Politics, Monasticism, and Miracles in Sixth Century Upper Egypt: A Critical Edition and Translation of the Coptic Texts on Abraham of Farshut 3161522141, 9783161522147, 9783161522765

Citation preview

Studien und Texte zu Antike und Christentum Studies and Texts in Antiquity and Christianity Herausgeber/Editors Christoph Markschies (Berlin) · Martin Wallraff (Basel) Christian Wildberg (Princeton) Beirat/Advisory Board Peter Brown (Princeton) · Susanna Elm (Berkeley) Johannes Hahn (Münster) · Emanuela Prinzivalli (Rom) Jörg Rüpke (Erfurt)

69

James E. Goehring

Politics, Monasticism, and Miracles in Sixth Century Upper Egypt A Critical Edition and Translation of the Coptic Texts on Abraham of Farshut

Mohr Siebeck

James E. Goehring, born 1950; 1968 BA from UC Berkeley; 1972 MA from UC Santa Barbara; 1981 PhD in Early Christian Studies from Claremont University; currently Professor of Religion at the University of Mary Washington in Fredericksburg, Virginia.

e-ISBN PDF 978-3-16-152276-5 ISBN 978-3-16-152214-7 ISSN 1436-3003 (Studien und Texte zu Antike und Christentum) The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2012 by Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, Germany. www.mohr.de This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that permitted by copyright law) without the publisher’s written permission. This applies particularly to reproductions, translations, microfilms and storage and processing in electronic systems. The book was printed by Laupp & Göbel in Nehren on non-aging paper and bound by Buchbinderei Nädele in Nehren. The Greek and Coptic fonts in this work are available from www.linguistsoftware.com. Printed in Germany.

For Linda

Preface This volume represents an interest that has spanned my academic career. In 1983, I delivered a paper at the international conference on the Roots of Egyptian Christianity in Claremont, California, entitled “New Frontiers in Pachomian Studies,” in which I explored the nature of the available sources, noting their concentration on the movement’s early history and the relative dearth of information on its later years. While the pattern is fully understandable, it awakened in me an interest in the later years of the movement, which led me to the texts on Abraham of Farshut. This bore fruit in 1984 in the form of a paper delivered at the 1984 annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature entitled “Chalcedonian Power Politics and the Demise of Pachomian Monasticism,” which appeared in 1989 in the Occasional Papers series of the Claremont Institute for Antiquity and Christianity. My decision in 1985 to accept a faculty position at Mary Washington College in Fredericksburg, Virginia, resulted in new expectations and new scholarly connections. Interest in the documentary evidence of early Egyptian monasticism came to intrigue me in terms of the counterevidence it supplied to the familiar literary accounts. Numerous papers and articles resulted, which led eventually to my interest in the role of the desert in the real and the literary construction of monastic origins. Throughout the years, however, as time permitted, I found myself returning to Abraham of Farshut. I carved out time to gather photographs of the manuscript pages, to transcribe and translate them, and to visit the museums and libraries that housed the originals. As my efforts progressed, Abraham of Farshut began to surface with increasing frequency as the subject of paper presentations and published articles. The decision to focus on these texts for my 1995 presidential address to the North American Patristics Society marked a turning point. While publication of the critical edition remained many years away, my focus had returned more fully to Abraham of Farshut. As with any research project, and especially one that has spanned so many years, numerous people and institutions that offered help, insight, and support deserve credit and thanks. Many elements in this volume depended on them. Tito Orlandi kindly supplied me with copies of Antonella Campagnano’s preliminary microfiche editions of White

viii

Preface

Monastery codices GB and GC, which contained the primary texts on Abraham of Farshut. The late René-Georges Coquin shared with me his interest in the project as well as his own transcriptions and photographs of the manuscript pages housed in the Institut français d’archéologie orientale. Stephen Emmel responded to numerous queries, checked various transcriptions against the originals, and helped resolve the codicology of the manuscripts. Apart from his wisdom and help, the codicological analysis and resulting pagination would be less secure. My colleague Mehdi Aminrazavi translated the Arabic section on Abraham of Farshut in the Copto-Arabic Synaxarion, and Febe Armanios kindly agreed to review it. Other scholars to whom I turned with specific questions and/or requests over the years included Monica Blanchard, Douglas Burton-Christie, Elizabeth Clark, Hans Förster, Gawdat Gabra, Clayton Jefford, David W. Johnson, Rebecca Krawiec, Bentley Layton, Mark Mousa, Caroline Schroeder, L. Stoerk, Janet Timbie, Richard Valantasis, Tim Vivian, and Colin Wakefield. I would also like to thank Ilse König of Mohr Siebeck, whose friendly help in the typesetting process accounts for much of the volume’s pleasant design. I must thank as well those who facilitated my work at the various libraries and museums that currently house the manuscript pages, and supplied permission to publish them in the present edition. These included the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek in Vienna, the Bibliothèque nationale de France in Paris, the Biblioteca Nazionale “Vittorio Emanuele III” in Naples, the Staatsbibliothek Preussischer Kulturbesitz in Berlin, the Insitute français d’archéologie orientale in Cairo, the University of Michigan Library in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and the Coptic Museum in Cairo. Both those with whom I corresponded and those on site were helpful and encouraging. I am also grateful to the Royal Library in Copenhagen which supplied the relevant pages from Zoega’s papers used in this edition, and to Paul Peeters of Peeters Publishers who granted permission to include the excerpt on Abraham contained in the Panegyric on Apollo. At my own institution, staff and students played an important role in the production of this volume. Our director of interlibrary loan services, Carla Bailey, offered essential aid, as did our departmental secretary, Cindy Toomey. Student requests to teach introductory Coptic generated opportunities to focus on the language and in some cases actually read pages from the panegyrics on Abraham of Farshut. Josh Sosin and Andrew Crislip, who went on in Classics and Early Christian Studies respectively, proved particularly capable and generated interesting insights into the text. Brent Arehart, Jennifer Hendricks, and Clelia LaMonica worked on the indices and proof read copies of the manuscript.

Preface

ix

Financial support from the National Endowment for the Humanities in 1993 and 2002–03 and from the University of Mary Washington on numerous occasions facilitated the acquisition of photographs, travel to various libraries and museums in Europe and America, and most importantly the time necessary for uninterrupted work on the project. Finally, scholarship does not arise in a vacuum. Mine is grounded in a broader world of family, friends, nature, and pets. They form the ground from which my scholarship grows and to which I return constantly for stability and nourishment. Conversations over dinner, a glass of wine shared on our deck, birding, canoeing, hiking, and camping offer the respite from the demands of research and writing that for me make it possible. Nature resuscitates me; it is my “desert.” Through it all, Linda has been there with me. Her unflinching support has nourished me through the long process of this book’s production. She is my escape, and I cannot imagine accomplishing what I do without her. For these reasons and more, I dedicate this book to her. Finally, I must take note of Mieze and Cleo, who have been a constant presence in our lives these last few years. Mieze, in particular, was intimately involved in my project. Each morning when I headed up the stairs to my office, her feline form raced past me to my desk. As I sat down to write, she was there, brushing up against the computer screen, demanding attention. Only after the appropriate amount of petting, defined by her of course, did she settle down on her desktop cushion, allowing my work to begin; and then, as I worked, she occasionally caught my attention, glancing up in a fetching manner that demands acknowledgement (another welcome respite in the day). She, like Linda, made the work easier. Fredericksburg, Virginia 2012

James E. Goehring

Table of Contents Preface .................................................................................................... vii Abbreviations ........................................................................................ xiii Introduction .............................................................................................. 1 Chapter 1: The Manuscripts ...................................................................... 5 A. White Monastery Codex GC ................................................................ 6 I. Codicology .................................................................................... 7 II. Paleography, Orthography, and Language...................................... 9 III. History of the Codex and Its Publication...................................... 13 B. White Monastery Codex GB .............................................................. 22 I. Codicology .................................................................................. 24 II. Paleography, Orthography, and Language.................................... 25 III. History of the Codex and Its Publication...................................... 27 Chapter 2: Literary and Historical Analysis............................................. 32 A. B. C. D.

Introduction ....................................................................................... 32 Synoptic Account .............................................................................. 33 The Individual Sources and Their Development ................................. 41 Hagiography and History ................................................................... 50

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations ........................................................... 68 A. White Monastery Manuscript GC....................................................... 72 I. First Panegyric on Abraham of Farshut ....................................... 72 II. On Abraham of Farshut ............................................................ 102 B. White Monastery Manuscript GB..................................................... 110 I. Excerpt on Abraham of Farshut from a Panegyric on Manasse... 110 C. Fragment 1 ...................................................................................... 120 Chapter 4: Related Texts ....................................................................... 122 A. Copto-Arabic Synaxarion ................................................................ 122 B. Panegyric on Apollo 10 ................................................................... 125

xii

Table of Contents

Appendix A: Previously Published Editions ......................................... 127 Appendix B: Manuscript Pages Listed by Library ................................. 130 Appendix C: Manuscript Sigla Table .................................................... 132 Plates .................................................................................................... 133 Bibliography ......................................................................................... 139 Index to the Coptic Texts ...................................................................... 147 A. Coptic Words .............................................................................. 147 B. Greek Loan Words ...................................................................... 151 C. Biblical Citations, Allusions, and References .............................. 155 Index of Subjects .................................................................................. 156

Abbreviations Amél

BA BEC BIFAO BM BN BRHE BS BSRAA Camp GB

Camp GC

CBC CH CMCL CS CSCO Excerpt GM HDR HOS-NME JA JCS JECS Lampe LSJ Mèmoires MIFAO MPON-NS

É. Amélineau, Monuments pour servir a l’histoire del’Égypte chrétienne aux 4., 5., 6., et 7. siècles. Mèmoires publiés par les membres de la mission archéologique français au Caire 4/2. Paris: Leroux, 1895. Biblical Archeologist Bibliothèque d’études coptes Bulletin de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale Bibliothèque du Muséon Bibliothéque nationale (Paris) or Biblioteca Nazionale (Naples) Bibliothèque de la revue d’histoire ecclésiatique Staatsbibliothek (Berlin) Bulletin de la Société royale d’archéologie d’Alexandrie Antonella Campagnano, ed. Preliminary Editions of Coptic Codices: Monb. GB: Life of Manasses – Encomium of Moses – Encomium of Abraham. CMCL. Rome: Centro Italiano Microfisches, 1985. Antonella Campagnano, ed. Preliminary Editions of Coptic Codices: Monb. GC: Life of Abraham – Encomium of Abraham. CMCL. Rome: Centro Italiano Microfisches, 1985. Cahiers de la bibliotèque copte Church History Corpus dei Manoscritti Copti Letterari Cistercian Studies Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium Excerpt on Abraham of Farshut contained in the Panegyric on Manasse (White Monastery Codex GB, pages 15–36) Göttingen Miszellen Harvard Dissertations in Religion Handbook of Oriental Studies, Section One, The Near and Middle East Journal Asiatique Journal of Coptic Studies Journal of Early Christian Studies Lampe, G. W. H. A Patristic Greek Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1961. Liddell, Henry George, et al, A Greek-English Lexicon. 9th edition with a supplement. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968. Mèmoires publiés par les membres de la mission archéologique française au Caire Mèmoires publiés par les membres de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale du Caire Mitteilungen aus der Papyrussammlung der österreichischen Nationalbibliothek (Papyrus Erzherzog Rainer), Neue Series

xiv

Abbreviations

M. Henri Munier, Catalogue general des antiquités égyptiennes du Musée du Caire. Manuscrits copte. Cairo: L’Institut français d’archéologie orientale, 1916. NARCE Newsletter of the American Research Center in Egypt NB Nationalbibliothek (Vienna) NTS New Testament Studies OECS Oxford Early Christian Studies OLA Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta On Abraham On Abraham of Farshut (White Monastery Codex GC, Text 1) OP Occasional Papers Panegyric Panegyric on Abraham of Farshut (White Monastery Codex GC, Text 2) PO Patrologia orientalis Porta Porta Linguarum Orientalium PTS Patristische Texte und Studien RE Revue d’égyptologie REG Revue des études grecques RP Researches de papyrologie SA Studia Anselmiana SDAW Sitzungsberichte der deutschen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin SEA Studia Ephemeridis Augustinianum TDSA Testi e Documenti per lo Studio dell’ Antichità Zoega Zoega, Georg. Catalogus codicum copticorum manuscriptorum qui in Museo Borgiano Velitris adservantur. Rome, 1810; reprint ed., Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1903. Zoega (Papers) Georg Zoega’s papers housed at the Royal Library in Copenhagen, Denmark Munier

Introduction Compared with his predecessor Pachomius, whom tradition credits as the founder of the communal form of monastic life, Abraham of Farshut has garnered little recognition in the annals of the Egyptian church, let alone in the work of modern church historians. This is as one would expect given the general human interest in origins, whether expressed as the monastic movement’s own attention to its founding fathers or the fascination of later historians with the emergence of new ideas and movements. The latter’s orientation is, of course, encouraged by the nature of the former’s literary production; namely, texts focused on the sayings and stories of founding fathers, whose lives and words became guidebooks for those who followed. It is this pattern of history and its recording that generates knowledge of and interest in figures like Pachomius and his earliest disciples, those associated with origins. Later followers, with rare exception, receive but scant notice in the historical record, or more likely, disappear completely. Abraham of Farshut deserves, however, a more prominent place in the history of Egyptian monasticism. For while the stories of Pachomius and his immediate successors portray the origins of Pachomian monasticism in the fourth century, the accounts of Abraham record its final days in the sixth century. Ends, like beginnings, mark decisive moments in history, moments that more than most shape the production of the future and the memory of the past. While the innovative creation of a communal monastic federation significantly impacted the development of monasticism in Egypt and beyond, the movement’s demise in the course of the sixth century noticeably altered the understanding and memory of it in the emerging post-Chalcedonian discourse of Coptic Christianity. A full understanding of the importance of Pachomian monasticism in Christian history requires attention not only to its beginning, but also to its end. The texts edited and/or translated in this volume represent the sole surviving witnesses to Abraham of Farshut, the last Coptic orthodox (nonChalcedonian)1 archimandrite of the Pachomian monastic federation. As

1

I have followed Volker Menze’s reasoning in the use of the terms Chalcedonian and non-Chalcedonian to describe the two sides represented in the sources. Volker L. Menze,

2

Introduction

such they offer valuable information on the latter-day fate of the movement and the way in which that fate impacted the remembered “history” of both Abraham of Farshut and Upper Egyptian coenobitic monasticism. The reader will soon discover that the sources in question are hagiographic in nature, fashioning a purposeful history that has more to do with the values and beliefs of the authors’ own time than the period of history they purport to describe. As such the texts bear witness to the way in which the Coptic community fashioned its own history in response to the theological, historical, and emotional divide that the Council of Chalcedon opened up between Coptic Egypt and Byzantium. At the same time, however, careful evaluation of the texts offers insight into the probable cause of the Pachomian federation’s demise in the sixth century in the reign of the Byzantine emperor Justinian I, a demise that in turn explains the subsequent landscape of Upper Egyptian coenobitic monasticism and the reformulated memory of it within Coptic Christianity. Interest in Abraham of Farshut, accounts of whom offer our only access to the final days of the Pachomian movement, has driven the research behind and shaped the format of this volume. Primary to the task has been the production of a new critical edition and English translation of three fragmentary sources on Abraham preserved in two tenth-eleventh century parchment codices from the White Monastery of Shenoute in Atripe in Upper Egypt: A Panegyric on Abraham of Farshut and On Abraham of Farshut from White Monastery codex GC, and an extended Excerpt on Abraham of Farshut included in a Panegyric on Manasse from White Monastery codex GB. The majority of evidence on Abraham of Farshut and the final days of the Pachomian federation derives from these three texts. Unfortunately, the vicissitudes of time resulted in the early dismemberment of the codices within the White Monastery and the loss of.n numerous pages. Those that survived were then further scattered as western scholars acquired them for their countries’ museums and libraries. The various pages edited in this volume reside today in Vienna at the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, in Paris at the Bibliothèque nationale de France, in Naples at the Biblioteca Nazionale “Vittorio Emanuele III,” in Cairo at the Insitute français d’archéologie orientale and the Coptic Museum, in Berlin at the Staatsbibliothek Preussischer Kulturbesitz, and in Ann Arbor, Michigan in the Special Collections Library of the University of Michigan Library. Numerous pages appeared in print relatively early,2 Justinian and the Making of the Syrian Orthodox Church, OECS (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 2. 2 Georg Zoega, Catalogus codicum copticorum manuscriptorum qui in Museo Borgiano Velitris adservantur (Rome: Sacra Congregatio de Propaganda Fide, 1810); É. Amélineau, Monuments pour servir a l’histoire de l’Égypte chrétienne aux 4., 5., 6., et 7. Siècles, Mèmoires 4/2 (Paris: Leroux, 1895); Johannes Leipoldt, Sinuthii Archimanritae

Introduction

3

and all were brought together in 1985 in a preliminary microfiche edition that incorporated the earlier published versions,3 a careful critical edition remained a desideratum. That edition forms the heart of the present volume. It required with few exceptions a new collation of the actual manuscript pages.4 While many of the pages are clean and easily legible, others have suffered from blotting and the transference of ink from a facing page.5 In addition, given the numerous missing pages and the frequent loss of page numbers on those that survive, a thorough codicological analysis was undertaken so as to reconstruct the original codices and thus the correct order of the surviving pages. While the Excerpt on Abraham of Farshut occupies but five of the surviving twentyseven leaves of White Monastery codex GB, analysis required the reconstruction of the entire codex to insure the proper placement of the leaves relevant to Abraham of Farshut edited in this volume. Two chapters precede the critical edition and following translation. The first, entitled “The Manuscripts: History and Paleography,” lays the foundation for the edition. It includes for each codex a thorough codicological analysis that establishes structure and pagination, an account of “Paleography, Orthography, and Language” that explores scribal practices, and a “History of the Codex and Its Publication” that recounts the life of each codex since its modern discovery. The second chapter, entitled “Literary and Historical Analysis,” offers studies based on the critical edition and related texts. It includes a synoptic account of Abraham’s story drawn from the various sources, a study of the literary structure and ideology of the more complete individual sources, and an exploration of the relationship between hagiography and history that seeks to unravel what can be known about Abraham of Farshut and the final days of the Pachomian federation. As such, it offers evidence and conclusions with Vita et Opera Omnia, CSCO 73, Scriptores Coptici 5 (Paris: J. Gabalda, 1913); M. Henri Munier, Catalogue general des antiquités égyptiennes du Musée du Caire: Manuscrits copte (Cairo: L’Institut français d’archéologie orientale, 1916), No. 9250. For specific references to specific pages see the codicological analysis of each codex in the chapter on “The Manuscripts: History and Paleography,” and Appendix A. 3 Antonella Campagnano, ed., Preliminary Editions of Coptic Codices: Monb. GC: Life of Abraham – Encomium of Abraham, CMCL (Rome: Centro Italiano Microfisches, 1985); idem, Preliminary Editions of Coptic Codices: Monb. GB: Life of Manasses – Encomium of Moses – Encomium of Abraham, CMCL (Rome: Centro Italiano Microfisches, 1985). 4 For the leaves at the Insitute français d’archéologie orientale, I relied on the transcription and photographs kindly supplied to me by the late René-Georges Coquin. For the single leaf in the Coptic Museum in Cairo, I used Munier’s published version (Catalogue général, No. 9250, pp. 62–63) checked against a recent photograph. 5 Transference from the facing page is clearly visible, for example, on the page shown in Plate 3 (Naples, Biblioteca Nazionale, IB 8 f. 48v), and blotting is visible in the page shown in Plate 5 (Michigan, University Library, Coptic Ms. 158, 46b (v)).

4

Introduction

respect to the latter-day history of the Pachomian movement and the impact of its demise on Coptic monasticism and history. In addition, the study of the individual sources in their sixth century context adds to our understanding of the totalizing non-Chalcedonian discourse being produced within Coptic Christianity at that time. For the sake of completeness and convenience, English translations of the two remaining sources that treat Abraham of Farshut have been included under “Related Texts” following the critical edition. The translation of the Copto-Arabic Synaxarion, produced by Professor Mehdi Aminrazavi and checked by Febe Armanios, represents the first translation of this source into English. It is based on the Arabic text published by René Basset.6 The translation of the excerpt from the Panegyric on Apollo, produced by K. H. Kuhn, was drawn directly from his critical edition of that text.7 These two sources figure into the discussion found in the chapter on “Literary and Historical Analysis.” The volume concludes with a bibliography, appendices, and indices. References to the text appear in the following three forms: 1] to the page and line number of the Coptic edition in this volume (000.00); 2] to the modern section divisions inserted in both the Coptic text and English translations in this volume (e.g., IV.1); and 3] at a few locations to the page, column, and line numbers of the original White Monastery codices (e.g., 9.ii.20–27).

6

René Basset, Le synaxaire arabe jacobite (Rédaction copte), PO 11.5 (Paris: FirminDidot, 1915), 684–88. 7 K. H. Kuhn, A Panegyric on Apollo Archimandrite of the Monastery of Isaac by Stephen Bishop of Heracleopolis Magna, CSCO 394–95, Scriptores coptici 39–40 (Louvain: Secrétariat du CCSO, 1978), 12–14.

Chapter 1

The Manuscripts The three fragmentary Coptic texts on Abraham of Farshut edited and translated in this volume derive from two tenth-eleventh century parchment codices from the White Monastery (Dayr al-Abyad) of Shenoute in Upper Egypt. The codices are designated today as White Monastery codex GC and White Monastery codex GB, following the system designed by Tito Orlandi under the auspices of the Corpus dei Manoscritti Copti Letterari project.1 As is the case with most White Monastery codices, neither GC nor GB survived complete from antiquity. Only 22 leaves or fragments of leaves (44 pages) survive from codex GC, which when complete, judging from the reconstruction of the codex, contained a minimum of 55 leaves or 110 pages. The case is similar for codex GB. Only 27 leaves or fragments of leaves (54 pages) remain from the codex, which when complete contained, judging again from the reconstruction of the codex, at least 87 leaves (174 pages). Both codices contained accounts of sixth century upper Egyptian monastic leaders, which, where sufficient text remains to judge, were composed in the form of panegyrics to be presented on the ascetic’s feast day. Each codex contained two texts, and in each case, the first text survives in more complete form. Both texts in codex GC concern Abraham of Farshut. The first is A Panegyric on Abraham of Farshut. The precise nature of the second text, which I have labeled On Abraham of Farshut,2 remains uncertain. While most likely a second panegyric on the same saint, the fact that only five leaves survive, the first of which begins already eight pages (four leaves) into the text, precludes certainty with respect to its nature. It could, for example, be a digression on Abraham of Farshut contained at the beginning of a panegyric on another saint, such as occurs in the Panegyric on Manasse in codex GB. Codex GB includes A Panegyric on Manasse and a second text, probably also a panegyric, on Moses of Abydos. The first text, A Panegyric on Manasse, includes a digression on Abraham of Farshut, a relative of Manasse, near the beginning of the text. Only those texts related 1 Tito Orlandi, “Un projet milanais concernant les manuscripts coptes du Monastère Blanc,” Muséon 85 (1972): 403–13; for CMLC, http://rmcisadu.let.uniroma1.it/~cmcl/. 2 On the CMCL site, Orlandi labels it In Abraham archimandritam.

6

Chapter 1: The Manuscripts

to Abraham of Farshut have been edited and translated in the present volume. These include A Panegyric on Abraham of Farshut and On Abraham of Farshut from codex GC and the excerpt on Abraham of Farshut contained in A Panegyric on Manasse from codex GB.

A. White Monastery Codex GC The following table presents the current status of White Monastery codex GC. It follows the method of presentation developed by Stephen Emmel for the White Monastery codices of Shenoute’s works.3 Column 1 (Leaves) designates the quire and leaf numbers of the reconstructed codex. Column 2 (Signatures) supplies the evidence of signatures on the extant pages. “ / ” indicates that the area on both sides of the leaf where a signature would appear is blank. “[ ] / [ ]” indicates that while the area where the signature would be expected is too damaged for any trace to be read, no signature would have been expected here. Column 3 (Pages) supplies the page numbers (recto/verso). For extant pages, both the transcription and Arabic numeral equivalents are given. More than one leaf (two pages) is given on a line only when all the pages’ page numbers are extant, or all are lost. For missing leaves, the equivalent page numbers appear in square brackets. Column 4 (Manuscripts) designates the leaves by call number following the system adopted by the International Association for Coptic Studies.4 A list of previously published editions of the surviving leaves can be found in Appendix A. White Monastery codex GC Panegyric on Abraham of Farshut and On Abraham of Farshut Leaves  D1–2 D3  D4–5  D6 

Signatures

Pages

Manuscripts

/ / /

[1–4] H/A=5/6  ]L/A= 7–10  LDLE/A= 11/12 

[2 leaves wanting] FR-BN 129 13 f.12 IFAO 5–6   FR-BN 129 13 f.13

3 Stephen Emmel, Shenoute’s Literary Corpus, 2 vols. CSCO 599-600, Subsidia 111– 12 (Louvain: Peeters, 2004), 1.385–87. 4 Stephen Emmel, ed., An International Directory of Institutions Holding Collections of Coptic Antiquities Outside of Egypt (Rome: Centro Italiano Microfiches, 1990). See Appendix C for a table of correspondence between this system and the more traditional institutional references.

7

A. White Monastery Codex GC Leaves  D7–8

Signatures

 

E1–2 E3  E4–5 E6  E7–8

/ /

J1–8 G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 G6 G7–8

     

G/ stub / / / /

Pages

Manuscripts

[13–16]

[2 leaves wanting]

[17–20] >ND@/>NE@= 21/22 [23–26] N]/NK= 27/28 [29–32]

[2 leaves wanting] AT-NB 9550 [2 leaves wanting] AT-NB 9549 [2 leaves wanting]

[33–48]

[8 leaves wanting]

PT/Q= 49/50



IFAO 8

QD/QE= 51/52  >QJ@/>QG@= 53/54 QH/QA= 55/56 Q]/QK= 57/58 [59–62]

AT-BN 9761  AT-BN 9527 AT-BN 9528 AT-BN 9548 [2 leaves wanting]

H1 H2  / H3 H4  >@/>@ H5 >@/>@ H6–8

[63/64] [H/[A= 65/66  [67/68] >[T@/>R@= 69/70 RD/RE= 71/72 [73–78]

[1 leaf wanting] IT-NB IB 8 f.44 [1 leaf wanting] IT-NB IB 8 f.45 IT-NB IB 8 f.46 [3 leaves wanting]

A1–2 A3 />@ A4  / A5 >@/>@ A6–8

[79–82] >SJ@/>SG@= 83/84 SH/SA= 85/86 >S]@/>SK@= 87/88 [89–94]

[2 leaves wanting] FR-BN 129 13 f.15 IT-NB IB 8 f.47 IT-NB IB 8 f.48 [3 leaves wanting]

]1 ]2 ]3 ]4–5 ]6 ] ]8

[95/96] >)]@/>)K@= 97/98 [99/100] UD–UG= 101–104 UH/UA= 105/106 >U]@/>UK@= 107/108 [109/110]

[1 leaf wanting] FR-BN 129 13 f.14 [1 leaf wanting] DE-BS 1607 ff. 9–10 AT-BN 9404 EG-C 3901 [1 leaf wanting]



/

  

/ / /

I. Codicology The surviving leaves of codex GC, when complete, measure between 28.1 to 31.9 cm. in height by 22.0 to 25.7 cm. in width. Construction of the codex employed standard 4 sheet (8 leaves, 16 pages) quires, with the occasional use of half-sheets as in the case of quire G. This 3 ½ sheet quire em-

8

Chapter 1: The Manuscripts

ploys a half-sheet for leaf [59]/[60] which, when stitched into the quire, left a stub between leaves 49/50 and 51/52. Pages from six of the initial seven quires survive, and judging from the content of the last surviving pages of quire ], an additional quire or quires must have followed.5 Individual quires were stitched together with a thin cord, a portion of which survives on the leaf formed by pages [53]/[54] of quire G. A similar piece of cord was used to repair a 5 ½ cm split in the parchment at the bottom of the leaf formed by pages 7/8 before the codex was inscribed (Plate 1). The order of all of the surviving leaves, including those without page numbers, is secure. Page numbers exist on 15 of the 22 surviving leaves, and page numbers can be reconstructed for the remaining leaves whose page numbers are lost. Five of these leaves ([53]/[54], [69]/[70], [83]/[84], [87]/[88], and [107]/[108]) directly follow and/or precede a leaf with page numbers, and another [21]/[22] is conjugate with leaf 27/28. The only remaining surviving leaf without page numbers is Paris, BN Copte 1291314. The identification of its proper location in the codex is more complicated. The content of this leaf involves Abraham’s appearance before Justinian I in Constantinople. This led Campagnano and Coquin to place it tentatively after leaf 11/12, which mentions Justinian I’s summons of Abraham to the royal city.6 Given the placement of leaf [21]/[22], however, Paris, BN Copte 1291314 cannot belong at this point in the codex. Since the contents of [21]/[22] place it after the affair with Justinian I, the only leaves left with which to identify Paris, BN Copte 1291314 would be the four between 11/12 and [21]/[22]. Since it does not connect textually to either 11/12 or [21]/[22], it cannot be leaf 13/14 or leaf 19/20. Its skin pattern of hair/flesh precludes its identification with 17/18. This leaves only 15/16, which should have been numbered as the last leaf in quire DÃ. No number appears, however, which precludes its identification with this leaf. It turns out that the content, including the names of certain monks, connect Paris, BN Copte 1291314 rather closely with the pages 101-108 of the second text in the codex, On Abraham of Farshut. It cannot be placed contextually much after 108, and likely comes before 101. Given the above reconstruction of the codex and the fact that Paris, BN Copte 1291314 is a hair/flesh leaf, it can be only one of four leaves: quire AÃ, leaf 6 (89/90) or 8 (93/94), or quire ]Ã, leaf 2 (97/98) or 8 (109/110). Since the first text in the codex ends on page 88 and Paris, BN Copte 1291314 is not the beginning of the second text, it cannot be quire AÃ, leaf 6 (89/90). Leaf 8 of quire AÃ (93/94) and leaf 8 of quire ]Ã (109/110) are both the final leaf of their re5 The last surviving page of the codex ([108]) breaks off at most only twenty pages (89–108) into the second text, On Abraham of Farshut, with no indication of the end approaching. See below, page 9. 6 This also kept it with Paris, BN Copte 129 1312–13, with which it was bound.

A. White Monastery Codex GC

9

spective quires and thus would have held a quire number in the upper right corner of the verso. Since no quire number occurs on Paris, BN, Copte 12913 14 where one would expect it, Paris, BN Copte 1291314 must equate with leaf 2 of quire ]Ã([97]/[98]). It is likely that the codex included additional quires beyond the seven for which evidence survives. The last surviving page of the codex ([108]) breaks off at most only twenty pages (89-108) into the second text, On Abraham of Farshut, with no indication of the end approaching. If one were to assume that On Abraham of Farshut was approximately the same length as the first text in the codex (88 pages), the codex would have required eleven quires (11 x 16 pages per quire = 176 pages – 2 pages for the stub in quire GÃ = 174 pages). II. Paleography, Orthography, and Language The twenty-two surviving leaves of manuscript GC were inscribed two columns to a page in good classical Sahidic in a bimodular script. The inscribed area of the individual pages, including both columns and all enlarged letters (ekthesis) that extend into the margins, measures between 23.2–25.9 cm. in height and 17.2–19.2 cm. in width.7 Columns vary in length between 26 and 32 lines,8 with the vast majority of the full surviving columns (71 of 75) ranging between 27 and 30 lines.9 The surviving pages of the manuscript represent the work of a single scribe. The script is neat and clear,10 the letters relatively square and written with upright vertical strokes. D X P, Z, andY are each rendered with a single stroke, the uprights of which are formed by a closed loop. H, R, and 7 Since I did not personally transcribe the pages at the IFAO and Coptic Museum in Cairo, I have not included their measurements. 8 Column 36.ii, which contains only 19 lines, is an exception. It concludes the Panegyric on Abraham of Farshut and ends with a series of decorative lines that extend down to line 25; see plate 3. 9 The breakdown of column length is given in the following chart. Under each column is the number of columns of the given length. Length Left Column Right Column Total Note 19 1 1 End of text 1; decorated. 26 1 1 2 27 7 2 9 28 4 10 14 29 21 15 36 30 4 8 12 31 1 1 32 1 1 ? 6 6 12 End of column lost. 10 Unfortunately, blotting and ink transfer between pages has made some areas difficult to read.

10

Chapter 1: The Manuscripts

V are written narrow, though the H and V can on occasion, most often at the beginning or end of a line, be written wide. The diagonal that connects the upper and lower curved halves of the + frequently appears as a straight line without curve, occasionally with a sharp angle at the transition to the lower curved half. L is written with the trema throughout, and the H frequently carries a straight or short curved superlinear stroke, though its use appears irregular and its function remains obscure. I appears as an open topped heart rising from the bottom of the central vertical stroke, often with an ink dot on each side of the vertical stroke in the center of each half of the heart. At the end of a line, the tail on the Dand Pare often extended horizontally into the margin, Q is frequently replaced by a hooked superlinear stroke over the preceding letter, and the X in QRXWH may appearin compressed form (like an angular vertically stretched sigma). The scribe uses the superlinear stoke fairly consistently (see below), frequently extending the horizontal bar of a tall W and less often the arm of the & for this purpose He also frequently, though inconsistently, places a stroke or arc above certain vowels (DHR, and Z). Page numbers are decorated with a series of closely spaced horizontal lines of decreasing width above and below the number. A curved stroke, like a large comma, usually caps the inverted pyramid of horizontal lines below the number, while a diagonal stroke occasionally caps the pyramid formed by the lines above the number. Two ink dots set vertically with a fairly long horizontal line extending outward from the middle occur on either side of the number (Plate 2). The two dots occasionally appear as an outward pointing triangle of three dots or an outward pointing diple (>). The one surviving occurrence of a quire number (Coptic page 49) is similarly decorated. Decorations and flourishes on particular letters, including page and signature numbers, are frequent. On every page, enlarged letters decorated with additional reddening extend into the left margin of both columns (Plates 1–3).11 While the enlarged letters often mark the beginning of a new sentence, such is not always the case. In a list of eleven negative behaviors each beginning with the indefinite article RX, the scribe reddened every R and enlarged it on the four occasions that began the line. Enlarged letters, which may also extend into the upper and lower margins of a column, often bear additional decoration, as for example the Y on page 21 whose tail extends downward into the lower margin ending in a counterclockwise coil. The tails of certain letters, particularly that of the D, are

11

On the surviving pages, the number of such letters per column range between 1 and 7, though more usually between 2 and 4.

A. White Monastery Codex GC

11

often extended into the column’s right margin, particularly on the right hand column. Additional decorations include a single inward facing diple (>) before each line 1–7 of column one on page 58. They appear to have been reddened and align themselves above the enlarged and decorated Q that begins line 8. The end of the first panegyric on page 88 is decorated with a stack of four column width horizontal lines, the last of which is cut into three equal lengths, each of which forms the base of an upside down pyramid formed by 5 horizontal lines of decreasing width. Each pyramid ends with a curved, comma-like stroke. Similar, though less pronounced patterns decorate the page numbers and the occasional enlarged Q. While the manuscript lacks systematic punctuation, the scribe does employ various sigla and techniques on an irregular basis to indicate the end of a clause or sentence. As noted above, enlarged initial letters often indicate the beginning of a new sentence or clause. These may in turn be facilitated by leaving space at the end of the preceeding line, often filled with a paragraphus. Raised dots both at the end of a line and internally (less frequent), the meaning of which remains unclear, also occur. In addition, the scribe frequently indicates a meaningful grammatical break or other sensible division that occurs in the interior of a given line by inserting a blank space of varied length. While the practice is not consistent, its frequency indicates a substitute form of punctuation.12 The following examples serve to illustrate the practice and should in no way be considered exhaustive. The space can, for example, set off the beginning of a new sentence or asyndetic linkage with the past tense.13 7.ii.21–28 DVYZSHGHQ WHUH)MHNP“Q“W VQRRXVQURP SHHEROD  SQRXWHRXZY HSRRQH)H  ERO+“P  SND+   

       

or        

       

9.i.9–16 1WHUH)QDXGH MHPSHSøTH QD)D)NZ QVZ)QQND QøPD)7SH) RXRø+“QRX&HSK HM“QW“PU+KW VQDX

12 Larry W. Hurtado, The Earliest Christian Artifacts: Manuscripts and Christian Origins (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2006), 177–85; Henry A. Sanders, The New Testament Manuscripts in the Freer Collection, Part I, The Washington Manuscript of the Four Gospels (New York: Macmillan, 1912), 12–14. 13 The citations below indicate the original manuscript page number, column (i or ii), and line numbers.

12

Chapter 1: The Manuscripts

It can be used to indicate the start of direct or indirect discourse.  8.ii.9–14 D)YDMHP“QWH) VZQHH)MZ  PPRVQDVMH HøV+KKWHHøV QHQHøRWHDX PWRQPPRRX    

      

   

   

   

   

or

6.ii.23–7.i.6

     

     

   

   

H D)SDLGHXHP PR)+“QWSH GHXVøVQQH JUDIKQQø  )HQWHSQRX WHNDWDTH HWVK+HWEH SQRPRTHWKV PZXVKVMH DXSDøHXHP PR)

It can separate items in a series (asyndeton). 9.ii.20–27 QWHUH)EZNGH H+RXQD)SHGD JZJHøPSSHW RXDDEDSDSD+R PZP“QSSHW RXDDEDSD+ZU VøKVLÏRVP“QD SDTHRGZURV While not every such space corresponds with a recognizable linguistic division, the fact that the majority do indicates their function as a form of punctuation. The practice warrants more study. The scribe writes in good Sahidic, though fluctuation in spelling does occur, often with variants appearing in relative close proximity to one another. Some cases involve variant use or non-use of the superlinear stroke for an initial H, or the use of L in place of the more usual HL The scribe thus on occasion writes QWROK (88.11) for the usual HQWROK QWDHQHLRWH for QWDQHLRWH (98.8),  MRøV for MRHøV (72.12; 90.13; 108.1), or HSøGKfor HSHøGK(78.25; 82.3). He also can reverse the substitution, writing KHøfor the more usual KL(94.11)Ñ. In a similar fashion, 7is occasionally employed for WL or WHL, as in H7 for HWL H>WL  (84.16; 100.15), H7PH for HWHLPH (80.12), and 7Z for WHLZ (100.14); or in reverse, Wøfor 7(104.13). The use or absence of the superlinear stroke also

A. White Monastery Codex GC

13

creates variants, as in the difference between YOKO (100.16) and YOO (82.23; 84.4). The scribe frequently varies in the use or absence of the superlinear stroke on the same word, writing for example both THRGZURV (104.23; 106.18) and THRGZURV (76.13; 106.16), and YLQWEDVH (76.7) and YLQWEDVH(76.29). Actual spelling variants, some of which may well reflect dialectical slippage, while not numerous, occur often enough. They include RXRøH (100.6) and RXRøK (100.7; listed as Svl in Kasser, Compléments, 73), MZ (90.4; Svl ), and EDEH (90.6; A2o according to Kasser, Compléments, 7). Note also the variants +HQHHWH  (94.16; 100.20) and +HQHWK (108.32; 110.2), and WZEH(88.9)and WZZEH(88.29). Interestingly, the name of the federation’s founder, Pachomius, who one might expect the author to know, is spelt variously as SD+RPZ (76.4, 13; 84.6; 98.21; 104.12; 106.23), SD+RPZ(110.3, 8), SD+ZP(108.2), and SD+ZPZ(86.23). Similar examples occur in the spelling of Greek loan words: the Greek SDLGHXYHLQ/SDLYGHXVLaappears as SDøGHXH(74.6, 9), SDøGHXVøV(74.14), and SHGHXVøV (74.13). The scribe spells the imperial title SUDLSRYVLWRa as both SURSRVøWRV(106.15) and SUHSRVøWRV(106.19). The scribe employs the following nomina sacra: FÂV for FULVWRV (76.11; 84.30; 90.15; 102.8; 104.21; 106.26); SÂQÂD for SQHXPD (80.16; 90.16; 102.9; 106.20); VÂZÂU for VZWKU (74.29); LÂV for LKVRXV (104.22); and LÂKÂO for LVUDKO (106.4). The scribe also employs the staurogram in V5RV for VWDXURV (94.12, 22, 24, 28; 96.4 and V5RX for VWDXURXQ (106.25).14 III. History of the Codex and Its Publication Nothing is known of the history of codex GC within the White Monastery community after its production until its leaves began to surface in the general dispersal of the White Monastery’s manuscripts to Europe during the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.15 It seems clear that the codices had not been used for centuries. By the time Europeans began to show interest in Coptic manuscripts, the codices survived in various states of preservation in a trash-like heap in a small room in the monastery. How 14

On the use of the staurogram, see Hurtado, Earliest Christian Artifacts, 135–54; idem, “The Staurogram in Early Christian Manuscripts: The Earliest Visual Reference to the Crucified Jesus?” in New Testament Manuscripts: Their Text and Their World, ed. Thomas J. Kraus and Tobias Nicklas (Leiden: Brill, 2006), 207–26; Erich Dinkler, Signum Crucis: Aufsätze zum Neuen Testament und zur Christlichen Archäologie (Tübingen: Mohr, 1967), 177–78; Kurt Aland, “Neue neutestamentliche Papyri II,” NTS 10 (1963-64): 75–79; idem, “Neue neutestamentliche Papyri II,” NTS 11 (1964-65): 1–3. 15 Stephen Emmel, Shenoute’s Literary Corpus, 2 vols. CSCO 599–600, Subsidia 111–12 (Louvain: Peeters, 2004), 14–24.

