposedly encountered an Arian monk. See D. Sahas, John of Damascus on Islam: The “Heresy of the Ishmaelites” (Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 1972), Appendix I, De Haeresibus, 133. 18 The Syriac writers considered Muslims as “Jews,” or “new Jews.” See A. Saadi, “The Letter of John of Sedreh: A New Perspective on Nascent Islam,” Journal of the Assyrian Academic Society, 11.1 (1997): 70; Theodore Bar Kōni (d. 792), describes Muslims as “believing as the Jews,” see Addai Scher, ed., Theodorus Bar Kōni Liber Scholiorum, CSCO Syr. II. 66 (Paris: Typographeo Reipublicae, 1912), 235; likewise, Patriarch Timothy (d. 823) sees them as “the new Jews among us;” S. Griffith, “Disputes with Muslims in Syriac Christian Texts: From Patriarch John (d. 648) to Bar Hebraeus (d. 1286),” Religionsgespräche in Mittelalter, edited by Niewöhner, F. (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1992), 264; . J. B. Chabot , ed., Chronique de Michel le Syrien, Vol. 4 (Paris: Culture et Civilisation, 1963) 405; I. Aphram Barsoum and J. B. Chabot, eds., Chronicon anonymum ad annum Christi 819 pertinens, CSCO 81, Syr. 36 (Paris: Secrétariat du CorpusSCO, 1920), 227-8 19 Daniel J. Sahas, John of Damascus on Islam, 26, 133. 20 S. Griffith, “Free Will in Christian Kalam: Moshe Bar Kepha Against the Teachings of the Muslims,” Le Muséon 100: 1-2 (1987): 159. Moreover, Griffith stresses that Moshe Bar Kepha’s treatise suggests that he must have been well versed in the traditional points of controversy between Christians and Muslims. 16

238

Abdul-Massih Saadi

risking any dangerous consequences; second, to instruct and assure his faithful community of its beliefs and strengthen its own sense of religious credibility. Moshe Bar Kepha writes his Commentary in dialectical style (J ), which is part of the literary tradition of formal discourse in the Syriac schools.21 He often starts his explanations by saying: “they say,” “others ask,” “let us ask,” and “we answer.” Moshe Bar Kepha converses with his readers by reviewing others’ viewpoints on a certain verse, then interpreting the verse himself. Such a literary genre enables Moshe Bar Kepha to be inclusive in his arguments, which are ultimately apologetic in nature.22 MOSHE BAR KEPHA’S APOLOGETIC TOPICS Moshe Bar Kepha’s apologetic theme runs throughout his Commentary verse after verse and episode after episode, explaining, expounding and declaring Christ as Lord and God, one of the Holy Trinity, and equal with his Father.23 His apologetic intention is clearly directed to Muslims’ objections when he addresses it to “heretics,” or when he deals with a distinct topic such as Paradise. As his contemporary, Nonnus of Nisibis, who wrote Commentary on the Gospel of John,24 spared no place to make an apology for the divinity of Christ.25 At the

21 S. Griffith, “Chapter Ten of the Scholion: Theodore Bar Kônî’s Apology for Christianity,” Orientalia Christiana Periodica 47 (1981): 170. 22 M. Cook argues that such conversational style may be the ancestor of the distinctive rhetorical form of the Arabic cilm al-kalām. Cf. Michael Cook, “The Origins of Kalām,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 43:1 (1980): 32-43. 23 Griffith explains that the divinity of Christ and the incarnation became a hot topic for all Christian apologists since the Quran manifestly denies them. See S. Griffith, “Disputes with Muslims in Syriac Christian Texts: From Patriarch John (d. 648) to Bar Hebraeus (d. 1286),” 245. 24 Robert W. Thomson, Nonnus of Nisibis, Commentary on the Gospel of Saint John (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2014). 25 Van Roey observed the apologetic intention of Nonnus of Nisibis in responding to Muslims in the way he explained the divinity of Christ; see

Moshe Bar Kepha’s Commentary on Luke

239

same time, Moshe Bar Kepha elaborates on all kinds of differences among Christians’ interpretations, as far as the contents of the Gospel of Luke allows, but only concluding that Christians are in agreement with all points that define the Christian faith. Christological Topics The Word of God is God