14

Chapter 1: The Manuscripts

and why they ended up in this room remains uncertain.16 The precise state of codex GC’s preservation at this point remains unknown. One suspects, however, given the relatively poor state of preservation of many of the leaves and the different degrees of loss evidenced among them, that the codex had fallen apart and lay disassembled for many years. While many leaves are relatively complete, others have ragged edges, torn away sections, and missing portions. Most evidence numerous small holes, tears, and cracks. Discolored or soiled areas and blotches are common, some apparently caused by exposure to a liquid that occasionally mars an entire corner, or more commonly appears as blotches on the page.17 The ink on some pages is dark and well preserved, while on others its surface layer has disappeared to varying degrees, leaving a fainter gray appearance. The remains of the red ink used to outline the enlarged marginal letters appears fairly clearly on some pages, as but a gray trace around the black letter on others, and has virtually disappeared on some. The thinness of the parchment also varies so that on numerous leaves the ink shows through to varying degrees from the reverse side of the page, on occasion making the text difficult to read. Of the fifty-six plus leaves in the original codex, only twenty-two are known to exist today. To what extent the lost leaves disappeared from the monastery before the late eighteenth and nineteenth century dispersal of its codices or were lost in the dispersal process itself remains unclear. The pattern of survival of the leaves from the individual quires, however, offers some indication of the process of dismemberment and destruction. The following table correlates the number of surviving leaves against their location within their respective quires. The first column lists the sheets that formed the quire. Sheet 1 represents the outermost sheet, which formed the outer first and last leaf of the quire. Sheet 4 represents the innermost sheet, which formed the inner two leaves of the quire. The number of surviving leaves for each location listed in the second column underscores the role played by a leaf’s location in the interior of its quire in its survival. The surviving leaves of codex GC come predominantly from the innermost sheets of the various quires. The final column lists the number of surviving leaves that survive as conjugate pairs. 16

On the state of the manuscripts at the monastery, see G. Maspero, Fragments de la version thébaine de l’Ancien Testament, MIFAO 6 (Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1892), 1. Alin Suciu has recently suggested on the basis of join patterns between certain fragments that “the codices were destroyed systematically and deliberately by someone, perhaps during the suppression of the monasteries” (http://alinsuciu.com/2012/05/15). The hypothesis, which makes perfect sense, will be presented by Susiu and Tito Orlandi in a paper presented at the Tenth International Congress of Coptic Studies in Rome in September 2012. 17 In some cases, the blotches look as though they resulted from a liquid that dropped or splattered on the page.

15

A. White Monastery Codex GC

Quire Sheet 1 2 3 4

Surviving leaves 1 3 8 10

Conjugate pairs 2 6 10

The pattern is best explained by the initial dismemberment of the codex into individual quires followed by the loss over time of outer pages from the individually stitched quires.18 It also seems clear from the surviving pages that the dismemberment process broke the quires down in such a way that the conjugate leaves remained for the most part intact as they moved to their various final resting places. Sixteen of the twenty-two surviving leaves fit this pattern: leaves 7/8–9/10 = Cairo, IFAO 5–6 (sequential and conjugate); leaves 5/6 and 11/12 = Paris, BN Copte 1291312–13 (conjugate); leaves 21/22 and 27/28 = Vienna, NB K 9550 and 9549 (conjugate); leaves 51/52–57/58 = Vienna, NB K 9761, 9527–28, and 9548 (sequential and conjugate); leaves [69]/[70]–71/72 = Naples, BN IB 8, 45–46 (sequential and conjugate); leaves 85/86–87/88 = Naples, BN IB 8, 47–48 (sequential and conjugate); leaves 101/102–103/104 = Berlin, SB Or. 1607, 9–10 (sequential and conjugate).19 In most cases, the common state of preservation of the leaves in these units further suggests a shared history. In two of these cases, specific patterns evident on the leaves confirm it. The shared pattern of the ragged edges on Naples, BN IB 8,45–46 clearly indicates that they remained together as the loss around the edges occurred, probably as they lay in the heap of manuscript fragments at the White Monastery.20 Similarly the Berlin, SB Or. 1607, 9 and 10 share a common diagonal crease across the bottom where they were folded together as a pair. The twenty-two surviving leaves of codex GC eventually found their way to six different institutions in five countries. Eighteen leaves ended up in Europe: seven at the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek in Vienna, five at the Biblioteca Nazionale “Vittorio Emanuele III” in Naples, four at the Bibliothèque nationale de France in Paris, and two at the Staatsbibliothek 18

The fact that the leaves preserved in Naples arrived in Europe before 1805 as part of the initial wave of dispersal from the monastery, while the other surviving leaves remained in the White Monastery’s library until much later in the century (see below, pgs. 16–18), indicates that the codex had already been dismembered 19 It is interesting to note further that the six leaves that traveled individually to their respective final locations (49/50, 65/66, 83/84, [97]/[98], 105/106, and [107]/[108]) all belong to quire sheets exterior to those that contained the sequential leaves that remained together. Leaves 97/98 and 107/108 are the only conjugate leaves that ended up at different institutions. 20 For Borgia’s gathering of the manuscripts, which would have included these two leaves in Naples, see Emmel, Shenoute’s Literary Corpus, 20–21.

16

Chapter 1: The Manuscripts

in Berlin. The other four leaves surfaced in Egypt: three at the Institut français d’archéologie orientale in Cairo and one at the Coptic Museum in Cairo. The particulars of the movement of the leaves to the various institutions now holding them is entwined with the general history of the dispersal of the remains of the White Monastery Library that began in the latter part of the eighteenth century. 21 The five leaves of codex GC preserved in the Biblioteca Nazionale in Naples (IB 8, 44–48) came to Italy as part of the initial wave of dispersal of White Monastery leaves and fragments that began in the last third of the eighteenth century and ran into the first half of the nineteenth century.22 They belong to the large collection of White Monastery leaves accumulated between 1778 and 1805 by Stephano Borgia, who had become the secretary of the Sacra Congregatio de Propaganda Fide in Rome in 1770 and used his position to gather manuscripts from around the world.23 He acquired his first White Monastery leaves, the first known to have reached Europe, in 1778 from a missionary in Upper Egypt, who reported that they came from the ruins of a monastery near Thebes.24 Precisely when the Naples leaves from codex GC entered Borgia’s collection is not recorded in the literature. The other surviving leaves from codex GC all appear to derive from the final dispersal of the White Monastery library following its discovery as the source of the leaves appearing on the market by Gaston Maspero in 1885.25 While initial negotiations to purchase the entire lot of remaining leaves and fragments fell through, Maspero and his colleagues were able to obtain the largest portion, numbering thousands of leaves and fragments, for the Bibliothèque nationale de France in Paris. The acquisition included the Paris leaves from codex GC (Copte 12913 12–15), which were bound

21

For the most thorough account of this history see Henry Hyvernat, “Introduction,” in E. Porcher, “Analyse de manuscripts coptes 1311–8 de la Bibliothèque nationale, avec indication des texts bibliques,” RE 1 (1933): 105–16; see also Emmel, Shenoute’s Literary Corpus, 14–28; Bentley Layton, “Two Unpublished Shenute Fragments Against Kronos: Layton, Brit. Lib., Nos. 90 and 91,” JCS 2 (1992): 117–38. 22 Hyvernat, “Introduction,” 106. 23 Emmel, Shenoute’s Literary Corpus, 20–21. Some additional fragments arrived after Zoega completed his work in 1805, but since the leaves in question (Naples, BN IB 8, 44–48) appear in Zoega’s catalogue (No. CCXXII), they formed part of the collection by 1805 at the latest. Cf., Hyvernat, “Introduction,” 106. 24 Emmel, Shenoute’s Literary Corpus, 20; Agostino Antonio Giorgi, Fragmentum Copticum ex Actis S. Coluthi Martyris Erutum ex Membraneis Vetustissimis Saeculi V ac Latine Redditum (Rome, 1781), 3–4. 25 The published accounts conflict on the date. For a discussion of the evidence, see Emmel, Shenoute’s Literary Corpus, 22; Layton, “Two Unpublished Shenoute Fragments,” 124 n. 33.

A. White Monastery Codex GC

17

together in Paris in a volume containing the leaves that derived from the lives of various ascetic saints (Copte 12913).26 The breakdown of Maspero’s initial negotiation efforts led the monks to sell some of the leaves for profit on the open market, from which they found their way to a number of different institutions in Europe and Egypt.27 The leaves from codex GC preserved in the Nationalbibliothek in Vienna, the Nationalbibliothek in Berlin, and the Institut français d’ archéologie orientale in Cairo appear to derive from this stage of the dispersal process. The Vienna leaves (NB K 9404, 9527–28, 9548–50, and 9761) appear to belong to the papyrus and parchment texts offered for sale in Vienna by Theodor Graf in February 1887, and acquired by the Erzherzog Rainer shortly thereafter.28 Graf’s letter of February 11, 1887, offering the “Papyri und Pergamente” for sale, supplies the first mention of parchment in connection with the Vienna collection.29 While the letter does not detail the contents of the items offered for sale, the fact that the provenance of the Coptic parchment leaves in the collection is almost always Achmim suggests the identification of this material with the White Monastery leaves sold off by the monks following the initial breakdown of Maspero’s negotiations. The case is furthered by Jakob Krall’s mention in a June 16, 1887 article of an “überraschenden Funden aus Akhmim.”30 The two leaves of codex GC preserved in the Staatsbibliothek in Berlin (Ms. Or. 1607, 9–10)31 were also apparently purchased in 1887 as part of a larger group of manuscripts from an antiquities dealer in Luxor.32 The li26

Hyvernat, “Introduction,” 107–11; Maspero, Fragments, 1; quoted in Layton, “Two Unpublished Shenute Fragments,” 124 n. 33; Emmel, Shenoute’s Literary Corpus, 22– 23. 27 Hyvernat, “Introduction,” 109–10; Emmel, Shenoute’s Literary Corpus, 23–24; Layton, “Two Unpublished Shenute Fragments,” 122–26. 28 Helene Loebenstein, “Vom ‘Papyrus Erzherzog Rainer’ zur Papyrussammlung der österreichischen Nationalbibliothek: 100 Jahre Sammeln, Bewahren, Edieren,” in Festschrift zum 100-jährigen Bestehen der Papyrussammlung der österreichischen Nationalbibliothek. Papyrus Erzherzog Rainer (P. Rainer Cent.) (Vienna: Bruder Hollinek, 1983), 18; cf., Tito Orlandi, Papiri Copti di Contenuto Teologico, MPON-NS 9 (Vienna: Brüder Hollinek, 1974), 15–17; Layton, “Two Unpublished Shenute Fragments,” 123 n. 31; Hyvernat, “Introduction,” 109 n. 2. 29 Herbert Hunger, Aus der Vorgeschichte der Papyrussammlung der österreichischen Nationalbibliothek, MPON-NS 7 (Vienna: Brüder Hollinek, 1962), nr. 48 = pp. 70–71; Loebenstein, “Vom ‘Papyrus Erzherzog Rainer,’” 18. 30 Jakob Krall, Aus einer koptischen Klosterbibliothek II, MPON-NS 2/3 (Vienna: K. K. Hofdruck, 1887), 54; Loebenstein, “Vom ‘Papyrus Erzherzog Rainer,’” 18. 31 The detailed information on the acquisition of Berlin Ms. Or. 1607 was kindly given to me by Professor L. Stoerk, who is producing a catalogue of the Coptic manuscripts in the Berlin Staatsbibliothek (May 9, 2003 email correspondence). 32 Adolph von Harnack and Carl Schmidt (“Ein koptisches Fragment einer MosesAdam Apokalypse,” SDAW (1891): 1045) report that Berlin Ms. Or. 1608 and other manuscripts were acquired in 1887 from an antiquities dealer in Luxor. A careful review

18

Chapter 1: The Manuscripts

brary’s acquisitions journal records the seller as the imperial consular agent in Luxor, Moharb Tadrus Bulos. The name in fact appears to be a combination of the names of Bulos Todrus, who died in 1898, and his son Mohareb Todrus, who died in 1937.33 The purchaser is not identified, though Emil Brugsch seems a likely candidate.34 The three leaves in the Institut français d’archéologie orientale in Cairo (ff. 5–6, 8) likewise appear to belong to the materials dispersed following the breakdown of Maspero’s initial negotiations to acquire the remains of the library.35 I have found no information on the origins of the half leaf preserved in the Coptic Museum in Cairo.36 The first pages of White Monastery codex GC to appear in print were those published by Georg Zoega in his 1810 Catalogus codicum copticorum manuscriptorum qui in Museo Borgiano Velitris Adservantur. The five leaves currently housed in the Biblioteca Nazionale in Naples (BN IB 8, 44–48) appear as manuscript number CCXXII, which Zoega describes as “De miraculis ab abate Abraham in vita et post mortem editis: sermo dictus die festo in ejus honorem instituto.”37 They belong to the first text in the codex. Only excerpts of the pages were published.38 In his work at the Bibliothèque nationale in Paris at the end of the nineteenth century, Émile Amélineau recognized three leaves (Bibliotheque nationale Copte 1291312–13 and Copte 78, 32) as part of the same text, a Life of Abraham, represented by the five leaves in Naples published by Zoega. He published the full Coptic text of all eight leaves together with a of the evidence has convinced Professor Stoerk that or. ms. 1607 was part of this purchase and that the acquisition year of 1890 that appears on the manuscript itself must have been written in error and should be changed to 1887. Harmut-Ortwin Feistel of the Staatsbibliothek Orientabteilung agrees with Stoerk’s conclusion. The date of 1887 aligns well with the final dispersal of the White Monastery library following the initial breakdown of Maspero’s negotiations to acquire the entire remaining lot. Cf., Hyvernat, “Introduction,” 109–10 n. 5; Maspero, Fragments, 1, cited in Layton, “Two Unpublished Shenute Fragments,” 124 n. 33. 33 So Stoerk (email correspondence, May 9, 2003), who also notes that the two figures appear in various travel books of the period. H. Sabersky, Ein Winter in Ägypten: Eine Reisebeschreibung (Berlin: Schall und Grund, 1896), 140, 162, 201, 203; Julius Stinde, Frau Buchholz im Orient (Berlin: Freund & Jeckel, 1888), 107–8. It was not uncommon for consular officials, e.g., Makarius Schenudi, the representative of Austria-Hungary, to deal in antiquities during this period. 34 Suggested by Stoerk (email correspondence, May 9, 2003), who notes that Carl Schmidt was not yet active at this time. 35 Hyvernat, “Introduction,” 109–10 n. 5. 36 Munier does not supply any information on its acquisition in his publication of the leaf in the Catalogue général, 62–63 (No. 9250). 37 Zoega, Catalogus codicum copticorum, 547. 38 Cited by the original manuscript pages numbers, the excerpts include 66.i.19–27, ii.3–12; [69].i.13–19; [70].i.2–9, 13-17, ii.1–7, 13–23; 72.ii.10–15; 85.ii.6–28; 86.i.15; [88].i.21–26.

A. White Monastery Codex GC

19

French translation in 1895 in his Monuments pour servir a l’histoire de l’Égypte chrétienne aux 4., 5., 6., et 7. siècles.39 In fact, only Paris, BN Copte 1291312–13 belong to the same text represented in the Naples leaves. Paris, BN Copte 78, 32, on the other hand, derives from the Life of Manasse, which Amélineau published in the same volume.40 His Life of Manasse is in fact the Panegyric on Manasse from codex GB, which contains a digression on Abraham of Farshut near the beginning of the text. The content of the leaf together with its similar scribal hand surely accounts for Amélineau’s decision to include it in his Life of Abraham. It is further interesting to note that while Amélineau recognized Paris, BN Copte 1291312–13 as part of his Life of Abraham, he missed Paris, BN Copte 1291314–15, which also belong to it.41 The pages published by Amélineau served as the basis for Cauwenbergh’s treatment of Abraham of Farshut in his 1914 Étude sur les moines d’Égypte depuis le Concile de Chalcédoine (451) jusqu’à l’invasion arabe (640).42 In 1916, Henri Munier published another leaf from codex GC (Cairo, Coptic Museum 3901) as number 9250 in the Catalogue general des antiquités égyptiennes du Musée du Caire. Manuscrits copte.43 The leaf, only the inner half of which survives, is labeled “Sur un schism au monastére de saint Pakhôme (recto); sur l’élection d’un nouveau supérieur (verso).” Munier briefly describes the contents and interprets the text as an account of one of a number of schisms that took place in the Pachomian community, like those during the tenure of Pachomius’s immediate successors, Theodore and Horsiesius. He does not connect the leaf with those published by Zoega and Amélineau. In 1917, W. E. Crum published a brief note on the Coptic manuscripts included in Munier’s Catalogue général in which he connected the texts published by Zoega, Amélineau, and Munier with additional leaves from Berlin (SB Or. 1607, 9–10) and Vienna (NB K 9404) as part of the Life of Abraham of Farshut. Crum writes, “Pages from the beginning of the work are in Paris (Miss. fanç. IV, 743–4); those of Zoega ccxxii come later; then come, in uninterrupted sequence, those at Berlin (Kgl. Bibl., Or. 1607, ff. 9, 19), Vienna (Hofbibl. K 9404, 9405), and our Cairo leaf,” i.e., the leaf

39

Amélineau, Monuments, 511–14, 742–53. Ibid., 666–79. 41 The four leaves were already linked together in some manner in 1894, the year before Amélineau’s publication. They appear in sequence in Paris, BN Copte 12913, a volume that binds together Coptic leaves from various texts and manuscripts. The first page of this volume bears the inscription, “Volume de 98 Feuillets 3 Avril 1894.” 42 Paul van Cauwenbergh, Étude sur les moines d’Égypte depuis le Concile de Chalcédoine (451) jusqu’à l’invasion arabe (640) (Paris: P. Geuthner, 1914; reprint ed., Milan: Cisalpino-Goliardica, 1973), 154–56. 43 Munier, Catalogue général, 62–63. 40

20

Chapter 1: The Manuscripts

published by Munier.44 It is difficult to interpret Crum’s reference to the Paris pages. His citation appears to be incorrect, since pages 743–44 in Amélineau’s edition include only the latter half of Paris, BN Copte 1291312 and the first three-fourths of Paris, BN Copte 1291313. It does seem, however, that Crum recognized Amélineau’s error in including Paris, BN Copte 78, 32, which appears on pages 745–46 of Amélineau’s edition, as part of the same text. A second problem occurs with Crum’s reference to two leaves in Vienna, NB K 9404 and 9405. There is currently no K 9405. The outside cover of an old folder that once contained the leaves at the Nationalbibliothek bears the sigla K 9404, 9405 along the bottom edge. A brief note on the same cover made by Walter Till on April 6, 1933 notes that there was only one leaf in the folder at that time. A longer note inserted in the folder by Till on June 26, 1934, adds that in addition to the folder, a catalogue card exists for the missing K 9405 as well. He reports that he questioned Crum about the citation and learned that already in 1913–14 only K 9404 was present in the folder. He includes the postcard from Crum that reported this last piece of evidence. Crum, in fact, reports that he had gotten the information on K 9404–9405 from Grohmann, namely, that there was only one leaf and that he never sought to explain the K9404–9405 reference. Till’s note concludes, “Bisher habe ich von K 9405 keine Spur entdeckt. Hat es überhaupt nie existiert?” In fact, the cover of the old folder inscribed with K9404, 9405 is labeled “Klostergeschichte Sebastian (and) Apa Abraham.” It further makes reference to the emperor Justinian and the slandering (of Abraham) by Peter of Nemhaate, Patelphe of Schmin, Pešour of Ermont, and Pancharis. K 9404, which does exist, mentions Abraham and refers to the emperor Justinian, but not by name. It does not mention Sebastian or the four figures who slandered Abraham. Vienna, BN K 942, however, mentions all of the figures noted on the cover of the folder. So it would appear that the missing K 9405 somehow became K 942.45 K 942 belongs to the Panegyric on Manasse preserved in White Monastery codex GB.

44

Walter E. Crum, “Catalogue Général du Musée du Caire: Nos. 9201-9304. Manuscrits Copte. By Henri Munier, Cairo, 1916,” JEA 4 (1917): 68. 45 It was suggested to me at the Nationalbibliothek in Vienna that K 9405 had been a fragment of the leaf and was joined to its other half, K 942. There is a diagonal crease across the leaf. It does not, however, appear to have been actually separated. Furthermore, the proper nouns Peter, Nemhaata, and Patelphe, which appear on the old folder’s cover, cross over the crease. In addition, the penciled number 942 occurs on the larger bottom half of the leaf, which includes the greater portion of the references noted on the folder. When I suggested that K 9405 had been renumbered as K 942 when it was recognized that it didn’t belong with K 9404, it was pointed out that such a renumbering would have given it a higher, not a lower, number. So, while K 9405 can been identified as K

A. White Monastery Codex GC

21

In 1978, Antonella Campagnano published a preliminary analysis of seven White Monastery codices (EH, EI, EL, EM, CB, GB, and GC) containing accounts of four fifth-sixth century Egyptian ascetics. She identified sixteen leaves surviving from codex GC. In addition to the leaves from Paris and Naples published by Amélineau (Paris, BN Copte 1291312– 13 and Naples, BN IB 8, 44–48), Campagnano added an additional leaf from Paris (BN Copte 1291315) and seven leaves from Vienna (NB, K 9404, 9527–28, 9548–50, and 9761). She failed to include the leaf published by Munier or those from Berlin that Crum had identified as coming from the same manuscript. In her analysis of the codex, she recognized two separate texts. The first, which she labeled a Life of Abraham of Pbow, included 15 of the 16 leaves that she included in codex GC. The second text, which she labeled an Encomium of Abraham of Pbow, was represented by a single leaf (Vienna, NB, K 9404). In 1985, Campagnano published an edition of the codex in her Preliminary Editions of Coptic Codices: Monb. GC: Life of Abraham – Encomium of Abraham. The edition includes an additional 6 leaves: the leaf from the Coptic Museum in Cairo published by Munier (Cairo, Coptic Museum 3901), the two leaves from Berlin noted by Crum (SB. Or. 1607, 9–10), and three leaves from the Institut français d’ archéologie orientale in Cairo (ff. 5–6, 8). Introductory pages supply brief information on the codicology and paleography of the codex, a list of the surviving leaves, and a brief summary of their contents. The edition itself reproduces the text and translation of the leaves previously published by Amélineau and Munier, and supplies transcriptions and Italian translations for the unpublished pages. Microfiche copies of the actual manuscript pages are included in a cover pocket. The edition retains the division of the codex into two texts, a Life of Abraham of Pbow, to which the three leaves from the Institut français d’ archéologie orientale are added, and the Encomium of Abraham of Pbow, to which the two leaves from Berlin and the leaf from the Coptic Museum in Cairo published by Munier are added. To date, no additional leaves from White Monastery codex GC have been identified beyond the twenty-two included in Campagnano’s preliminary edition. In addition, two of the leaves (Paris, BN Copte 1291314 and Vienna, NB K 9550) were placed incorrectly in terms of their sequence in the edition.46 Accounts of Abraham based on the texts were published in 1989 by James E. Goehring and 1991

942, an explanation for the number change is still wanting. Perhaps, the penciled number 942 represents an error for a four digit number 942_. 46 The current listing of leaves in the Corpus dei Manoscritti Copti Letterari (http://rmcisadu.let.uniroma1.it/~cmcl/) varies from Campagnano’s edition in that it moves Paris, BN Copte 1291315 and Vienna, NB K 9550 to the end of the list as unplaced fragments.

22

Chapter 1: The Manuscripts

by René-Georges Coquin.47 Subsequent articles by Goehring have detailed various aspects of the texts.48

 

B. White Monastery Codex GB Of the twenty-seven leaves or fragments of leaves that survive from codex GB, I have inspected in person and edited only the five leaves (10 pages) that deal with Abraham of Farshut, the subject of this volume. As a result, a complete and thorough analysis of codex GB lies beyond the scope of this work. Efforts to understand the place of the five leaves that deal with Abraham of Farshut within the codex as a whole, however, resulted in an analysis of the structure of the entire codex and the placement of all of its surviving leaves. The table below lists the known surviving pages from codex GB following the format established for codex GC.49 Column 1 (Leaves) designates the quire and leaf numbers of the reconstructed codex. Column 2 (Signatures) supplies the evidence of signatures on the extant pages. “ / ” indicates that the area on both sides of the leaf where a signature would appear is blank. “[ ] / [ ]” indicates that while the area where the signature would be expected is too damaged for any trace to be read, no signature would have been expected here. Column 3 (Pages) supplies the page numbers (recto/verso). For extant pages, both the transcription and Arabic numeral equivalents are given. More than one leaf (two pages) is given on a line 47

James E. Goehring, “Chalcedonian Power Politics and the Demise of Pachomian Monasticism,” OP 15 (Claremont, CA: Institute for Antiquity and Christianity, 1989), reprinted in idem, Ascetics, Society, and the Desert: Studies in Early Egyptian Monasticism (Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1999), 241–61; René-Georges Coquin, “Abraham of Farshut,” in The Coptic Encyclopedia, 8 vols., ed. Aziz S. Atiya (New York: Macmillan, 1991), 1.11–12. 48 James E. Goehring, “Remembering Abraham of Farshut: History, Hagiography, and the Fate of the Pachomian Tradition,” JECS 14 (2006): 1–26; “Keeping the Monastery Clean: A Cleansing Episode from an Excerpt on of Abraham of Farshut and Shenoute’s Discourse on Purity,” in The World of Early Egyptian Christianity: Language, Literature, and Social Context. Essays in Honor of David W. Johnson, ed. James E. Goehring and Janet Timbie (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University Press, 2007), 158–75; “The Life and Miracles of Abraham of Farshut: Community Disaster and the Making of a Saint,” in Christianity and Monasticism in Upper Egypt, Vol. 2, Nag Hammadi - Esna, ed. Gawdat Gabra and Hany N. Takla (Cairo and New York: The American University in Cairo Press, 2010), 49–61; “The Ship of the Pachomian Federation: Metaphor and Meaning in a Late Account of Pachomian Monasticism,” in Christianity in Egypt: Literary Production and Intellectual Trends, ed. Paolo Buzi and Alberto Camplani, SEA 125, Rome: Istituto Patristico Augustinianum, 2011, 289–303. 49 See above, pgs. 6–7.

23

B. White Monastery Codex GB

only when all the pages’ page numbers are extant, or all are lost. For missing leaves, the equivalent page numbers appear in square brackets. Column 4 (Manuscripts) designates the leaves by call number following the system adopted by the International Association for Coptic Studies.50 A list of previously published editions of the surviving leaves can be found in Appendix A. The leaves containing the excerpt on Abraham of Farshut edited in the present volume (D8 – J2) appear in italics. White Monastery Codex GB Panegyric on Manasse and On Moses of Abydos Leaves  D1–3 D4–5  D6–7 D8 

E1–3 E4  E5  E6 E7  E8 J1 J2



J3–7 J8   G1 G2–5 G6  G7 G8  H1-7 H8  50

Pages51

Manuscripts

[1–6] ]–, = 7–10  [11–14] >LH@/>LA@ = 15/16

[3 leaves wanting] IT-NB IB 2 ff.2–3 [2 leaves wanting] AT–BN 942 

[17–22] N>J@/NG= 23/24 [ NH@/>NA@ = 25/26 [27/28] NT/O = 29/30 [31/32]

[3 leaves wanting] US-MU 158 ff. 46a/b US-MU 158 ff. 46c/d [1 leaf wanting] FR-BN 78 f. 32 [1 leaf wanting]

[33/34] OH/OA = 35/36 [37–46] P]/PK = 47/48

[1 leaf wanting] FR-BN 12913 f.1 [5 leaves wanting] FR-BN 129 13 f.2

/G

PT/Q = 49/50  [51–58] QT/[ = 59/60  [61/2] >[J@/>[G@ = 63/64

US-MU 158 ff. 46e/f [4 leaves wanting] FR-BN 129 13 f.4 [1 leaf wanting] FR-BN 129 13 f.3

/H

[65–78] RT/S = 79/80

[7 leaves wanting] IT-NB IB 2 f.4

Signatures

/

/D / / /

/ /J G/ /



Emmel, An International Directory. See Appendix C for a table of correspondence between this system and the more traditional institutional references. 51 With the exception of the five leaves that I inspected in person, page numbers derive from the earlier editions, particularly Campagnano’s with its microfiche copies of the manuscript pages, and inspection of the photographs of the Paris pages housed in the Institute for Christian Oriental Research in Mullen Library at the Catholic University of America.

24

Chapter 1: The Manuscripts

Leaves  A1-7 A8  ]1 ]2 ]3 ]4–5 ]6–7  ]8  K1–3 K4–5  K6–8  T1–8 L1–2 L3–4 L5 L6

  

Fragments 1 2 3 4

Signatures

Pages

Manuscripts

/A

[81–94] )H/)A = 95/96

[7 leaves wanting] FR-BN 130 4 f.114

[97/98] )T/U = 99/100 UD/UE = 101/102 [103–106]  U]–UL = 107–110 [111/112] 

[1 leaf wanting] IT-NB IB 2 IT-NB IB 9 f.1 [2 leaves wanting] IT-NB IB 9 ff.2-3 [1 leaf wanting]

[113–118]  ULT–UNE = 119–122 [123–128] 

[3 leaves wanting] IT-NB IB 2 ff.6–7 [3 leaves wanting]

/ / /

/

[129–144] / / /



[145–148]  UPT–UQE = 149–152 >UQJ@/>SQ@G= 153/154 UQH/SQA = 155/156

[8 leaves wanting] [2 leaves wanting] FR-BN 130 3 ff. 30–31 FR-BN 130 3 f. 32 FR-BN 130 3 f. 33



FR-BN 1322 f. 61 FR-BN 12913 f. 5 GB-OB CP 5,62 FR-BN 1313 f. 44

I. Codicology The five leaves that I inspected in person measured between 30.7 to 33.3 cm. in height and 24 to 25.5 cm. in width. The codex was constructed using standard 4 sheet (8 leaf, 16 page) quires. Quire numbers survive on the last page (16) of quire DÃ, the last page (48) of quire JÃ, the first (49) and last (64) page of quire GÃ, the last page (80) of quire HÃ, and the last page of quire AÃ. It seems likely that an additional quire or quires followed, for which no evidence survives.52 With the exception of the four fragments, the placement of the remaining 23 surviving leaves is secure. While the page numbers of the four fragments and therefore their precise location in the codex remain unknown, various factors suggest the association of each fragment with a par52

The contents of page 156 do not suggest the approaching end of the text, which would occur only two pages later if quire LÃD were the final quire. Furthermore, since fragment 4 appears to be the final page of the codex and lacks a quire number, one assumes that the last quire had one or more flyleaves at the end.

B. White Monastery Codex GB

25

ticular portion of the codex. The small fragment 1 contains the name Theodore (>THR@GZURV), which apparently led Campagnano to link it to the initial section of the Panegyric on Manasse which reports on Abraham of Farshut’s appearance before Justinian I in Constantinople.53 While the name Theodore does not actually occur in the surviving pages of this section in codex GB, the name appears three times in the parallel account preserved from the second text in codex GC, On Abraham of Farshut. Fragment 2, also very small, includes a reference to “the prayers of saint Apa Manasse,” which likely associates it with the first text in the codex, A Panegyric on Manasse.54 Fragment 3 (Oxford, B.L. CP b. 5, 62), which is a more complete leaf, includes references to “the man of God Apa Moses” and “our father Apa Moses.” These suggest its placement with the second text in the codex, On Moses of Abydos.55 Fragment 4 (Paris, BN Copte 131344) appears to be the last inscribed leaf of the codex.56 The recto includes a request for the blessing of “our God-loving king” and “the whole court of the palace and all the people of the city,” before ending with a typical doxology. The text ends half way down column ii, followed by a boxed interlaced pattern of decoration. The last half of the column is blank as is the entire verso. No page numbers survive, and since it lacks quire numbers where one would expect them to have occurred, it is not the beginning or end of a quire. While it could conceivably be the end of an interior text, the fact that the verso is completely blank suggests that it rightly belongs at the end of the codex, followed by one or more flyleaves.57 II. Paleography, Orthography, and Language The twenty-seven surviving leaves of manuscript GB were inscribed two columns to a page in good classical Sahidic in a bimodular script. In the case of the five leaves that I have inspected, the inscribed area, including both columns and all enlarged letters (ekthesis) that extend into the margins, measures between 23.2–24.6 cm. in height and 17.6–18.5 cm. in width. The columns vary in length between 26 and 29 lines, with the vast majority (16 of 18) containing either 27 or 28 lines. 53

Campagnano placed frg. 1 at the end of the account of Abraham, after leaf 35/36 (Paris, BN Copte 129 131) in her preliminary edition. She mistakenly interpreted the surviving pages on Abraham ([15]/[16], 2[3]–[26], 29/30, 35/36) as the remains of a third text within the codex, which she placed at the end, after On Moses of Abydos. 54 Campagnano placed it after the last surviving full leaf (Naples, BN IB 2, 7) of A Panegyric on Manasse in her preliminary edition. 55 Campagnano placed it as the first surviving leaf of this text. 56 So identified by Orlandi in the Corpus dei Manoscritii Letterari listing for codex GB (http://rmcisadu.let.uniroma1.it/~cmcl/). 57 The information on fragment 4 was kindly provided by Stephen Emmel in two email messages on February 24 and 26, 2003.

26

Chapter 1: The Manuscripts

The five leaves represent the work of a single scribe, whose hand appears similar to that of the scribe of manuscript GC, though the strokes generally seem somewhat thicker. While he writes most of the individual letters in a similar fashion, some variation is noticeable. The stylized I, for example, appears as an open topped heart rising from the bottom of the central vertical stroke, as in manuscript GC, but in this manuscript consistently without the dots that occur within the heart on either side of the vertical stroke. The scribe likewise thickens the inner arc of the lower curve of the +, and draws the upper arm of the &as a straight horizontal stroke as opposed to the arching curve of the scribe of manuscript GC. The scribe’s use of the trema over the L is similarly consistent. The superlinear stroke, however, varies in that the scribe of manuscript GB consistently employs a short arc rather than a horizontal stroke over an initial consonant. He shares the practice with the scribe of manuscript GC of often employing the horizontal stoke of the W, and less frequently the arm of the &, as the superlinear stroke. Page numbers are decorated similarly to those in manuscript GC, though where they survive on the five leaves I inspected, they display only a single horizontal line above and below the number rather than the series of strokes of decreasing width found in manuscript GC. Decorations and flourishes on particular letters are frequent and generally of the same style as in manuscript GC. The extensive decoration of the initial enlarged Q that occurs in manuscript GC, however, does not appear in manuscript GB, and the practice of placing a single stroke with a single dot centered above and below it over the letters Q, W, M seems unique to manuscript GB (Plates 4–5). The manuscript, like manuscript GC, lacks systematic punctuation. The practice of indicating new sentences or clauses by leaving space at the end of a line, occasionally filled by a paragraphus, is similar. The scribe also occasionally indicates a meaningful grammatical break or other sensible division that occurs within a line by inserting a blank space of varied length, similar to the examples given above for manuscript GC. The scribe writes in good Sahidic, though like the scribe of manuscript GC, his spelling can fluctuate. He can, for example, write MRLV (114.16) for MRHøV (114.16), even in close proximity to one another. The scribe similarly refers to the community’s central monastery as both SERRX (112.16) and SEDRX (114.3; 116.28), and interestingly, he consistently writes SD+ZPR for Pachomius, a form not found among the variants employed on the surviving pages of manuscript GC. A more complete study of all of the surviving pages of the manuscript would surely multiply such examples. On the five leaves that I inspected, the scribe employs the nomina sacra FÂVfor FULVWRV(110.20)and SÂQÂDfor SQHXPD(112.2).

27

B. White Monastery Codex GB

III. History of the Codex and Its Publication Nothing is known of the history of the codex GB within the White Monastery after its production until the emergence of its surviving pages in the rediscovery of the monastery’s library in the eighteenth-nineteenth centuries.58 As with codex GC, it is clear that it had not been used for centuries. It had ended up in the same heap of disintegrating manuscripts in a trash room in the monastery where it lay until Europeans began to show interest in such texts. The state of codex GB’s preservation at this point remains unknown. The varied condition of the leaves I inspected, together with the smaller surviving fragments, suggest that it had fallen apart and lay disassembled for years.59 Some of the leaves are fairly complete and in a relatively good state of preservation. Others evidence ragged edges and missing portions. Creases, cracks, and tears in the parchment are common, as are discolored and soiled sections. The ink on some pages is dark and well preserved, while on others its surface layer has disappeared to varying degrees, leaving a fainter gray appearance. The degree of preservation of the red ink used to outline the enlarged marginal letters varied among the leaves I inspected. Of the seventy-eight plus leaves in the original codex, only twentyseven are known to exist today. The pattern of survival of the leaves from the individual quires, however, once again offers some indication of the process of dismemberment and loss. The following table correlates the number of surviving leaves against their location within their respective quires and lists the number of the surviving leaves whose conjugate pair also survives. Quire sheet number 1 is the outermost sheet of the quire. Quire Sheet 1 2 3 4

Surviving leaves 6 4 5 8

Conjugate pairs 2 2 2 8

In distinction from codex GC, the pattern of survival of leaves from codex GB is not overly weighted in favor of the leaves from the interior of the individual quires. The survival of the leaves as conjugate pairs as the individual quires broke apart, on the other hand, does appear to have played a role in their survival. With the exception of one surviving conjugate leaf pair (49/50–63/64), which interestingly formed the outer leaf of codex GÃ, both leaves of each surviving conjugate leaf pair reside at the 58 59

Emmel, Shenoute’s Literary Corpus, 14–24. As had codex GC; see above, pgs. 16–18.

28

Chapter 1: The Manuscripts

same institution. The fact that four of these six conjugate pairs formed the innermost sheet of their respective quires suggests the separation of the codex into individual quires followed by the separation and loss of their outer leaves or sheets. In two cases, pairs of sheets found their way to the same institution. Leaves 149/150, 151/152, [153]/[15]4, and 155/156, which formed the two innermost leaves of quire LÃ, apparently traveled as a unit to the Bibliothéque nationale in Paris. The two outer sheets of the quire are lost. In the case of quire ]Ã, the two interior sheets formed by leaves 99/100–109/110 and 101/102–107/108, found their way to Naples.60 The other two sheets are lost. The twenty-seven surviving leaves of codex GB eventually found their way to five different institutions in five countries. The leaves ended up in Europe and the United States: thirteen at the Bibliothèque nationale de France in Paris, nine at the Biblioteca Nazionale “Vittorio Emanuele III” in Naples, three in the Special Collections Library of the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, one at the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek in Vienna, and one at the Bodleian Library in Oxford. Most of the surviving leaves of codex GB followed the same paths to Europe recounted above for the leaves from codex GC that reside at the same institutions.61 The nine leaves in Naples (BN IB 2, 2-7 and 9, 1–3), for example, came to Italy as part of the first wave of manuscripts collected from the White Monastery in the late eighteenth-early nineteenth century by Stephano Borgia.62 So too, the majority of the Paris leaves (BN Copte 129131–5, 130330–33, 1304114, 131344, and 132261) belong to the thousands of manuscript pages acquired by the Bibliothéque nationale de France following Maspero’s identification in 1885 of the White Monastery as the source of the texts that had been making their way to Europe.63 The Vienna leaf likewise belongs to those collected in the late 1880’s by Erzherzog Rainer.64 The remaining five leaves (Paris, BN Copte 78, 32, Michigan 158, 46a– f, and Oxford, B.L. CP b. 5, 62) came to Europe and the United States at various points in the dissemination process. The single leaf preserved in Oxford (B.L. CP b.5, 62) came from the collection of Charles Godfrey 60

The fact that leaf 99/100 is preserved in Naples as BN IB 2, 5 while the other three leaves appear as BN IB 9, 1–3 suggests that it may well have followed a different path to Naples. If that is the case, the fact that they were all gathered in the early stage of the dissemination of the library (see above, p. 15) suggests a similar location in the heap of manuscripts in the trash room. 61 For the most thorough account of this history see Hyvernat, “Introduction,” 105– 16; see also Emmel, Shenoute’s Literary Corpus, 14–29; Bentley Layton, “Two Unpublished Shenute Fragments,” 117–38. See above, pgs. 16–18. 62 See above, pg. 16. 63 Hyvernat, ‘Introduction,” 109–11; On the date, see above pg. 17. 64 See above, pg. 17.

B. White Monastery Codex GB

29

Woide. On his death in 1790, the Coptic portion of his library, which included five volumes of early fragments, was purchased by the Clarendon Press. The press deposited the collection in the Bodleian Library in 1885.65 Paris, BN Copte 78, 32 likewise arrived at the French Imperial Library in the early stage of the White Monastery library’s dissemination, sometime before 1808.66 The three leaves at the University of Michigan (158, 46a–f), on the other hand, were among the last to leave Egypt following the breakdown of Maspero’s negotiations to acquire the entire remaining lot of White Monastery manuscripts in 1885. Hyvernat dates their arrival in Ann Arbor to 1922.67 As is the case with codex GC, the first pages of White Monastery codex GB to appear in print were those published by Georg Zoega in his 1810 Catalogus codicum copticorum manuscriptorum qui in Museo Borgiano Velitris Adservantur. The nine leaves housed in the Biblioteca Nazionale in Naples (BN IB 8, 44–48) appear as manuscript numbers CLXXX and CCXXIII, which Zoega describes respectively as “Vita abbatis Manassè” and “Sermo in festo monachi ascetae.”68 Only excerpts of the Coptic from select pages were published. In 1895, Émile Amélineau published the Coptic text and French translation of a Life of Manasse in his Monuments pour servir a l’histoire de l’Égypte chrétienne aux 4., 5., 6., et 7. siècles that included the nine leaves from Naples (BN IB 2, 2–7 and 9, 1–3) and four leaves from the Bibliothéque nationale in Paris (BN Copte 129131-4).69 Two other leaves from codex GB appeared in the same volume, one placed with pages from codex GC in a Life of Abraham (Paris, BN Copte 78, 32),70 and the second (Oxford, B.L. CP b. 5, 62) in a Life of Moses.71 The pages published by Amélineau as a Life of Manasse, served as the basis for van Cauwenbergh’s treatment of Manasse in his 1914 Étude sur les moines d’Égypte depuis le Concile de Chalcédoine (451) jusqu’à l’invasion arabe (640).72 In 1913, Johannes Leipoldt published four additional leaves from the Bibliothéque nationale in Paris (BN Copte 130330–33) containing the re65 Hyvernat, “Introduction,” 2 n. 2; Edmund Craster, History of the Bodleian Library, 1845-1945 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1952), 213. Colim Wakefield of the Department of Oriental Collections of the Bodleian Library kindly communicated the information on this fragment to me in an email of May 13, 2003. 66 Emmel, Shenoute’s Literary Corpus,” 21; Étienne Quatremère, Recherches critiques et historiques sur la langue et la literature de l’Égypte (Paris: Imprimerie impériale, 1808), 113–14, 139, 215. 67 Hyvernat, “Introduction,” 109–10 n. 5. 68 Zoega, Catalogus codicum copticorum, 547. 69 Amélineau, Monuments, 666–79. 70 Amélineau, Monuments, 745–46. 71 Amélineau, Monuments, 703–4. 72 van Cauwenbergh, Étude sur les moines d’Égypte, 157–58.