Invoking the Qur’anic reference to Jesus as “the word of God” and as a “Spirit from Him,”26 Moshe Bar Kepha comments on Luke 1:2, which reads: “Those who were eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word.” Moshe Bar Kepha explains that the disciples experienced and ministered to the Word of God, not merely to a man. Moshe Bar Kepha writes: “[the Gospel] says that the apostles saw and ministered to the Word of God, not merely a human being as the wicked say.”27 Moshe Bar Kepha continually reaffirms that “truly the Word, God, was seen in flesh.”28 In these comments, Moshe Bar Kepha clearly underscores the central Christian theme of the divinity of Jesus. As many Christian apologists before him,29 he repeatedly A. Van Roey, A. Van Roey, Nonnus de Nisibe.Ttraité apologétique, Bibliothèque du Muséon 21 (Louvain: Bureaux du Muséon, 1948) 29. 26 Cf. Sura 4 (Women):171, which reads: ‫ل اللَّ ِه‬ ُ ‫يسى ا ْب ُن َم ْر َي َم َر ُسو‬ ُ ‫إنما إِنَّ َما الْ َم ِس‬ َ ‫يح ِع‬ ‫وح ِمنْه‬ ٌ ‫“ َو َك ِل َم ُت ُه أَلْقَا َها إِلَى َم ْر َي َم َو ُر‬Jesus, Son of Mary, was but the messenger of God, and His Word—the Word which He imparted to Mary—and a Spirit from Him.” 27 All Moshe Bar Kepha’s quotations are taken from his surviving Syriac manuscript 102 in Mardin Syrian Orthodox Manuscripts Library; while an edition and translation are in press, the reader may confer with my   dissertation. Fol. 1v: '5 .*06J 'K9J () I8 &5 M695 &6/

   A0J
=/%8 4/ &5  K;I 28 Fol. 1v: I?  &5 M68 () IK 29 The writing of the Monk of Bêt Halê, in the eighth century, reflects the Christians’ conviction that these terms occurring in the Quran, “Word of God,” and “Spirit from God,” imply Christ’s divinity. See S. Griffith, “Disputing with Islam in Syriac: The Case of the Monk of Bêt Halê and a Muslim Emir,” Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies 3:1 (2000): 9.

240

Abdul-Massih Saadi

makes use of the Quranic term, “the Word from Him [God],”30 as a title for Christ, leveraging his argument from Muslim scripture (Qurān),31 although the Muslims do not consider the Qurān’s description of Jesus to imply his divinity.32 Paradise

Concerning the controversial topic of Paradise, Moshe Bar Kepha contrasts the spiritual concept of the Christians’ Paradise with the earthly concept of the Muslims’ Paradise.33 For example, in Luke 1:17, which reads, “and to prepare for the Lord a perfect people,” Moshe Bar Kepha identifies perfect people with Christians because they are concerned with and hope for heavenly reward, “and not hoping for a land that flows with milk and honey.”34 Although neither the verse nor The Quran has Jesus as kalima minhu ‫“ كلمة منه‬Word from Him” (Q ِ ‫“ ِم ْن ُر‬from 3:45), or kalima alqaahaa ilaa Maryam (Q 4:171), or min ruhina ‫وح َنا‬ Our Spirit,” but not as kalimat allah ‫“ كلمة الله‬the Word of God,” as it is read in the Gospel.
31 John of Damascus, in a context of encounter with a Saracene (Muslim), says that Christ is “Word of God,” just as it reads in Christian Scripture, “Christ is called Spirit and Word of God;” likewise in your (Islamic) Scripture is called, “The Spirit and the Word of God.” See D. Sahas, John of Damascus on Islam, 149. 32 cAdb al-Jabbar (d. 1025), a Muslim apologist, argues that “if you asked the disputants and debaters among them [Christians] about their statement on Christ, they would say, “Our statement is that he is the Spirit of God and His Word, just like the statement of Muslims. We say, ‘God is One.’” See cAbd al-Jabbar, The Critique of Christians: A Parallel English-Arabic Text, S. Samir, ed., G. Reynolds, trans. (Provo: Brigham Young University Press, 2010), 2-3. 33 Cf. Quranic references to Paradise, Sura 47 (Muhammad): 15, Sura 2 (the Cow) 25; Sura 56 (the Invitable) 15-26. 34 Moshe Bar Kepha was drawing on Ephrem’s explanation of this verse; while Ephrem identifies the perfect people as people who fear the Lord (i.e., the Christians), and who do not worship idols, Moshe Bar Kepha identifies the perfect people as the people who seek the Kingdom of Heaven (i.e., the Christians), and not the people who seek a land that flows with milk and honey ( Fol. 6r: K

 6) / I8 @ '5 ); cf. L Leloir, ed. and trans., Saint Ephrem: Commentaire de l'Évangile Concordant, Texte 30

Moshe Bar Kepha’s Commentary on Luke

241

the context refers directly to Paradise, Moshe Bar Kepha uses this verse to address this topic and covertly criticize Islamic doctrine.35 The Doctrine of Christ and God are Identical