30

Chapter 1: The Manuscripts

mains of an account of the abbot Moses.73 The text, which he entitled De abate Moyse, represents the second text in codex GB. In 1978, Antonella Campagnano published a preliminary analysis of seven White Monastery codices (EH, EI, EL, EM, CB, GB, and GC) containing accounts of four fifth-sixth century Egyptian ascetics. She identified twenty-five leaves from codex GB. In addition to recognizing that both the fourteen leaves published by Amélineau and the four published by Leipoldt belonged to this codex,74 she identified an additional seven leaves. These included Paris, BN Copte 78, 48; 129135; 131344; Vienna, NB K 942; and Michigan, 158, 46a–f.75 In her reconstruction, Campagnano identifies three texts in the codex: a Life of Manasse, an Encomium of Moses, and an Encomium of Abraham of Pbau. The Encomium of Abraham (currently leaves [15]/[16], 2[3]/24–[25]/[26], 29/30, 35/36 and frg. 1) appears as the final text in her reconstruction. She included Paris, BN Copte 78, 48 and 131344 as the final two surviving leaves of the Encomium of Abraham, neither of which in the end proved to belong to it.76 In 1985, Campagnano published a preliminary edition of codex GB entitled Preliminary Editions of Coptic Codices: Monb. GB: Life of Manasses – Encomium of Moses – Encomium of Abraham. The edition dropped Paris, BN Copte 78, 48 and Copte 131344 from the codex, corrected the accidental omission of Naples, BN IB 9, 3, and added three new leaves, Paris, BN Copte 1304114, 131637 and 132261.77 Introductory pages supply brief information on the codicology and paleography of the codex, a list of the surviving leaves, and a brief summary of their contents. The edition itself reproduces the text and translation of the leaves previously published by Amélineau and Leipoldt, and supplies transcriptions and Italian translations for the unpublished pages. Microfiche copies of the actual manuscript pages are included in a cover pocket. The edition retains the division of the codex into three texts, with the Encomium on Abraham as the final text. The current listing for White Monastery codex GB in the Corpus dei Manoscritti Copti Letterari recognizes the material on Abraham as a digression that occurs at the beginning of the first text on Manasse and moves it accordingly to its proper place near the start of the codex.78 In ad73

Leipoldt, Sinuthii Archimandritae, 209–14. She omits, presumably by error, Naples, BN IB 9,3 (leaf 109/110) from her list. 75 Paris, BN Copte 78, 48 and 129135 have subsequently been removed from codex GB. 76 Paris, BN Copte 78, 48 does not appear to belong to codex GB (Stephen Emmel, March 1, 2003 email). While Paris, BN Copte 131 344 remains as part of GB, presumably the final leaf of the codex, the movement of the Abraham material earlier in the codex as a digression in the first text on Manasse removes its connection to the final leaf. 77 Paris, BN Copte 131 637 has been subsequently dropped as a leaf of codex GB. 78 For CMCL, see http://rmcisadu.let.uniroma1.it/~cmcl/. The listing presented here was that of February 2, 2003. The page numbers that occur on the leaves of the Abraham 74

B. White Monastery Codex GB

31

dition, it drops Paris, BN Copte 131637 from the codex, and adds Paris, BN Copte 78, 48 and 131344, which had been dropped by Campagnano between her 1978 article and 1985 preliminary edition. With the exception of Paris, BN Copte 78, 48, which does not appear to be part of the codex,79 the leaves correspond with those in the present edition. The recognition of the quire number DÃ on the verso of Vienna, NB K 942 has resulted in its placement as leaf [15]/[16].

material places them naturally at the start of the codex. Campagnano’s error in placing them later can only have occurred because she understood them as a separate text rather than a digression, leading her to assume an unlikely renumbering of the pages that began the text on Abraham starting with the number 1. In the introductory materials to her 1985 edition, she asserts under the heading Numerazione pagine, “Ricomincia da Ɨ con l’initzio dell’encomio di Abraham di Pbaw.” R.-G. Coquin (October 7, 1992 letter) recognized the Abraham material as a digression. He includes Michigan 158, 46 A-D, Paris, BN Copte 78, 32, and Paris, BN Copte 129131 under the heading “Encomium de Manassé–Digression sur Abraham de Pboou, son cousin.” Cf. also Coquin, “Abraham of Farshut,” 1.11. 79 See above, page 30, n. 76. Over the course of the reconstruction of the codex since Campagnano’s first effort in 1978, three leaves from the Bibliothéque nationale in Paris have been suggested for inclusion and subsequently rejected. They are Copte 78, 48, Copte 129 135, and Copte 131637.

Chapter 2

Literary and Historical Analysis A. Introduction The surviving accounts of the sixth century Coptic abbot Abraham of Farshut preserve important unique evidence on the demise of the Coptic orthodox Pachomian monastic movement in the reign of the Byzantine emperor Justinian I (527–565 C.E.). The historical evidence of these events, however, lies deeply embedded in a devout rendering of the saint’s story or life, filled with miracles and pious embellishments that participate in the emerging non-Chalcedonian discourse of the Coptic church. As such, serious methodological difficulties confront any effort to unravel the historical events of Abraham’s life from the ideologically informed discourse that shapes the surviving literary sources. The various accounts collected here are nonetheless together suggestive of events that explain later patterns in the ascetic landscape of Upper Egypt and as such warrant careful consideration. Moreover, in terms of the subsequent history of Coptic literature, the texts edited here serve as valuable witnesses to the development of the totalizing discourse of Coptic Christianity and the formulation of Upper Egyptian monastic history within it. The fullest accounts of Abraham of Farshut, all unfortunately incomplete, occur in two tenth-eleventh century codices from the White Monastery at Atripe. The first, White Monastery codex GC, contains two texts, A Panegyric on Abraham of Farshut, composed, as the ending makes clear, for the celebration of the saint’s feast day (24 Tnjbah = January 19), and a second text, probably a second panegyric, which I have labeled On Abraham of Farshut. The second White Monastery manuscript, codex GB, preserves an important extended excerpt on Abraham, centered on his conflict with Justinian I, embedded in a Panegyric on Manasse, a contemporary ascetic and relative of Abraham. These are the texts edited in the current volume. In addition, a summary account of Abraham, focused on his later years at Farshut, appears in the Copto-Arabic Synaxarion,1 and he is brief1 Basset, Le synaxaire arabe jacobite, 682–88; Jacques Forget, Synaxarium Alexandrinum, CSCO 48, Scriptores Arabici, ser. 3, vol. 18 (Beryti: E Typographeo catholico, 1906), 411–13 (text); CSCO 78, Scriptores Arabici, ser. 3, 1 (Rome: Karolus de Luigi, 1921), 401–05 (translation).

33

B. Synoptic Account

ly mentioned in the Panegyric on Apollo, Archimandrite of the Monastery of Isaac, a monk who had belonged to the Pachomian monastery of Pbow during Abraham’s tenure as its archimandrite.2 The English translations of these two sources have been included in this volume for convenience. The fragmentary nature of the three panegyrics makes reconstruction of Abraham’s life, either as a composite drawn from the various sources or as presented individually in each of the sources, difficult at best. While the three panegyrics overlap at various points, lost leaves preclude a clear understanding of what was absent from each source all along and what is missing as a result of lost pages. The situation is complicated even further by the fact that when the overlapping portions do survive, they frequently disagree on details. It seems from what survives that each author, as one might expect, presented Abraham through a lens shaped at least in part by his own agenda.

B. Synoptic Account The following synoptic table of the sources illustrates the complexity involved. The various episodes of the life that survive in the sources appear vertically down the left hand column. The five columns to the right record the starting point3 of each of the episodes, when it occurs, in each of the five texts: 1] A Panegyric on Abraham of Farshut (henceforth Panegyric); 2] On Abraham of Farshut (henceforth On Abraham); 3] the Excerpt on Abraham contained in the Panegyric on Manasse (henceforth Excerpt); 4] the account of Abraham in the Copto-Arabic Synaxarion; and 5] the mention of Abraham in the Panegyric on Apollo. References that appear in italics point to parallels that are more distant or occur in different sequence in different sources. Episode

Pan

Early Years Birth and childhood

II.1–6

Early Monastic Life Decision to leave the world Enters Pachomian federation Death of Predecessor

III.1 III.4 IV.3

2

OnA

Exc

Syn

Apollo

684 I.2

Kuhn, A Panegyric on Apollo. The citations for the three panegyrics (first three columns) refer to the section numbers found in both the Coptic text and English translation where the episode begins. The page numbers in columns four and five refer to the editions of the texts by Basset (Le synaxaire arabe jacobite) and Kuhn (Panegyric on Apollo), respectively. 3

34

Chapter 2: Literary and Historical Analysis

Episode Becomes archimandrite

Pan IV.4

Conflict with Justinian: Initial Phase Letter summons bishops and monks V.2 Abraham visits Apa Moses Accusers bring charges against Abraham Abraham’s arrest Abraham journies to Constantinople V.4 Conflict with Justinian: In Constantinople Appearance before Justinian V.5 Meets with archbishop Theodosius Abraham’s exchange with Justinian Brothers’ discussion of orthodox faith Ship metaphor Abraham removed as archimandrite Empress intercedes on Abraham’s behalf Conflict with Justinian: Return to Egypt Abraham writes letter to Pbow Pancharis enters Pbow as archmandrite and the monks disperse Abraham goes to the White Monastery and makes a copy of the rules Deposits copy in monastery of Moses Monastery at Farshut The revelation to build a monastery Initial construction and success Retrieves copy of rules from the Monastery of Moses Expands the monastery Abraham ordained

Exc

Syn

Apollo

VII.2 VIII.1

684

13

X.1

684

X.2

684

II.1

VI.1

I.1 I.3 II.1 III.1 IV.1 V.6 V.1

II.1 IV.1 V.2 VI.1

VI.6

684 685

VII.1

685 685 685

VII.5 686

Miracles Performed in Abraham’s Lifetime Man healed of dropsy IX.3 Hiding of bread in famine revealed VIII.1 Multiplication of loaves in famine Destruction of pestilence of worms Abraham’s Death Vision of his coming death Announces vision to John and Theophilus Abraham falls ill First instruction to keep the rules Celebrates the Feast of Nativity Second instruction to keep the rules Third instruction to keep the rules

OnA

X.1 X.6 X.10 XI.1 XII.1 XII.3 XIII.1

686 687 688

13

35

B. Synoptic Account Episode Abraham’s death Postmortem Miracles Elias cured of gout Hiding of bread in famine revealed Child exorcized Parents pray to Abraham for their son Peasant who stole lemons Concluding Praise

Pan XIV.5

XVI.2 XVIII.1 XIX.2 XX.1 XXII.1 XXIII.1

OnA

Exc

Syn

Apollo

688

686

While many leaves have been lost from the panegyrics, the serendipitous survival of episodes from different periods of Abraham’s life in the different sources allows for a relatively complete, if conflated, account of his life. An account of Abraham’s early years prior to the conflict with Justinian I survives only in the Panegyric preserved in White Monastery codex GC.4 The author, who claims to be a relative of about the same age, reports that Abraham was born to people of note in the village of Tberþot in the district of Diospolis. He entered school at age twelve and performed very successfully under a devout teacher who instructed him in scripture.5 Sometime after the completion of his education, God called him to the monastic life.6 In the same year, however, his parents died, leaving him alone with his sister. He postponed his plans for the customary year of mourning, and then, when his sister refused to follow him into the ascetic life, he left for the monastery of Pachomius. After his acceptance into the community by the archimandrite Pshintbahse, he turned to the study of its founding fathers, Pachomius, Horsiesius, and Theodore, and practiced the ascetic life.7 How long he continued in the monastery before succeeding to the post of archimandrite remains unclear. The sources simply announce his ap4

The second text in this codex, which I have labeled On Abraham of Farshut, may have preserved an account of these years. Unfortunately the initial four leaves (eight pages) are missing. 5 Panegyric II.1–6. 6 Coquin (“Abraham of Farshut,” 1.11–12) claims that the call occurred when Abraham was twelve. The text, however, is confused. The author first asserts that Abraham entered school “after he had grown up and completed twelve years” (II.3). On the following page, he reports that Abraham completed his education and then states “after he completed twelve years, God wanted him to withdraw” (III.11). See James E. Goehring, “The Life and Miracles of Abraham of Farshut: Community Disaster and the Making of a Saint,” in Christianity and Monasticism in Upper Egypt, Vol. 2, Nag Hammadi - Esna, ed. Gawdat Gabra and Hany N. Takla (Cairo and New York: The American University in Cairo Press, 2010), 60, n. 14. A similar confusion with the Pachomian monk Theodore’s age when he entered the monastic life occurs in the Pachomian dossier. See James E. Goehring, The Letter of Ammon and Pachomian Monasticism, PTS 27 (Berlin: DeGruyter, 1986), 215. 7 Panegyric III.2–4.

36

Chapter 2: Literary and Historical Analysis

pointment on the death of the preceding archimandrite, either Pshintbahse (Panegyric) or Sebastian (Excerpt).8 In the course of his tenure as archimandrite, a crisis emerged in the federation over its stance with respect to the demands of the Council of Chalcedon.9 The sources agree in linking the crisis to the policies of Justinian I, whom they style throughout as Abraham’s primary antagonist in the drama. The Panegyric locates the origin of the crisis in a general letter sent by the emperor to the bishops and monastic superiors in Egypt requesting their appearance at the court in Constantinople.10 The Excerpt, on the other hand, supported by On Abraham, identifies the impetus with accusations brought against Abraham by members of his own federation, identifying the four culprits as Peter of Nemhaate, Patelphe of Šmin, Pešour of Ermont, and Pancharis. The latter, who would eventually succeed Abraham as archimandrite, comes in for particularly harsh opprobrium.11 In response to the accusations, the emperor orders the duke of Antinoë to arrest Abraham and send him to the imperial city. Abraham thus proceeds to Constantinople, either of his own accord in response to the emperor’s general summons (Panegyric) or under arrest, brought to the city by soldiers on a long and difficult overland journey (Excerpt).12 The Panegyric unfortunately breaks off shortly after Abraham’s arrival in Constantinople. All that survives of this period is a general statement by the emperor asking Abraham to “agree to our faith (Chalcedon) and receive the Eucharist with us,” and the author’s observation that Abraham “was not persuaded by the glory that will perish.”13 The events of this period survive, however, albeit in fragmentary form, in On Abraham and the Excerpt. Unfortunately a leaf is missing from the Excerpt after Abraham’s 8 Panegyric IV.3–4; Excerpt I.2–II.1. The Excerpt reports that Sebastian served but a short time in office. Either one or both authors confused the names or, the author of the Panegyric forgot and dropped the brief intervening service of Sebastian. Neither figure is known from other sources. 9 The Panegyric (V.1) suggests that it occurred almost immediately upon Abraham’s appointment as archimandrite. If this were the case, one might assume that Abraham’s opposition acted on a perceived weakness within the federation following Pshintbahse’s death. 10 Panegyric V.2. The text then proceeds to the specific letter to Abraham requesting his attendance (V.3). 11 Excerpt II.4; On Abraham VI.1; cf., Panegyric on Apollo 10 (Kuhn, A Panegyric on Apollo, CSCO 394.17.10–27 (text) and 395.13.10–25 (trans.)). 12 Panegyric V.4; Excerpt IV.3–VI.1. The Excerpt indicates that the accusers used a particular event, namely Abraham’s purifying of a room in which the emperor’s men had met, to bring charges against him (James E. Goehring, “Keeping the Monastery Clean”). The charges lead in turn to a letter from the emperor to the duke demanding that he arrest Abraham and send him overland to Constantinople. As Abraham is under arrest, the monks who appear with him later in Constantinople are presented as simply following him on the journey; in the Panegyric, Abraham takes four brothers with him. 13 Panegyric V.5–6.

B. Synoptic Account

37

arrival in Constantinople and the emperor’s request for him to appear before him the following day. The manuscript resumes at the end of Abraham’s interrogation with the emperor’s declaration that he will replace Abraham as archimandrite with someone loyal to him, namely, the accuser Pancharis.14 Abraham, of course, remains steadfast and is cast out by the emperor. The author of the Excerpt next reports the empress’s failed attempt to intercede with Justinian on Abraham’s behalf.15 Following two missing leaves, the Excerpt concludes with a brief citation from Abraham’s letter to his monastery announcing his banishment and the report of Pancharis’s entry into the monastery, presumably as Abraham’s Chalcedonian replacement.16 By fortuitous happenstance, On Abraham fills in the account of Abraham’s appearance in Constantinople, though here too missing pages interrupt the flow of events and sow confusion. The first surviving page of the text begins in medias res with a first person report of events that plays on the definition of orthodoxy and the presence of the Coptic Archbishop Theodosius in Constantinople. The speaker, from a group of Abraham’s adherents, professes Abraham’s orthodoxy to the emperor, meaning of course his non-Chalcedonian orthodoxy. Abraham is apparently absent. The speaker goes on to report that after they left, the emperor sent his secretary (referendarios) Peter to them telling them to go to the archbishop, presumably meaning the Chalcedonian archbishop of Constantinople. They report instead to their archbishop, Theodosius, who in turn writes to the empress for support.17 After a few missing lines, Abraham stands before the emperor, who, with his bishop beside him, asks Abraham why he didn’t go to the archbishop (of Constantinople). Abraham responds that he has met him now here beside the emperor. In the exchange that follows, Abraham defends his (non-Chalcedonian) faith as the faith of his fathers.18 The play on the meaning of “orthodoxy” and “faith” in this section exemplifies the author’s literary sophistication. After a missing leaf, the exchange appears to have shifted to one between the general Theodore, who is connected with the empress, and one 14 Excerpt VII.1–2. One presumes that the words, in the first person, are those of the emperor. Pancharis is only mentioned later as entering the monastery (X.2). His assumption of the office gains support from the Copto-Arabic Synaxarion (page 684) and less directly from the brief reference in the Panegyric on Apollo 10 (Kuhn, A Panegyric on Apollo, CSCO 394..17.10–12 (text) and 395.13.10–13 (trans.). 15 Excerpt VIII.1–4. She subsequently sends two eunuchs for Abraham, though her purpose is lost in the following two missing leaves. 16 Excerpt X.1–2; cf., Copto-Arabic Synaxarion (Basset, Le synaxaire arabe jacobite, 684), which mentions the arrival of Bankares, who comes with troops. At this point the author of the Excerpt returns to the primary subject of the panegyric, Manasse. 17 On Abraham I.1–4. 18 On Abraham II.1–III.2.

38

Chapter 2: Literary and Historical Analysis

of the brothers, who speaks in support of Abraham’s position. The brother’s defense includes a metaphor comparing the Pachomian federation to a ship, which, in response to questions from the imperial chamberlain (praepositos) Narses and the general Theodore, he explains in some detail.19 The general, after weeping with the brother over Abraham’s fate, departs to report to the empress. She in turn informs Abraham of the emperor’s decision to remove him as archimandrite. She further tells him to remain close to the archbishop (Theodosius), so that he might return with him to Egypt. Abraham sends a message back to the empress requesting that she do her utmost to insure his return to Egypt.20 The final few surviving pages from On Abraham report the rejoicing of the accusers over Abraham’s fate, a debate among the brothers over whether or not to enter into communion with the new leadership of the federation, and the monk John’s report to the emperor that the new archimandrite must be a virgin.21 Abraham’s actual return to Egypt does not survive in any of the sources, though On Abraham preserves allusions to it as a result of the empress’s intervention.22 The Copto-Arabic Synaxarion alone fills in the initial events following Abraham’s return. It begins, in fact, where the Excerpt ended, with Abraham’s letter to his monastery announcing his removal as archimandrite.23 The author reports that when Pancharis,24 accompanied by soldiers, entered Pbow as its new archimandrite, the monks dispersed to the deserts and other monasteries.25 Abraham proceeded to the monastery of Shenoute at Atripe, where he copied the rules of Shenoute, sealed them in a container, and sent them to the monastery of Moses for safekeeping.26 Following a subsequent revelation, he proceeded to his native Farshut, where he founded a successful monastery. The new community grew, attracting both monks and virgins, which he led according to the rules of Shenoute that he had copied and subsequently retrieved from the monastery of Moses. In addition to the miracles that complete the 19

On Abraham III.1–IV.4. On the ship metaphor, see James E. Goehring, “The Ship of the Pachomian Federation.” 20 On Abraham IV.6–V.6. The author errs here by suggesting that the emperor would allow Theodosius to return to Egypt. Theodosius died in exile. Stephen J. Davies, The Early Coptic Papacy: The Egyptian Church and Its Leadership in Late Antiquity (Cairo and New York: American University in Cairo Press, 2003), 101–109; Edward R. Hardy, “Theodosius I,” in The Coptic Encyclopedia, 7. 2241. 21 On Abraham VI.1–VII.2. 22 On Abraham V.3 and 6. 23 Copto-Arabic Synaxarion 684 indicates that Abraham sent the letter from Constantinople; the parallel in the Excerpt (X.1) does not mention where the letter was composed. 24 He appears as Bankares in the Synaxarion. 25 The Panegyric on Apollo also reports the flight from the monastery. Paneygric on Apollo 10 (Kuhn, A Panegyric on Apollo, CSCO 394.17.27–19.5 (text) and 395.13.25–18.18 (trans.) 26 Copto-Arabic Synaxarion 684–85.

B. Synoptic Account

39

Synaxarion account, the author briefly mentions Abraham’s ordination, his daily asceticism, his frequent travel, and his death in beautiful old age.27 Fortunately, one of the other sources, this time the Panegyric, expands on the founding of the monastery of Farshut. After a number of missing leaves, the text resumes with the author turning to Abraham’s departure, perhaps from the monastery of Moses to which he had gone to retrieve the copy of the rules.28 He reports that Abraham departed with two brothers for the mountain (monastery) 29 of his village (Farshut), where together they built a small dwelling place. They were soon joined by seven others. The increasing numbers led the community to move to the foot of the mountain where they built a larger monastery that included a well and garden.30 The text breaks off at this point, and when it resumes,31 Abraham is working on the construction of a new building, which is already quite high. The reference to the building serves to set up a revelation from Pachomius, Petronius, and Shenoute to Abraham of his impending death in six months time.32 They further exhort him to bid his monks to keep the commandments and laws that have been handed down to them.33 The following pages record Abraham’s report of the revelation to the brothers, his repeated (three times) instructions to the brothers to keep the commandments, and his failing health.34 In the process, we learn that Abraham celebrated the Eucharist one last time on the feast of the nativity, his failing body held up by Theophilus and John, after which he went to the infirmary. On 23 Tnjbah (18 January), he summoned the brothers to him, instructed them to keep the commandments, and bid them a final farewell. Theophilus and John remained with him singing Psalms, as he prayed, “Lord, my God, permit me to worship in your presence.”35 Unfortunately the text breaks off at this point. Miracle stories attributed to Abraham both during his life and after his death survive in the Panegyric and Synaxarion.36 It is likely that they ex27

Copto-Arabic Synaxarion 685–86. Panegyric VII.1. The text mentions neither the Monastery of Moses nor the copy of the rules specifically. It does, however, state that “after he had received the papyri (QHFDUWKV), he left him in peace.” 29 The term mountain (SWRRX) can mean monastery, desert, or cemetary (H. Cadell and R. Rémondon, “Sens et employs de 72>2526 dans les documents papyrologiques,” REG 80 (1967): 343–49). The text could imply that Abraham first moved to a loose community of anchorites near his village from which he later withdrew to establish a coenobitic community. 30 Panegyric VII.1–2. 31 Only one (pages 27–28) of the intervening thirteen leaves survives, and it preserves miracle stories. 32 Panegyric X.1. 33 Panegyric X.2–5. 34 Panegyric X.6–XIV.5. 35 Panegyric XIV.5. 36 Cf. Panegyric XXIII.1. 28

40

Chapter 2: Literary and Historical Analysis

isted too in the text On Abraham, though are now lost as a result of missing leaves. The nature of the Excerpt, focused as it is on Abraham’s conflict with Justinian I, explains the absence of miracle stories in this source. No miracle stories were associated with Abraham prior to the affair with Justinian I. They first appear in the Panegyric following the establishment of his monastery in Farshut. Unfortunately, only one leaf survives from this section of the manuscript, preserving the conclusion of one miracle (the cure of a woman) and the full story of a man healed of dropsy.37 Additional miracles surely existed on the now missing pages.38 After the account of Abraham’s death, the author of the Panegyric introduces the postmortem miracles as evidence of the righteousness of the saints. While their bodies are buried, “they do not remain as corpses. Rather they work wonders among the living.”39 Comparing Abraham to Elisha, who while dead raised the dead (2 Kings 13:20–21), the author asserts that “after the Lord visited him [Abraham] and he left the body, God worked cures and wonders through him at the place where he is now buried.”40 Postmortem miracle stories occupied the following ten and a half leaves (pages 66–86), only four and a half of which survive (pages 66–72 and 83–86). The surviving stories include a rich man cured of gout by standing on Abraham’s tunic,41 the revealing of a man and wife who sought to preserve their own bread while eating at the monastery during a famine,42 the exorcism of a boy on a ship through the use of sand and water brought from the monastery,43 the healing of a couple’s son,44 and, after an initial conclusion, a final miracle, the story of Abraham’s intervention with a peasant stealing lemons.45 The final two pages of the Panegyric praise the saint and the miracles worked through him. Before the final blessing, the author notes one final sign that “occurred through the saint on the day of his holy commemoration in the monastery” that they saw with their own eyes; namely, the holy altar shedding tears “so that the water that flowed from the pillar

37

Panegyric VIII.1–IX.7. Two missing leaves (pages 23–26) separate the account of the foundation at Farshut from the ending of the first surviving miracle story. Ten missing folios (pages 29–48) follow the story of the man with dropsy. The account resumes with Abraham’s revelation of his impending death (X.1). 39 Panegyric XV.2; cf., David Frankfurter, “Syncretism and the Holy Man in Late Antique Egypt,” JECS 11, 3 (2003): 380. 40 Panegyric XV.3. 41 Panegyric XVI.2–4. The end is missing. 42 Panegyric XVIII.1–6. 43 Panegyric XIX.2–6; cf., Frankfurter, “Syncretism and the Holy Man,” 359. 44 Panegyric XX.1–2. The exact nature of the miracle is lost as only half a page from the middle of the episode survives. 45 Panegyric XXI.1–3 (initial conclusion); XXI.4–XXII.4 (miracle story). 38

C. The Individual Sources and Their Development

41

that wept ran onto the ground like a flood.”46 The eye-witness nature of the final miracle story serves to lend credence to the earlier accounts. The Synaxarion includes three miracle stories, all occurring prior to Abraham’s death. These include the account of the man and his wife who sought to preserve their own bread while eating at the monastery during a famine, the multiplication of the monastery’s bread supplies during a famine, and the destruction of crop destroying worms.47 Interestingly the first miracle appears in the Panegyric as a postmortem event, indicative of the fluidity of the story telling process. The other two miracles, unique to the Synaxarion, may well exist on the lost leaves of the Panegyric or On Abraham.

C. The Individual Sources and Their Development It is striking that with the exception of the later Copto-Arabic Synaxarion, the sources all point to the conflict between the archimandrite Abraham and the Byzantine emperor Justinian I as the defining moment of Abraham’s life and therefore the impetus for his inclusion among the saints and their memory within the Coptic tradition. Among the remaining four sources that mention Abraham, the two that refer to him within the context of the author’s panegyric of another saint, the Panegyric on Apollo and the Panegyric on Manasse, refer only to this episode. The Panegyric on Apollo, in fact, mentions Abraham only once during a general account of the affair so as to explain Apollo’s departure from the Pachomian monastery of Pbow. For when the holy brethren saw that their faithful shepherd, the latter-day patriarch, Abraham, who was archimandrite at the time, was taken away from them, and that the transgressor whom the emperor had sent was appointed to stand in the place of this man, all who loved godliness acted with great zeal and chose to leave the dwelling-place of their fathers lest they should make themselves strangers to the God of their fathers. The affair extended to distant paths, O my beloved, but by going through the thorns they find the lily. For our holy father Apa Apollo is in truth a lily who uprooted himself from among the thorns of the heretics. And thus he departed from Pbow at that time…48

The Panegyric of Manasse, on the other hand, as we have seen above, includes an extensive digression or excerpt on the conflict between Abraham and Justinian I. Neither source offers any information on his life before or after the affair with Justinian. One suspects, in fact, that the crisis involving Abraham’s banishment from Pbow formed the kernel around which the memory of Abraham took 46

Panegyric XXIII.2. Copto-Arabic Synaxarion 686–88; Frankfurter, “Syncretism and the Holy Man,” 372. 48 Translation from Kuhn, A Panegyric on Apollo, CSCO 395.13.21–31. 47

42

Chapter 2: Literary and Historical Analysis

shape. Apart from the crisis, Abraham, like the other later Pachomian archimandrites, would likely have been forgotten. The Pachomian dossier focuses rather on the formative years of the movement. Various letters, lives, instructions, chronicles, and rules, introduce the reader to the movement’s founding fathers, the first four leaders of the federation: Pachomius, Petronius, Theodore, and Horsiesius. These sources function as foundational documents, guides to the ascetic life for later generations.49 With the guides in place, however, little need was felt to record the federation’s subsequent history.50 Evidence surfaces infrequently in contexts where the federation is of secondary interest at best. Of the five later archimandrites whose names we know, for example, Victor, Paphnutius, Martyrius, Pshintbahse, and Abraham, only the accounts of Victor and Abraham offer much more than the name.51 And in both of these cases, they are linked to specific events in the later life of the community: Victor to the construction of the community’s great fifth century basilica at Pbow and the Council of Ephesus (431),52 and Abraham to the federation’s disastrous loss to the Chalcedonian faction in the sixth century. Interest in the Pachomian federation itself remains minimal in these sources. One hears little about later developments, organizational structure, or day to day operations. The later sources focus rather on larger questions of orthodoxy and heresy in which the archimandrite figures. His mention or fame resulted from the event or circumstance. The religious memory thus began as a

49

On the book as spiritual guide, see Richard Valantasis, Spiritual Guides of the Third Century: A Semiotic Study of the Guide-Disciple Relationship in Christianity, Neoplatonism, Hermetism, and Gnosticism, HDR 17 (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991), 35-61. 50 James E. Goehring, “New Frontiers in Pachomian Studies,” in The Roots of Egyptian Christianity, ed. Birger A. Pearson and James E. Goehring (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986), 236–57; reprinted with addendum in idem, Ascetics, Society, and the Desert, 162–86; idem, “The Life and Miracles of Abraham of Farshut,” 49-50. 51 Paphnutius appears briefly in On Macarius of Tkôw (Johnson, A Panegyric on Macarius) and the History of Dioscorus (F. N. Nau, “Histoire de Dioscore, patriarche d’Alexandrie, écrite par son disciple Théopiste,” JA, série 10, no. 1 (1903): 5–108, 241–310). Martyrius is mentioned as the archimandrite who completes the great fifth century basilica after Victor’s death (Arn. van Lantschoot, “Allocution de Timothée d’Alexandrie prononcée a l’occasion de la dédicace de l’église de Pachome a Pboou.” Le Muséon 47 (1934): 13–56), and Pshintbahse (and/or Sebastian; see above, pg. 36) appears as Abraham’s predecessor only in the Panegyric (III.5 and IV.3) and the Excerpt (I.2). 52 The Coptic sources report that Victor also accompanied Cyril of Alexandria and Shenoute of Atripe to the Council of Ephesus in 431 C.E. For Victor, see, Wilhelm Kraatz, Koptische Akten zum ephesiniaschen Konzil vom Jahre 431 (Leipzig: J. C. Henrichs, 1904); van Lantschoot, “Allocution de Timothée d’Alexandrie;” Johnson, A Panegyric on Macarius, CSCO 415.78.9, 83.9 and 416.60.6, 64.4; also van Cauwenbergh, Études sur les moines d’Égypte, 153–54; Coquin, “Victor of Tabennese,” in The Coptic Encyclopedia, 7.2308; Caroline T. Schroeder, Monastic Bodies: Discipline and Salvation in Shenoute of Atripe (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 2007), 122–24.

C. The Individual Sources and Their Development

43

memory built on the event, which over time enhanced the memory of the archimandrite, generating an account of his life. In the case of Abraham, memory of the federation’s loss to the Coptic orthodox tradition through its acceptance of Chalcedon, forced or otherwise, generated an enhanced account of the events that participated fully in the emerging totalizing discourse of Coptic Christianity.53 Born of the vicissitudes of the Council of Chalcedon and its aftermath, the discourse fashioned sharp divisions between the orthodoxy of Coptic Christianity and the errant ideology of its Byzantine and Latin opponents. Accounts and stories developed so as to enhance the division, boosting the sanctity of the Coptic saints and vilifying their Chalcedonian antagonists.54 The Latin Pope Leo I and his hated tome, and the Byzantine emperor Justinian I generate particular animosity. The accounts of Abraham participate fully in this ideological vendetta. Justinian becomes the “wicked emperor” whose “heart was corrupt and his mind went astray raging in the madness of the heretics.”55 “Aroused by Satan,” he is drawn into the conflict by Abraham’s accusers and emerges as the saint’s primary antagonist. The battle becomes personal. Justinian “ground his teeth and shook his head”56 when he learned of Abraham’s arrival in Constantinople. He interviews Abraham directly, and in the end “gave into his madness” and removed Abraham as archimandrite of the Pachomian federation. Justinian serves as the perfect foil in the drama, encapsulating in a single figure Coptic opposition to the political and religious ideology of Chalcedon.57 The centrality of this plot and the detail involved in the three White Monastery texts (Panegyric, On Abraham, and Excerpt) argue that the 53

The orthodox Coptic construction of history contained in such texts offers a fascinating counterview to the Byzantine construction of the same history, illuminating thereby the inner cultural psychology of the Copts towards the Byzantine church and empire. For an interesting example, see Arietta Papaconstantinou, “Historiography, Hagiography, and the Making of the Coptic ‘Church of the Martyrs’ in Early Islamic Egypt,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 60 (2006): 65–86. 54 Tito Orlandi, “Literature, Coptic,” in The Coptic Encyclopedia, 5.1454–55. 55 Excerpt II.3 and Panegyric V.1. 56 Excerpt V.1 and VI.5. 57 The pattern is commonplace in the Coptic literature of this period. In the Panegyric on Apollo, the author, after noting “the pit of the abyss” that opened in the Apocalypse of John, declares that “this very pit of the abyss was opened again in the days of the Emperor Justinian” (Kuhn, A Panegyric on Apollo, CSCO 395.10–11; translation by Kuhn). In the Life of Samuel of Kalamun, he appears as “the false-king of the Romans” (Anthony Alcock, The Life of Kalamon by Isaac the Presbyter (Warminster, England: Aris & Phillips, 1983), 83.29). In the Coptic Life of Daniel, he is the “impious emperor” who “promulgated the impious Tome of Leo” (Tim Vivian, Witness to Holiness: Abba Daniel of Sectis (Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 2008), 115). See David W. Johnson, “Anti-Chalcedonian Polemics in Coptic Texts, 451–641,” in The Roots of Egyptian Christianity, ed. Birger A. Pearson and James E. Goehring (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986), 216–34.

44

Chapter 2: Literary and Historical Analysis

events on which they are based formed the core around which the memory of Abraham developed.58 The Panegyric on Abraham of Farshut, the only text complete enough to permit analysis in this regard, well illustrates the process. The panegyric totals 87 pages, many of which are lost. The account of Abraham’s conflict with Justinian I through the foundation of his monastery at Farshut occupies pages 11–22 or so (pages 22–26 are missing), which I argue represents the core around which the rest of the panegyric was built. It is preceded by a general introduction (pages 1–5, of which 1–4 are missing) and an account of Abraham’s early years (pages 6– 10), and followed by miracles linked to Abraham during his life (pages 26?–48; 23–26 and 29–48 are missing), an expanded account of Abraham’s death (pages 49–58 or so; pages 59–64 are missing), and miracles effected by Abraham after his death (pages 65–87). The account of Abraham’s early years appears secondary. While the author seeks to add credence by claiming to be a relative of similar age who attended school with Abraham, the story so parallels the Life of Antony as to leave little doubt that it served as a model. Abraham’s parents, like those of Antony, were prominent people in the local community. His call to the ascetic life, again like Antony’s, was interrupted when both his parents died, leaving him and his sister orphans. He sought to encourage his sister in the ascetic life, and when she refused, he, like Antony, left everything behind and entered the monastic life.59 The differences from the Life of Antony reflect the author’s own creative influence. While Antony, for example, eschewed his education, Abraham excelled in his. The author here models Abraham on the Old Testament figures of Samuel, who “increased greatly in good favor before God and men,” and Moses, who “was instructed in all the wisdom of Egypt.” In addition, he uses the account both to connect himself more closely with Abraham as a fellow student and to express his humility by declaring his insignificant and slothful efforts in comparison to those of the saint. The secondary nature of the story appears to be confirmed when the author turns to the account of Abraham’s conflict with Justinian. He connects the beginning of the affair with Abraham’s elevation as archimandrite and links his appointment to the office with the death of his predecessor Pshintbahse. The text reads as follows: “And it happened when the saint Apa Pshintbahse completed his span of life in good old age, that he fell 58

Note too that outside of the accounts linked to the liturgical celebration of Abraham (Panegyric and Synaxarion), his name appears only in connection with the conflict with Justinian (Excerpt and Panegyric on Apollo). On Abraham is too fragmentary to judge in this regard. 59 Antony, of course, is successful in placing his very young sister (EUDFXWDYWKa DMGHOIKCa) in the charge of trusted virgins (Vita Antonii 2.1). There is no indication of Abraham’s sister’s age.

C. The Individual Sources and Their Development

45

asleep in blessedness and they buried him with honor with his fathers who existed before him. And they appointed another to his place whose name was Apa Abraham. This one was also a wonder in his life and mighty in his virtues.” The author of the Panegyric introduces Abraham to the reader here as though for the first time, as though the account of his early years that immediately proceeds it in the text did not exist. One suspects in fact that the literary seam inadvertently reveals the hand of the author expanding the account of the conflict with Justinian into a life of the saint. The pre- and postmortem miracle stories that follow the account of Abraham’s conflict with Justinian represent natural accoutrements to a hagiographic life. Their addition as part of the expansion into a life would be expected. The extended account of Abraham’s death, however, bears the hallmark of a particular interest or concern of the author.60 He turns to the account of Abraham’s death by employing the common trope of the revelation of the saint’s impending death to the saint himself, but expands the revelation to include instructions to Abraham from the “holy fathers of the federation, Apa Pachomius and Apa Petronius and Apa Shenoute of the monastery of Atripe.” After informing Abraham that he has six months yet to live, they charge him: “Bid your children to keep the commandments and laws that we [Pachomius, Petronius, and Shenoute] have received from the Lord and given to everyone who desires to live piously” (X.5). This opens the door for the author to expand the account of Abraham’s final six months through the inclusion of three speeches to the assembled brothers of the monastery to keep the commandments. The first speech occurs after an initial announcement of the revelation of his impending death to Theophilus and John. He began to speak with them and tell them the commandments (HQWROK) and laws (QRPRV) of the Lord. And he said to them, “Listen to me, that I might tell you what will happen to you when you abandon the commandments (HQWROK) and laws (QRPRV) of the Lord that our fathers laid down for us. They will be a testimony against you on the day of judgment, so that I may be innocent of your blood. Therefore I bear witness to you today in heaven and earth that if you turn away from them, the Lord will turn away from you, and you will be lacking and in need of everything, both food and clothing. And even if the whole world were flourishing, you yourselves would be in need because you abandoned the laws (QRPRV) of the Lord that our holy fathers gave us, namely Apa Pachom and Apa Shenoute. And again, if you stand fast in them, observe them, and keep them, the Lord God will pour forth his blessing upon you and bless you, and you will flourish in everything that exists for you, both in food and in clothing. And even if the whole world were in distress and need, you yourselves would be flourishing and blessed. 61

60 James E. Goehring, “Abraham of Farshut’s Dying Words: Reflections on a Literary Motif in the Ascetic Literature of Early Christian Egypt,” Coptica 8 (2009): 21–39. 61 Panegyric XI.1–4.

46

Chapter 2: Literary and Historical Analysis

A little over a page later, he gathers them again and addresses them concerning the rules. and once again he spoke with them about the teachings of the Lord and his commandments (HQWROK). And he said to them, “Pay attention, brothers, and guard your hearts, so that the enemy might not sow these evil weeds among you, which will produce hatred towards one another, enmity, wroth and anger, envy and strife, plotting, slander, indulgence, derision, covetousness, love of one’s own ease, and all the other evils which our holy fathers wrote down so as to remove them from among us. For one of the saints also said, ‘How is it that those whose bodies have dried up through ascesis and whose mouths stink from hunger and thirst have God as an enemy and have gained nothing because of the hatred in their heart towards their neighbors?’ Therefore, brothers, purify your hearts from these kinds of evil so that the Lord may be with you as he was with all our fathers, and rescue you from every trap of the adversary, the devil, and save you into his kingdom in heaven.”62

And again on the next page: They came to him again, their tears streaming down their cheeks. He began to speak with them again about the fear of the Lord, and said to them: “Behold, this is the third time that I am proclaiming to you the commandments (HQWROK) and laws (QRPRV) of the Lord. Therefore the Lord is my witness that I am innocent of your blood. But I bear witness to you and adjure you before God not to permit these evil weeds to sprout among you, those which we already recited for you, and we will recite them now again: arrogance, which is the abomination of God, hardness of heart, disobedience, boastfulness, love of money, idle speech, blasphemy, lying, impurity, and licentiousness, undoing all the commandments (HQWROK). I bear witness to you that if you grow in these things and these things grow in you destructively, you will perish, and you will be wanting and very distressed. If on the other hand, you perform all the commandments (HQWROK) and laws (QRPRV) of the Lord, you will flourish and abound in all things.” 63

The repetitious instructions by the saint to keep the commandments and laws that God gave to the federation’s founding fathers serve, of course, as instructions to the latter day readers and hearers of the panegyric. The author has crafted the account of Abraham’s death so as to encourage present day adherence to the monastic rules. The emphasis suggests a special concern and may perhaps point to problems being experienced by the community. It is interesting in this regard to note that the Panegyric ends with an account of the miracle of the weeping altar, asserting that “the water that flowed from the pillars that wept ran onto the ground like a flood, signifying the destruction that is coming upon us, that will be as great as the destruction that occurred in the whole land of Egypt and Ethiopia” (XXIII.2). The conclusion suggests another impending catastrophe, and one has to believe that the author has used the story of Abraham to prepare the community for just such an event. Whether a literary device designed to encourage adherence to the rule or tied to real events, perhaps the Persian 62 63

Panegyric XII.4–6. Panegyric XIII.1–4.

C. The Individual Sources and Their Development

47

occupation of Egypt or the impending rise of Islam,64 the author has cleverly fashioned the story of Abraham into a call to ascetic arms. The author of the Panegyric participates as well in the merging of the two major independent Upper Egyptian coenobitic federations, those of Pachomius and Shenoute, into a unified memory of the institutions’ founding fathers.65 He enrolls Shenoute alongside Pachomius, Petronius, and Horsiesius in the lists he generates of those from whom the commandments and laws have been received.66 The revelation to Abraham of his impending death, for example, is delivered by “the holy fathers of the federation, Apa Pachomius and Apa Petronius and Apa Shenoute.”67 He likewise warns the monks from abandoning the “laws of the Lord that our holy fathers gave us, namely Apa Pachomius and Apa Shenoute,”68 and towards the end of the panegyric praises Abraham in part by linking him to the founding fathers. You know, oh my beloved, that this righteous one [Abraham] is a great one among the saints and an elect and perfect one among the monks, like our ancient fathers and forefathers, that is, Apa Pachomius and Apa Shenoute and Apa Petronius and Apa Horsiesius, the fathers of the world.69

The text suggests that at this time, after the demise of the Pachomian federation during the middle of the sixth century, the federation of Shenoute filled its place in the history of Upper Egyptian Coptic orthodox coenobitic monasticism, and in the process, the founding fathers of the Pachomian federation were incorporated alongside Shenoute in the memory of the origins of the coenobitic institution. To what degree the literary memory re64 H. Munier, “Le Monastère de Saint Abraham à Farshout,” BSRAA 30 (1936): 30; it is important to note, however, that the archeology of various monastic sites indicates that Coptic monasticism flourished in the seventh to ninth centuries under Islam. See Darlene Lynn Brooks-Hedstrom, “’Your Cell Will Teach You All Things’: The Relationship Between Monastic Practice and the Archetectural Design of the Cell in Coptic Monasticism, 400–1000” (Ph.D. diss., Miami University of Ohio, 2001), 158 and 216. See also above, page 13 n. 16. 65 Goehring, “Remembering Abraham of Farshut,” 20–25; idem, “Pachomius and the White Monastery,” in Christianity and Monasticism in Upper Egypt, Vol. 1, Akhmim and Sohag, ed. Gawdat Gabra and Hany N. Takla (Cairo and New York: The American University in Cairo Press, 2008), 47–57. 66 Theodore is interestingly left out of these lists, though he does appear with Pachomius and Horsiesius in a list of those that Abraham studied when he first entered the monastery of Pbow (Panegyric III.6). Petronius, on the other hand, appears to play a more important role in spite of his very brief tenure as Pachomius’ successor. The apparent dedication of a church to Petronius in Aphrodito in the latter part of the sixth century supports his continuing significance in the region of Panopolis. See the discussion of P.CairMasp. 1.67021 by Jean Gascou, Les archives de Dioscore d’Aphrodité cent ans après leur découverte: histoire et culture dans l’Égypte byzantine, ed. Jean-Luc Fournet (Paris: De Boccard, 2008), 275–82. 67 Panegyric X.2. 68 Panegyric XI.2. 69 Panegyric XXI.2.

48

Chapter 2: Literary and Historical Analysis

flects an actual merging of the two traditions remains unclear. It is worth noting that the tradition portrays Abraham, the former archimandrite of the Pachomian monastery of Pbow using a copy of the rules of Shenoute which he made during his sojourn at the White Monastery as the governing rule of his new monastery at Farshut.70 The account fosters the notion of a shared rule, even though the Synaxarion identifies the rules copied by Abraham as those of Shenoute.71 While the hand of the author is clearly visible in the organization, structure, and ideology of the Panegyric on Abraham, too little survives of On Abraham on which to base such an analysis. The surviving pages all derive from the account of the conflict with Abraham and could conceivably even be an excerpt within a text on another saint, similar to the Excerpt contained in the Panegyric on Manasse. The author of the Copto-Arabic Synaxarion, on the other hand, who appears to rely on traditions found in the panegyrics, covers the affair with Justinian only briefly by way of introducing Abraham’s later monastic foundation and career in Farshut. The struggle with Justinian in Constantinople has in fact fallen away between mention of Abraham’s initial entry into the monastic life at the monastery of Pachomius and a quotation from the letter he wrote to the monks announcing Justinian’s ultimatum and his removal as archimandrite.72 The letter serves to introduce the events that followed in Upper Egypt; namely, the arrival of Pancharis as Abraham’s replacement and the dispersal of the monks to other monasteries, which the author then quickly narrows down to Abraham.73 The Synaxarion offers unique information at this point, reporting that Abraham left for the monastery of Shenoute at Atripe, where 70

Copto-Arabic Synaxarion (Basset, Le synazaire arabe jacobite, 684); cf., White Monastery codex GC [21].i.23-27, from the Panegyric, which may refer to the copy that Abraham made. 71 While the Synaxarion indicates that Abraham copied to the rules of Shenoute, I have wondered whether this refers to some form of the Canons or simply reflects an anachronistic conflation from a later era when Shenoute and Pachomius were understood as the authors of the rule. Cf., the Panegyric on Apollo (Kuhn, a Panegyric on Apollo, CSCO 394.36.14–22 [text] and 395.27.25–32 [translation]). 72 Copto-Arabic Synaxarion 684. The Synaxarion naturally begins with reference to Abraham’s death in Farshut at the Monastery of Hadda or Jadda (René-Georges Coquin and Maurice Martin, “Farshut,” in The Coptic Encyclopedia, 4.1092–93; É. Amélineau, La Geographie de l’Égypte à l’epoche copte (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1893; reprint ed., Osnabrück: Otto Zeller, 1973), 178. The letter, written after the events in Constantinople had concluded, appears as well in the Excerpt contained in the Panegyric on Manasse (X.1). 73 The Synaxarian (684) refers to Bankares, who was sent by Justinian to the monastery of Pbow with soldiers. Paul van Cauwenbergh understood Bankares as an imperial officer sent to expel the non-Chalcedonian monks from Pbow (Études sur les moines d’Égypte, 155). He is, however, to be equated with the accuser Pancharis, mentioned in the Excerpt on Abraham (II.4; III.1; X.2). The soldiers mentioned in the Synaxarion should be understood as the force sent to install Pancharis as the new pro-Chalcedonian archimandrite.

C. The Individual Sources and Their Development

49

he copied the rules, sealed them in a jar, and sent them to the monastery of Moses for safe keeping.74 A subsequent revelation led to his founding of a monastery and affiliated women’s cloister in Farshut, for which he retrieved the copy of the rules he had deposited at the monastery of Moses. The author further reports in passing Abraham’s ordination by the bishop, his frequent trips, his daily struggle with the flesh, and his death in old age.75 The author of the Synaxarion incorporates entertaining elaborations and miracle stories into his account. When Abraham sends the sealed jar containing the rules to the monastery of Moses, for example, we are told that he included a letter informing the monks that the jar contained beneficial seeds. When the monks later ran short of food, they, thinking the jar contained actual seeds, opened it. The monks were pleased to find the copy of the rules of Shenoute, which they preceded to copy. When Abraham later retrieved the jar and found that it had been opened, he unbraided the monks, leading the abbot to beg for forgiveness.76 The author likewise includes three miracle stories connected to Abraham: the revealing of a man and his wife who hid their own wheat during a famine and went to the monastery to receive food; the multiplication of loaves during the famine; and the destruction of a pestilence of worms.77 Only the first miracle story finds a parallel in the surviving pages of the panegyrics, and interestingly there it occurs as a postmortem miracle. The author of the Synaxarion locates all of the miracles during Abraham’s lifetime. While one cannot know why the author of the Synaxarion so limited the account of Abraham’s conflict with Justinian, around which the earlier panegyric tradition had been built, one suspects that the focus had simply shifted to Abraham’s role in the later existing monastery of Farshut. As the Pachomian federation disappeared from the plane of Coptic-orthodox history after its loss to the Chalcedonian elements in the sixth century and Shenoute’s monastic organization filled the void, the tradition developed so as to link Abraham, the ex-Pachomian archimandrite, with Shenoute, whose rules he copied to serve as the basis for his own communities in Farshut. Over time, as his tenure in Farshut lengthened and memories and miracles attached to it, the later affiliation became primary in the memory of the Coptic church. Abraham of Pbow became Abraham of Farshut.

74 Whether or not this information existed on now lost pages in the panegyrics cannot be known. As noted below, it works to transition Abraham and his monastery from Pachomius to Shenoute. 75 Copto-Arabic Synaxarion (Basset, Le synaxaire arabe jacobite, 685–88). 76 Ibid., 685–86. 77 Ibid., 686–88.

50

Chapter 2: Literary and Historical Analysis

D. Hagiography and History The historical claims of hagiographic sources have long been suspect and rightly so. Written as paeans in remembrance of a saint, historical memory conforms itself with and in service of the author’s ideological agenda. History of the events described is shaped by the later concerns of the author’s time and his religious environment. As such, scholars today tread lightly in the use of these sources in the reconstruction of the history they describe, preferring to see and use them as evidence of the belief, environment, and situation at the time of their composition.78 While they certainly offer more direct evidence in this regard, in many cases hagiographical sources remain our main, if not only, witness to particular figures and/or events in history. As such, their use in the reconstruction of ancient history remains unavoidable. The difficulty lies, of course, in the identification and extraction of the historical evidence, if indeed it exists at all as such, from the hagiographical setting into which it has been so thoroughly embedded. While the methodologies employed to accomplish this task have become more sophisticated over the years, the conclusions they produce inevitably remain tentative and rarely go unchallenged.79 The problem involves, in fact, the very identification and separation of the categories. As Evelyne Patlagean suggested in 1968, there is in fact “not so much a definite separation between historical and hagiographical works as the possibility of a common classification along a continuum at either end of which, at almost theoretical extremes, are the work of pure hagiography and that of pure history.”80 While the hypothetical “pure” forms may be easily recognizable, real sources prove more problematic. The effort to unravel history from hagiography remains fraught with danger, a task that

78

Alison Goodard Elliott, Roads to Paradise: Reading the Lives of the Early Saints (Hanover and London: Brown University Press, 1987); Averil Cameron, Christianity and the Rhetoric of the Empire: The Development of Christian Discourse, Sather Classical Lectures 55 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991), esp. 89–119; for an excellent illuminating example with respect to the Coptic church of the martyrs, see Papaconstantinou, “Historiography, Hagiography, and the Making of the Coptic ‘Church of the Martyrs,’ 65–86. 79 For a good example of such discussions, see the three articles by David Frankfurter (“Hagiography and the Reconstruction of Local Religion in Late Antique Egypt: Memories, Inventions, and Landscapes,” 13–37), Jacques van der Vliet (“Bringing Home the Homeless: Landscape and History in Egyptian Hagiography,” 39–55), and Peter van Minnen (“Saving History? Egyptian Hagiography in its Space and Time,” 57–91) in The Encroaching Desert: Egyptian Hagiography and the Medieval West, ed. Jitse Dijkstra and Mathilde van Dijk (Leiden: Brill, 2006). 80 Evelyne Patlagean, “Ancient Byzantine Hagiography and Social History,” in Saints and their Cults: Sociology, Folklore, and History, ed. Stephen Wilson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), 109.

D. Hagiography and History

51

forces the interpreter to chart a methodological course between Skylla and Charybdis, eddies and rocks on which many a conclusion has foundered. The accounts of Abraham presented in the current volume represent the problem well. Apart from these sources, little to nothing is known of the sixth century Pachomian archimandrite Abraham, the impact of the division fostered by the Council of Chalcedon within the Pachomian monastic federation, and the cause of the federation’s disappearance from textual and archeological sources after the sixth century.81 In each of the individual accounts of Abraham, this information is embedded in a constructed history designed to further the author’s ideological agenda. The various antemortem and postmortem miracle stories attributed to Abraham, as well as the authors’ forceful participation in the era’s ideological caricature of Justinian I, offer insight into the piety of the time and the then current production of a totalizing non-Chalcedonian discourse.82 The texts serve as valuable witnesses in this regard to the period of their composition and its particular construction of reality. At the same time, however, the authors know and build upon a memory of events that catastrophically altered the structure of Upper Egyptian coenobitic monasticism and forced its subsequent reordering in the memory of Coptic Christianity. While the events have been dramatically shaped and reshaped by the authors to conform to and support the new discourse, the existence of actual events behind their current ideologically embedded form cannot be ignored. Something happened that changed the configuration of monasticism in Upper Egypt in the sixth century. Our only access to that something lies in and through the panegyrics on Abraham of Farshut. When shorn of the pious language and clear ideological elaborations, the basic elements in the story outlined above are imaginable within the general context of the Chalcedonian policies of Justinian I,83 and in particular in connection with the more focused efforts to repress nonChalcedonian elements in Egypt between 536-540 C.E.84 Justinian was not averse to using force in his efforts to establish religious unity, and his leg81

See below, n. 136. So with respect to the Syrian orthodox church, Volker Menze (Justinian and the Making of the Syrian Orthodox Church, 6) notes that “non-Chalcedonians shaped the past according to the needs and the framework of their sixth century present.” 83 W. H. C. Frend, The Rise of the Monophysite Movement: Chapters in the History of the Church in the Fifth and Sixth Centuries (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972), 255–95; John W. Barker, Justinian and the Later Roman Empire (Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 1966), 100–12; Pauline Allen, “The Definition and Enforcement of Orthodoxy,” in the Cambridge Ancient History, vol. XIV, Late Antiquity: Empire and Successors A.D. 425–600, ed. Averil Cameron, Bryan Ward-Perkins, and Michael Whitby (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 820–28. 84 Edward R. Hardy, “The Egyptian Policy of Justinian,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 22 (1968): 32–36. 82

52

Chapter 2: Literary and Historical Analysis

islative efforts to shape and control the monastic life underscore his awareness of the significant role it played as an institution in religious matters.85 His first novel or law governing the monastic life, in fact, issued in 535 C.E., established the coenobitic life as the expected norm.86 One can well imagine in this context that control of the well known and powerful Pachomian federation looked especially appealing.87 Its geographical reach throughout Egypt from the Thebaid where it began to the important monastery of Metanoia in Alexandria, from which three fifth to sixth century Chalcedonian patriarchs were drawn,88 would have underscored its importance. The opportunity to bring the federation more fully into the Chalcedonian orbit would immediately be seen in terms of its broader implications; namely, as a means to influence the monastic movement in Egypt more generally and through it all of Christian Egypt. Though it is perhaps a bit more difficult, one can likewise imagine the summons of the movement’s archimandrite to the imperial city as part of an effort to effect the desired ideological change within the federation and gain more complete control. Justinian often enough summoned recalcitrant bishops to Constantinople, demanding their allegiance to his religious policies. Failure resulted in their being deposed and exiled.89 The Egyptian Archbishop Theodosius, who appears in the panegyrics on Abraham, was so summoned in 537 C.E. and given the choice between accepting Chalcedon or removal from his see.90 He died in exile. Evidence likewise indicates that archimandrites from the Upper Egyptian coenobitic federations of Pachomius and Shenoute were well known in ecclesiastical circles and when required could travel overseas. Shenoute of Atripe and Victor of 85 Corpus juris civilis, novel 5 (see also novels 67 and 79); Charles A. Frazee, “Late Roman and Byzantine Legislation on the Monastic Life from the Fourth to the Eighth Centuries,” CH 51 (1982): 271–76. 86 Ibid., 272–73. 87 Goehring, “Chalcedonian Power Politics,” 17 (idem, Ascetics, Society, and the Desert, 257). 88 The three patriarchs were Timothy II Salofaciolus (460–75 and 477–82 C.E.), John I Talaia (482), and Paul of Tabenna (537–40). Goehring, “Chalcedonian Power Politics,” 17– 18 (idem, Ascetics, Society, and the Desert, 257–60); idem, “Remembering Abraham of Farshut,” 16. 89 Allen, “The Definition and Enforcement of Orthodoxy,” 80. On Justinian’s use of force in Egypt, see Leslie S. B. MacCoull, “‘When Justinian Was Upsetting the World’: A Note on Soldiers and Religious Coercion in Sixth Century Egypt,” in Peace and War in Byzantium: Essays in Honor of George T. Dennis, S.J., ed. Timothy S. Miller and John Nesbitt (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1995), 106–13. On her reference to the Scythae Justiniani being quartered at the monastery of Pbow, drawn from P. Grenf. II 95 (107 n. 5), however, see Jean Gascou, “P. Fouad 87: Les Monastéres pachômiens et l’état byzantine,” BIFAO 76 (1976): 172–74; R. Rémondon, “Soldats de Byzance d’après un papyrus trouve à Edfou,” RP 1 (1961): 75. 90 Frend, The Rise of the Monophysite Movement, 274; Hardy, “The Egyptian Policy of Justinian,” 33.

D. Hagiography and History

53

Pbow, for example, accompanied their archbishop Cyril to the Council of Ephesus in 431 C.E.91 While the portrayal of Abraham’s summons parallels better that of Theodosius in that both were ordered to Constantinople, the fact of Shenoute and Victor’s journey to Ephesus lends support to the knowledge and perceived importance of their respective federations both within and beyond Egypt. Support for the account might also be claimed from the fact that the panegyrics’ authors possess some detailed knowledge about the imperial court and the various players in it. The grand chamberlain (praepositus sacri cubicula) Narses and the imperial secretary (referendarios) Peter, for example, appear with their appropriate titles, and the former, like the empress, is aligned with the non-Chalcedonian cause in keeping with the tradition evident in other sources.92 While such evidence adds an aura of historical accuracy to the account, however, it hardly warrants confidence with respect to the story’s general historicity. Such facts are of the kind a literate person might be imagined to know, particularly one interested in the hagiographical subject matter at hand. Furthermore, the very use of such material could well be literary, designed precisely to create an aura of history so as to better legitimate in the reader’s mind the ideological claims of the discourse. The fact that the basic elements of the story are imaginable as history tells us in the end nothing more or less than that the authors were good story tellers, for one can well imagine their fabrication under the influence of the emerging non-Chalcedonian discourse of the mid- to late sixth century. 93 The events offer a riveting story of the struggle between the holy Apa Abraham and the forces of evil aligned against him and embodied in the

91

For Shenoute: Stephen Emmel, Shenoute’s Literary Corpus, §2.1 (pg. 8); idem, “Shenoute the Monk: The Early Monastic Career of Shenoute the Archimandrite.” In Il Monachesimo tra eredità e aperture: Atti del simposio “Testi e temi nella tradizione del monachesimo cristiano” per il 50o anniversario dell’Instituto monastico di Sant’Anselmo, Roma, 28 maggio—1o giugno 2002, ed. Maciej Bielawski and Daniël Hombergen, SA 140 (Rome: Pontificio Ateneo S. Anselmo, 2004), 152; see also Cyril of Alexandria, Ep. 107–9; and the Coptic Life of Shenoute §§17–21. For Victor: Cyril of Alexandria, Ep. 107–109; Kraatz, Koptische Akten; van Lantschoot, “Allocution de Timothée d’Alexandrie, 13–56; Johnson, A Panegyric on Macarius, CSCO 415.78.9, 83.9; 416.60.6, 64.4; Schroeder, Monastic Bodies, 122–24. 92 On Abraham IV.2 (Narses) and I.2 (Peter). On Narses, see Walter Emil Kaegi, “Narses,” in The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, 3 vols., ed. Alexander P. Kazhdan et al. New York-Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991, 2.1438; for Peter, see J. R. Martindale, The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, 3 vols. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 3b.1002. 93 Johnson, “Anti-Chalcedonian Polemics,” 216-34 (especially 223); Papaconstantinou (“Historiography,” 79), in describing the Coptic church of the martyrs, notes that “the century and a half following the [Arab] conquest was a period of active mythmaking.”

54

Chapter 2: Literary and Historical Analysis

figure of the emperor Justinian I.94 While other players emerge in support of these two figures (John the Little, the archbishop Theodosius, the empress, and the imperial secretary Narses in support of Abraham; Pancharis and the other accusers, the duke of Antinoë, the archbishop of Constantinople, and the imperial secretary Peter in support of Justinian), they function in the drama as but a supporting cast arrayed behind the two primary antagonists. The starkness of the divide between good and evil evinces apocalyptic overtones. The literary construction of the story is readily apparent. Hagiographers conform their heroes to a pattern, borrowing and repeating common motifs, multiplying miracles stories, amplifying elements like the saint’s suffering, and sharpening the dualism between good and evil.95 The account of Abraham’s struggle against Justinian is no exception. The vitriol directed against the emperor and Pope Leo’s “hated tome” became such standard fare in the literature of this period that one is hard pressed to unravel the account of an individual saint from the common patterns to which it has been made to conform. The Coptic and Ethiopic versions of the Life of Daniel of Scetis offer an interesting case in point. Accounts of Daniel, which survive in numerous textual traditions, appear to have their origin in a collection of unconnected episodes (paterikon), of which the Greek sources offer the best example.96 The later lives or rather encomiastic traditions that arose in the Coptic and Ethiopian churches “took earlier ‘biographical’ material (sayings by and stories about the saint) and transformed it for homiletic and paraenetic purposes.”97 In the process, they incorporated an account of Daniel’s struggle against Justinian I and the hated Tome of Leo into the story. In the Coptic version, when “the impious and defiled Justinian became emperor, … he attempted to impose the accursed faith of the defiled Council of Chalcedon everywhere and scattered the beautiful flocks of Christ. He ran the orthodox bishops and archbishops off their thrones, and the impious Justinian was not satisfied with this but promulgated the impious Tome of Leo, which the impious Council of 94 A similar effort to demonize an emperor occurs in the case of Diocletian, who by being identified as an Egyptian becomes a latter-day Judas Iscariot for the Egyptian Church. Papaconstantinou, “Historiography,” 81. In a similar vein, as Susan Ashbrook Harvey notes, Abraham bar Kayli, the Chalcedonian metropolitan of Amida, becomes “the archvillian of the Syrian tradition.” Susan Ashbrook Harvey, Asceticism and Society in Crisis: John of Ephesus and the Lives of the Eastern Saints (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997), 62. 95 Elliott, Roads to Paradise, especially 1–15; Hippolyte Delehaye, The Legends of the Saints (New York: Fordham University Press, 1962), 49–85. 96 The various texts have been conveniently brought together in English translation by Vivian, Witness to Holiness; for the Greek tradition, Britt Dahlman, Saint Daniel of Sketis: A Group of Hagiographical Texts Edited with Introduction, Translation, and Commentary. AUP-SBU 10 (Uppsala: Uppsala University Library [distributor], 2007). 97 Vivian, Witness to Holiness, 97.

D. Hagiography and History

55

Chalcedon had accepted.”98 The author goes on to report that when the tome was brought to Egypt, it was taken to Scetis by the emperor’s soldiers where the monks were expected to subscribe to it. When Daniel is shown the tome, he is, of course, “filled with the grace of the Holy Spirit; he leapt forward and seized the Tome filled with every kind of sacrilege. He tore it apart and cried out to the soldiers, ‘Anathema upon the defiled Council of Chalcedon!”99 The author leaves no doubt as to his feelings about Justinian, the Council of Chalcedon, and the Tome of Leo: impious and defiled indeed! What is interesting, however, is the fact that the earlier collections of unconnected episodes include no mention of these events. They appear only in the Coptic and Ethiopian encomia. While it is possible that they were dropped from the others versions for ideological reasons, it seems more likely that the virulent discourse that emerged in Egypt in the sixth century worked to conform Daniel to a pattern of persecution designed to enhance the saint and edify the congregation.100 The story is found again in the ninth century Life of Samuel of Kalamun, including the association of the order to promulgate “the defiled tome of the impious Leo” with Justinian I, the use of soldiers to impose it on the monks of Scetis, Samuel’s anathematizing of it, and his subsequent flight.101 Justinian’s effort to enforce the Chalcedonian position on the monks of Egypt appears as well in the Panegyric on Manasse and the Panegyric on Apollo. In the former, it occurs as an extended excerpt reporting the conflict and Abraham’s removal in some detail; in the latter, it is mentioned only briefly in a more general account that sets up Apollo’s own departure from the Pachomian community.102 While the reality of the im98

Ibid., 117. Ibid., 118. 100 Scholars naturally debate the issue. Evelyn White, for example, deemed the story apocryphal and Tito Orlandi doubts its historical veracity. MacCoull and Vivian, on the other hand, award it more credence. Hugh G. Evelyn White, The Monasteries of the Wâdi ‘n Natrûn: Part II, The History of the Monasteries of Nitria and of Scetis (New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1932; reprint ed., New York: Arno Press, 1973), 247; Tito Orlandi, “Daniel of Scetis, Saint,” in The Coptic Encyclopedia, 3.692; MacCoull, “‘When Justinian Was Upsetting the World,’” 107–115; Vivian, Witness to Holiness, 97–103. 101 Alcock, The Life of Samuel of Kalamun, 9–11 (text) and 83–85 (transl); idem, “Samnj’Ưl of Qalamnjn, Saint,” in The Coptic Encyclopedia, 7.2092–93. 102 The material from the Panegyric on Manasse is edited in the present volume. For the Panegyric on Apollo, see section 10 (Kuhn, A Panegyric on Apollo, CSCO 394.16–19 (text) and 395.12–14 (transl.); the translation is included in the present volume (below, pgs. 125– 26). Another text, the Life of Moses, participates in this discourse more indirectly. Mark R. Moussa, “Abba Moses of Abydos,” (MA Thesis, The Catholic University Of America, 1998); René-Georges Coquin, “Moses of Abydos,” in The Coptic Encyclopedia, 5.1679–81; idem, “Moïse d’Abydos,” Deuxième journée d’études coptes. Strasbourg 25 mai 1984 (CBC 3; Louvain and Paris: Peeters, 1986), 1–14; see more generally, Johnson, “Anti-Chalcedonian Polemics,” 223–24. 99

56

Chapter 2: Literary and Historical Analysis

pact of Justinian’s religious policies in Egypt is surely to be accepted in some form, the shared details of the various episodes involving him, the Tome of Leo, and individual ascetic heroes suggest the creative hand of hagiographers participating in a common cause. The caricatured struggle against the evil emperor, the saint’s bold stance against Chalcedon, and his subsequent exile establish his bona fides, and in the process work to enfold its readers into the emerging non-Chalcedonian discourse of Coptic Christianity. When one turns to the various accounts of the conflict between Justinian I and Abraham, numerous elements illustrate the creative hand of authors more interested in what was “ethically rather than factually true.”103 As noted above in the discussion of the Panegyric on Abraham, a seam in the text created by a second introduction of Abraham suggests the secondary nature of the account of Abraham’s origin and early years, a supposition bolstered by the “facts” it shares in common with the Antony of Athanasius’s Life of Antony.104 The author fashions Abraham in the model of the ideal ascetic. Only then does he turn to the conflict between Abraham and Justinian, indicating that it began with a letter sent by the emperor “to the whole land of Egypt, to the bishops in the various places and the superiors of the monasteries, so that they might come to the imperial city,” which he then narrows down to a letter addressed specifically to Abraham.105 His claim of a general letter from the emperor summoning all the bishops and monastic heads of Egypt to Constantinople finds no support in other sources, including the other accounts of Abraham. Furthermore, the fact that no evidence exists indicating that the crisis impacted other monasteries in the area, such as those of Shenoute’s federation, argues against a universal letter.106 As I have suggested elsewhere, the author universalizes the summons “as part of its [the text’s] pejorative rhetoric against the emperor, drawing perhaps on the fact that Justinian I had earlier summoned the non-Chalcedonian Alexandrian patriarch Theodosius to Constantinople and forced his continuing exile there.”107 The expansion of the summons enhances the emperor’s evil nature in the story, which underscores the ethical point of the author’s ideology. In a similar fashion, the emperor’s request in the Excerpt that Abraham be brought quickly to the city not by boat but overland, a journey that takes almost three months, serves to increase for the reader both the sense of Justinian’s unbridled wickedness 103

Elliott, Roads to Paradise, 6. Panegyric IV.4; see above, page 44. 105 Panegyric V.2–3. 106 For an interesting account of the better documented fate of the Syrian monasteries, see Menze, Justinian and the Making of the Syrian Orthodox Church, ch. 3, “Monks and Monasteries,” 106–44. 107 Goehring, “Remembering Abraham of Farshut,” 11, n. 36. 104

D. Hagiography and History

57

and the saint’s sanctity expressed through the sufferings he endured.108 The inclusion of the empress’s [Theodora’s] efforts on Abraham’s behalf fit into the same mold. While her non-Chalcedonian leanings were real, by oversimplifying her portrayal in opposition to the emperor, literary accounts enhance their invective against him.109 The account of Abraham’s summons to and appearance at the court in Constantinople has in fact all the hallmarks of a literary creation. One might wonder whether the entire story was modeled on Theodosius’s summons to and exile in Constantinople, an event that widened and cemented the ecclesiastical gulf between Constantinople and non-Chalcedonian Egypt. It established the long reach of Justinian’s religious policies (and thereby of Justinian) into Egypt and branded the emperor in the mind of Theodosius’s supporters as the evil king. One is left, however, in situations such as these, with only speculative possibilities. While the detailed accounts of Justinian’s and Abraham’s interaction in Constantinople are surely suspect, in the end, given the available evidence, there is no way of knowing for sure whether or not Abraham was summoned to the imperial city.110 Nonetheless, while the accounts of Abraham’s conflict with Justinian remain suspect in terms of their historical accuracy, the evidence suggests that they originated in response to specific events that so radically impacted the Pachomian monastic federation in the sixth century as to alter the subsequent patterns and memory of Upper Egyptian coenobitism. Setting aside the question of whether or not Abraham was actually summoned to Constantinople to face charges, the indication in On Abraham and the Excerpt that the crisis began when certain Chalcedonian elements within the Pachomian federation brought charges against their archimandrite has an

108

Excerpt V.2–VI.4. On the literary elaboration of Theodora, see Susan Ashbrook Harvey, “Theodora the ‘Believing Queen’: A Study in Syriac Hagiographical Tradition,” Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies (on-line journal) 4, 2 (July 2001). 110 While Justinian certainly took a personal interest in religious matters, even writing a tract against Origen and the Origenists (Allen, “The Definition and Enforcement of Orthodoxy,” 826), it seems unlikely that he would have expended the energy suggested in the panegyrics on such a case. The details certainly were crafted as the tradition developed. It is worth noting that in Justinian’s use of missionary activity to spread Christian culture and Byzantine control, the religious orientation (non-Chalcedonian or Chalcedonain) of the missionaries did not always matter. Jitse H. F. Dijkstra, Philae and the End of Ancient Egyptian Religion: A Regional Study of Religious Transformation (298–642 C.E.), OLA 173 (Leuven: Peeters, 2008), 279. Evidence from Syrian sources, on the other hand, suggests that Chalcedonians often focused on monastic ringleaders, expelling “only certain members – often the archimandrite.” Menze, Justinian and the Making of the Syrian Orthodox Church, 125 and 133. 109

58

Chapter 2: Literary and Historical Analysis

aura of accuracy about it.111 The existence of internal accusers runs counter to the stylized dualism between good and evil that epitomizes most hagiography and clearly structures the accounts of Abraham. It is difficult to imagine an author creating such figures out of whole cloth, figures that so dramatically shift the focus of evil’s origin in the crisis from the emperor to the Pachomians themselves. One can certainly better imagine the author of the Panegyric dropping the accusers in favor of a general letter from the emperor that initiates the crisis, thereby shifting blame to the emperor and sharpening the dualism, than the authors of the other texts adding accusers to the story and thereby blurring the division between good and evil. Evidence of just such a division between non-Chalcedonian and Chalcedonian elements within the Pachomian federation, while limited and difficult to delineate with any degree of accuracy, exists. In the fifth and sixth centuries, three Chalcedonian Alexandrian patriarchs were drawn from the Pachomian monastery of Metanoia on Canopus, clear indication that the monastery contained at least a significant Chalcedonian element at that time.112 Van Cauwenberg, drawing on a fragmentary account of Martyrius, a fifth century archimandrite of Pbow, argued that the Pachomian federation as a whole, including its upper Egyptian monastery at Pbow, adhered to the Chalcedonian faith.113 The panegyric in question reports Martyrius’s involvement in the construction of the great basilica at Pbow, which it dates to the reign of Chalcedonian emperor Leo I (457–474 C.E.) and the Alexandrian Archbishop Timothy. 114 Van Cauwenbergh identified this Timothy as Timothy Salofaciolus, the Chalcedonian patriarch drawn from the Lower Egyptian monastery of Metanoia, which led him to conclude that the monastery of Metanoia was Chalcedonian. Martyrius’s involvement meant in turn that the Upper Egyptian monastery of Pbow was also Chalcedonian, which led to his conclusion that in the fifth century the federation was as a whole uniformly Chalcedonian.115 The evidence of Abraham’s later conflict with Justinian indicated to van Cauwenbergh that an ideological split had subsequently occurred. “Nous avons vu les moines pakhòmiens du ve siècle suivre le parti chalcédoniens. Au vie siècle il n’en est plus ainsi: les communautés sont divisées. Certains

111

The Panegyric on Apollo 10 (Kuhn, A Panegyric on Apollo, CSCO 394.17.10–27 (text) and 395.13.10–25) and the Copto-Arabic Synaxarion (Basset, Le synaxaire arabe jacobite, 684) also point to the existence of accusers. 112 The three were Timothy II Salofaciolus (460–75 and 477–82 C.E.), John I Talaia (482), and Paul of Tabenna (537–40). See Jean Gascou, “Metanoia,” in The Coptic Encyclopedia, 5.1609; Goehring, “Remembering Abraham of Farshut,” 16. 113 van Cauwenbergh, Études sur les moines d’Égypte, 153–54. 114 Amélineau, Monuments, 530–32. 115 van Cauwenbergh, Études sur les moines d’Égypte, 153–54.

D. Hagiography and History

59

moines se raillient au concile, d’autres restent attachés à la foi de Dioscore.”116 Arnold van Lantshoot, however, challenged van Cauwenbergh’s conclusions in his 1934 publication of a panegyric on Pachomius and Victor preserved in Arabic.117 The pseudonymous text presents itself as a homily delivered by the patriarch Timothy of Alexandria at the dedication of the great Pachomian basilica at Pbow at the beginning of the reign of the Byzantine emperor Leo I. Van Lantshoot contends that the dedication occurred in 459 C.E., two years after Leo assumed the throne in 457 C.E., which would make the patriarch in question the non-Chalcedonian Timothy Aelurus, who was not exiled until January 460.118 If van Lantshoot is correct, then Martyrius and the Pachomian federation in Upper Egypt need not have been Chalcedonian in the fifth century as van Cauwenbergh claimed. Given the absence of other evidence, it seems safer to assume that the Upper Egyptian elements of the federation centered at Pbow had remained non-Chalcedonian until the crisis that emerged during Abraham’s tenure as archimandrite. At the same time, the association of the Pachomian monastery of Metanoia with the Alexandrian patriarchate119 and its role in the dissemination of the Pachomian traditions outside of Egypt120 make reasonable its 116

Ibid., 159. van Lantschoot, “Allocution de Timothée d’Alexandrie,” 13–56; Goehring, “Remembering Abraham of Farshut,” 15–16; for a brief treatment of the panegyric, see Schroeder, Monastic Bodies, 122–23. 118 van Lantshoot, “Allocution de Timothée d’Alexandrie,” 21–22. 119 Evidence suggests that the Alexandrian Archbishop Theophilus (d. 412 C.E.) sought to establish close ties with the Pachomians. A letter survives from Theophilus to the Pachomian abbot Horsiesius requesting that he bring a copy of the Life of Pachomius and Theodore to him in Alexandria (Walter E. Crum, Der Papyruscodex saec. VI–VII der Phillippsbibliothek in Cheltenham. Koptische theologische Schriften (Strassburg: Trübner, 1915), 12–21 [text], 65–75 [trans.]; L. Th. Lefort, Les vies coptes de saint Pachôme et de ses premiers successeurs, BM 16 (Louvain: Bureaux du Muséon, 1943), 389–99). In addition, the Coptic History of the Church of Alexandria reports that Theophilus brought Pachomian monks from Upper Egypt to establish the monastery on Canopus (Tito Orlandi, Storia della Chiesa di Alessandria, 2 vols, TDSA 17 and 31 (Milan: Cisalpino, 1968–70), 2.12–14 [text], 61–62 [trans.]). Note also the later drawing of patriarchs from the Monastery of Metanoia discussed above. 120 Jerome obtained copies of Pachomian Rules, the Letters of Pachomius, a Letter of Theodore, and the Testament of Horsiesius, which had been recently translated into Greek, from the priest Silvanus, who had acquired them in Alexandria, likely via the Monastery of Metanoia, which Jerome mentions (Jerome, S. Pachomii Regula, Praefatio 1; Amand Boon, Pachomiana latina: Règle et épitres de s. Pachome, épitre de s. Théodore et “liber” de s. Orsiesius. Texte latin de s. Jerome, BRHS 7 (Louvain: Bureaux de la revue, 1932), 3–5; Armand Veilleux, Pachomian Koinonia, 3 vols., CS 45–47 (Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Press, 1980-82), 2.141–42). Note also Archbishop Theophilus’s request for a Life of Pachomius and Theodore mentioned above (n. 120), and Evagrius of Pontus (d. 399 C.E) mention of a “Lives of the Monks of Tabennesi” in his Chapters on Prayer (De oration 108). 117

60

Chapter 2: Literary and Historical Analysis

involvement in the controversy unleashed by the Council of Chalcedon from the start, and in the long run explains its later Chalcedonian orientation. While the evidence precludes any final judgment on the degree of Chalcedonian and non-Chalcedonian elements in the federation’s various monasteries, it seems apparent that the Chalcedonian faction held sway in Lower Egypt while the Upper Egyptian core remained staunchly nonChalcedonian.121 The religious policies of Justinian I in the middle of the sixth century offered the Chalcedonian elements centered in Lower Egypt an opportunity to seize control of the entire federation, which they effectively did through the replacement of Abraham as archimandrite of the federation at the central monastery of Pbow. In addition to the internal evidence drawn from the accounts of Abraham, the shift that occurs in the memory of Upper Egyptian coenobitic monastic history in the later Coptic tradition lends support to the basic claim of the texts; namely, that the Pachomian federation was lost to the Coptic orthodox tradition when Chalcedonian elements took control in the course of the sixth century.122 While we have in fact limited evidence concerning developments in the Pachomian federation subsequent to Horsiesius’s tenure as its superior in the latter half of the fourth century,123 the fact that the archimandrite Victor accompanied Archbishop Cyril of Alexandria to the Council of Ephesus in 431 C.E. suggests its continuing and perhaps growing importance.124 The construction of the great fifth century basilica at federation’s central monastery of Pbow in Upper Egypt confirms this conclusion. Dedicated with the support of the Alexandrian patriarchate in 459 C.E., the structure’s massive size (75 x 37 meters),125 required perhaps by the annual gathering of monks from the federation’s

121

Roger Rémondon (“Le monastere alexandrin de la metanoia etait-il beneficiaire du fisc ou a son service?,” in Studi in Onore de Edoardo Volterr (Milan: Giuffre, 1971), 5.771) argued that Monastery of Metanoia was a “solid bastion of Chalcedonian orthodoxy.” Gascou (“Metanoia,” 5.1608–11), however, has shown that traces of non-Chalcedonian sentiment in the monastery in the fifth-seventh centuries suggests some degree of internal opposition. In the case of Upper Egypt, the fact that the Chalcedonian Pancharis was installed as Abraham’s replacement suggests the continuation of the movement in some form. This would mean that not all fled to the deserts and other monasteries as suggested in the Synaxarion. It is interesting in this regard that the final surviving pages of On Abraham suggest discord among his followers over what to do (VI.2). 122 The following discussion draws on and repeats arguments that I have put forth elsewhere; see especially, Goehring, “Remembering Abraham of Farshut,” 1–26. 123 Goehring, “New Frontiers,” 236–57 (idem, Ascetics, Society, and the Desert, 162–86). 124 See above, n. 92. 125 van Lantshoot, “Allocution de Timothée d’Alexandrie,” 21–22; on the dimensions, see Peter Grossmann, Christliche Architektur in Ägypten, HOS-NME 62 (Leiden: Brill, 2002), 546–52 and plates 162–63; idem, “Pbow: Archaeology,” in The Coptic Encyclopedia, 6.1927–29.