Commenting on Luke 1:16, the annunciation by the angel Gabriel to Zechariah that his son “will turn the Israelites to the Lord their God,” Bar Kepha identifies God with Christ. Moshe Bar Kepha responds to the objections of “the heretics,” an implicit reference to Muslims, who claim that according to the angel, John will turn the people to their God and not to Christ. Moshe Bar Kepha, on the other hand, argues that the word Jesus Christ did not appear here because it was hidden from the angel, and it was kept secret to be announced at the proper time.36 While Moshe Bar Kepha's opponents separate God and Christ, he asserts that “the Lord their God,” refers only to Jesus Christ. Again, in Luke 2:11, which reads, “Behold a Savior is born for you, who is the Lord, the Messiah,” Moshe Bar Kepha demonstrates the identity of Jesus Christ as the Lord God from the angel’s declaration. Then he elaborates, saying that Christ is with the Father in eternity, where there is no time or space; this human birth, however, is for us and for our salvation, and

Syriaque (Manuscrit Chester Beatty 709) Chester Beatty Monographs 8 [Syriac and Latin] (Dublin: Hodges Figgis, 1963) 20; Saint Ephrem's Commentary on Tatian's Diatessaron: An English Translation of Chester Beatty Syriac Ms 709 with Introduction and Notes, Journal of Semitic Studies Supplements 2, Carmel McCarthy, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993) 52. 35 Nonnus of Nisibis (d. 870), the West Syriac apologist, like Moshe Bar Kepha, caricatures the Muslims’ description of Paradise, but without mentioning their name. He writes: “Rivers of fattening foods, along with time in bed, that do not satiate; a new creation of women whose birth is not from Adam and Eve, things known and acknowledged to incite carnal people.” See A. Van Roey, Nonnus de Nisibe.Ttraité apologétique, Bibliothèque du Muséon 21 (Louvain: Bureaux du Muséon, 1948) 31*. 36 Cf. Fol. 4v.

242

Abdul-Massih Saadi

not for the sake of Christ.37 Thus, Moshe Bar Kepha stresses the identification of Jesus Christ with the Lord God and rejects any reason to doubt Jesus’ divinity or immortality, an issue frequently raised and rejected by Muslims. Jesus is Greater than John the Baptist

In response to Muslim arguments that “Jesus is less than John the Baptist” on the account that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist,38 Moshe Bar Kepha refers to John's own testimony when he confesses that Jesus is greater than he is. Moreover, Moshe Bar Kepha comments on Luke 1:76, which reads, concerning John, “And you will be called the prophet of the Most High for you will go before the face of the Lord.” Moshe Bar Kepha then argues that if Christ is the Most High, and he has prophets like his Father, then he is the incarnated God. Moshe Bar Kepha hereby asserts not only the greatness of Jesus, but also his superiority as God over his messenger John.39 Intentional Denial of Jesus’ Divinity

Commenting on Luke 2:35 concerning the prophecy of Simon the Elder: “And a sword will pierce through your soul, and the deeper thought of many would be revealed,” Moshe Bar Kepha distinguishes between some who disbelieve in him because of their weakness and others because of their 37 Although the theological topic of two births for Christ, eternal from the Father, and human birth from Mary is based on the Creed of Faith, it was also used as an apologetic response to Muslims for confirming Christ’s divinity. See A. Saadi, “The Letter of John of Sadreh: A New Prospective on Nacent Islam,” Karmo, 1.2 (1999): 49; Penn, Michael, “John and the Emir: A New Introduction, Edition and Translation,” Le Muséon 121:1-2 (2008): 86. 38 The Muslims were debating that the Christians should worship John the Baptist because, according to the Christians, Jesus was baptized by John. See D. Sahas, John of Damascus on Islam: The Heresy of the Ishmaelites (Leiden: Brill, 1972) Appendix, II, Disputatio Saraceni et Christiani, 155. 39 Cf. Fol. 19r. 4/ &5 M/ 0 ; *0K8  M/ 06@  .I?  M/ &5 =/$8 . '

Moshe Bar Kepha’s Commentary on Luke

243

wickedness. While he clearly refers to the priests and the teachers of the Jews as non-believers because of their ill will, he surreptitiously refers to Muslims as “heretics.” He says: “But these raise doubt in him because of their ill will, just as the priests and the teachers of those [Jews], and as the heretics of today.”40 The Divinity of the Word of God from Birth

Moshe Bar Kepha confirms the mainstream Christology among Christians that Mary conceived the Word of God, who came from heaven and not from earth, out of human seed. Therefore Christ is God, Moshe Bar Kepha confirms, not merely a man, as the heretics claim.41 Commenting on Luke 1:31, “For behold, you will receive conception and will bear a son,” Moshe Bar Kepha elucidates this apologetic theme in two ways: First, displaying the common belief of all Christians that the Son who was born in Mary is “God the Word,” in a mysterious way beyond human comprehension, despite their various interpretations.42 Second, in sharp contrast with Muslims who admit that Jesus was not of human seed but denounce Jesus’ divinity.43

 4/ :& =06K2M8