D. Hagiography and History

61

other monasteries,126 precludes any notion of the federation’s decline in Upper Egypt at this point in time. Furthermore, the federation’s successful Lower Egyptian monastery of Metanoia, from which a number of Alexandrian patriarchs were drawn from the middle of the fifth to the middle of the sixth centuries, indicates that it remained intact and strong up until the time of Abraham, after which the sources fall silent and the Pachomian federation disappears from the plane of history. 127 In this same period, the monastic federation of Shenoute, centered at what is now known as the White Monastery in Atripe, had grown to become a parallel Upper Egyptian coenobitic powerhouse.128 Although it had drawn from the Pachomian experience in its formative years, perhaps borrowing from its rules, the two federations were never linked institutionally. 129 While their common cause resulted in continuing contact, they developed independently, a fact underscored by their distinctive ascetic ideologies.130 Shenoute’s emphasis on purity and pollution, for example, an emphasis that led to strict enforcement of the rules, harsh punishment, and frequent expulsion, finds little resonance in the Pachomian dossier.131 The success of Shenoute’s federation appears nonetheless remarkably parallel. Like Victor, Shenoute accompanied Cyril to the Council of Ephesus,132 and like the Pachomians, he built a massive basilica at his federation’s central monastery in Atripe.133 The construction of the two basilicas, in fact, occurred simultaneously, and their dimensions were approximately the same. Whether this was a result of competition or some shared pattern of growth, 126

Sahidic-Bohairic Life of Pachomius 71 and 144 (Veilleux, Pachomian Koinonia, 1.93 and 205); First Greek Life of Pahcomius 83 (Veilleux, Pachomian Koinonia, 1.354). 127 Jean Gascou’s intriguing interpretation of P.CairMasp. 1.67021, dated 567 C.E., suggests a continuing federation presence in Aphrodito, where monks sought to build a church dedicated to Pachomius’ successor Petronius, who had originally headed the federation’s Monastery of Šmin. See his “Les Pachômiens à Aphrodité,” 275–82. 128 Shenoute’s federation included three individual congregations or monasteries, two male (the White Monastery and the Red Monastery) and a female community. Bentley Layton, “Social Structure and Food Consumption in an Early Christian Monastery: The Evidence of Shenoute’s Canons and the White Monastery Federation A.D. 385–465,” Muséon 115 (2002): 26–27. 129 Bentley Layton, “The Monastic Rules of Shenoute,” in Monastic estates in late antique and early Islamic Egypt: Ostraca, papyri, and essays in memory of Sarah Clackson (P. Clackson), ed. Anne Boud'hors, et al. American Studies in Papyrology 46. Cincinnati: American Society of Papyrologists, 2009, 170–77. 130 The groundbreaking work on this was done by Caroline Schroeder, Monastic Bodies; idem, “Purity and Pollution in the Asceticism of Shenute of Atripe,” Studia Patistica 35 (2001): 142–47; idem, “‘A Suitable Abode for Christ’: The Church Building as Symbol of Ascetic Renunciation in Early Monasticism,” Church History 73 (2004): 472–521. 131 Schroeder, Monastic Bodies, 59–89. 132 See above, n. 92. 133 Grossmann, Christliche Architektur in Ägypten, 528–36 and plate 150; idem, “Dayr AnbƗ Shinnjdah: Architecture,” in The Coptic Encyclopedia, 3.766–69.

62

Chapter 2: Literary and Historical Analysis

the evidence indicates that the two federations had become equally strong and influential in the course of the fifth century. While our knowledge of the subsequent history of the two federations is limited, different trajectories are suggested by the few sources that do survive, the physical remains of the monasteries themselves, and their later impact in the cultural memory of Coptic Christianity. The individual monasteries of both federations ultimately declined and eventually disappeared as viable monastic institutions. The evidence indicates, however, that the federation of Shenoute long outlived its Pachomian counterpart and in the process succeeded it as the primary representative of Upper Egyptian coenobitism in the Coptic tradition. Let us turn first in this regard to the two federations’ large central monasteries (Pachomius’s Pbow and Shenoute’s White Monastery) and the remains of the fifth century basilicas that form part of their respective monastic campuses. One is immediately struck by the different fates of the two structures. A visit to the site of the Pachomian monastery of Pbow located at the northern edge of the modern village of Faw Qibli reveals nothing more than a series of fallen rose granite columns strewn across an expanse of ground made uninhabitable and inarable through their presence.134 While to the trained eye their location suggests the outline of the basilica, the basilica itself is gone. Archeological excavations have revealed that the stone had been robbed out after the community’s decline and abandonment, which, judging from the lack of later archeological evidence, probably occurred towards the end of the sixth century.135 No clear indication survives of the monastery’s existence, let alone that of the Pachomian federation, after this date.136 134 Peter Grossmann, “The Basilica of St. Pachomius,” Biblical Archeologist 42, 4 (1979): 232–36; esp. the drawing on 234. 135 Gary Lease, “Traces of Early Egyptian Monasticism: The Faw Qibli Excavations,” OP 22 (Claremont: CA: The Institute for Antiquity and Christianity, 1991), 8–9. Earlier excavation reports include: James M. Robinson and Bastiaan van Elderen, “The First Season of the Nag Hammadi Excavation 27 November - 19 December 1975,” NARCE 96 (1976): 18–24 and GM 22 (1976): 71–79; idem, “The Second Season of the Nag Hammadi Excavation 22 November - 29 December 1976,” NARCE 99/100 (1977): 36–54 and GM 24 (1977): 57–71; Bastiaan van Elderen, “The Nag Hammadi Excavation,” BA 42 (1979): 225–231; Gary Lease, “The Fourth Season of the Nag Hammadi Excavation 21 December 1979 - 15 January 1980,” GM 41 (1980): 75–85; Peter Grossmann and Gary Lease, “Faw Qibli - 1989 Excavation Report,” GM 114 (1990): 9–16. 136 One assumes that some monks chose to stay at Pbow after Abraham’s removal. The Panegyric on Apollo appears to suggest as much when it reports that “all who loved godliness” left, which implies that some did not. The author later compares such elements to the Jews, who, “while they still possessed the temple as their sanctuary, this only begotten Son of God departed from their midst because of their hypocrisy” (Panegyric on Apollo 10; Kuhn, A Panegyric on Apollo, CSCO 394.17.27–18.16 (text) and 395.13.25–14.7; Kuhn’s translation). Note also the debate among the brothers reported in On Abraham over whether or not to follow the new leadership after Abraham’s ouster (VI.2). Nonetheless, cut off from the increasingly non-Chalcedonian populace in Upper Egypt, such communities did not survive for long.

D. Hagiography and History

63

When one turns to Shenoute’s federation and the basilica of the White Monastery the situation is strikingly different. It remains largely intact, albeit reconstructed and modified from its original form at various times over the years. 137 Its survival can be directly attributed to the longer continuing existence of the White Monastery and thus perhaps of Shenoute’s federation. The even better preserved large basilica of the nearby Red Monastery, the other male monastery in Shenoute’s federation, offers at least circumstantial evidence to this effect.138 Papyrological documents, manuscript colophons, and inscriptions within the White Monastery’s basilica confirm the monastery continued to function in some form into the thirteenth century, after which it fell into ruins.139 Without going into detail here, the situation of the Red Monastery and its basilica appears remarkably similar.140 The two large male monasteries of Shenoute’s federation thus survived some six or seven centuries after the apparent abandonment of the Pachomian monastery at Pbow. The longer continuing survival of Shenoute’s monasteries has, as one might expect, left its impact in the traditions and memories of Coptic Christianity. The annual pilgrimage to Shenoute’s White Monastery, for example, centered on his feast day of July 1 (AbƯb 7), remains one of the most popular in the Nile Valley. Each year it draws thousands of pilgrims from throughout Egypt to the site, where they erect a virtual tent city for the-month long festival.141 In striking contrast, no pilgrimage festival occurs on Pachomius’s feast day of May 9 (Bashans 14). His central monastery at Pbow has been virtually forgotten, lying as it is in ruins at the edge of the village. Nothing remains around which to congregate beyond the 137 Grossmann, Christliche Architektur in Ägypten, 528–36; idem, “Pbow: Archaeology,” 3.766–69. 138 Peter Grossmann, Christliche Architektur in Ägypten, 536-39 and plate155; idem, “Dayr AnbƗ Bishoi: Buildings,” in The Coptic Encyclopedia, 3.740. 139 The numerous tenth-eleventh century codices from the White Monastery, many of which were copied there, indicate a vibrant monastic culture at that date, and a dated inscription in the basilica (1259 C.E.) mentions the rebuilding of the cupolas. Al-MaqrƯzƯ (d. 1441) reports that the monastery was in ruins in his day with only the church left standing. For details, see René-Georges Coquin and Maurice Martin, “Dayr AnbƗ Shinnjdah: History,” in The Coptic Encyclopedia, 3.761–66. 140 René-Georges Coquin and Maurice Martin, “Dayr AnbƗ Bishoi: History,” in The Coptic Encyclopedia, 3.736–39. 141 Gérard Viaud, Les pèlerinages coptes en Égypte d’apres les notes du Qommos Jacob Muyser, BEC 15 (Cairo: Institut français d’archéologie orientale du Caire, 1979), 55–56 and plates 9–10; idem, “Pilgrimages,” in The Coptic Encyclopedia, 6.1969–70. See also Otto F. A. Meinardus, Coptic Saints and Pilgrimages (Cairo and New York: American University in Cairo, 2002), 81. Two pictures of the tent city from 1999 can be found in Schroeder, “‘A Suitable Abode for Christ,’” 510–12; Goehring, “Remembering Abraham of Farshut,” 5. For evidence of earlier pilgrimages to the site, see Janet Timbie, “A Liturgical Procession in the Desert of Apa Shenoute,” in Pilgrimage and Holy Space in Late Antique Egypt, ed. David Frankfurter (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1998), 415–41.

64

Chapter 2: Literary and Historical Analysis

ancient columns strewn across the ground. There is no church and no grounds on which to erect an ephemeral city.142 A second example of the impact of the longer survival of Shenoute’s monasteries can be seen in the patriarchal names chosen over the course of history by the one hundred and seventeen patriarchs of the see of Saint Mark. While three have chosen the name of Shenoute (Shenoute I [the 55th patriarch, 858-880 C.E.], Shenoute II [the 65th, 1032–1046 C.E.], and Shenoute III [the 117th patriarch, 1971-2012], not a single patriarch has borne the name of Pachomius. While one cannot completely dismiss the possibility of coincidence here, the pattern seems more likely the result of Shenoute’s enhanced position over time following the demise of the Pachomian federation in the course of the sixth century. Just such an enhancement appears to lie behind the inclusion of Shenoute’s name alongside those of Pachomius, Petronius, Theodore, and Horsesius in the list of the founding fathers of Upper Egyptian communal monasticism and his association with the rules attributed to them.143 The combined evidence points to a later literary merger of the two federations’ traditions occasioned by changes in the monastic landscape of Upper Egyptian. It is in this context that the events portrayed in the sources on Abraham of Farshut fit. They offer the most reasonable explanation for changes that one sees in the Coptic memory of Upper Egyptian monastic history. The success of Pancharis and the non-Chalcedonian faction within the Pachomian movement in gaining control of the federation as a whole proved, in the long run, counter-productive. They had, in fact, won the battle, but lost the war. While they effected Abraham’s forced removal as archimandrite and transformed the federation’s Upper Egyptian monasteries into Chalcedonian establishments, they failed to win the hearts of the monks and surrounding laity who remained predominantly non-Chalcedonian. The individual Pachomian monasteries immediately bled monks who, like Abraham, fled to other communities rather than deny their faith. One imagines that Shenoute’s federation became an immediate beneficiary as the departing monks sought nearby and similar monasteries in which to continue their ascetic lives. If this is the case, it goes a long way in accounting for the prominence of Pachomian sources in the White Monas-

142 Two smaller local pilgrimages do occur to Deir Anba Palemon (= Deir Abu Sufein), the monastery dedicated to Pachomius’s spiritual father. They are, however, much smaller in scope and not directly linked to Pachomius. See Viaud, Les pèlerinages coptes, 60; idem, “Pilgrimages,” 6.1973–74; René-Georges Coquin and Maurice Martin, S.J., “Dayr AnbƗ Palaemon,” in The Coptic Encyclopedia, 3.757; Meinardus, Coptic Saints and Pilgrimages, 82; Goehring, “Remembering Abraham of Farshut,” 5–6. 143 Discussed at length above in the literary analysis of the Panegyric on Abraham (above, pgs. 47–48); Goehring, “Remembering Abraham of Farshut,” 20–24.

D. Hagiography and History

65

tery’s library144 and for the subsequent integration of Shenoute among the founding fathers of Upper Egyptian coenobitism. The change brought about by Pancharis and his group effectively severed the Pachomian federation from its roots. Its monasteries, Chalcedonian establishments in an increasingly non-Chalcedonian land, experienced rapid decline and abandonment.145 As they withered and died, the orthodox Coptic tradition maintained continuity with the past by grafting the geographically proximate, closely related, and staunchly orthodox federation of Shenoute onto the roots of the Pachomian movement. The continuity of the Upper Egyptian coenobitic tradition was thus maintained, and in the process the stature of Shenoute within the tradition significantly increased.146 One suspects that a number of factors played into the dramatically different outcomes experienced by the two federations in the era of Justinian’s reign. As noted above, the fact that Shenoute’s equally impressive Upper Egyptian institution reveals no signs of the conflict encountered by its sister federation to the south argues against a common effort on Justinian’s part as suggested in the Panegyric. The apparent focus on the Pachomian federation results from the fact that the crisis emerged from within its own ranks and, as a result, remained essentially confined to it. While the religious policies of Justinian may have offered the occasion for the accusers to act, their action depended ultimately on their existence in the first place. Shenoute’s federation experienced no such crisis because it had no Chalcedonian elements within its ranks. Their absence or presence, moreover, should not be seen as mere coincidence. It is better explained as the result of two federations’ distinct ascetic ideologies and different orientations towards geographical expansion. Shenoute developed his ascetic ideology around the concept of purity, which he understood as multidimensional, linking the purity of the monastic institution (federation) to the purity of the individual monks.147 Maintaining the institution’s purity became a central goal, effected through the application of strict rules, harsh enforcement, and frequent expulsions. Such practices, coupled to his stern stance against pagan tradition and Christian heresy fashioned an institution with fairly impervious ideological boundaries. There would have been little or no opportunity for Chalcedonian elements to take root and grow within Shenoute’s federation. Shenoute’s discourse of purity and pollution fashioned an ascetic ideology that set his federation “apart from its Pachomian counterpart [and] worked to short-circuit the very sort of ideo144 Most of the Sahidic Coptic sources in the Pachomian dossier derive from the White Monastery. 145 The degree to which the individual monasteries of the federation suffered remains, in fact, an open question, since the sources only mention the central monastery of Pbow. 146 Goehring, “Remembering Abraham of Farshut,” 24–26. 147 Schroeder, Monastic Bodies.

66

Chapter 2: Literary and Historical Analysis

logical division that shattered the Pachomian federation in the sixth century by ‘purifying’ the community of members that threatened the integrity of the whole.”148 The Pachomian federation, on the other hand, with its more forgiving rule and rare use of expulsion, remained vulnerable to the very sort of internal division that proved its ultimate undoing. This is evident already shortly after Pachomius’s death, when opposition emerged to Horsiesius’s appointment as the federation’s new superior. The monastery of Tmoušons, led by Apa Apollonius, withdrew from the federation, and others soon threatened to follow. The first Greek Life of Pachomius reports monks’ assertion: “We no longer belong to the federation of the brothers.”149 While Theodore was able to replace Horsiesius and quell the uprising, the mere fact of its occurrence illustrates the reality of the problem for the Pachomian federation.150 Its greater geographical expansion, including its acceptance of pre-existing communities into the federation, made it less homogeneous and more difficult to control centrally. The fact that the opposition to Abraham appears to have been centered in the Lower Egyptian monastery of Metanoia underscores the point. Its proximity to Alexandria and across the Mediterranean to Constantinople opened it up to Chalcedonian influence in a way and to a degree unparalleled in the federation’s Upper Egyptian monasteries. It developed as an alternate center with strong Chalcedonian elements which, when the occasion offered itself in the reign of Justinian I, moved to subsume the Upper Egyptian communities under their control. Shenoute’s federation, on the other hand, limited its reach geographically to the immediate vicinity of its central monastery at Atripe. Consisting of just two male monasteries and an affiliated female community, the federation was bound together not only ideologically, but also geographically. While complaints and occasional opposition to central authority figures naturally occurred,151 nothing appears to have reached the level of opposition seen in the Pachomian milieu. There was no threatened withdrawal from the federation, and no internal cabal rose up in an attempt to overthrow the leadership.152 The geographical limits and the ideology of purity that informed its governance set Shenoute’s federation apart from its 148

Goehring, “Remembering Abraham of Farshut,” 18–19. First Greek Life of Pachomius 127 (Veilleux, Pachomian Koinonia, 1.387); cf. Sixth Sahidic Life of Pachomius 139 (Veilleux, Pachomian Koinonia, 1.195). 150 Goehring, “New Frontiers,” 240–44; Sixth Sahidic Life of Pachomius 144 (Veilleux, Pachomian Koinonia, 204–05). 151 Rebecca Krawiec, Shenoute and the Women of the White Monastery: Egyptian Monasticism in Late Antiquity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002). 152 It is interesting in this regard that Shenoute’s earlier career led him to oppose the authorities in the White Monastery, a move that ultimately led to his rise as archimandrite. Stephen Emmel, “Shenoute the Monk,” 151–74. 149

D. Hagiography and History

67

Pachomian counterpart and explain the different outcomes experienced by the two parallel institutions in the course of the sixth century. Taken as a whole, the evidence supports the historicity of the underlying core of the stories about Abraham of Farshut. While the location of the line between history and hagiographic elaboration remains elusive at best, the rapid decline of the Pachomian monastery of Pbow towards the end of the sixth century set over against the continuing success of Shenoute’s communities suggests that something happened in the course of the sixth century that led to the former federation’s demise. The evidence of a divide within the geographically dispersed Pachomian federation over the faith pronounced at Council of Chalcedon sets a reasonable stage for the crisis reported in the reign of the Byzantine emperor Justinian I. While most of the details in the accounts of Abraham of Farshut are fictional, serving to enhance the story as an edifying tale and integrate it into the emerging totalizing non-Chalcedonian discourse of Coptic Christianity, the basic core event offers the historical cause that explains the subsequent history of Upper Egyptian coenobitic monasticism.

Chapter 3

Texts and Translations The Coptic text, written originally in a two column format, has been transformed into continuous text for this edition. Coptic page numbers are given in the margin, with the precise break noted by an asterisk in the text. The break to the second column is noted within the text by a vertical line ( | ). I have with few exceptions printed the text that the scribe wrote in so far as it is preserved. Lacunae have been filled sparingly. Only those superlinear strokes and tremas still visible as separate strokes in the manuscript are recorded. Curved forms of the superlinear stroke, which are relatively common in the manuscript, are not distinguished in the edition. Variant spellings are retained. Errors, suggested corrections, and notes are for the most part relegated to footnotes, which also record alternate readings, references to biblical and other quotations and allusions that occur in the text, and selected notes from earlier editions. These include references to Zoega’s handwritten transcriptions of the pages in Naples that he produced in preparation for his Catalogus Codicum Copticorum Manuscriptorum, and which are currently housed in the Royal Library in Copenhagen (cited in the notes as Zoega (Papers).1 In a few cases, Zoega’s transcriptions include readings from edges of the manuscript that are currently missing. Use of this material in the text and translation is always indicated in the notes, since it remains unclear whether this material represents text that still existed in Zoega’s day or emendations made by him. With the exception of the pages preserved in Cairo at the Coptic Museum (White Monastery Codex GC 107–108), the Institut français d’ archéologie orientale (White Monastery Codex GC 7–10, 49–50), and one small fragment in the Bibliothèque nationale de France in Paris (White Monastery Codex GB Frg. 1), all individual pages have been collated by the author against the original manuscripts. In the case of the single folio preserved at the Coptic Museum, I have depended on the edition published

1

The Royal Library kindly supplied me copies of the relevant pages, listed in Zoega’s hand as Num. 31 and bearing the number 118 in a later hand at the bottom of the first of two pages. They correspond to Zoega’s Catalogus No. CCXXII and include Coptic pages 65–66, 71–72, 85–86, and 87–88. There was no transcription in the pages supplied to me of Coptic pages 69–70, though excerpts from them are included in Zoega’s Catalogus.

Texts and Translations

69

by M. Henri Munier in 1916, collated against recent photographs.2 For the three folios from the Institut français d’ archéologie orientale, I have relied on the excellent transcriptions and photographs kindly supplied by the late René-Georges Coquin. For the fragment from the Bibliothèque nationale, Stephen Emmel kindly provided a transcription based on Campagnano’s earlier effort checked against more recent photographs. In all three cases, I have checked these earlier scholars’ work against photographs. I am indebted more generally to all of the earlier editors on whose work I have built. The preliminary microfiche edition of Antonella Campagnano proved particularly valuable as the basis for the present critical edition. Many of the emendations printed here derive from her work. The parallel translation aims to produce a literal and yet readable English version of the text. The former has the advantage of reproducing the Coptic text more precisely, though it at times leads to less felicitous English constructions. The latter compels the translator, on occasion, to intervene where improbable English constructions verge on the impossible. Throughout the process, I have sought to remain as faithful as possible to the Coptic. While clarity remained a top priority, in the end poor style and infelicities in English were preferred over alterations that ignored or changed the Coptic. Translation of the repetitious “and it happened that,” for example, which seems cumbersome in English, was retained. The translation positions the original manuscript page numbers within the text in square brackets and bold type. It includes indication of missing manuscript leaves, portions of leaves, and individual lines. The indication of “lines wanting” denotes lines that are either completely or mostly missing due to damage or loss of the parchment. Those places marked “lines damaged” indicate sufficient damage or missing letters to render translation impossible. References such as “± 6 lines missing,” indicate uncertainty due to the loss of the bottom portion of the page. I have chosen to include Greek loan words in parentheses within the translation.

2

M. Henri Munier, Catalogue general des antiquités égyptiennes du Musée du Caire: Manuscrits copte (Cairo: L’Institut français d’archéologie orientale, 1916), no. 9250, pp. 62–63. Permission to publish this leaf in the current edition was granted to me in 1992 by Gawdat Gabra, then Director of the Coptic Museum in Cairo; Makram Girgis supplied photographs for my work.

70

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

Sigla .

A dot beneath a letter indicates that the letter is visually uncertain, even if the context makes the letter certain. A dot on a line outside of square brackets indicates a letter for which vestiges of ink survive.

[ ]

Square brackets indicate a lacuna in the manuscript where writing most probably existed at one time. The lacuna may be the result either of missing parchment or of a blotting, smudging, or ink loss that has obliterated the letters. Dots within brackets [ . . ] or numbers [Ì5] indicate the number of missing letters, using the width of the Coptic letter Q as the equivalent of one letter and where necessary assuming the average width of a line. Brackets listing a number of lines [Ì4 lines missing] indicate the number of missing column lines. When at the end of a column, the number listed assumes the average column length of 29 lines.

< >

Pointed brackets indicate a correction of a scribal omission or error. In the latter case, the MS reading is recorded in a note.

{ }

Braces indicate letters or words erroneously added by the scribe.

( )

Parentheses in the translation indicate material that has been added for clarity.

Ca

Indicate a letter inserted above the line.

Abbreviations Amél

É. Amélineau, Monuments pour servir a l’histoire de l’Égypte chrétienne aux 4., 5., 6., at 7. Siècles. Mèmoires publiés par les membres de la mission archéologique français au Caire 4/2; Paris: Leroux, 1895, 668–69, 742–53; “Am note” indicates that the alternative reading was offered in a note to the text.

Camp GB

Antonella Campagnano, ed., Preliminary Editions of Coptic Codices: Monb. GB: Life of Manasses – Encomium of Moses – Encomium of Abraham. Corpus dei Manoscritti Copti Letterari; Rome: Centro Italiano Microfisches, 1985.

Texts and Translations

71

Camp GC

Antonella Campagnano, ed., Preliminary Editions of Coptic Codices: Monb. GB: Life of Abraham – Encomium of Abraham. Corpus dei Manoscritti Copti Letterari; Rome: Centro Italiano Microfisches, 1985.

Zoega

Georg Zoega, Catalogus codicum copticorum manuscriptorum qui in Museo Borgiano Velitris adservantur. Rome, 1810; reprint ed., Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1903.

Zoega (Papers)

Georg Zoega’s papers housed at the Royal Library in Copenhagen, Denmark

72

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

A. White Monastery Codex GC I. First Panegyric on Abraham of Farshut



[2 leaves = 4 pages missing] ( 1 I.1 W“Q+HQUZPHQYRXWDQ+RXWRXHWPHMHNDWDTHQWDQ VZW“PWDøRQWHTHQWDQQDX2. DOODMHNDVQQHQWDYH SYDMHHSH+RXR:-- PDU“QNWRQHMPSHSURNøPHQRQHWNK QDQH+UDøQWQDUFHLHSH)EøRVMøQWH)PQWNRXø3. NDøJDU 5 )SDUDJJHøOHQDQH U SDøQ&øSODVPSHV7QRX)HSDXORV H)ÚMZPPRVMHDUÚLùSPHHXHQQHWQQR&QDøQWDXMZQKWQ  PSYDMHPSQRXWHQDøùHWHW“Q&ZY“WHSMøVHQWHXDQDVWUR_IK W“QW“QWKXW“QHWHXSøVWøV4. NDQPHQHYMH —SHQHYNDWRUTRXQ ODDX+“QQHXDUHWKHWEHWHQPQWDPHOKV 10 DXZWHQPQWUH)MQDDXPDU“QMøQDQP SHVPRWQ WHFKUD Q V+øPHQ WDVQRXMHPSOHSWRQVQDXHSND]RIXODNøRQ HDSMRøVHSDøQRXP PRVQ +RXRHQHQWDXQRMRXWKURXK Q THQQHQWDXHøQHP S)ZQ EDDPSH+“PSHRXRHøYP SWDPøR  Q WHVNXQKNDWDWHXPQW+KNH5. WDLù+ÚZZQWHWQ +HHWEH A 15WHQPQW+KNHP“QWHQ PQWDWQRHøHQQDNZQKW“QH+UDø P SYDMHH UHSQRXWHYRRSQDQQ UH)FRUKJHøDXZ Q ERKTRV:-- II.1 SHQSHWRXDDEGHRXQQ HøZWP SURIKWKV DXZQDUFKPDQGUøWKVDSDDEUD+DPH)KSHQWRYQ7RV WSROøVHRXHEROSH+“QRX7PHHYDXPRXWHHUR)MH 20 WEHU&ZWH SYKUHSHQ +HQUZPHQ QR&+“QQHWRX¡Q“+HERO Q WHS7PHHW¬“PPDX:--- DQRN+ZZW^Q`QHDJJRXHERO+“Q WH)VXJJHQøD:----- 2. DVYZSHGHQ _WHURXMSR P PR)DXZ  QH)SURNRSWHø()7HSDQDøHQDQRX)H PDWHQ QD+UQ

1

Cf. 1 John 1:1. Cf. Panegyric VI.2. 3 Heb 13:7. 4 Cf. Mark 12:41–43. 5 Cf. Exod 35. 6 A stack of three short horizontal lines with a diagonal stroke or tail below appears below the right column; so too on page PT. 7 1GLRVSROLVAmél (473 n. 2); a short space separates the words in the ms. 8 RQ Amél (743); it appears as if the scribe wrote the Q and then tried to erase it. 9 Cf. Leipoldt, Sinuthii vita bohairice, CSCO 41.8.19. 2

A. White Monastery Codex GC

73

A. White Monastery Codex GC I. Panegyric on Abraham of Farshut [2 leaves = 4 pages missing] [5] I.1 some men who can be trusted with the truth (say), “As NDWDY we have heard, so also have we seen.”10 2. But DMOODY lest we prolong the account too much,11 let us turn to the matter SURNDLYPHQRQ that lies before us and begin D>UFHLQ his life ELYRa from his youth. 3. For truly NDLJDYU the perfumedtongued Paul enjoined SDUDJJHYOHLQ us to do this, saying, “Remember your great ones, those who spoke the word of God to you. Seeing the exaltation of their way of life DMQDVWUIKY , imitate their faith SLYVWLa .”12 4. Even ND@Q PHYQ  if we are not able to attain NDWRUTRXCQ  any of their virtues DMUHWKY  because of our carelessness DMPHOKYa  and sloth, let us be like the widow FKYUD  woman who contributed two pennies OHSWRYQ  to the treasury JD]RTXODYNLRQ , for the Lord praised HMSDLQHLCQ her more than all who contributed.13 Or K@  like those who brought goat hair on the occasion of the building of the tabernacle VNKQKY because of NDWDY their poverty.14 5. This is also our way, on account of our poverty and our [6] ignoranceQRHLCQ , as we set forth for you the account, with God as our provider FRUKJHLCQ  and helper (ERKTRYa . II.1 Our saint then GH RX?Q , father, prophet SURIKYWKa , and archimandrite DMUFLPDQGULYWKa Apa Abraham, belonged to the district of Diospolis, being from a village called Tberþot.15 He was the son of some prominent people among those who lived in that village. I myself was one of his relatives VXJJHQHLYD . 2. And GHY it happened after he was born and was progressing (SURNRYSWHLQ , (that) he increased greatly in good favor before  

10

Cf. 1 John 1:1. Cf. Panegyric VI.2. 12 Heb 13:7. 13 Cf. Mark 12:41–43. 14 Cf. Exod 35. 15 The village of Farshut; see É. Amélineau, Geographie de l’Égypte à l’epoche copte (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1893; reprint ed., Osnabrück: Otto Zeller, 1973), 178–79; Stephan Timm, Das christlich-koptische Ägypten in arabischer Zeit. Teil 2 (D-F), Beihefte zum Tübinger Atlas des vorderen Orients Reihe B, Nr. 41/2 (Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert, 1984), 2.945–46. 11

74

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

1   Ÿ5    10   15   K   20     25     T 30  16

SQRXWHP“QQ UZPHNDWDTHHWVK+HWEHSHSURIKWKV VDPRXKO3. DVYZSHGHQ WHUH)U QR&DXÚZQ WHUH)MHN PQWVQRRXVQURPSHHERODQH)HøRWHQRM)HWDQ]KEH +DUDW“)Q RXVD+Q VSRXGDøRVDXZQ UH)U +RWHH D)SDLGHXH P PR)+“QWSHGHXVøVQ QHJUDIKQ Qø)HQ WHSQRX WHNDWDTH HWVK+HWEHSQRPRTHWKVPZX VKVMHDXSDøGHXHP PR)+“Q VRIøDQøPP PQWU“PQ NKPH4. DQRN+ZZWRQQHø+QWHø DQ]KEHQ RXZWQ“PPD)+DUDW“)P SHøVD+Q RXZWQ“PPD)DXZ Q WDQSDøGHXH+“QWHøDQ]KEHQ RXZWP“QQHQHUKXDOODDQRN PHQHWEHWDPQWHODFøVWRVP“QWDPQWUH)MQDDXP SHøHY H SHøQRHøP SHøV+Dø+“QRXMZN5. |SDøGHQ WR)HWEH WH)PQWNDTDUøZWKVDXZWPQWODPSURVQ Q WH)\XFK D)NDWRUTRXQ WSHGHXVøV+“QRXMZN6. DVYZSHGH Q WHUH)MZNHEROQ WSDøGHXVøVDXZQH)SURNRSWHø+“Q WVRIøDP“QW+XOKNøDNDWDTHHWVK++“PSHXDJJHOøRQQ NDWD ORXNDV:--- III.1 DVYZSHGHQ WHUH)MHNPQWVQRRXV Q URPSHHERODSQRXWHRXZYHSRRQH)HERO+“PSND+ HWPH+ Q URRXYDXZHWUKWQ YRQWH+øDURRXHH +RXQHSND+ QHP\XFRQHWNøZRXSDøHWHUHSMRHøV&øQHP SH)YøQH QRXRHøYQøPHøYDMHHSEøRVQ WHIøORVRIøDQ WH WPQWPRQDFRV2. Q WHUHSQRXWHRXQU +QD)H WUH)WR&)+“P SND+Q QHWRQ“+HW“PPDXNDWDTHQ WDQYUSMRRVD SQRXWH&“P SYøQHQ WH)PDDXP“QSH)HøZW+“QWHøURPSHQ RXZWD)YZM“S _PDXDD)P“QRXVZQHQ V+øPHQ WD):-- 3. Q WHUH)MZNGHHERO Q WURPSHQ QH)HøRWHNDWDWVXQKTøDP SNRVPRVD)YDMHP“Q WH)VZQHH)MZP PRVQDVMHHøV+KKWHHøVQHQHøRWH DXP WRQP PRRXDQRQGHDQYZSHQRUIDQRVDUKX W“UQDVZW“PQ VZøQ W“QSDU+øVWDQ QHQVZPDHXRXDDEP SQRXWH Q W“QWDORHMZQP SQD+“EH WDVZRXQ WHSHQVZUNDWDTH HWVK++“QøHUKPøDVSHSURIKWKV MHRXDJDTRQP SUZPHSH

Cf. 1 Sam 2:26. Cf. Panegyric III.1. 18 Acts 7:22. 19 Cf. Luke 2:40. 20 Cf. Panegyric II.3; note parallel to Jesus in Luke 2:42. 21 Note rare form (WU ) of 2nd sing. fem. personal prefix; see Bentley Layton, A Coptic Grammar with Chrestomathy and Glossary: Sahidic Dialect, Porta Linguarum Orientalium 20 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2000), §318. 17

A. White Monastery Codex GC

75

God and men, as (NDWDY  it is written concerning the prophet SURTKYWKa  Samuel.22 3. And GHY it happened that after he had grown up and completed twelve years,23 (that) his parents enrolled him in school under a diligent VSRXGDLCRa  and devout teacher who instructed SDLGHXYHLQ  him in the teaching SDLYGHXVLa  of the divinely inspired scriptures JUDTKY , [7] as NDWDY it is written concerning the lawgiverQRPRTHYWKa Moses, that he was instructedSDLGHXYHLQ in all the wisdom VRILYD of Egypt.24 4. I myself was also in this same school with him, under the same teacher with him. And we studied SDLGHXYHLQ in this same school together. But DMOODY  I PHYQ , because of my insignificance (HMODYFLVWRa  and slothfulness, was not able to comprehend HMSLQRHLCQ this teaching25 fully. 5. ButGHY he, because of his purityNDTDULRYWKa and the brillianceODYPSURa of his soul\XFKY , completed NDWRUTRXCQ  the education SDLYGHXVLa  fully. 6. And (GHY it happened after he completed the education (that) he advanced26SURNRYSWHLQ in wisdom VRILYD  and years K-OLNLYD  as NDWDY it is written in the Gospel HXMDJJHYOLRQ according to NDWDY Luke.27 III.1. And GHY it happened after he completed twelve years,28 (that) God wanted him to withdraw from the land that is full [8] of cares and overgrown with acacia trees and thorns to the spiritual (H>P\XFRa land that is fertile, which the Lord always visits, I mean the life ELYRa of philosophy ILORVRILYD  monasticismPRQDFRYa . 2. When God desired to plant him in that land of the living, as NDWDY  we have already said, God visited his mother and his father in the same year, (and) he left him alone with his sister. 3. And GHY  after he completed the year (of mourning)29 for his parents according to NDWDY  the custom VXQKYTHLD  of the world NRYVPRa , he spoke with his sister, saying to her, “Behold, our parents have died,30 and GHY we have become orphans RMUIDQRYa . Perhaps you will listen to me, and we will presentSDULVWDYQDL our bodies VZCPD holy to God and lay upon ourselves the light yoke of our SaviorVZWKYU as NDWDY it is written in Jeremiah the prophetSURIKYWKa [9] ‘It is goodDMJDTRYQ for the man

22

Cf. 1 Sam 2:26. Cf. Panegyric III.1. 24 Acts 7.22; the Coptic translates literally “of Egyptian.” 25 Literally, “writing” or “letter”; Walter E. Crum (A Coptic Dictionary [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1939], 383a) notes its use for JUDPPDWLNK (WHYFQK) in Dan 1:17. 26 Literally, “and he was advancing”; cf. Panegyric II.2. 27 Cf. Luke 2.40. 28 Cf. Panegyric II.3; note parallel to Jesus in Luke 2.42. 29 “year (of mourning)” so Camp GC; literally “year.” 30 Literally, “have rested.” 23

76

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

1  5

10

 L 15

20

25

L D  30

31

+RWDQH)YDQ7SQD+“EHMZ)MøQWH)PQWNRXøQ WRVGHP S“UU  +QDVHRXD+“VQ VZ)4. Q WHUH)QDXGHMHP SHVSøTHQD) D)NZQ VZ)Q Q NDQøPD)7SH)RXRø+“QRX&HSKHM“QW“PU+KW VQDXH+RXQHSPRQDVWKUøRQQDSDSD+RPZ:---- 5. QHXQ RXD GHR Q +XJRXPHQRVHUR)P SHRXR HøYHW“PPDXSDø+ZZ) RXYSKUHSH+“PSH)EøRVDXZH)PH+HERO+“PSHV7QRX)H QQDUHWK_HSH)UDQSHSYøQWED+VHSDøGHHUHSYDMHNKQDQ H+UDøH WUHQYDMHHWEKKW“)WHQRXD)7SH)RXRøH UR) D)SDUDNDOHøPPR)HWUH)DD)P PRQDFRV+D+WK):--Q WHUH)QDXGHHUR)MHSH)+KWWDMUKXD)MøW“)H+RXQ H WDNXOOHP SHF“VDXZD)+RN“)+DUDW“)P S“UUR QDWPRX:--- 6. Q WHUH)EZNGHH+RXQD)SHGDJZJHøP SSHWRXDDEDSD SD+RPZP“QSSHWRXDDEDSD+ZUVøKVøRVP“QD SDTHRGZURV Q WHUH)QDXGHDXZD)7+WK) HW&øQDQDVWUHIKQQHVQKX QDVNKWKVH W“PPDX:---- D)NZ++“QRXNZC+aQ WHSQRXWHNDWD THHWHUHSDXORVMZP PRVMH7NZ+HUZW“Q+“QRXNZ+Q WH SQRXWHORøSRQD)WDD)H+HQDVNKVøVHXMDMZDXZ +HQSROXWøDHQDYZRXQDøGHSQRXWHPDXDD)SHWVRRXQ PPRRXNDWDTHHWVK+MHQHW&ZO“SHEROQ QHW+KS P S+KW:---- DXZRQMHQHW+KSSQRXWHVRRXQHURRX IV.1. ORøSRQQHUHSPD7HTKSHDXZQHUHWEZQH_ORROH DX[DQHHQHMNRXSHUHEROPPKQHHWHQ VZWSQHQDVNKWKV Q WDX7RXZ HEROQ +KW) 2. SGøDERORVGHSPDV“WSHWQDQRX) ¬¬Q WHUH)QDXHGHH WQR&Q NDWDVWDVøVHWYRRS+“Q P PRQDVWKUøRQDXZWSøVWøVHWWDMUKX+“PSNRVPRVWKU) P SH)HY)øH UR)D)ITRQHøDXZQH)YøQHSHQ VDRXRHøY HWUH)QH+VHQRXFøPZQHM“QWHNNOKVøDPSMRHøV3. DVYZSH GHQ WHUH)MHNSH)D+HHERO +“QRXPQW+“OORHQDQRXVQ&ø SSHWRXDDEDSDSYøQWED+VHH D)Q NRW“N+“QRXPQWPDNDUøRV DXZDXWRPV“)+“QRXWDHøR P“QQH)HøRWHQDøQ WDXYZSH+D WH)+K 4. DXNDTøVWDGHRQQ NHRXDHSH)PDHSH)UDQSH

Lam 3:27; see Epistula Ammonis 3 (James E. Goehring, The Letter of Ammon and Pachomian Monasticism, Patristische Texte und Studien 27 (Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1986), 125.18–21), where Theodore employs the passage in the public instruction of a monk. 32 2 Cor 11:2. 33 1 Cor 14:25. 34 Ps 44:21.

A. White Monastery Codex GC

77

whenR^WDQ  he bears the yoke from his youth.’”35 ButGHY she did not want to follow him. 4. And GHY  when he saw that she was not persuaded SHLYTHLQ by him, he left everything behind (and) proceeded quickly without a second thought to the monasteryPRQDVWKYULRQ of Apa Pachomius.36 5. And GHY the one who was its superior at that time was himself a wonder in his life ELYRa and full of the perfume of the virtuesDMUHWKY . His name was Pshintbahse.37 And GHY it is this one about whom, in setting the account down, we now speak. He went up to him (and) imploredSDUDNDOHLCQ him to make him a monk PRQDFRYa  with him. And GHY  when he saw that his heart was strong, he received him in the flock DMJHOKY  of Christ, and he served under the immortal king. 6. And GHY  after he entered, he studied SDLVHXJZJHLCQ  the saint Apa Pachomius and the saint Apa Horsiesius and Apa Theodore. And GHY when he looked at and considered [10] the way of life DMQDVWURIKY of those ascetic DMVNKWKYa brothers, he was envious with a divine envy, asNDWDY Paul said, “I envy you with a divine envy.”38 ThereforeORLSRYQ he committed himself to difficult ascetic practices D>VNKVLa  and numerous ascetic disciplines SROLWHLYD . And GHY  these, God alone knew, as NDWDY it is written, “The things revealed are the hidden things of the heart.”39 And again, “God knows the hidden things.”40 IV.1 Meanwhile ORLSRYQ , the monastery41 was making progress, and the grape vine was growing DXM]DYQHLQ , sending forth blossoms daily, which are the elect ascetics DMVNKWKYa  who sprouted from it. 2. But GHY  the devil GLDYERORa  the hater of good, when (GHY) he saw the great way of life NDWDYVWDVLa  that exists in the monastery PRQDVWKYULRQ  and the faith SLYVWLa that is firm in the whole worldNRYVPRa , he was not able to bear it. He was jealous ITRQHLCQ  and sought an occasion to raise up a storm FHLCPZQ against the churchHMNNOKVLYD of the Lord. 3. And GHY  it happened when the saint Apa Pshintbahse [11] completed his span of life in good old age, that he fell asleep in blessednessPDNDYULRa , and they buried him with honor with his fathers who came before him. 4. And GHY they appointed another to his place whose name was  35 Lam 3:27; see Epistula Ammonis 3 (James E. Goehring, The Letter of Ammon and Pachomian Monasticism, Patristische Texte und Studien 27 (Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1986), 125.18–21), where Theodore employs the passage in the public instruction of a monk. 36 The federation’s central monastery of Pbow; see below, Panegyric V.3. 37 The Excerpt I.1–2 identifies Abraham’s predecessor as Sebastian. 38 2 Cor 11:2. 39 1 Cor 14:25. 40 Ps 44:21; see below, Panegyric VII.2. 41 Literally, “place,” which can refer to a monastery (Crum, Coptic Dictionary 153a).

78

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

1

DSDDEUD+DPSDøRQQHRXYSKUHSH+“PSH)EøRVDXZRQQH RXGXQDWRVSH+“QQH)DUHWKHP“QY&RPP PRQHYDMH  HWH)DQDVWURIK:-------- V.1. +“PSHRXRHøYGHHW“PPDX D)NøPQ&ø_SGøDERORVH SHFøPZQDXZD)QH+VHQRXYWRUW“U 5 H M“QWHNNOKÕVøDP SMRHøV+“PSWUH)QH+VHRXQQ &øRXUUR HSH)UDQSHøRXV7QøDQRVSDøGHQHUHSH)+KWWDNKXDXZ HUHSHC)aQRXVVRUړPH)OREH+“PSOøEHQ Q +DøUHWKNRV  Q WHUH)+PRRVGHHMPSHTURQRVD)7SH)+KWHMQ Q PQWUH)MøRXDQDUøRVP“QQHVWZUøRVDXZSGRPRVQ OHZQ 10 SDVHEKV:------ 2. ORøSRQD)V+DøQRXHSøVWROKHWHFZUD LE WKU“VQ NKPHYDQHSøVNRSRV NDWDPDDXZQ +XJRXPHQRV Q P PRQDVWKUøRQMHNDVHXQDEZNYDUR)HWSROøVQWPQWHUR  3. D)V+DøYDSSHWRXDDEDSDDEUD+DPSDøHWR Q+XJRXPHQRV HSERRXP SHRXRHøYHW“PPDXÚMHNDVH)QDEZNHSNRPHWDWøRQ 15 QH)DSDQWDHUR)4.Q WHUH)QDXGHHQHV+DøP SU URD)Mø Q“PPD)Q NH)WRRXQ VRQ+DPRøRQHQHP SH)MøWRXQ“PPD) D)WZRXQD)EZNYÚDSUÚURHSNRPHWDWZQ5. Q WHURXPHQHXH  P PRRXP S“UUR_D)NHOHXHHWUHXMøWRXQD)H+RXQD)YDMH P“QSHWR Q +XJRXPHQRVH)MZP PRVMHQ WDøùWQQRRXQ VD 20 WHW“QPQWSHWRXDDEHWEHRX+ZEQDQDJNDøRQ HWUHWHWQ>V@XÚQKQHøHW>Q@SøVWøVDXÚZQ WHW“QVXQDJHQ“PPDQ >Q @WD7QDNQRXÚHRRXP“QRXÚWDHøR HQDYZ>)@+“QWDPQWHUR6.  Q WR)GHSSHWRXDDEHW“PPDXP SH)SLTHH SHRRXHWQDWDNR DOODD)VZW“SQD)P SHRRXHWQDPRXQHEROYDHQH+  [4 leaves = 8 pages missing] >N D @25VI.1. H SøGKJDU+HQU“P+HQHHERO+“PSHø+ZESDøDXZ W“QHøPHH SDø+øùW“QQHXHSøVWROKHWRXV+DøP PRRX YDQHXHUKXHXWDHøR Q QHXHUKXQ +KWRXHUHSDøPRXWHHSDø  MHSDHøZWHUHSHøNHRXDPRXWHHSDøMHSDVRQDXZSDYEKU  U +ZEH+RXQHWPQWHUR Q“PSKXÚ>H@2. DOODMHNDVQ>QHQ@WDYH

Perhaps ½Q¾HUHSH)QRXV For the meaning of VXQDJH, see Hans Quecke, Untersuchungen zum koptischen Stundengebet, Publications de l’Institut orientaliste de Louvain 3 (Louvain: Université Catholique de Louvain – Institut Orientaliste, 1970), 118–24; G.W.H. Lampe, A Patristic Greek Lexicon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1961), VXQDYJHLQ. 42 43

A. White Monastery Codex GC

79

Apa Abraham. This one was also wondrous in his lifeELYRa  and mighty GXQDWRYa in his virtuesDMUHWKY , (such that) it is impossible for us to speak about his way of life DMQDVWURIKY . V.1 And GHY  at that time, the devil GLDYERORa  set the storm FHLCPZQ  in motion and raised up a disturbance against the churchHMNNOKVLYD of the Lord, while an emperor named Justinian was rising up.44 And GHY  his heart was corrupt and his mind YQRXCa  went astray, raging in the madness of the hereticsDL-UHWKNRYa . And GHY when he sat on the throne TURYQRa , he devoted himself to the blasphemies of Arius and Nestorius and the tome WRYPRa of the impious DMVHEKYa Leo. 2. In this connectionORLSRYQ , he wrote a letterHMSLVWROKY to the whole land FZYUD  of Egypt, to the bishopsHMSLYVNRSRa [12] in the various NDWDY places and the superiors K-JRXYPHQRa  of the monasteries PRQDVWKYULRQ  so that they might come to him in the imperial citySRYOLa . 3. He wrote to the saint, Apa Abraham, who was superior K-JRXYPHQRa  of Pbow at that time, so that he might come to the court NRPLWDCWRQ and appear D-SDQWDCQ before him. 4. And GHY when he saw the emperor’s letter,45 he took with him four other brothers – oh that he had not taken them with him – (and) arose (and) went to the emperor at the court NRPLWDCWRQ . 5. When they were announced PKQXYHLQ to the emperor, he ordered NHOHXYHLQ them to be brought before him. He spoke with the one who was (the) superior K-JRXYPHQRa saying, “I sent for your holinesses on account of a compelling DMQDJNDLCRa matter, so that you might agree VXQDLQHLCQ to our faith SLYVWLa and celebrate the Eucharist VXQDYJHLQ  with us, so that I might give you (sing.) glory and great honor in my empire. 6. But GHY that saint was not persuaded SHLYTHLQ by the glory that will perish, but DMOODY chose for himself the glory that will endure forever. [4 leaves = 8 pages missing] [21] VI.1 since HMSHLGK JDYU  they are free from this very thing. And we know this from their letters HMSLVWROKY which they wrote to one another, honoring one another, the one calling the other, “My father,” (and) the other calling him, “My brother and my fellow worker in the kingdom of the heavens.” 2. But lest we prolong   

44 Amél (744) translates “en faisant que s’éveillât un roi don’t le nom était Justinien,” and in a footnote to s’éveillât observes “C’est-à-dire: En mettant sur le trône.” 45 Literally, “letters”.

80

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

SYDMHHSH+RXRPDU“QNWRQHM“QWH)&øQHøHERO+øWRRW“) VII.1. Q WHUH)MøGHQ QHFDUWKVD)HøHERO+øWRRW“)+“Q RXHøUKQK:---- H)PRRYHGHP“QSVRQVQDXHWQ“PPD) YDQWH)HøHSWRRXP SH)7PH2. |DXEZNH>M“P@SWRRX 5 H>W“PPDX@DXVPøQ>HQDXP @SNRXø>P PDQ @YZS>HDXZ@QHXRXK+ Q>+KW“)@SHP“QQHXHUK>X@HUHSMRHøVYRRSQ“PPDXNDWD SHWVK++“PSHXDJJHOøRQMHSPDHWHUHVQDXK YRPQ W   VRRX+Q +KW“)+“PSDUÚDQ7YRRSQ“PPDX+“QWHXPKWHDXZ  DSYDMHP SHNOKVøDVWKVMZNHEROHMZRXMHS+RVH WR  10 Q YRPQ WQ UR )QD&HSKDQH VZO“S:------ QHXYRRSGHSH+“Q +HQDVNKVøVHXQDY“WDXZHXMDMZH PDWHQDøGHSQRXWH >N E @ PDXDD)SH7PHHURRX:----- 3. DVYZSHGHP“Q >QVD  +HQ@+RRXDXHø>YDUR)@Q &ø+HQNH>PRQDFR@V QVDY)  >Ì@WHXK>Ì@DXSDUDND>OH@øùPPR)HWUHX>&@Z+D+WK)Q WR)GH 15 D)YRSRXHUR)+“QRXUDYHHWEHMHQHRXPDøUZPHHSH+RXR  SHQHXYRRSGHSHP“QQHXHUKX+“PSUDYHP SHSQDHWRXDDE HXR Q RX+KWQ RXZW+“PS+ZEP SMRHøVQHX+HM+ZMGHSH+“Q  WHX&øQRXZ+HWEHMHQHRXNRXøSHSHXPDQ RXZ+4.  DVYZSHGHQRX+RRXDXYDMHP“QSHXHøZWMHDUKXNQDEZN 20 HEROHUDW“)P SWRRX_Q“JVPøQHQDQQRXPDQ YZSH+“PSPD H W“PPDX5. Q WR)GHQ WRXQRX+ZVHøZWQDJDTRVDXZP PDø QH)YKUHD)WZRXQ+“QRX&HSKP SH)DPHOHø+ROZVD)Hø HEROHUZ)P SWRRXYRU“SPHQD)YÚøNHP SNRXøùQYÚ>KL@DXZ RXNRPDUøRQHWEHSYKPQ RXR R WHQ QHVQKXP“QQHWSDUDJH 25 DXZDXNZWP SPDQ YZSHH)R Q QR&DXZQH)U +ZEP“QQHVQKX     1

46

Cf. Panegyric I.2. Matt 18:20. 48 Eccl 4:12. 49 For SHWHLPH. 50 Lacunae filled following Camp GC; >PRQDFR@V: the V is unclear. A short superlinear stroke appears over the letter, of which only the top and upper half of the right edge survive. There is no indication of an angle to the right edge or a break that would dictate an “s”, though context supports the emendation. 51 NRPDUøRQ: Greek NZPDYULRQ, a gloss on DMJULYGLRQ; Henry George Liddell, et al. A Greek-English Lexicon, 9th edition with a supplement (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968), s.v. 47

A. White Monastery Codex GC

81

the account too much,52 let us turn to his departure from him. VII.1 And GHY after he had received the papyri FDYUWKa ,53 he left him in peace HLMUKYQK . And GHY  he walked with the two brothers who were with him until he came to the mountain54 of his village. 2. They went up [on] that mountain55 and built [for themselves] a small dwelling [place,56 and] they lived [in it] together, the Lord being with them, asNDWDY it is written in the Gospel HXMDJJHYOLRQ , “Where two or three are gathered in my name, I am with them in their midst.”57 And the word of Ecclesiastes was fulfilled in them, “The rope that has three plies will not quickly break.”58 And GHY they led a life of difficult and very hard ascetic practices D>VNKVLa , and GHY it was God alone who knew it.59 3. And GHY it happened [22] [after a few] days (that) seven other [monks PRQDFRYa ] came [to him] [1 ½ lines damaged] They appealedSDUDNDOHLCQ to him to let them remain with him. AndGHY he received them joyfully because he was a great lover of mankind. And GHY they lived with one another joyfully in the Holy SpiritSQHXCPD , being single minded in the work of the Lord. ButGHY they were restricted in their way of life because their dwelling place was small. 4. And GHY it happened one day (that) they spoke with their father (saying), “Will you go to the foot of the mountain and build for us a dwelling place there?” 5. AndGHY immediately, like Z-a a goodDMJDTRYa  father who loves his children, he arose quickly (and) was not at all R^OZa  neglectfulDMPHOHLCQ . He went down to the foot of the mountain. First  PHYQ  he dug a small well and a little garden NZPDYULRQ for the few herbs for the brothers and those who pass bySDUDYJHLQ . And they built a large dwelling place, and he worked with the brothers,

52

Cf. Panegyric I.2. Papyri or documents. According to the Synaxarion, after his expulsion from Pbow, Abraham went first to the monastery of Shenoute, where he copied the rule and sealed it in a jar, from which he later reclaimed it. The reference here may be to his reclaiming of the copy of the rule from the superior of the monastery of Moses (see Synaxarion 686). 54 The Coptic term WRRX, which means “mountain,” is commonly used to refer to a “monastery,” “desert,” or “desert cemetery” (Crum, A Coptic Dictionary, 441a; Cadell and Rémondon, “Sens et employs de 72 >2526 dans les documents papyrologiques,” Revue des etudes grecques 80 (1967): 343–49). Given that here the story recounts the founding of the monastery, I have chosen to translate the term literally as “mountain.” It is possible, however, that Abraham initially settled in a loose community of anchorites near the village before withdrawing to establish a coenobitic monastery. Cf. Panegyric IX.3 where the term is more clearly used for monastery. 55 See note 52 above. 56 The Coptic term (PD), here translated as “place,” can also be used for a “monastery” or “cell” (Crum, A Coptic Dictionary, 153a). 57 Matt 18:20. 58 Eccl 4:12. 59 Literally “them,” referring to the ascetic practices; see above, Panegyric III.6. 53

82

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

1

HUHSMRHøV7Q WRRW“)NDWDTHHWVK++“PSDSRVWRORV:--MHW“QVRRXQMH [2 leaves = 4 pages missing]

N]  5

 10

 15 N K  20

 25

30

60

VIII.1 *WDVQD+PHH SøGKQ RXRHøYQøPSQRXWHMøHRRX+“P ^S`SYRMQHQQH)SHWRXDDEIX.1. DXHøVGHRQQ W“QMZ HUZW“QQ NHYSKUHH D SQRXWHHQHUJHøP PRVHERO+øWRRW“) P SHøSHWRXDDE2. Q WHUHWHV+øPHGHRQRXÚM>DL@DVEZN HS>HVKL@DV&ZORøSRQHVWDYHRHøYQ Q &RPP SHWRXDDENDWD SHWVK++“QQH\DOPRVMHVHQDYDMHHQHNYSKUHDXZ Q VHMZQ W&RPQ WHN+RWH3. ORøSRQQHUHRXUZPH+“PS7PH HW“PPDX_H)R Q +XWURSøNRVHUHSH)VZPDWKU)YREH Q WHUH)VZW“PGHHWHV+øPHHVWDXR P SRXMDøQ WD)YZSH QDVH ERO+øWRRW“)P SSHWRXDDED)SDUDNDOHøQ QH)UZPH HWUHXWDOR)Q VHMøW“)H+UDøH SWRRXHUDW“)P SSHWRXDDE4. Q WR>R@XG>H@RX>@UR>H@M“Q>R@XPDQ QNRW“NDXHQW“) H +UDøYDUR)DXSDUDNDOHøP SVRQHW“QSPDP SUR HWUH)Mø SRXZH+RXQÕYDSSHWRXDDE5. Q WHUH)EZNGHH+RXQQ &ø SVRQD)WDPR)MH RXQ RXUZPH+øU“PSUR H)RQ +XWURSøNRV DXZH)YREHWKU)D)VHSVZSWH)MZP PRVMHDUøWDJDSK Q“J)øP SDYøQHH+RXQP SQR&Q UZPHQ WR)GHD)RXZY“EH)MZ P PRVMHQ VHQDNDDQDQH VHU)HHWHQ\XFKM>L@QWHQRX6. Q >@RXÚ>@)Ú>@R>@DSVRQHWWKYHSNRXø QHXNWKUøRQH WUH)HøQHQD)QRXNRXøP PRRX+“PSORXWKU P SHTKVLDVWKUøRQD)MLW)D)EZNHEROYDUR)D)YO“OHMZ) D)WUH)_VZQRXNRXø+“PSPRRXH)MZP PRVQD)MHNDWD WHNSøVWøVPDUHVYZSHQDN7. DXUPQWUHQDQQ &ø+HQVQKX QHXODEHVWDWRVDXZP PDøQRXWHH QDSH)PRQDVWKUøRQQH MHQ WHU“QEZNYÚ>DU@R)ÚQ RXVRS>H&“P@SH)YøQHMHMøQ WHXQRXQ WDSPRRXEZNHSHVKWH +KW“)D)WDXR HSHVKW Q +HQPDWRX+ø+RXQPPR)HXRXHWRXZWQ THQRXMQK DSH)VZPDWKU“)NRXIø]HHERO+“PSYZQHD)U THP SDRX

Rom 8:28 (?). Ps 145:5-6. ϲϮ DUøWDSDJK: cf. GreekSRLHLCQDMJDYSK; cf. Lampe, A Patristic Greek Lexicon, 8a. 61

A. White Monastery Codex GC

83

the Lord helping him asNDWDY it is written in the apostleDMSRYVWRORa “We know that63 [2 leaves = 4 pages missing] [27] VIII.1 she was saved, since HMSHLGKY God is always glorified in the counsel of his saints. IX.1 But GHY  come, let us tell you another wonder that God worked HMQHUJHLCQ through this saint. 2. After + GHY the woman was cured, she departed to her home. She continued furtherORLSRYQ to proclaim the powers of the saint, as NDWDY it is written in the Psalms\DOPRYa , “They will speak of your wonders and tell of your fearful power.”64 3. Furthermore ORLSRYQ there was a man in that village who suffered (so) from dropsy X-GUZSLNRYa  that his whole body VZCPD  was deformed. And GHY  when he heard the women recounting the cure that had happened to her through the saint, he implored SDUDNDOHLCQ his people to lift him up and take him to the monastery to the saint.65 4. And GHY  they [2 lines damaged] on a litter (and) brought him to it (the monastery). They implored SDUDNDOHLCQ  the brother at the gate to carry the news in to the saint. 5. And GHY when the brother went in, he reported that [28] there was a man at the gate who had dropsy X-GUZSLNRYa and was all deformed. He begged me, saying, “Please DMJDYSK , take my request to the great man.” But GHY he answered, saying, “We are not free ourselves (\XFKY to attend (to him) at present.” [2 lines damaged] 6. the brother who was assigned to the small oratory HXMNWKYULRQ  to bring him a little water from the basin ORXWKYU  in the sanctuary TXVLDVWKYULRQ . He took it (and) went to him. He prayed over him (and) had him drink a little of the water, saying to him, “In accordance with NDWDY your faithSLYVWLa , let it happen to you.” 7. Some most devout HXMODEHYVWDWRa and pious brothers from his monasteryPRQDVWKYULRQ testified to us (saying), “When we went once to visit him, (he said) that as soon as the water went down into his stomach,66 he vomited up poisons that were green as an herb. His whole body VZCPD was relievedNRXILY]HLQ of the illness (and) became like 



63

Rom 8:28 (?). Ps 145:5–6. Literally, “mountain”; see note 52 above. 66 Literally, “into his heart.” 64 65

84

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

[10 leaves = 20 pages missing] P T 1 X.1 DVYZSHGHQ WHUH)DUFHøH SNZWNDWDSHQWDQYU S  MRR)DXZQ WHUHSNZWMÑLVHD)U +QD)Q &LSQRXWHH 7P WRQ QD)HERO+“QQH)+øVH2. DVYZSHGH+“QVRXDP SHERWHSKS SHMDX+“QWSDYHQ WHXYKQH)D+HUDW“)H)YO“ONDWD 5 WH)VXQKTøDD)&ZYWD)QDXHQHQHøR WHHWRXDDE Q WNRøQZQøDHWHDSDSD+RPZSHP“QDSDSHWUZQøRVP“QDSD YHQRXWHP SWRRXQDWUøSHDXHøYDUR)DXZQ WHUH)QDX _HURRXD)SZWHERO+KWRXD)RXZY“WQDX+“PSH)+R H +UDø HM“PSND+DXDPD+WHP PR)DXWRXQRV“)DXDVSD]HP PR)3. 10 DXZSHMDXQD)MH7UKQKQDNSHQWD)NZWH+UDøH M“QWV QWH Q WDQNDDVH +UDøV“EWZW“NWDUHNHø+D+WKQ:--- H SHøGK DSQRXWHQDXH WHNEZQHORROHMHDVDX[DQHDXZWHNEZ Q MRHLWMHDVWH&NODGRVHEROD)RXZYH7P WRQQDNHWEH SDLD)W“QQRRXQYDURNHWUHQWDPRNHWEHSHNHøHERO+“Q Q 15 VZPD4. DXZMHQ WRNDQSHWQDMZNHEROP SNZWDOOD THR IøORVSHWQDHøP“QQ VZNH7NHVRRXQHERWHWHRXQ  WDNVRX+“PSHøNRVPRV5. +ZQHWRRWRXQ QHNYKUH HWUHX+DUH+HQHQWROKP“QQ QRPRVQDøQ WDQMøWRXHERO+øW“P SMRHøVHDQWDDXQ RXRQQøPHWRXHYRQ“++“QRXPÂQÂWHXVHEKV 20 DXZTHR IøORVPDUH)SUR+øVWDNDOZVP SR R +H Q WDXWDQ+RXW“)H UR)DXZQ WHURXMHQDø_QD)D)OR H)QDX H URRX6. Q WHUH+WRRXHGHYZSHD)PRXWHH øZ+DQQKV D)YDMHQ“PPD)H)MZPPRVMH7PHHXHMHDSDRXR HøY+ZQ H +RXQHWUDEZN+øWH+øK Q QDHøRWHWKURXPRXWHH THR IL ORV 25 Q WHW“QHøWDWDPZW“QH +ZEQøP:---- 7. DXZQ WHURXHøSHMD) QDXMHQ WZW“QP SHVQDXWHW“QQDXHURø+“QWD&LQEZNH+RXQ Q D P“QWD&LQHøHERODXZMHP SHø +RN“W+“QWD&RPWKU“V H W“PWDPZWQDXZQHVQKXWKURXHQHQWROKP“QQGøNDøZPD Q QHQHøR WHDXZSYRMQHWKU“)P SQRXWHHWEHSDøSURVHFH 30 HUZW“QP“QSRR+HWKU“)SDøQ WDSHF“VNDWKXW“QQDUFKJRV HMZRXHøWH+RRXWHøWHV+øPHMHSMRHøVQDMQRXÚW“Q HQHX\XFK8. DQRNJDUDSHRXÚRHøYP SDEZOHERO+ZQH+RXQ 67 A stack of three short horizontal lines with a diagonal stroke or tail below appears below the right column; so too on page H. 68 Cf. Ps 121:8.

A. White Monastery Codex GC

85

[10 leaves = 20 pages missing] [49] X.1 And GHY it happened after he had begunD>UFHLQ the building, as NDWDY was already mentioned, and when the building was (quite) high, God desired to grant him rest from his labor. 2. And GHY it happened on the first day of the month of EpƝp,69 they say, (that) in the middle of the night he was standing and praying as NDWDY was his customVXQKYTHLD . He looked (and) saw our holy fathers of the federation NRLQZQLYD , Apa Pachomius and Apa Petronius and Apa Shenoute of the monastery70 of Atripe. They came to him, and when he saw them, he ran to them (and) greeted them with his face downcast towards the earth. They embraced him, raised him up, (and) greeted DMVSDY]HLQ him. 3. And they said to him, “Peace HLMUKYQK to you who has built upon the foundation that we laid. Prepare yourself to come with us. Because HMSHLGKY God has seen that your grapevine has grown DXM[DYQHLQ and that your olive tree has sprouted branchesNODYGRa , he has desired to grant you rest. Therefore he has sent us to you to inform you concerning your departure from (the) body VZCPD . [50] 4. And it will not be you who completes the building, but DMOODY Theophilus, who will come after you. You still H>WL have another six months in this worldNRYVPRa . 5. Bid your children to keep the commandments HMQWROKY  and laws QRYPRa  that we received from the Lord (and) have given to everyone who desires to live piously HXMVHEKYa . And let Theophilus lead SURLVWDYQDL  well NDOZCa the flock entrusted to him. And after they said these things, to him, he stopped seeing them. 6. And when morning came, he called John (and) spoke with him saying, “I think that my time has come to go the way of all our fathers. Call Theophilus and come, and I will tell you everything.” 7. And when they came, he said to them, “You two see me in my coming in and my going forth,”71 and “Have I not [51] exerted myself with all my strength to tell you and all the brothers about the commandments HMQWROKY and rulesGLNDLYZPD  of our fathers and the whole counsel of God? Therefore pay heed SURVHYFHLQ  to yourselves and the entire flock, those over whom Christ placed you as head DMUFKJRYa , whether HL>WH  male or HL>WH  female, because the Lord will ask you about their souls\XFKY . 8. For me, the time of my departure approaches,  

69

June 25. Literally, “mountain”; see note 52 above. 71 Cf. Ps 121:8. 70

86

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

1 DXZ7PHHXHMHNHVRRXQHERWQHWHRXQ WDøVRX+“P SHøNRVPRVND_WDTHQ WDXWRXQRXHøDWHERO+øW“PSMRHøV9. Q WHUH)MHQDøGHQDXDXÚRXZY“EHXUøPHMHHUHSQRXWH QD+RXUZQP SHN+R+“PSHRXR HøYHW+RVHQ WR)GHSHMD)MH 5 SHQWD)YÚZSHD)Ú>Ì@Q >Ì@> lines missing@>Ì@Q R“X>Ì@D)MWR 10. >HSYZ@QH+“PS>QDX@HWPPD>XDXZ@RQP SH>)NDQ @WRRW) Q E >HERO@ +“QQH)DVNKVøVH WHøH)YRRS+“PSYZQHDOOD QH)RXZ+H MZRXSHP PKKQHDXZQH)PRXN“+P PR)HSH+RXR  QH)PKQGHHERO+“PSYZQHQ7+HQ WH>Ì@GHH>8 lines 10 missing@>Ì@Q WR)>Ì@WHHUR>Ì@ZQWH>Ì@SPDH >Ì@NR W“N>Ì@ )XI.1. >D)DU@FHøQYDMH_Q“PPDXDXÚZH MZH UÚRRX >Q @QHQWROKP“QQ QRPRVP SMRHøVDXZSHMD)QDXMHVZW“P HURøWDMZHUZW“QQ QHWQDYZSHP PZW“Q+“PSVKXHWHWQDNZ  Q VZW“QQQHQWROKP“QQ QRPRVP SMRHLVQDøQ WDQHQHøRWH 15 NDDXQDQH+UDøQ VHYZSHHXPQWPQWUHH UZW“Q+“PSH+RRX Q WHNUøVøVDXZH WUDYZSHHøRXDDEHERO+“PSHW“QVQR) >Q J @ WKUW“Q2. HWEHSDø7UPQWUHQKW“QP SRRXQWSH P“QSND+MH H WHW“QYDQUDNWKXW“QHEROPPRRXSMRHøVQDUDNW“)HERO  P PZW“QQ WHW“QYZSHH WHW“QYDDWDXZHWHW“QU &UZZ+Q +ZE 20 QøPDXZ+“QWH+UHP“QÕT“EV“ZDXZNDQHUYDQSNRVPRVWKU)  YZSH+“QRXZZOHH WHWQDYZSHQ WZW“Q+“QRXYZZWHWEHSDø MHDWHW“QNZQ VZW“QQ Q QRPRVP SMRHøVHQWDXWDDXHWRRW“Q Q &øQHQHøRWHÕHWRXDDEH WHDSDSD+ZPZÕ_SHP“QDSD  Y>H@QRXWH3. DXZRQH WHW“QY>DQ@D+H UDWWK>X@W“QQ +KWRX 25 Q WHW“Q+DUH+HURRXQ WHW“QDDXSMRHøVSQRXWHQDSZ+“W P SH)VPRXH+UDøH M“PWKXW“QQH)VPRXH UZW“QQ WHW“QYZSH H WHW“QRXR ROH+“Q+QDDXQøPHWYRRSQKW“QHøWH+“QWH+UH HøWH+“QT“EVZDXZNDQHUYDQSNRVPRVWKU“)YZSH+“Q  RX+RM+HMP“QRX&UZZ+WHWQDYZSHQ WZW“Q+“QRXZZOHP“Q >QG@30 RXVPRX4. Q WHUH) >M@HQDøGHQDXD)NDDXH ERODX>E@ZN H QHXKø>H@XÚPRN“+Q +KW>H@WEHQ YDMHQ WDXVZW“PHURRXHERO +øWRRW“)DXZQHXOXSHøP PDWHMHHXQD+RXUZQQ RXHøZW Q7PøQHXII.1. Q WR)GHSSHWRXDDEQH)PKQH ERO+“PSYZQH  DXZQH))øH+UDø+“QRXPQWMZZUHQ WHUH)+ZQGHH+RXQQ &ø 35 S+RXPøVHP SMRHøVD)H SøTXPHøH )øQ WDQDIRUD+“PSH+RRX

72

Note the shift to the authorial voice “we” (Q).

A. White Monastery Codex GC

87

and I believe that I have another six months in this world NRYVPRa , since (NDWDY I have been informed by the Lord.” 9. And GHY after he said these things to them, they replied weeping, “Will God deprive us of your presence at (this) troubled time?” AndGHY he said, “He who was [11 lines wanting] 10. he fell [ill] at that [time, and] he did not [stop] [52] his ascetic practices D>VNKVLa even though H>WL he was ill, but DMOODY he added to them daily and was afflicted greatly. AndGHY he continued in the illness in this manner. [15 lines wanting] XI.1 He beganD>UFHLQ to speak with them and tell them the commandmentsHMQWROKY and laws QRYPRa of the Lord. And he said to them, “Listen to me, that I might tell you what will happen to you when you abandon the commandmentsHMQWROKY and lawsQRYPRa of the Lord that our fathers laid down for us, that they will be a testimony against you on the day of judgment NULYVLa and I will be innocent of all of your blood. 2. Therefore I bear witness to you today in heaven [53] and earth that if you turn away from them, the Lord will turn away from you, and you will be lacking and in need of everything, both food and clothing. And even ifND>Q the whole worldNRYVPRa  were flourishing, you yourselves would be in need because you abandoned the laws QRYPRa  of the Lord that our holy fathers gave us, namely Apa Pachomius and Apa Shenoute. 3. And again if you stand fast in them, observe them, and keep them, the Lord God will pour forth his blessing upon you and bless you, and you will flourish in everything that exists for you, bothHL>WH  in food and HL>WH in clothing. And even ifND>Q the whole worldNRYVPRa  were in distress and need, you yourselves would flourish and be blessed.” 4. And GHY  after he [54] said these things to them, he dismissed them. They went to their houses troubled at heart because of the words that they had heard from him. And they were greatly distressedOXSHLCQ that we73 would be deprived of such a father. XII.1 And GHY  the saint continued in the illness, and endured with strength. And GHY  as the nativity of the Lord approached, he wanted HMSLTXPHLCQ to make the eucharistic offering DMQDIRUDY on that day; 

73

Note the shift to the authorial voice “we.” Literally “to carry or lift the offering”; the term refers to the offering of the eucharist; cf. Lampe, A Patristic Greek Lexicon, s.v. 74

88

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

1 HW“PPDXQHWH)+DK JDUWHDXZDXDPD+WHP PR)Q &ø THR IøORVP“QøZ_+DQQKVHWEHMHDSH)VZPDND&RPHERO +øW“PSZVNP SYZQHDXZD))øQ WDQDIRUDP SH+RRX H W“PPDX:---- 2. Q WH^)`UH)MZNGHHEROQ WVXQD[øVDXZ 5 QH)NDSPKKYHHEROD)EZNH +RXQHSWRSRVQ QHWYZQHD))ø Q WH)RXHUKWHH +UDøHM“PSH&OR&DXZP SH)RXZ+HWRRW“) H NDDXHSHVKWYDSH+RRXP SH)PRXHWEHMHDSYZQH+URY H+UDøH MZ)HSH+RXR 3. DVYZSHGH+“PSH+RRXQ VRXVRRX 1H Q WZEHP SQDXÕQ M“SYRPWHP SH+RRX D)PRXWHMHøZ+DQQKV 10 PRXWHQDøHQHVQKX4. D)RXZ+RQHWR R W“)D)YDMHQ“PPDX +“QWHVEZP SMRHøVP“QQH)Q WROKDXZSHMD)QDXMH 7+WKW“QH UZW“QQHVQKXDXZQ WHW“QURHøVHQHW“Q+KWMH Q QHSMDMHMR Q +KWWKXW“QQ QHøHQWK&HTRRXH WHQDøQH RXPRVWHH+RXQHQHW“QHUKXRXPQWMDMHRXQRX&VP“Q 15 RX&ZQ“WRXNZ+P“QRX7WZQRXPQWUH)VNRSWHøRXNDWDODOøD RXVSDWDODRXVZEHRXPQWPDøWR Q +RXR RXPQW_PDøWH QP WRQPDXDDQP“QQ NHSHTRRXWKURXQDøQ WDQHQHøRWH H WRXDDEV+DøVRXHWUHQ)øWRXH EROQ +KW“Q5. NDøJDU D)MRRVQ &øRXDQ QHWRXDDEMHQDYQ +HQHQWDQHXVZPD 20 YRRXH+øW“QWDVNKVøVDXZDWHXWDSUR OZP“V+DSH+NRP“Q SHøEHH UHSQRXWHR Q MDMHH URRXDXZP SRX7+KXQ O>D@DX HWEHSPCRaVWHHW+“PSHX+KWH+RXQH QHW+øWZRX6. HWEH SDø&HQHVQKXW“EERQQHW“Q+KWHEROÕ+“QQHøSHTRRXWKURX 1A Q 7PøQHMHNDVH UHSMRHLV YZSHQ“PPKW“QQ THQ WD)YZSH 25 P“QQHQHøR WHWKURXDXZQH)QH+“PWKXW“QHERO+“Q&RU&VQøP Q WHSDQ7NøPHQRVSGøDERORVQH)WRXMHWKXW“QH +RXQ H WH)PQWHUR HW+“0WSH7. Q WHUH)MHQDøGHQDXD)NZ P PRRXH ERODXZP SH)YDMHQ“PPDXQ ODDXYD+UDø H VRXMRXWYRPWHP SHERWQ WZZEH:---- XIII.1 DVYZSHGH 30 P SH+RRXHW“PPDXP SQDXQ MS WPKWHP SH+RRXD)PCRaXWHRQ MHøZ+DQQKVPRX_WHH THR ILORVQDøDXZQHVQKXWKURX DXHøRQYDUR)HUHQHXU“PHøRRXHYRXR HM“QQHXRXRR&H2. D)DUFHøRQQ YDMHQ“PPDX+“QTRWHP SMRHøVDXZSHMD)QDX MHHøVSPH+YRPÂQÂWQ VRSSHSDøHøWDXR H UZW“QQ QHQWROK 75 In the following list of evil actions, the initial R of each is outlined in red. A similar, though different, list appears in Panegyric XIII.2. 76 HøÑV written below MR.

A. White Monastery Codex GC

89

for it was his last. And Theophilus and John took hold of him because his body VZCPD  had lost strength through the duration of the illness. And he made the offering DMQDIRUDY on that day. 2. And GHY after he finished the Eucharist VXYQD[La  and dismissed the multitude, he went to the infirmary WRYSRa .77 He put his feet up on the bed and did not again put them down to the day of his death because the illness was very heavy upon him. 3. And GHY it happened on the sixth day of Tobe78 in the third hour of the day [*p. 55] *he called, “John, call the brothers to me.” 4. And once again he spoke with them about the teaching of the Lord and his commandments HMQWROKY  And he said to them, “Pay attention, brothers, and guard your hearts, so that the enemy might not sow among you these evil weeds, which are hatred towards one another, enmity, wroth and anger, envy and strife, plotting VNHYSWHVTDL , slander NDWDODOLYD , indulgence VSDWDYOK , derision, covetousness, love of one’s own ease,79 and all the other evils which our holy fathers wrote down so as to remove them from among us. 5. For JDYU  one of the saints also NDLY  said, ‘How is it that those whose bodies have dried up through ascesis (D>VNKVLa and whose mouths stink from hunger and thirst have God as an enemy and have gained nothing because of the hatred in their heart towards their neighbors.’80 6. Therefore, brothers, purify your hearts from all these kinds of evil, so that the Lord may [56] be with you as he was with all our fathers and rescue you from every trap of the adversary DMQWLNHLYPHQRa , the devil GLDYERORa , and save you into his kingdom in heaven.” 7. And GHY after he said these things to them, he dismissed them, and did not speak with them (again) until the twenty-third day of the month of Tobe.81 XIII.1 And GHY  it happened on that day at twelve noon he called again, (saying), “John, call Theophilus to me and all the brothers.” They came to him again, their tears streaming over their cheeks. 2. He began again to speak with them about the fear of the Lord, and said to them, “Behold, this is the third time that I am proclaiming to you the commandments HMQWROKY 

77

Literally, “to the place of those who are ill.” January 1. 79 A similar, though different, list appears at Panegyric XIII.2. 80 Cf. Apophthegmata Patrum, Anonymous Series, Nau 222 (F. Nau, “Histoire des solitaires égyptiens,” Revue d’orient chrétien 14 (1909): 357-79; Benedicta Ward, The Wisdom of the Desert Fathers (Oxford: SLG Press, 1975), 29 (saying 90)). I thank Douglas BurtonChristie for this reference. 81 January 18. 78

90

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

1 P“QQ QRPRVP SMRHøVHWEHSDøRQSMRHøVR P PÂQÂWUHQ“PPDL MH7RXDDEHERO+“PSHW“QVQR)SOKQ7UPQWUHQKW“QDXZ HøZ U“NH UZW“QP SQRXWHH W“PWUHWHW“QNZQ QHøHQWK&HTRRX 1 ] HWZ&HQ +KWWKXW“Q QDøQ WDQY“US MZRX H UZWQDXZRQ 5 W“QQDMRRXWHQRXRXPQW MDVø+KWHWHWDøWHWERWH P SQRXWHRXPQWQDY“W+KWRXPQWDWVZW“PRXPQWEDEHUZPH RXPQWPDø+RPQWRXPQWUH)MHYDMHQHSUDRXMøRXH RX&RORXMZ+“PP“QRXVZZ)R>X@PQWUH)EZOHEROQHQWRO>K@ QøP3. 7UPQWUHQKW>Q@MHHYZZS>H@HWHW“QYDQDX[DQH+“Q 10 QDøDXZQ WHQDøDX[DQHQ +KWWKXW“Q+“QRXWDNR WHWQD_WDNR  DXZWHWQDYZSHHWHW“QYDDWDXZH WHW“Q+HM+ZMH PDWH4. H YZSH+ZZ)HWHW“QYDQHøUHQQHQWROKWKURXP“QQ QRPRV P SMRøVWHWQDYZSHH WHW“QRXZOHDXZQ WHW“QU +RXR +“Q+ZE  QøPXIV.1. Q WHUH)MHQDøG>HÌ@>7 lines missing@>Ì@Q>Ì@ 1 K 15 WR>Ì@PQW>Ì@WS>Ì@P >Ì@Q>Ì@2. SHF“VSHQMRHøV SDøH WHUHH RRXQøPSUHSHøQDNQ“PPD)P“QSHSQDHWRXDDE YDHQH+QHQH++DPKQQ WHUH)MZNGHHEROP S+DPKQ DXRXZY“EWKURXMH+DPKQP“QQ VZVD)WDDXH WRRW“) P SMRHøVH)MZPPRVMHHøV+KK>WH@Z>Ì@>8 lines 20 missing@>Ì@QKV>Ì@Q>Ì@P SH>Ì@P>Ì@Z3. |P PRVQDXYD YRPQWQ VRSMHPRRQHNDOZVQ QHVRRXQ WDXWDDX H WZWWKXW“Q:----90 4. Q WHUH)MHQDøGHQDXDXDVSD]HP PR) WKURXQ &øQHVQKX+“PSDVSDVPRVQ +DK DXMøVPCRaXHERO +øWRRW“)DXEZNHQHXKø5. THR IøORVGHP“QøZ+DQQKV 25 QHX+PRRV+D+WK)>Q@WR)GHQH)MZDXZQH)\DOOHø+“P 82 Rudolphe Kasser, Compléments au dictionnaire copte de Crum (Cairo: L’Institut français d’archéologie orientale, 1964) lists MZ as Svl (=langue vulgaire ou lapsus, fantaisie de scribe). 83 In the following list of evil actions, the initial R of each is outlined in red. A similar, though different, list appears in Panegyric XII.4. 84 Kasser, Compléments, lists EDEH as A2o. 85 Cf. 1 Tim 6:10. 86 Cf. Titus 1:10. 87 Cf. Gal 5:9. 88 Lines 1–3 and 6–7 each decorated to left of the first letter with a dipple ( > ); lines 4-5 with a dot and dipple ( ·> ); all likely outlined in red. The decoration began on the preceeding page with line 25 of the right hand column, though the text here is missing. 89 The tops of the letters before the final Z are visible. The remains could be read as +KK>WH@WPQZ. 90 John 21:16.

A. White Monastery Codex GC

91

and laws QRYPRa of the Lord. Therefore the Lord is my witness that I am innocent of your blood. But SOKYQ I bear witness to you and adjure you before God not to permit these evil weeds to sprout among you, [57] those which we already recited for you, and we will recite them again now:91 arrogance, which is the abomination of God, hardness of heart, disobedience, boastfulness, love of money,92 idle speech,93 blaspheming, lying, impurity and licentiousness,94 undoing all the commandments HMQWROKY . 3. I bear witness to you that if you grow DMQDX[DYQHLQ in these (things) and these (things) grow DXM[DYQHLQ in you destructively, you will perish, and you will be wanting and very distressed. 4. If, on the other hand, you perform all the commandments HMQWROKY and the laws QRYPRa of the Lord, you will flourish and abound in all things.” XVI.1 After he said these things, [15 lines wanting] [58] 2. Christ, our Lord. Together with him and the Holy Spirit SQHXCPD  all glory is fitting (SUHYSHLQ for you forever and ever,95 AmenDMPKYQ .” When he finished the amen DMPKYQ , they all answered “Amen DMPKYQ .” Afterwards, he entrusted them to the Lord, saying, “Behold… [15 lines wanting] 3. it to them three times: “Tend well NDOZCa the sheep that are entrusted to you.”96 4. After he said these things to them, all the brothers bid him farewell DMVSDY]HLQ with a final embraceDMVSDVPRYa ,97 were blessed by him, and went to their houses. 5. Theophilus GHY and John were sitting beside him, and GHY he was speaking and singing psalms \DYOOHLQ in  

91

The ensuing list, however, is different from the previous list (Panegyric XII.4). Cf. 1 Tim 6:10. 93 Cf. Titus 1:10. 94 Cf. Gal 5:9; “defilement and pollution.” 95 Literally: “This one who all glory is due to you with him and the Holy Spirit forever and ever.” 96 John 21:16. 97 Literally: “the brothers greeted (DMVSDY]HLQ) him with a final greeting (DMVSDVPRYa); for the sense of “bidding a final farewell,” see Liddell, A Greek-English Lexicon, DMVSDY]RPDL  92

92

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

1 SH)+KW>H@SMRHøVP >S@QDXGHQ M“S>W@PKWHQ WHXYKD)RXZQ Q UZ)H)MZP PRVMHSMRHøVSDQRXWHHNH7THQDø H WUDRXZY“WP SHNP WRHERO  [3 leaves = 6 pages missing] ½[ H ¾ XV.1 Q VD)SH>DX@ZQ WR)RQPSRRXSHDXZRQ>Y@DHQHø 5 H QH+HWEHSDø+ZZ)QHW“U+RWH+KW“)H WHøUH Q WGøNDøRVXQKQH)>P@QWQDYZSHQDX2. W“QQDXJDU HQGøNDøRVWHQRXHXURXR HøQQ THP SUK+øW“QQ &RPP“Q QHYSKUHH WHUHSQRXWHHøUHP PRRXHERO+øWRRWRX+“P SHXZQ“+DXZP“QQ VDSHXPRXHWWDHøKXNDWDSHWVK+MH 10 SPRX Q QH>W@RXDDEP SMR>HøV@WDHøKXP SH)P WRHEROHWEH SDøPHQQHXVZPDQ WDXPRXVHWZP“V_PPRRX+ZRXQ TH Q Q VZPDQ QHQWDXPRXWKURXDOODVH&HHWDQ+ZVNZZV DOODVHHQHUJHøQ +HQYSKUHSDUDQHWRQ“++RVZQSVZPD PHQP SPDNDUøRVH OøVVDøRVQH)&HHWSH+“PSWDIRV+ZV 15 NZZVDOODQH)WRXQRXVGHQ Q UH)PRRXW3. Q WHø+HGHRQ SHQHøZWHWRXDDEP SURIKWKVDXZQDUFKPDQGULWKVDSD DEUD+DPP“QQ VDWUHSMRHøV&PSH)YøQHQH)HøHERO+“Q [A VZPDQHUHSQRXWHHQHUJHøQ +HQW>D@O>&R@P“Q+HQ YSKUH HERO+øWRRW“)+“PSPDH WH)WRP“VQ +KW“)WHQRXDOODW“QQDMH 20 +HQNRXøHXHRRXPSQRXWHP“QSH)SHWRXDDEXVI.1. DVYZSH GHP“QQ VDWUHSMRHøV&PSH)YøQHNDWDTHQ WDøYUSMRRV DXZSUZYHQ &RP+øYSKUHDXYZSH+øWRRW“)H RXH ERO Q +KWRXWHWDø2. RXUZPHGHMH+KOøDVQ MRXERXUHH)KS HSWRYQDQ7QRRXRXSURWHNWZUSHQ U“PPDRH PDWHH)R  25 P SRWDNUøRVD)VZWPHWEHQ &RPP“QQHYSKUÚHH WHUHSQR>XWH H@_QHUÚJHLP PRRXH ERO+øW“PS+“OORH WRXDDED)WDOHHXMRø D)HøHUÚKVH SPRQDVWKUøRQ3. H)WDOKXHXW“EQKH)R &“U+LôW“P SYZQ>H@HXWZRXQP PR)H+RXQHERO+øW“QRX+RXUøRQDXZ 

The ms. reads J which, though an obvious error, is very clear and distinct, and decorated with the usual pattern used by the scribe to set off page numbers. Stephen Emmel kindly confirmed this reading for me on his visit to Naples in March 2003. 99 Cf. Ps 116.15. 100 Cf. 2 Kgs 13:20–21. 98

A. White Monastery Codex GC

93

his heart to the Lord. And GHY  in the middle of the night, he opened his mouth saying, “Lord, my God, permit me to worship in your presence. [3 leaves = 6 pages missing] [65] XV.1 He is yesterday, and he is today and still forever. But therefore those who fear him (and) act (with) righteousnessGLNDLRVXYQK will have his charity. 2. For we see the righteous GLYNDLRa  now shining like the sun through the miracles and wonders that God works through them in their lives and afterwards (in) their honored death, as (NDWDY it is written: “The death of the Lord’s saints is honored by his presence.”101 Therefore they do indeed PHYQ bury their dead bodiesVZCPD like the bodies VZCPD of all who have died, but DMOODY  they do not remain as Z-a  corpses. Rather DMOODY  they work HMQHUJHLCQ  wonders among SDUDY  the living, such as R^VRQ indeed PHYQ  the body VZCPD  of the blessed PDNDYULRa  Elisha remained in the tomb WDYIRa  as Z-a  a corpse, but DMOODY  raised the dead.102 3. In this way also our holy father, the prophet SURIKYWKa  and archimandrite DMUFKPDQGULYWKa Apa Abraham, after the Lord visited him (and) he left the bodyVZCPD , God workedHMQHUJHLCQ cures and [66] wonders through him at the place where he is now buried. ButDMOODY we will tell a few (stories) to the glory of God and his saint. XVI.1 And GHY it happened after the Lord visited him, as NDWDY  I said before. And numerous miracles and wonders took place through him, this being one of them. 2. A man named Elias of Djouboure, a protector protektor)103 of the very rich from the district104 of Antinoë, suffered from gout SRGDYJUD .105 He heard about the miracles and wonders that God worked HMQHUJHLCQ  through the holy old man, boarded a ship, (and) came south to the monastery PRQDVWKYULRQ . 3. Seated on a donkey106 (and) stiff107 from the disease, he was carried in by a gate keeperRX>ULRQ .108 And  101

Cf. Ps 116:15. Cf. 2 Kgs 13:20–21. 103 Latin protector, meaning “protector” or “bodyguard.” 104 Literally “reckoned to the district.” 105 See Historia Monachorum in Aegypto 26 where a John in Diolcos “was especially successful at healing people afflicted with paralysis and gout.” 106 The transition from having boarded the ship to sitting on the donkey is missing from the text. 107 What I translate as stiff (H)R&U), Zoega (547 n. 1) suggests as “tremere,” “vacillare;” Amél (748) translates “ayant froid.” 108 From the Greek RX>ULRQ, meaning “ward” or “watch;” Liddell, A Greek-English Lexicon, s.v. directs one to RX?URa (“watcher” or “guardian”) and gives the synonym TXUZURYa, which translates “door-keeper;” hence the monastery gatekeeper, which was a known position in the Pachomian system. I thank Tim Vivian for this insight. On the Pachomian Gatekeeper, see Goehring, The Letter of Ammon, 193 and 279. 102

94

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

1 Q WHXQRXQ WD)QRM“)+øMZ)D)DøWHøQ WZW“QQRXHøGRV HSDSHQHøZWSHDSDDEUD+DPH WUH)NDD)H MQ QH)RXHUKWH 4. DQRQGHDQWUHXHøQHQD)P SH)>+@XSRWXPDH WRXDDE Q WHUH)ÚMøW“)GHD)WDD)H QH)RXHUKW+“QRXSøVWøVQ WHXQRX 5 GHD)VRR+H  [1 leaf = 2 pages missing] >[ T @

XVII.1. R@XQR&P SXU>J@RVH WUHXRXZ+Q +KW“)HUYDQ RXWDUDFKYZSHMHNDVQQHRX\XFK+HH EROQ +KWRXP“QQ VZV D)EZNHSH)KøH)7HRRXP SQRXWHH M“PSH+PCRaWQ WD)WD+R) XVIII.1. DVYZSHGHRQQRXURPSHDXU“PSYøUHYZSH+øW“P 10 SRXH+>V@D+QHP SMRHøV>D@QUZPHYZZWHQRHøNSURVTH Q WDQ>V@ZW“P:----- 2. >QH@XQ RXUZPH>S@H+“PSHQKHø W>H@RXQ WD)RXVX>Q@KQ RHøND)WD>QR@QRXV5RV>Q RHøN D)QR@M)>HSHVKWHVKQHDXZQ WHUH)@_PR+“VD)VZO“&P PRV D)WRREHVSHMD)Q WH)V+øPHMHYDøEZNH +UDø 15 H SPRQDVWKUøRQWDRXZPQ WR+ZZWHQ WHEZNH+RXQ H THQHHWHQ P PR QDFKQ WHRXZPQ W“Q+DUH+H QHøRHøNQDø HXYRRSQDQYDQWHSVHøHøHEROMHQ QHQPCRaXDXVPQW“VP“Q QHXH UKXHSHø+ZE+“QRXPQWYD)WHNDWDTHQ WDX+RPRORJHø H S+DK 3. YDVYZSHSHWHYDXRXR P“)P PKQHYDUHWVKQH >R @20 YZZWP PR)P PKKQHYDQWRXEZNHUDW>)ÌDV@ YZSHGH Q RX+RRXD)HøMHH)QDRXZPD)VRRXW“QQ WRRW“)HERO HSSøQD[D)+HH SRCXaDQ MQD+P SHV5RVD)VRXZQ“)DXZ WH)V+øPHRQNDWDWHø+HD)GøVWD]H+“PSH)+KWMHDUKX SHV5RVSHSDøQ WDøQRM“)H SHVKWH WDVHQK4. D)WZRXQ 25 P SH)UDVWHD)EZNH SHVKWH S7PHD)PRXWHH +RXQ H WH)V+øPHÕ+“PSNRøQZEøRQQ QH+øR PHM½H¾DPKQ W“QEZN H SHQKøQW“QR Yړ)HEROH >SHø@DLEZNMH>Q WHUHøRXZPQ @_URX+H Døô+HH>X@NRXøQ NRR+QR HøNHVHLQHP SHV5RVQ WDQVP“QW“)

109 VX>Q@K: alternatively spelled VKQH ([69].ii.25) and VHQK ([70].ii.7, 15, 21); Walter E. Crum (A Coptic Dictionary [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1939], 343b) cites this text for VXQK. 110 The lacunae filled here represent a conjectural reconstruction based on the following story. 111 “infra ni fallor rectius MQD), moxdicitur NRR+ angulus, frustum.” Zoega (547 n. 3).

A. White Monastery Codex GC

95

immediately he imposed upon him112 and asked DLMWHLCQ us for something HL?GRa that belonged to our father Apa Abraham to place on his feet. 4. We brought him his holy tunicX-SRYGXPD . When he got it, he placed it on his feet with faithSLYVWLa , and GHY immediately he stood up. [1 leaf = 2 pages missing] [69] XVII.1 a great tower SXYUJRa to dwell in if some trouble WDUDFKY  occurred, so that no one \XFKY  among them would perish. Afterwards he went to his house glorifying God for the grace that had befallen him. XVIII.1 And GHY  it happened one year that a famine occurred113 through the command of the Lord. People lacked bread, as SURYa we have heard. 2. There was a man in our house who had a (storage) bin for bread. He made a cross VWDXURYa [of bread and put] it [down in the bin.] [And after he had]114 filled it (up), he smeared it (with clay) and sealed it. He said to his wife, “I will go up to the monastery PRQDVWKYULRQ and eat. You too go in to the monastery of nuns PRQDFKY and eat, and (so) we will keep this bread that is ours until there is abundance, so that we may not die. They settled with one another on this matter impiously as NDWDY they confessedR-PRORJHLCQ in the end. 3. It happened (that) the (storage) bin was reduced each day (by the amount) that they ate each day, until they went to [………And (GHY it] [70] happened one day (that) he went to eat, (and) he stretched forth his hand toward the platter SLYQD[ (and) found an arm of the crossVWDXURYa (and) recognized it. And (it happened) to his wife too in this way. He was uncertainGLVWDY]HLQ in his heart, saying, “Maybe this is the crossVWDXURYa that I put down in the (storage) bin.” 4. He arose the next day and went down to the village. He called his wife in the women’s monastery NRLQRYELRQ saying, “Come, let us go to our house and slip in. For HMSHLY I left because [when I ate in the] evening, I found a small piece of bread that resembled the cross VWDXURYa that we made 

112

Literally, “threw himself upon him.” Literally “there was a little year;” Zoega (547 n. 2) observes, “UPSYLUH ex contextu idem fere quod +HEZZQH charitas annonae, a URPSH annus et YLUH quod famen, penuriam significare hic doceor.” Amél (748 n. 4) notes, “Ce passage rapelle l’année petite don’t il est question au papyrus Anastasi IV, pl. X, l. 1.” 114 The lacunae filled here represent a conjectural reconstruction based on the following story. 115 In the Pachomian system, female monasteries were established in the village (SBo 27; G132, 134); so too in the communities under Shenoute. Rebecca Krawiec, Shenoute and the Women of the White Monastery: Egyptian Monasticism in Late Antiquity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), 24, 187 n. 104; Susanna Elm, ‘Virgins of God’: The Making of Asceticism in Late Antiquity (Oxford Classical Monographs; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994), 299-300. 113

96

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

1 DQQRM“)H SHVKWH WVHQK:---- Q WRVGHSHMDVMHDOKTZV WDøWHTHQ WDVYZSHP PRø+ZZW5. Q WHURXEZNGHHSHXKø DX+HHWVHQKHVWRREHQ WHV+HQ WH>U@RX½RX¾ZP>GH@P PRV DX+HH WNHSDYHP SHV5RVP SHVKWQ W“VHQKP“QSYDX 5 Q MQD)Q RHøN6. Q WHXQRXGHD>X@HLH ERODXWDYHRHøYÚ R D Q >QH@YÚ>SKUHP SHW RXDDE@DSDDEUD>+DP@H DSYD>MH@ PSSDU+RøPLDVWKVMZNHEROHMZRXÕMHQHNUR)QD7+KXDQ Q ODDXDXZRQ+“QWJHQKVøVP PZX VKVMHNQDRXZP P SHNRHøN+“QWEZWHPSHN+RHWEHSDøYD+RXQHSRRX 10 Q +RRXPHUH>U@ZPHSDSHQH>@WSHSHLTH>@R>X@ZPRHøN >P @SPRQDVWK>UøR@QQ MøôQ MKXIX.1. >DX@MRRVGHRQ>H@WEKKW“) Q WR)>S@HQHøZWH WRX>DDE@P SURIK>W@KVDSDDEUD>+D@P SDUFK>PDQGULWKV@>Ì2 lines missing@2. |DXUZP>H@Q QHH)HøH +UDL HSPRQDVWKUøRQH WUH)VXQDJHDXZQH)HøPHH WDYHQ Q &RP 15 P“QQHYSKUHHWHUHSQRXWHHøUHP PRRXHERO+øWRRW“) P SSHWRXDDEDSDDEUD+DP3. Q WHUH)VXQDJHGHD)Mø QRXYKPQ YZP“QRXNRXøP PRRX!+“PSWRSRV+“QRXSøVWøV D)HQWRXHEROHSMRø4. DVYZSHGHSHMD)Q WH^ø`UøMøWRX HERODøWDDXQRXYKUHNRXøHWUH)+ZOP SMRøQ +KWRXWDF>D R E 20 G@HQHXQ>RXHQHUJøDQ@ Q GDøPZQøRQ+“PSNRXøQ YKUH H W“PPDXQ WHQRXQ WD)MøP SHVPRXP SSHWRXDDEH W“PDDX H SHVKWHQH)&LMDWHQHUJøDHWHQ+KW“)YWRUW“UDVQRM“)H MP PMRøDVZYHEROP SUDQP SSHWRXDDEDSDDEUD+DPMH DNEDVDQø]HP PRøHPDWH7QKXH EROQ +KW“)WDW“PNRWNH UR) 25 Q NHVRSDXZQ WHXQRXD)RXMDøQ &øSYKUÚHYKPHERO+“Q WPDVW“L“J[HWQPPD)YDS>H+RRXP SHXQRX5. DXZ+Q QDø WKURX@_Q WDWHQ>HUJøD@P SGDøP>ZQøRQ@DDXQ“PPD>)@ P SHSPRRXPQSYZSZ+ÚWH EROQ WRRW“)H)DPD+WHP PRRX   “SDYH hic stare videtur pro SD&H asserculus, frustum ligni.” Zoega (547 n. 5). While the quotation is identified as coming from Proverbs, I have been unable to identify it specifically; cf. Prov 12:27 and 13:13. 118 Gen 3:19. 119 See Crum, A Coptic Dictionary, 660b, who cites this text. Amél (750) translates the phrase “afin qu’il en brossât (?) la barque…” 120 Lacunae filled following Zoega (Papers); the parchment breaks off at this point. 121 Lacuna filled following Zoega (Papers). 122 Read PP>R@RX ½PQ SYZ¾, “water (and sand)”; the scribe erroneously left it out, as indicated by the plural QPPDX. 116 117

A. White Monastery Codex GC

97

and put down in the (storage) bin. And GHY she said, “IndeedDMOKTZCa , that is what happened to me too.” 5. And GHY when they went to their house, they found the (storage) bin sealed as it should be.123 And GHY when they opened it, they found the other part of the cross VWDXURYa  down in the bin and a basket worth of bread. 6. And GHY immediately they went forth and proclaimed the [wonders of the] [71] [saint] Apa Abraham, the word of the author of ProverbsSDURLPLDVWKYa being fulfilled in them, that says, “The deceitful will gain nothing.”124 And also in the Genesis JHYQKVLa  of Moses: “You will eat your bread in the sweat of your face.”125 Therefore until this day, no one [2 lines damaged] eat bread of the monastery (PRQDVWKYULRQ in vain. XIX.1 And GHY  they also said about our father, the ho[ly] prophet SURIKYWKa  Apa Abraham, the archimandrite DMUFLPDQGULYWKa  [±2 lines missing]. 2. A sailor came to the monastery PRQDVWKYULRQ to celebrate the Eucharist VXQDYJHLQ . And he knew of the many miracles and wonders that God worked through the saint, Apa Abraham. 3. And after he had celebrated the Eucharist (VXQDYJHLQ  he took a bit of sand and a little water from the place WRYSRa in faith SLYVWLa  (and) brought them to (his) ship. 4. “And GHY  it happened,” he said, “(that) after I took them away, I gave them to a small child to bring126 to the ship. [And] there was [presently a power HMQHYUJHLD of] [72] demonsGDLPRYQLRQ in that little child. Immediately he received the blessing of that saint in his hands, (and) the power HMQHYUJHLD  that was in him was troubled. It threw him (down) on the ship and cried out the name of the saint, Apa Abraham, (saying), ‘You have tormented EDVDQLY]HLQ me greatly. I will come forth from him and not return to him again.’ And immediately, the little boy was healed from the scourge PDYVWL[  that was in him until the present day. 5. And through all those things that the power HMQHYUJHLD of the demon did with him, the water and the sand did not pour through his hand,128 (but) grasping the water  

123

Literally, “in its manner.” While the quotation is identified as coming from Proverbs, I have been unable to identify it specifically; cf. Prov 12:27 and 13:13. 125 Gen 3:19. 126 Amél (750) translates the phrase “afin qu’il en brossât (?) la barque…” 127 The Coptic as it stands is plural, though the following account makes it clear that a single demon is involved. 128 Literally, “The water and sand did not pour forth from him.” 124

98

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

1 H)+øWHQ“PPDXYDQWH)OR6. P“QQ VDQDøDXMøP SYZ DXPRXU P PR)H SHYWHP SMRøSPRRXGHDX+RO)HSMRøDXZ Q WHUÚRX>SD@UDFZUHH>Ì@HøQP SMRøQ QHH)GHQH>XU@YSKUH Q Q >&RP@P SSHWRXD>DE@DXZQHXY>Ì@Q +KWRXÚP >Ì@QHQW 5 >Ì@GHHXQDUÚ+Z>Ì@HLÑ>@>Ì lines missing@  [5 leaves = 10 pages missing] >S J@

XX.1 DQMHQ WD)H>L@HWZQHER>O@MHSQRXWHQ>D@VNHSD]H P >PR)@PQQHYOK>O@ PSSHWRXDD>E@DSDDEUD+DPMH RXDWQREHSHQDYHSUÚLPHP“QQ QH+SHQ WDHQHøRWHP SYKUH YKPDDX!2. Q WHURXWZRXQGHQ YZUSDXHSHøNDOHø 10 P SQRXWHP“QSSHWRXDDEDSDDEUD+DPHWEHSRXYÚKUHDXZ D)WZRXQQ &LSHøZWP SYKUHYKPD)MøQD)Q+HQRHøN D)PRRYHH +KW+øSWRRXYDQWH)SZ+H _>10 lines missing@SH >Ì@TRRX>Ì@PR)>Ì@H ERO>Ì@WH>Ì@SQ>Ì@QH>Ì@S>Ì@ S>Ì@H>Ì@H>Ì@D>Ì@>Ì@D>Ì@W>Ì@D>Ì@>Ì3 lines missing@ >S G @15 >lines missing@>Ì@>Ì@WR>ÌS@SHW>RXDDED@SDDE>UD+DP D@XÚZ>Ì@MHN>Ì@HERO>Ì@SHX>Ì@P >Ì@Q>Ì@>Ì@D>Ì@X >Ì@P>Ì5 lines missing@_>@QXXI.1. Q &RPP SHøSHWRXD>DE@ HW“QU YD>QD@)P SRRX>SH@QHøZWHWRX>DDE@DSDDEUD+DP2. >WH@WQVRRXQZ QDPHUDWHMHRXQR&SHSHøGøNDøRV+“Q 20 QHWRXDDEDXZRXVZW“SQ WHOøRVSH+“QP PRQDFRVQ TH Q QHQHøRWHQDUFDøRQDXZP SURSDWZUHWHDSDSD+RPZSH P“QD SDYHQRXWHP“QDSDSHWUZQøRVP QDSD+ZUVøKVøRV Q HøR WHP SNRVPRVH QHRXVZW“SJDUDQSHQ WHX+H SH QHX QDWROPDDQSHH&PSH½)¾YøQHMøQP SYDQ WDSRXD 25 SRXDHøQ +KW“)3. SHøSHWRXDDEGHRXQDQHQHøR WH Q WDQYUSYDMHHURRXDXZDQRQRPD]HP SHXUDQNZQD) H+UDøQ QHXQRPRVQ WR)+ZZ)D)NZWH +UDøHMZRX1TH It appears as those the scribe corrected an initial PH to Z. “YWH M. YTHU platea, locis contsratus, hic tabulatum navis.” Zoega (547 n. 6). 131 DXZQWHUÚRX>SD@UDFZUH endDXZQWHURX>SD@͘͘͘Hø > @   >DXZQWHURX   UDFZUHHWPͲHLQPSMRLQQHH)GHQ   YSKUHQQ  PSSHWRXDDE DXZQRXY  Q+KWRX PP    QH   QWHUH    GH HXQDU+Z     HLV RXSZPH lacuna Zoega (Papers); DXZ QWHURX>SD@UDFZUHL ͘ ͘ ͘ ͘ ͘ HLQ PSMRL ͘ ͘ ͘ ͘ ͘ QQHH) GH Q ͘ ͘ ͘ ͘ ͘ YSKUH QQ ͘ ͘ ͘ ͘ ͘ PSSHWRX>DDE@DXZQHXY͘͘͘͘͘Q+KWRXP͘͘͘͘͘QHQWHUH͘͘͘͘͘GHHXQDU+Z>W@͘͘͘HLV͘ ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘(sic exit) Amél (751). 132 Ms. reads SHXYøQH. 129 130

A. White Monastery Codex GC

99

(and sand),133 he rubbed (himself) with them until he was healed. 6. Afterwards, they took the sand and fastened it to the mast of the ship, and they brought the water to the ship. And after they made way for SDUDFZUHLCQ  [1/2 line damaged] of the ship, the sailors were marveling at the [miracles] of the saint and [±5 lines damaged or wanting]134 [5 leaves = 10 pages missing] [83] XX.1 where he had gone,135 for God will protect VNHSDY]HLQ him, and the prayers of the saint Apa Abraham, because he is without sin. Many were the tears and laments that the parents of the little boy made. 2. And GHY  when they arose in the morning, they called upon HMSLNDOHLCQ God and the saint Apa Abraham for the sake of their son. And the father of the little boy arose and took some bread and went north from the mountain136 until he arrived at [column ii wanting] [84] [12 ½ lines wanting] 3. t]he saint A]pa Ab[raham a]nd [13 lines wanting] XXI.1 the miracles of this saint who we celebrate today, our holy father Apa Abraham. 2. You know, oh my beloved, that this righteous one GLYNDLRa is a great one among the saints and an elect and perfectWHYOHLRa  one among the monks PRQDFRYa , like our ancient DMUFDLCRa  fathers and forefathersSURSDYWKU , that is, Apa Pachomius and Apa Shenoute and Apa Petronius and Apa Horsiesius, the fathers of the world NRYVPRa . For if he were not an elect one like them, they [85] would not dare WROPDCQ to visit him from the place whence they each came. 3. This then (RX?Q is the saint to whom our fathers, who we mentioned before and gave RMQRPDY]HLQ their names, bequeathed their rulesQRYPRa . He himself built upon them like  

133 The scribe erroneously dropped the “and sand” as indicated by the following plural preposition. 134 The interpretation of this passage remains difficult. The binding of the sand (PPR): the ) could refer to child, though that makes little sense) to the mast suggests its use by the sailors as an amulet of sorts. 135 Campagnano begins her translation “che non sapevano] dove fosse andato,” Camp GC. 136 Or “monastery.” On the meaning SWRRX, see above, note 52.

100

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

1 QRXYKUHHQDQRX)H)VZW“PQ VDQH)HøR WH:--- 4. WHQRX&H QHVQKXSHWHYYHJDUSHHWUHQWDXR HUZW“QQ WHøNHQR& Q YSKUHH DVYZSHHERO+øWRRW“)P SHøSHWRXDDE _QRXYRXVDDW“VDQWHQ W“Q7QRXGZNP SYDMHXXII.1. 5 DVYZSHGHP“QQ VDQDøQHXQ RX+RøVDUKVP SPRQDVWKUøRQ HYDXP RXWHH UR)MHSND+Q E“UUHH UHRXRøH Q +KW“) HYDXPRXWHHSH)UDQMHSD+ZPH)R Q RXRøK H S+DøHW“PPDX H UHD SDGøRVNRURVSHSUHVEXWKURVR P SURHøVWRVH UR)P“Q DVNOKSøRVSH)VRQ2. DSVDWDQDVEZNH+RXQHSRXRøK  S A 10 HW“PPDXQ WDQYUSWDXHSH)>UDQ@ D)EZNH +RXQ H SNRPDUøRQD)MZZOHQ VDQ VZW“SQ &LWUHH W“Q+KW“)+ZVWH Q VHU MRXWKD)DSRVWDP PRRXP SDWH)&QWHXNHUøD Q WHUH)&QWHXNHUøDRXQD)+ZNQ WH)HøZ D)WDORRXHURV Q WHXYKH UHQ UZPHR E“YD)MZU“PQ VD7Z H)PHHXH H EZN 15 HWPRXYRQ“VQHRXU“PS7PHJDUHWPPDXSHNDWDTHQ WDQYUS MRRV3. DSQRXWHP“QQHYÚOKOP _SHQHøZWDSDDEUD+DP D)VZU“PPSH)QRXVP SH)HøPHMHH)PRRYHH WZQ YDQWHSRXR HøQVZUHWEHMHD)U E“OOHJDUD)+HH UR½)¾ H)+“PS+RøQ &DPRXOD)HøPHMHSSHWRXDDEDSDDEUD+DPSH 20 QWD)&RS“)4. D)NWR)H+RXQH THQHHWHD)+RPRORJHøQDQ P SHVIDOPDQ WD)DD)DXZD)MøPHWDQRøDH)Z U“NMH >S ] @ PHøRXZ+H WRRWH U SHø+ZESDøMHMøRXH YD SH+R>R@X P SDPCRaXDXZD)EZNHSH)KøH)7H RRXPSQRXWHHMQQ &RP P“QQHYSKUHP SH)SHWRXDDEDSDDEUD+DPQ WD)RXRQ+“VHERO 25 Q +KW“)XXIII.1. +HQQR&Q &RPQ WD)DDXH7H)+“PSVZPDDXZ RQP“QQ VDSH)PRX!QH)&RPH QHUJHøYD+RXQHWHQRX PDU“Q+ZH URQYDSHøPDZ QDPHUDWHH EROMHP“QODVQ VDU[ QDY&P&RPHYDMHHSWDHøRP“QQ &RPQ WD_SQ>R@XÚWH>FDUø@]H P PRRX>P SHQ@HøZWDSD>DE@UD+DPSHøSHWRXDDERXQHW“QU YD 30 QD)P SRRX2. RXQR&P PDHøQQ YRXU SH)PHHXH!D)YZSH HERO+øWRRW“)P SHøSHWRXDDEP SH+RRXP SH)U SPHHXH H WRXDDE+“PSPRQDVWKUøRQDXZDQQDX+“QQHQEDOH WHYSKUH P SDUDGR[RQHW“PPDX:------ +ZVWHQ WHSHTKVøDVWKUøRQ 137 “+RL +DL supra pag. 537 not. 1 agger, hic et pag. 501 not. 2 praedium, forte quod aggere cincta essent praedia.” Zoega (547 n. 7). 138 HSNZPDULRW Amél (752 n. 1); see NZPDYULRQ in Liddell, et al. A Greek-English Lexicon, where it is noted as a gloss on DMJULYGLRQ, a diminuative of DMJURYa. 139 Ms. reads HURV.

A. White Monastery Codex GC

101

a good son who obeys his parents. 4. Now then, brothers, it is fitting that we recount for you this other great wonder that took place through this saint. It is not appropriate to pass over it so that we might finish the discourse. XXII.1 And GHY it came about after this140 (that) there was a field on the south side of the monastery PRQDVWKYULRQ  that they called the new land. There was a peasant on it whose name was Pachom, who farmed the field. Apa Dioscoros the elder SUHVEXYWHURa  was his and his brother Asclepios’s superior SURHVWZYa .142 2. Satan VDWDQDCa entered into that peasant whose name we have already given. [86] He went into the small field NZPDYULRQ and picked the best lemons in it so thatZ@VWH there were twenty-five. He put them away DMILVWDYQDL , (since) he had not yet found the right timeHXMNDLULYD . Then (RX?Q when he found the right timeHXMNDLULYD , he harnassed his donkey, put the lemons143 on it at night while the people slept, and drove the donkey, thinking to go to Tmoušons, forJDYU he was a man of that village as NDWDY we have already said.144 3. God, with the prayers of our father Apa Abraham, led his mind QRXCa  astray, and he did not know where he was going until the sun began to rise, for JDYU  he had become blind. He found himself in the field of camels and knew that it was the saint Apa Abraham who had taken him (there). 4. He returned to the monastery and confessedR-PRORJHLCQ to us the mistakeVIDYOPD he had made. And he received forgivenessPHWDYQRLD , swearing, “I will not again do this thing, namely steal, until [*p. 87] *the day of my death. And he went to his house glorifying God for the miracles and wonders of his saint, Apa Abraham, (and) what he had revealed through him. XXIII.1 Some great miracles he accomplished while stillH>WL in the body VZCPD , and also after his death, his miracles continueHMQHUJHLCQ to the present.145 Let us be satisfied at this point, oh my beloved, for no tongue of flesh VDYU[  will be able to express the honor and power that God bestowed FDULY]HLQ [on our] father Apa Abraham. So RX?Q this is the saint who we celebrate today. 2. A great sign worthy of his memory occurred through this saint on the day of his holy commemoration in the monastery PRQDVWKYULRQ . And we saw with our (own) eyes that incredible SDUDYGR[Ra wonder, so that Z@VWH the entire holy altarTXVLDVWKYULRQ 

140

Literally, “after these (things).” Or “priest.” 142 SURHVWZYa (from SURLYVWKPL) used for monastic superiors (see Lampe, A Patristic Greek Lexicon, s.v.); Lisez sans doute proistos Amél (751 n. 2); he translates “possesseur (?).” 143 Literally, “them.” 144 In fact, this point has not been mentioned before in this story; Amél suggests in a note that the scribe has omitted a phrase. 145 See above, Panegyric XV.2. 141

102

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

>S K @1 WKU“)HWRXDDESZ&HQ“)WDXHU“PHøK HERO+“Q >QHV@WXOORV P >PDU@PDUZQ>QDø@HWWZRXQH+UDø+DW+DJøDQ WUDSø]D+ZVWH QWHSPRRXHWVZNHERO+“QQHVWXOORVHWULPH+DDWH+“Q QHSOD[Q THQRXPRRXH)VXPDQHP SWDNRHWQKXHMZQ 5 H WHSQR&Q THQ WD!NR^Q`Q WD)YZSH+“PSND+WKU“)Q NKPHP“Q QH&RRYH3. SDHøZWH WRXDDEDSDDEUD+DPSDøH SHQ“UYDQD) P SRRX+øM“PSND+_DXZH UÚ>H@S>H@)ÚSROøWHXPD+“QP SKXH +D+W“QQH)HøRWHQ +RXR GH+D+WKQSHQWD)PHUøW)SHF“V4. HXHRRXQ WHWULDVH WRXDDESHøZWP“QSYKUHP“QSHSQD 10 HWRXDDEQ UH)WDQ+R DXZQ +RPRRXVøRQWHQRXDXZQRXR HøY QøPYDQDøZQWKURXQ QDøZQ+DPKQ146  II. On Abraham of Farshut [4 leaves = 8 pages missing] I.1 QHøDQP“QSUURSHMDøQD)MH)NRøQZQHøH WSøVWøV QRUÚTRGR[RVHNWRVQHW7RXEHWNDTROøNKHNNOKVøD PH)YOKOQPPDX 2. Q WHUHQHøGHHERO+øWRRW“)D)W“QQRRX 15 P SHWURVSHUHIH½UH¾QWDUøRVQDQH)MZPPRVMHSHMH SDMRHøVSUURMHPDUHWHNPQWHøZWEZNYD SDUFKHSøVNRSRVQ WHWQ>ND@WHFHHUR)NDWDSHTRV Q QHW“QHLRWH+RøQHGHQ +KWQDXMRRVMHW“QQDEZN +HQNR_R>XHÌ@M>Ì@>@>@>@DQRXZYE>Ì@ 20 HSHøGKQ>Ì@VNXRHøQ>Ì@+RRXVQDX>Ì@YDQOR)QD>W@ZPQW HUR)DQNDSUZPHHEROH)7H RRXP SQRXWH 3. DQRN+ZDø)ø Q øZ+DQQKVSNRXøDQEZNYDSDUFKH SøVNRSRVDSD THRGZVøRVDQWDXHWDSRNUKVøVHUR) 4. D)V+DLH+RXQ Q W“UUZH WUHV+ZQHWRRW“)P SHSøVNRSRVHW“P7WZQP“Q >) K @25 S+“OORRXGHQ“)W“PDQDJND]HP PR) >Ì@>Ì@SUÚ>Ì@Q >@ 

>) ] @

146 The Panegyric on Macarius Bishop of Tkôw, attributed to Dioscorus of Alexandria has a similar ending (CSCO 415.129.2-16). Decoration marks the end of the text. Three full column-length horizontal lines followed by three sets of five horizontal lines of decreasing length (forming three inverted pyramids), each ending with a curved vertical tail. The decoration was apparently outlined in red. The outlining is visible on all but the three fullcolumn length lines. See Plate 3. 147 SHMD) QDøMH Q)NRLQZ@QHL:Conjecture for end of preceding page offered by Josh Sosin in a 1994 Coptic class. 

A. White Monastery Codex GC

103

dripped and shed tears from [88] the pillars VWXCORa of marblePDYUPDURa  that supported the holy D@JLRa  table WUDYSH]D , so that Z@VWH  the water that flowed from the pillarsVWXCORa that wept ran onto the ground SODY[  like a flood,149 signifying VKPDLYQHLQ the destruction that is coming upon us, that will be as great as150 the destruction that occurred in the whole land of Egypt and Ethiopia. 3. My holy father Apa Abraham is the one we celebrate today on the earth, and his citizenship (SROLYWHXPD is in the heavens with his fathers andGHY above all with the one he loved, Christ. 4. To the glory of the holy TrinityWULDYa , the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, who is the Life-giver and consubstantialR-PRRXYVLRa , now and for all time until all ages of ages. Amen.151 II. On Abraham of Farshut [4 leaves = 8 pages missing] [97] I.1 with the emperor.152 I said to him, “He is in communionNRLQZQHLCQ  with the orthodox RMUTRYGR[Ra  faith SLYVWLa ; moreover HMNWRYa  he does not pray with those who oppose the catholicNDTROLNKY churchHMNNOKVLYD .” 2. And GHY  after we left him, he sent Peter,153 the imperial secretary UHIHUHQGDYULRa  to us saying, “My lord, the emperor says that your fatherhood should go to the archbishopDMUFLHSLYVNRSRa , and you (pl.) should hold fast NDWHYFHLQ to him asNDWDY is the custom H>TRa of your fathers.” And GHY some of us said that we would go. Others answer [5 lines damaged] sinceHMSHLGKY [2 lines damaged] two days [ … ] cease, he will meet him. We dismissed the man glorifying God. 3. I, for my part, fetched John the little,155 (and) we went to the archbishop DMUFLHSLYVNRSRa Apa Theodosius (and) reported the response DMSRYNULVLa to him. 4. He wrote to the empress, so that she might order the bishop HMSLYVNRSRa  neither to argue with the old man norRXMGHY to force DMQDJNDY]HLQ him [98] [3½ lines  148

Literally, anything flat or broad; see Lidell, et al., A Greek-English Lexicon, s.v. Literally, “like a water”; PRRX can be used to refer to the inundation of the Nile (Crum, A Coptic Dictionary, 197b). Amél (753) translates the entire phrase as “de sorte que l’eau qui coulait des colonnes pleurantes courait sur les tables comme une eau…”, and adds a note to “courait” stating, “Toute cette phrase est embrouillée, il n’y a pas de verbe et le scribe pressé de finir a dû l’oublier.” 150 Literally, “that is great like.” 151 The Panegyric on Macarius of Tkôw attributed to Dioscorus of Alexandria has a very similar ending (CSCO 416.100.4–15). 152 Read “He said to me that he was not in communion with the emperor.” This follows a conjecture for the end of the preceding page offered by Josh Sosin in a 1994 Coptic class. 153 See J. R. Martindale, The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, 3 vols (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), vol. 3b, 1002. 154 See Lampe, A Patristic Greek Lexicon, s.v. 155 Or “the younger.” 149

104

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

1 II.1 DQEZNH+R>X@QDQD+HUÚDWQHSH)P WRHERO H UHSHSLVNRSRV+D>+@WK)SHMHS>U@UÚRQDSDDEUD+ÚDPMH HWEHRXP SHNEZNQJSURVNXQHøHSDUFKHSøVNRSRVSHMH S+ÚOORGHQD)MHHSHøùGKP SHøE>Z@NHøV+KKWHDøùWZPQW 5 HUR)+D+WKN 2. SHMD)QD)MHHWE>H@RXP SHN>E@ZNNDWD SHTRVQ QHNHøRWHSHMHS+“OORQD)MHHNYøQHQ NDWD SHTRVQ QHQHøRWHP SHQVZW“P_MHDSøVWøVYøEHP SNDLURV Q QHQHøR WH 3. SHMHS“UUR QD)MHH UHWHW“QSøVWLVQ WZWKURX SHMHS+“OORQD)MHHNYDQMQHSHSøVNRSRVQRUTRGR[RV 10 Q YRRVP SODRVVHQDWDPCRaNDQRNUZDQ“JRX+XGøZWKV Q U“PQ RXRøK+“PSYDMHDXZNDWDTHQ WDDS½D¾DTDQDVøRV WDDVH WRRW“)PSHQHøZWDSDSD+RP>Z@HXÚ+“PSVZPDPQ QHXH UKXQ WHUÚH)WøùTHH W“QHLôUÚHP PRVPSHQUSERO Q Q NDQZQQ WDDSDDTDQDVLùRVWDDX  [1 leaf = 2 pages missing] U D 15III.1 Q VHVXQKQHøHXSøVWøVQ Y“PPR Q WRRXQHWQDMZZUH H EROPKQH)VK+DQMHHXYDQSZWQ VZW“Q+“QWHL SROøVSZW H+UDøH NHRXHøÑK P SHNVZW“PQ WRNHWEHQHQWDXMUR  HWP“QWHUR +øW“QWSøVWøVMHHXVRU“P+“QQ MDøH P“QQ WRRXP“Q  QHYNROP SND+QDøHWH)U PQWUH+DURRXMHP SNRVPRVP SYD 20 P PRRXDQ 2. WDøRQWHTHQ Q +“P+DOP SQRXWHHXSKWNDWD SHVNRSRVP SHNORPP SWZ+“PQ WSH_P SQRXWH+LW“QSHF“V L“V:------ PDQøPH WRXQDEZNH UR)SQRXWHQDFZUKJHøQDX Q QHWRXD+HQDX 3. SHMHTHR GZURVQD)MHHWEHRX  P SHNSøTHP SDUFKPDQGUøWKVHWUH)SøTHP S“UURSHMHSVRQ  25 QD)MHPHJHQHWR HWUHSDøYZSHP PRøRXPRQRQH WUDSøTH P SDUFKPDQGUøWKVDOODRXRQQøPHWSøTHP SHW+øWRXZ) H SHø+ZEH)R QHQRFRVHWJH+HQQDQ VDWHDXZ)P SERO U E  QWNDTROøNKHNNOKVøD 4. DQRQPHQHQ&ZY“WH SHQHøZW  SDUFKPDQGUøWKVQ THQRXDJJHORVQ WHSQRXWHRXPRQRQ Reading very difficult; Camp GC leaves unfilled. Only the outline of the first H and the vertical upright of the second letter remains. HNZ is another possibility, though the available space would seem to preclude it. 157 Matt 10:23. 158 Heb 11:32–38. 159 The second R is written below the line. 156

A. White Monastery Codex GC

105

missing or damaged] II.1 we entered (and) stood before him. With the bishop HMSLYVNRSRa  beside him, the emperor said to Apa Abraham, “Why did you not go and make obeisance SURVNXQHLCQ  to the archbishop DMSFL HSLYVNRSRa ?” And GHY the old man said to him, “SinceHMSHLGKY I did not go, behold, I have met him (here) by you.” 2. He said to him, “Why did you not go according to the custom H>TRa of your fathers?” The old man said to him, “You ask about NDWDY the customH>TRa of our fathers. We have not heard that faith (SLYVWLa has changed from the timeNDLURYa of our fathers.” 3. The emperor said to him, “Is your faith SLYVWLa that of all (men)?” The old man said to him, “If you ask the orthodox RMUTRYGR[Ra  bishop HMSLYVNRSRa , the shepherd of the peopleODRYa , you will be told. But I am an untrained man LMGLZYWKa , a peasant in speech. And just as NDWDY  Apa Athanasius entrusted it (the faith) to our father Apa Pachomius when they were both together in the body VZCPD , when he (Pachomius) gave us the means to do it, we did not avoid the canonsNDQZYQ that Apa Athanasius had entrusted [1 leaf = 2 pages missing] [101] III.1 and they agreed VXQDLQHLCQ to an alien faith SLYVWLa .They are the ones who will scatter. Indeed PKYQ , is it not written, ‘If they persecute you in one city SRYOLa flee to another.’160 Or have you not heard about those who conquered the empire through faith SLYVWLa , wandering in the deserts and mountains and caves of the earth, those on whose behalf he bears witness that the world NRYVPRa is not worthy.161 2. So also are the servants of God pursuing (+ NDWDY the goal VNRSRYa of the crown of the heavenly calling of God through Christ Jesus. Wherever they go, God will provide FRUKJHLCQ  them with what they need.” 3. Theodore said to him, “Why have you not persuadedSHLTHLCQ the archimandriteDMUFLPDQGULYWKa to obeySHLTHLCQ the emperor?” The brother said to him, “May this never PKJHYQHVTDL happen to me! Not RXM only PRYQRQ (may it never happen) that I persuade PHLTHLCQ  the archimandrite DMUFLPDQGULYWKa , but DMOODY everyone who persuades SHLTHLCQ his neighbor in this matter is subject H>QRFRa to the fire of hellJHYHQQD ,163 and he is outside the catholicNDTROLNKY churchHMNNOKVLYD . [102] 4. We, on the other hand, look to our own father the archimandriteDMUFLPDQGULYWKa as an angel D>JJHORa of God, notRXM only PRYQRQ  

160

Matt 10:23. Heb 11:32–38; see Synaxarion 684.. 162 PK JHYQRLWR appears as a strong negative in Paul. Cf. also Vita Pachomii S4 in L. Th. Lefort, S. Pachomii Vitae Sahidice Scriptae, CSCO 99/100, 210B17. 163 Literally, “to the Gehenna of fire.” 161

106

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

1 DQRQDOODQ WRN+ZZNRQP“QRXRQQøPQRUTRGR[RVQ WHN+H 5. DXZSHQHøZWDSDTHRGZVøRVSDUFKHSøVNRSRVHW+“Q  WH[ZUKVWøDP SHøPDP“QRXQQøPHWQ“PPD)P“QRXZQQøP HW&ZY“WH ERO+KW“)PSVROV“OP SLKOHX&ZY“W+KW“)QDSD 5 DEUD+DPP“QSDJZQH W“Q+KW“)Q THQRXPDUWXURVQ UH)MøNORP _GHNDV+“PSWUH)MHNSSZWH EROQ“)+DUH+H WSøVWøV)NKQD) H +UDø0 &øSHNORPQ WGøNDøRVXQKHWHUHSMRHøVQDWDD)QD)  P SH+RRXH W“PPDXSGøNDøRVQ NUøWKVQD)GHPDXDD)DQDOOD RXRQQøPQ WDX+DUH+HWSøVWøVHWVRXWZQQ“PPD) IV.1. VZW“P 10 JDUH RXQ RXGRøH UHRXYWKWDMUKXQ +KW“)DXZHUHQ QRX+ WKURXPKUH UR)PQWVQRRXVQ VDSHLVDP PR)DXZ U J PQWVQRRXV Q VDSDøDXZS+øH H WU+“PPHP PR)H UHWODRXR   QH+HHUR)H)U +ZW+“QRXPRRXH)RYHUHRXRQQøPÕ&ZY“W H SMRøH W“PPDXWDøWHTHP SHQHøZWDSDDEUD+DP2. 15 D)RXZY“EQ &øQDUVøVSHSURSRVøWRVP S“UURH)P PDX HXRUTRGR[RVSHSHMD)Q THRGZURVSHVWUDWKODWKVMH SDUDNDOHøP SHøQR&Q UZPHH WUH)EZOHURQP SHQøJPDP SMRø  P“QQ QRCXa+D)RXZY“EQ &øTHR GZURVSHMD)P SVRQMH SHSUHSRVøWRV_SHWSDUDNDOHøP PRNH WUHNEZOHURQP SMRø 20 3. SHMHSVRQQD)MHSMRøSHWNRøQZQøDS+øH SHSHSQD P SHQHøZWDSDSD+RPZDXZRQSMRXWD)WHQ QRX+HWPKU HUR)WHWMRXWD)WHQ NRøQZQøDHWPKUH +RXQH UR)SHYWK  SHDSDDEUD+DPP“QQDSKXHWKURXQ WD)YZSHQRUTRGR[RV WODXR WHW+DøEHVQ WNRøQZQøDSPRRXHWH)U +ZW+øZZ)SH 25 SODRVP PRQDFRVS+øHSHSWXSRVP SHV5RVQ WDXV5RX U G P SHF“VH UR)4. SHMHSHSUHSRVøWRVQD)MHHUHQ +DX&DO P PDXRQHWEHRXSHMHSVRQQD)MHH UHQ +DX&DOP PDX  HWEHQRUTRGR]RVQ WHN+HHWUHXDPD+WHQ WSLV½W¾øVQ TH Q Q +DX&DOH WDPD+WHP SMRøDOOD7SDUDNDOHøP PRNP“QRXRQ 30 QøPHWQ“PPDNQRUTRGR]RVHWUHNURHøVHSHN+DX&DO H W“PWUHNNDD)HSZU“N+“QWSøVWøVH WRXDDE5. QWHUH)VZW“P GHH QDøD)7HRRXP SQRXWH_D)EZNHSH)KøH)U YSKUHDXZ  H)UDYH6. SHVWUDWKODWKVGH+ZZ)D)UøPHH)VRRXQ Q WDSøOKP SUUR H)MZP PRVMHHXQDURXRQHWEHQ NRøQZQøD 35 DSVRQRXZYE H)UøPH+ZZ)SHMD)MHH YMHSHTURQRV 

A. White Monastery Codex GC

107

us, but DMOODY  you too, and all the orthodoxRMUTRYGR[Ra like you. 5. And our father, Apa Theodosius the archbishopDMUFLHSLYVNRSRa , who is in exile HM[RULVWLYD here and all those who are with him and all those who wait for the consolation of Israel LÂKO Â look to Apa Abraham and his struggleDMJZYQ  as a crowned martyr PDYUWXURa , that as he was finishing the race, he kept the faith SLYVWLa . Preserved for him is the crown of righteousness GLNDLRVXYQK  that the Lord will give him on that day. And GHY  the just GLYNDLRa judgeNULWKYa (will give it) not only to him, but DMOODY to everyone who has kept the right faithSLYVWLa with him. IV.1 Now JDYU listen, there is a ship that has a mast set firmly in it with all the ropes tied to it, twelve from one side and twelve [103] from the other, and the rudder that steers it. With the sail set, it is sailing on a large body of water. Everyone is watching that ship. This is like our father Apa Abraham. 2. Narses, the imperial Praepositos (SUDLSRYVLWRa , who was present and orthodox (RMUTRYGR[Ra , responded and said to Theodore the general (VWUDWKODYWKa , “Ask (SDUDNDOHLCQ  this old man to explain the mystery DL>QLJPD of the ship and the ropes.” Theodore replied and said to the brother, “The Praepositos SUDLSRYVLWRa asks SDUDNDOHLCQ that you explain the ship for us. 3. The brother said to him, “The ship is the federation NRLQZQLYD , (and) the rudder164 is the spirit SQHXCPD  of our father Apa Pachomius. And the twenty-four ropes tied to it are the twenty-four communities NRLQZQLYD joined to him.165 The mast is Apa Abraham and all the leaders who were orthodox (RMUTRYGR[Ra . The sail is the shadow of the federation NRLQZQLYD . The water in which it sails is the population ODRYa  of monks PRQDFRYa  The rudder166 is the image WXYSRa  of the cross VWDXYURa  on which Christ [104] was crucified VWDXURXCQ . 4. The Praepositos SUDLSRYVLWRa said to him, “Why are there also anchors?” The brother said to him, “The anchors are there on account of the orthodox RMUTRYGR[Ra like you, so that they hold on to faith SLYVWLa like the anchors that hold on to the ship. But DMOODY I urge SDUDNDOHLCQ you and all the orthodox RMUTRYGR[Ra  with you to guard your anchor in the holy faith SLYVWLa and GHY not let it be destroyed.” 5. And when he heard these things, he glorified God and went to his house marveling and rejoicing. 6. But GHY the general VWUDWKODYWKa , for his part, wept, knowing the threat DMSHLOKY of the emperor, saying “What will they do then about the federation NRLQRQLYD ?” 7. The brother, also weeping, replied and said, “Even though the throne TURYQRa  164

The “rudder” is given two meanings in the following interpretation. If accurate, the number suggests the continuing growth of the federation. See James E. Goehring, “The Ship of the Pachomian Federation: Metaphor and Meaning in a Late Account of Pachomian Monasticism,” in Christianity in Egypt: Literary Production and Intellectual Trends in Late Antiquity, ed. Paolo Buzi and Alberto Camplani (Studia Ephemeridis Augustinianum; Rome: Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum, 2011), 289–303. 166 See above, note 161. 165



108

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

1  U H

Q WNDTROL NKHNNOKVøDYW“UWZUPKRXQ +“P+DOQDD)HSH)MRøV KRXQ YKUHQDD)HQH)HøR WHSHQHøZWSD+ZPGHSHSYKUH Q WNDTROøNKHNNOKVøDP“QWDQODDXQ +ZEDQRQ HøPKWH H SDUDNDOHøP SQRXWHMHNDVH)H+DUH+HURQH ERO+“P 5 SHøDøZQP SRQKURQYDQW“QHøH ERO+“PSHøPDQ &RHøOHQ WH SQRXWH7P SRXDSRXDNDWDQH)+EKXH V.1 DXZQ WHø+H  D)EZNHERO+LWRRW)P SVRQH)7HRRXP SQRXÚWHDXZ D)WDPHWUÚUZH QHøYDMHWKURXÚQ WRV+ZZVDVUYSKUH DV7HRRXP SQRXWHHM“PSWDMUR Q WHXSL VWøV 2. DXZ+“P 10 SPH+VRSVQDXDW“UUZW“QQRRXQDSDDEUÚD+DPHVMZ>P PRV@ QD)MHHøV>+KKWH@_DLôYDMHP“QSU URHWEKKW“NHWUH)NDDN  H EROQ WR)GHSUURD)7WH)PDQøDH+RXQMHHNW“PNRøQZQHø Q“PPDøQ7QDNDDNDQHNR QDUFKPDQGUøWKV 3. ORøSRQ DøW“QQRRXQDN+øW“PSDD SRNUKVDUøRVMHP SU HøH ERO+D+W“P 15 SDUFKH SøVNRSRVHWEHMHDS“UUR7ORJRVQDøHWUH)NDD) H EROQH)EZNH NKPHWDUHNEZN+ZZNQ“PPD) 4. WHQRX U A  HøVS D)OX>Ì@>Ì4 lines missing@ SHøPD7QDUÚRHøVH URNDXZ Q WDSURVHFHH URN 5. DDSDDEUD+DPRXZY“ESHMD) P SHW“PPDXH D)MRRX)Q W“UUZH SH)UDQSHSUHVEHXWKV 20 HXPRQDFRVSHQ U“PWVXUøDQ WR)SHWGøDNRQHøH SYDMH Q W“UUZHXRUTRGR[RV+ZZ)SH 6. H)SDUDNDOHøP PRVH)MZ  P PRVMHHYMH)QDNDDWDQHøR QDSHDULWRX&RP Q WHSDUDNDOHøP PR)>Q“@)ÚNDDWHERO>QWDEZ@NH NK>PHÌ@>Ì lines missing@_D)EZNGHD)WDPRVRQH +ZEQøPQ WD)VRWPRX  25 VI.1 Q NDWKJRSRVGH+ZRXQ WHURXQDXMHD DSDDEUD+DP DSRWDVVHQ VDVDQøPDXUDYHHPDWHQ THP SGøDERORV  HDX+HP+“PQ THQ QHLPRXøP“QQHøRXZQ“YQ WHWDUDEøD Q UH)SH+\XFKH DXRXZ+HWRRWRXH NDWKJRUHøP PRQ HSH+RXR 2. Q WHURXQDXGHRQQ&LQHWYRRSP“QDSDDEUD+DP >U ] @30 MHD)DSR>WD@VVHH W“PN>Ì@HøP“Q>Ì@SRXD SRXDWDXR   P SH)YDMHDXZDXVWDVøVYZSH+“QWHXPKWHRXDPHQMH PDUړQNRøQZQHøM>H@Q QHQNDQDøHEZNH+RXQH +HQHWK HS>D@SHNHRXDGHMHP PRQQ W“QQDNRøQ>Z@QHøDQ PDUHQ NRøQZQL DMZZUHH EROMHQ QHøWDNRQ WD\XFK+DSOZV 35 GHSRXDSRXDP“QSH)YDMH 3. LZ+DQQKVGHQ WHXORJøD 167

The same image is found in the Panegyric on Macarius Bishop of Tkôw (CSCO 415.50.30–32); cf. 1 Pet 5:8.

A. White Monastery Codex GC

109

of the catholic NDTROLNKY  church HMNNOKVLYD  is disturbed, no servant is greater than his master, and168 no son is greater than his parents. And GHY our father Pachomius is the son of the catholic NDTROLNKY  church HMNNOKVLYD . We have nothing [105] except HLM PKYWL to call upon SDUDNDOHLCQ God so that he might protect us in this evil SRQKURYa age DLMZYQ until we leave this dwelling place that God gave to each according to NDWDY his deeds. V.1 And so he left the brother glorifying God. And he reported all these matters to the empress. She too was amazed and glorified God for the strength of their faith SLYVWLa . 2. And for the second time the empress sent to Apa Abraham saying, “Behold, I have spoken with the emperor about you so that he might release you. But GHY the emperor gave (into) his madness PDQLYD , saying ‘If you are not in communion NRLQZQHLCQ with me, I will not allow you to be (the) archimandrite DMUFLPDQGULYWKa .’ 3. Then ORLSRYQ I sent to you (word) through my messenger DMSRNULVLDYULRa , (saying), ‘Do not leave the side of the archbishop DMUFLHSLYVNRSRa , for the emperor gave me (his) word ORYJRa that he would release him, and he would go to Egypt; and you too will go with him. 4. Now behold [3 ½ lines damaged or missing] [106] here I will watch over you and attend SURVHYFHLQ to you.” 5. Apa Abraham answered and spoke with him,169 sending him (back) to the empress. His name was Presbeutes. He was a Syrian monk PRQDFRYa  who attended GLDNRQHLCQ to the affairs of the empress, and he was orthodox RMUTRYGR[Ra . 6. He (Abraham) beseeched SDUDNDOHLCQ her, saying, “If he will not allow me to be head (of the federation), do your utmost and urge SDUDNDOHLCQ  him to release me so that I may go to Egypt.” [1+ wanting] And GHY he went and told her everything he had heard. VI.1 And when the accusers NDWKYJRURa saw that Apa Abraham had renounced DMSRWDYVVHLQ  everything, they rejoiced greatly like the devil GLDYERORa , roaring like the lions and wolves of Arabia; dividers of souls \XFKY ,170 they continued to accuse NDWKJRUHLCQ us vigorously. 2. And GHY  when those who were with Apa Abraham saw that he had renounced DMSRWDYVVHLQ  [2 lines damaged] [107] [each] one put forth his opinion,171 and discord VWDYVLa arose among them. While PHYQ one said, “Let us be in communion NRLQZQHLCQ , so that we might not permit them to enter the monastery as head, GHY  another one (said), “No, we will not be in communion NRLQZQHLCQ . Let the communities NRLQZQLYD disband, so that I do not destroy my soul \XFKY .” In short D-SOZCCaGHY everyone had his (own) opinion. 3. And GHY John of the blessing HXMORJLYD   168

Literally, “or.” Literally, “with that one”; i.e. the messenger. 170 The same image is found in the Panegyric on Macarius Bishop of Tkôw (CSCO 415.50.30–32); cf. 1 Pet 5:8. 171 Literally, “word.” 169

110

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

1 D)YDMHP“QRXDQ“+KWRXD)MZP PRVMHHNRXHYWUÚHQ_>right >U K @ column missing@ >left column missing] VII.1 |+HQHWKQ WHDSD SD+RPZ DøZ+DQQKVRXZY“ESHMD)ÚMH7ÚDøWHøP SHNUÚDWRV QWHNPQWHUÚRHYÚMHPPRQSDMRHLùV>H@LQDWDPRN 5 HSHøPXVWKULRQ>SH@MHS“UURMHDML) 2. >SH@MHøZ+DQQKV >M@HPDUHSDMR>Hø@VS“UURZ Q“+YDHQH+HøPKWHøUÚZPH H)>R@XDDE+LùSDUTHQRVP“QY&RPQ UZPHH +PRRV+ø SHTURQRVP SHQHøZWDSDSD+RPZ SHMHS“UURQD)MHRXN RXÚQP“QSDUTHQRVQ +KWWKXWQSHMHøZ+DQQKVMHP SHøPDUZ 10 P“QRXRQQ VD 

B. White Monastery Codex GB, pages 15-36 I. Excerpt on Abraham of Farshut from a Panegyric on Manasseh >L H @ I.1 HQYKQWKURCXaP SOøEDQRV 2. DXNDTøVWDQ NHRXDHSH)PD  HWHVHEDVWøRXSHRXUZPHGHRQSHQ GøNDøRVDXZP PDø QRXWHP“QQ VDWUH)U+HQNRXøQ RXRHLYGHRQH)R  QDUFKPDQGUøWKVDSMRHøV&PSH)YøQHD)HPWRQP PR) II.1. 15 P“QQ VZVGHRQDXVZW“SQ NHRXDH SH)PDHWHDSDDEUD+DP  SHDXNDTøVWDP PR)QDUFKPDQGUøWKVQHRXYSKUHSH+“P  SH)EøRV_H)U SRHL>QQ@THP SUK+LW“QQH)SUD[øVHWRXDDE ^DXZ` 2. DXZQH)7VEZP SHWQDUøNHHERO+“QQ QRPRV HQNDQZQøNRQP SHQHøZWP SURIKWKVDSDSD+ZPR+DSOZV 20 HQH)NZWP PRRXH)PRRQHP PRRX 3. H UHSHF“VYDMHHERO  +“QWH)WDSURYD+UDøHSHRXRHøYHQWDSDQ+ZVøRVQ“UUR  øRXVWøQøDQRVDUFHøH WP“QWHUR 4. DX7YWRXKWH SSHWRXDDE >LA @ DSDDEUD+DP >DX&R@S)Q&L+HQNDWKNRURVHXV+RXRU“WQDø HW“QQDRXHQ“+QHXUDQQKW“QHEROSHWURVSUPQ“P+DDWH^P“Q` 25 P“QSDWHOIKSU“PYPøQP“QSHYRXUSU“PU PRQ“WP“QSDQFDULV HWHSDøSHSDWFDUøV+“QRXPHP“Q+HQNRRXHQ“PPD)NDWD THHQWDXU P“QWUHQDQQ &L+HQHøRWHQHXODEKV Q YRXWDQ+RXWRXH WPHMH III.1. P SHRXRHøYQ WDSHW“PPDX  HøYDMHHSDQ_FDUL VHøH)QDEZNYDS“UURP“Q+HQNRRXH 30 Q“PPD)D)EZNH+UDøYDDSDPZX VKVSDUFKPDQGUøWKVQH

172 173

Erased by scribe. Scribe corrected SD to SH.

B. White Monastery Codex GB



111

spoke with one of them saying, “Do you want us [column ii missing] [108] [column i missing] VI.1 monastery of Apa Pachomius.” John answered and said, “I ask DLMWHLCQ  your imperial majesty NUDYWRa ,174 if I might not, my lord, explain this mystery PXVWKYULRQ to you.” The emperor said, “Speak.” 2. John said, “May my lord the emperor live forever. Unless HLM PKYWL a man be holy and a virgin SDUTHYQRa , it is not possible for him to sit on the throne TURYQRa of our father Apa Pachomius.” The emperor said to him, “Is there not RXMN then RX?Q a virgin SDUTHYQRa among you?” John said, “Here indeed there is no one except 

B. White Monastery Codex GB, pages 15-36 I. Excerpt on Abraham of Farshut from a Panegyric on Manasseh 15] I.1 all the trees of Lebanon. 2. They appointed NDTLVWDYQDL another in his place named175 Sebastian.176 And (GHY  he was a just GLYNDLRa  and godfearing man. And (GHY  after he had served a short time as archimandrite DMUFLPDQGULYWKa , the Lord visited him and he died.177 II.1 And (GHY  afterwards, they chose another in his place, whose name was Apa Abraham. They appointed NDTLVWDYQDL  him archimandrite DMUFLPDQGULYWKa . He was a marvel in his life ELYRa , shining like the sun through his holy deedsSUDC[La . 2. And he taught178 the one who would turn away from the canonical (NDQRQLNRYa rules QRYPRa of our father the prophet SURIKYWKa , Apa Pachomius. In short D-SOZCa , he edified them (and) shepherded them. 3. It was through his mouth that Christ FULVWRYa spoke, until the time when the wicked DMQRYVLRa emperor Justinian ruled D>FHLQ the empire. 4. They raised accusations against the saint Apa Abraham, [16] and some cursed accusers NDWKYJRURa seized him, whose names we will reveal to you: Peter of Nemhaate, and Patelphe of Šmin, Pešour of Ermont, and Pancharis who is truly graceless D>FDULa , and some others with him, as NDWDY  some pious HXMODEKYa  fathers who can be trusted for the truth witnessed to us. III.1 At that time, I say, as Pancharis was about to go to the emperor with some others, he (Abraham) went to Apa Moses the archimandrite DMUFL PDQGULYWKa .  

174

Or “sovereign power”; literally, “the power of your kingdom.” Literally, “who is.” 176 Panegyric IV.3–4 identifies Abraham’s predecessor as Pshintbahse. 177 Literally, “he rested.” 178 Or “chastised. 175

112

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

1 RXQR&+ZZ)SHP SURIKWKVDXZQGøNDøRVH)RXDDE SPRQDFRVQ WHOøRVH)NRVPHøù+“QQDUHWKWKURXP SHSQD HWRXDDEH)R Q HøZWHM“QRXVRRX+“VP PRQDFRVQ WDSQRXWH  VRRX+RXQD)H+RXQHD)YZSHQDXQ UH)7VEZH)NZW 5 P PCRaRX  [3 leaves = 6 pages missing] N >J@    10     15

IV.1. QD)YDQWRXHøHEROQ VHEZNQDXQ WHURXEZNGHD)Hø +ZZ)Q &LDSDDEUD+DPH SPRQDVWKUøRQ 2. D)EZNH+RXQ HSVZRX+PDQLPHQWDQHNUZPHD+HUDWRX+øMZ)P“QSPD Q WDX+PRRVQ +KW)D)WUÚHQHVQKXWKURXSHQJ PRRXDXHøZ HEROP SVZRX+WKU“)+ZVH)MøERWHH URNSHQMRHøVSUUR P“QQHWYRRSWKURCXa+DSHNUDWRVQ WPQ“WHURQ QH+UÚZPDøRV 3. |WHQRXGHW“QQRRXQ VZ)Q“JHQW)HSHøPDQ“JHSHLùWLùPDQD) +ZVNDNRXUJRVYDQWHRXRQQøPHøPHMHRXSH7RXEHS“UUR 4. H SHøDQ“RQWQ QDVXQDJHP“QSHQMRHøVS“UURQ“J7QDQ Q WPQWQR&P SERRXQ W“QMZNHEROQ NHOHXVøVQøP HSDSHQMRHøVS“UURSH+“QRXNHOHXVøVQDXTHQWøD  Q EDVøOøNRQ 5. WRWHS“UURSHMD)QDXMHDQRNSHWQDW“QQRRX N G  Q VDSPRQDFRVHW“PPDXWD HQW“)+“QRX&HSKDXZSUUR  D)NDDXHEROWDURX+PRRVYDQW“)W“QQRRXQ VZ) V.1. WRWH 20 S“UUR+ZVHXNøPHUR)HERO+øW“PSVDWDQDV+øW“Q QHQWDXHSHøERXOHXHH+RXQHSSHWRXDDEDSDDEUD+DPNDWD  THQ WD)MRRVQ &øSVRIRV+LW“PSHSQDHWRXDDEHWE“UE“U+“P  SH)+KWQ THQRXPRRX+øW“QWVRIøDP SQRXWHHQWD)WDDV  QD)MHYDUHQHøYDMHHTRRXWDNHQHø+KWHWQDQRRXDXZ 25 MH_YDUHRXUZPHH)+RRXUHN“+RXSROøV 2. DXZQ WHø+H

179

Cited in Crum, A Coptic Dictionary, 45b. Prov 12:25. The biblical text had the singular RXYDMHßß … S+KW (ORYJRa ... NDUGLYDQ LXX); Alexander Böhlig, Der achmimische Proverbientext nach Ms. Berol. Orient. Oct. 987. Teil I: Text und Rekonstruktion der sahidischen Vorlage (Studien zur Erforschung des christlichen Aegyptens herausgegeben von Alexander Böhlig 3; München: Robert Lerche, 1958), 62–63. 181 Prov 29:8. The biblical text has the plural +HQUZPHHX+RRX (D>QGUHaD>QRPRL LXX); P. Augustini Ciasca, Sacrorum Bibliorum fragmenta copto-sahidica Musei Borgiani iussu et sumptibus S. Congregationis de propaganda fide, vol. 2 (Rome: S. Congregationis de propaganda fide, 1889), 191. 180

B. White Monastery Codex GB

113

He too was a great prophet SURIKYWKa , just GLYNDLRa and holy, the perfect WHYOHLRa monk PRQDFRYa , adorned NRVPHLCQ in all the virtues DMUHWKY of the Holy Spirit SQHXCPD . He was father of a community of monks PR QDFRYa that God had gathered to him, being a teacher to them (and) edifying them. [3 leaves = 6 pages missing] [23] IV.1 to him until they left and went to them. And GHY after they left, Apa Abraham himself came to the monastery PRQDVWKYULRQ . 2. He went into the assembly hall, (and) every place where your men stood and where they sat, he had all the brothers bring water and wash the entire assembly hall since Z-a  he loathed you our lord emperor, and all who are under the authority NUDYWRa of the Roman (U-ZPDLCRa) empire. 3. So GHY  now send for him, bring him here and punish HMSLWLPDCQ him as Z-a a criminal NDNRXCUJRa  so that everyone knows what it means to oppose the emperor. 4. Since HMSHLY  we will celebrate the Eucharist VXQDYJHLQ  with our lord the emperor, you will give us command182 of Pbow, and we will carry out every order NHYOHXVLa of our lord the emperor through a command NHYOHXVLa of regal EDVLOLNRYa authority DXMTHQWLYD . 5. Then WRYWH the emperor said to them, “I will send for that monk PRQDFRYa  and [24] bring him (here) quickly.” And the emperor dismissed them so that they might remain until he sent for him. V.1 Then WRYWH the emperor, as Z-a  aroused by Satan VDWDQDCa  through those who plotted (HMSLERXOHXYHLQ against the saint Apa Abraham, as NDWDY the wise one VRIRYa  said through the Holy Spirit SQHXCPD  that boiled in his heart like water through the wisdom VRILYD of God who gave it to him, “Evil words destroy good hearts,”184 and “An evil man burns a city SRYOLa .”185 2. And so



182

Literally, “greatness” or “seniority.” It is used in connection with the office of abbot (cf. Crum, A Coptic Dictionary, 251b). 183 Introduces an aside that takes over the sentence. 184 Prov 12:25; the biblical text (Coptic and LXX) uses the singular (word … heart). 185 Prov 29:8; the biblical text (Coptic and LXX) uses the plural (evil men).

114 1  5 >N H @

 10

 15

>N A @ 20

 25 

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

D S“UURV+DøQ RXHSøVWROKH UDW“)P SGRX[QDQWøQRRXMH Q WHXQRXHWHNQDMøQ QDV+DøYøQHQ VDSHøPRQDFRV HWHDEUD+DPSHS+“OORQDUFKPDQGUøWKVHQWNRøQZQLDP SEDRX Q“JW“QQRRX)QDø+“QRX&HSKH W“PDOHH MRøRXGH&øQRXKODOOD Q“JW“QQRRX)QDø+“QQ W“EQRRXHDXZV+DøQDQP SRXMDø HQNKPHWKU)RXMDøP“QQHWQ“PPDNWKURX 3. WHSøVWROKGH Q WHURXHQW“VHUKVHDQ7QRRXDXWDDVP SGRX[D)DVSD]H P PRVD)RY“V 4. ORøSRQD)W“QQRRXQ WHXQRXQ +HQPDWRø WDURX&RS)+“QRXVSRXGKHEROMHSYDMHP S“UUR&P&RP Q WHURXEZNGHQ &øP PDWRøH +RXQHSPRQDVWKUøRQDXYøQH+“Q RXNUR)DX&ZSHP S+“OORH WRXDDED SDDEUD+DPDXHQW“) P SGRX[QDQWøQRRX:-- 5. Q WHUH)QDXH UR)Q &LSGRX[D½)¾7 QD)Q QHV+DøP S“UUR_D)RYRXQWHXQRXD)WDXH P SHøHQøJPD Q &øS“+OORP SHWRXDDEDSDDEUD+DPMH+“PSDQRXWH 7QDRXZW“EQ RXVRE“WDSSDYRXZY“)DQRQDQQRX+“P+“PSUDQ P SMRLV 6. DXZRQMHSMRHøVSHSDRXHøQDXZQ WR)SH SDVZWKUQ 7QDU +RWHDQMHHUHUZPHQDURXQDø VI.1. DXZQ WHXQRXD)W“QQRRXQ +HQPDWRøQDJUøRQP“QSSHWRXDDE DSDDEUD+DPDXWDORQ WHXYKP“QQHWRXQDMLWRX HURRX+ÚL WH+øK2. DXZ+HQNHPRQDFRVHXRXDDEDXRXD+RXQ VDDSD DEUD+DP+“PSHXRXZYH+RXQHUÚR)NDWDRXDJDSK Q WHSQRXWHDXZDXHQWHXFUøDSURVSNZWQ QHVQKXP“Q SHXEøRVH WH+øKQ“PPDX 3. DXEZN+D+W“PSUUR+LW“Q+HQQR& Q +øVHP“QRXQR&Q +RM+HM 4. DXZMHQ WDXEZN+“QQ W“EQRRXH DXNDWDQWD+“PSRXZYP SQRXWH_P S+RXQQHERWVQDXP“Q MRXZWQ +RXHWSROLVQ WPQWHURDX7WHSLVWROKP S“UUR 5. Q WHUH)RY“VGHD)HøHM“PSPDQ WDSGRX[V+DLÑQD)MHHøV DSDDEUD+DPDøWQQRRX)QDNP“QQDUZPHQ WHXQRX D)+URMUHMQ QH)RE+HD)NøPQ WH)DSH 6. SHMD)QDXMHEZN

The enlarged Mextends into the left margin of the right hand column, and from here to the end of the page, each of the twenty remaining lines is preceeded by a dot and diple (·>) (Plate 5). 187 Cf. Mark 14:1. 188 Scribe wrote DX7. 189 In the ms., the lines in the right column preserving the following two riddles are each decorated to the left with a double dot and diple (··>). 190 Cf., 2 Sam 22:30 and Ps 124:7–8. 191 Ps 27:1. 186

B. White Monastery Codex GB



115

the emperor wrote a letter HMSLVWROKY to the duke GRXY[ of Antinoë, saying, “As soon as you receive my letter,192 seek out the monk PRQDFRYa Abraham, the old archimandrite DMUFLPDQGULYWKa  of the federation NRLQZQLYD  of Pbow and send him to me quickly, not by boat or RXMGHY  ship, but DMOODY send him to me on animals.193 And write us about the situation in all of Egypt. Good health (to you) and all who are with you.” [25] 3. And GHY when the letter HMSLVWROKY was carried south to Antinoë, it was given to the duke GRXY[ . He welcomed DMVSDY]HVTDL it and read it. 4. Then ORLSRYQ he immediately sent some soldiers to quickly VSRXGKY arrest him, because the word of the emperor prevails. When the soldiers entered the monastery PRQDVWKYULRQ , they searched with deceit,194 arrested the holy old man Apa Abraham, and brought him to the duke GRXY[ in Antinoë. 5. When the duke GRXY[ saw him, gave him the emperor’s letter.195 The old man saint Apa Abraham read it and immediately put forth this riddle DL>QLJPD : “By my God I will cross a wall, the trap has been destroyed, we are saved by the name of the Lord.” 196 6. And further, “The Lord is my light and my savior, I will not fear what man might do to me.”197 VI.1 And immediately he sent some rough D>JULRa soldiers with the saint Apa Abraham. They loaded up at night with the things they would take [26] on the road. 2. And some other holy monks PRQDFRYa  followed Apa Abraham through their affection for him in accordance with NDWDY  a love DMJDYSK  of God. And they brought with them things necessary FUHLYD  for SURYa  the edification199 of the brothers and for their life ELYRa on the road. 3. They appeared before the emperor after great suffering and great distress. 4. And because they came on animals,200 they arrived (NDWDQWDCQ by the will of God in two months and twenty days at the imperial city SRYOLa and gave the letter HMSLVWROKY to the emperor. 5. And GHY when he read it, he came to the place where the duke GRXY[ had written to him, “Behold, I have sent Apa Abraham to you with my men.” Immediately he ground his teeth and shook his head. 6. He said to them, “Go   192

Literally, “letters” or “writings.” That is, by land; see below, Excerpt VI.1-4. 194 Cf. Mark 14:1. 195 Literally, “letters” or “writings”. 196 Cf. 2 Sam 22:30 and Ps 124:7–8. 197 Ps 27:1. 198 Literally, “their necessary thing.” 199 The Coptic term NZW, which translates literally as “edification,” can be used with respect to a monastic rule, including in the Pachomian literature (Crum, A Coptic Dictionary, 122b). 200 See above, Excerpt V.2. 193

116

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

1 

Q WHW“QP WRQPPZW“QYDUDVWHHQWHW“QHQW“)QDøHSHøPD P“QQ VDYRPQW [1 leaf = 2 pages missing]

N T 5 

 10 

 15 O 

 20 

 25 



VII.1. RXZ++“QNRøQZQø>D@Q WHD SDSD+ZPRYDHQH+ 2. ORøSRQHøV+HQUZPHP SHøPDHQDWNRøQZQLDQHQDSD SD+ZPRH +HQSøVWRVQHQ U“PP PHHXPHQQHUZRX7QD7QDX Q WPQWDUFKPDQGUøWKVQDSDSD+ZPRH W“PWUHODDXQ UZPH HYDQWøOøJHQDX 3. WRWHSSHWRXDDEDSDDEUD+DPP SH)7 +WK)+ROZVH QHWHUHS“UURMZP PRRXDOODD)NDDV+“P SH)+KWMHRXPQWPDUWXURVRQSHPRX_H +UDøH M“QWSøVWøV P SYKUHP SQRXWHQ +RXRH WUDSDUDEDP PRVQ VHQRM“W HQNRODVøVQ THQ QHVWZUøRVP“QDUøRVP“QøRXEHQDUøRVP“Q PDUNøDQRVP“QSNHVHHSHQ WDXDUQDQ WSøVWøVP SYKUH P SQRXWHVHYRRSWHQRX+“PSPDHWHP SYDHQH+&øQHDQ P SH)YøQH 4. WRWHS“UURD)WUHXQRM“)HEROP SH+RRX HW“PPDX VIII.1. DVYZSHGHQ WHUHW“UUZVZW“PHQHQWDXYZSH DSHV+KW+LVHHPDWH:--- 2. Q WHUHS“UURGH EZNH+RXQ H SSDOODWøRQDVSDUDNDOHøP PR)HWEHSSHWRXDDEDSD DEUD+DPMHRXUZPHH QDQRX)SHNDD)H EROQ“)EZN H SH)PRQDVWKULRQ+“QRXHøUKQK 3. SHMHS“UURQ W“UUZ+“Q RX&ZQ“WNDWDTHQ WDXWDPRQQ &LQDSKøP S“UURMHHYZSH QH)QDVXQDJHQ“PPDøDQQ QH)RXZ++“QNRøQZQøDQ WHDSD SD+ZPRYDHQH+ 4. W“UUZGHQ WHUHVVZW“PH S“UURDVHøPHMH QH)QDW“VWR)_DQH SD+RX+“PSHQWD)PHHXHH UR)H +RXQ H SSHWRXDDEDSDDEUD+DPDVNDD)HERO IX.1. DVYZSHGH Q WHUHWHXYKYZSHDWU UZW“QQRRXQ VøRXUVQDXQ VD SSHWRXDDE 2. DXZQ WHUH)EZNQDVH+RXQSHMHW“UUZQD) MHQWRNSHSDHøZWHWRXDDEDSDDEUD+DPSDUFKPDQGUøWKV P SEDRXSHMD)MHDQRNSH+“PSRXZYP SQRXWHP“QSRXZY Q QHQMøVRRXH [2 leaves = 4 pages missing]



201

Scribe corrected an initial PPRø to PPRV.

B. White Monastery Codex GB

117

and rest until tomorrow, and (then) bring him to me here. After three [1 leaf = 2 pages missing] [29] VII.1 dwell in (the) federation NRLQZQLYD of Apa Pachomius forever. 2. Moreover ORLSRYQ some men here who belong to the federation NRLQZQLYD  of Apa Pachomius are faithful SLVWRYa honest men who love the emperors. I will give them the office of archimandrite DMUFKPDQGULYWKa  of Apa Pachomius and allow no one to oppose DMQWLOHYJHLQ  them. 3. Thereupon WRYWH the saint Apa Abraham paid no heed at all R^OZa to what the emperor said to them, but DMOODY trusted in his heart that martyrdom is to die on behalf of the faith (SLYVWLa  of the Son of God rather than to transgress SDUDEDLYQHLQ against it and be cast into punishment NRYODVLa like Nestorius and Arius and Juvenal and Marcion and the rest who have repudiated DMUQHLCVTDL the faith SLYVWLa of the Son of God. They are now in the place that he never visits. 4. Then WRYWH the emperor had him cast out that day. VIII.1 And GHY it happened (that) when the empress heard what had happened, her heart was greatly troubled. 2. And GHY when the emperor [*p. 30] *came into the palace SDODYWLRQ  she beseeched SDUDNDOHLCQ  him about the saint, Apa Abraham, saying, “He is a good man. Release him so that he might go to his monastery PRQDVWKYULRQ in peace.” 3. The emperor said to the empress angrily, “As NDWDY those belonging to the emperor’s house informed us, ‘If he will not celebrate the Eucharist VXQDYJHLQ with me, he will never dwell in the federation NRLQZQLYD of Apa Pachomius.’” 4. And GHY when the empress heard the emperor, she knew that he would not change his mind202 about the saint, Apa Abraham, (and) she dismissed him. IX.1 And GHY it happened when it became night, (that) the empress sent two eunuchs for the saint. 2. And when he came to her, the empress said to him, “Are you my holy father Apa Abraham, the archimandrite DMUFLPDQGULYWKa  of Pbow?” He said, “I am, by the will of God and the will of our lords [2 leaves = 4 pages missing]     

202

Literally, “he was not turning back in what he thought”.

118

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

O H 1 X.1. D)V+DøQ RXHSøVWROKD)W“QQRRXVH SPRQDVWKUøRQ MHHøCVaTHP“QTHQ WDVYZSHDSU URH [ZUø]HPPRø WHQRXGHSHWRXHYSRXMDøQ WH)\XFKQ“)W“PDUQDQ WSøVWøV P SYKUHPSQRXWHPDUH)WRXMRQWH)\XFKPRQRQHøVQ> 5 @DQQDXH>@GH>@>Ì10 lines missing@_PDX 2. QHQWDXYZSH P SQDXQWDSDQFDUøVEZNH+RXQHSPRQDVWKUL RQ+KEH SHVRWPRX:--- XI.1. SDUDRXNRXøZQDPHUDWHDQEZN+“QNHVD HDQU SZEYP SHSUR+RLPøRQQWDQNDD)ßH +UDøHWEHS“USPHHXH P SDHøZWQ THRIRURVDSDPDQDVVKSD,HW“QMZNHEROPSH)U  O A 10SPHHXH+P>Ì@>Ì@>Ìlines missing@2. SEøRVP SHøùWHOøRV Q WHø&RW3. P SHRXRHøYRXQQ WDSQRXWHYDMHP“Q SSDWUøDUFKVDEUD+DPP SH)ORH)PRXWHHUR)MHDEUDP YDQWHSSøUDP SYDMHRXZQ“+HEROH WHSWDORH+UDøQ LùVDDN SH)YKUHSHDSQRXWHYDMHQ“PPD)P SH+RRXHW>P@PDXMH 15 Q QHX>PR@XWHHURN>Ì@>Ì lines missing@4. |QR& Q +HTQRVQH)SZU“YHEROMøQDUKM“)PSND+YDDUKM“) DWHW“QQDXMHQ WDSQRXWHPHUHSSDWUÚøùDUFKVHWEH SH)RXZY?ÚH+RXQHUR) 5. SHøSHWRXDDERXQQ WD)PHUH SQRXWHD)RXD+“)Q VZ)DXZDSQRXWHPHUøW“)D>)@WDøR)+“Q 20 RXQR&Q WD>HLR@Q >Ì@>Ìlines missing@  

203

The lines from here to the end of what remains of the left hand column are each decorated in the margin with a dot and dimple (·>). 204 The V is squeezed in secondarily by a second hand. 205 Cf. Gen 22.

B. White Monastery Codex GB

119

[2 leaves = 4 pages missing] [35] X.1 He wrote a letter HMSLVWROKY and sent it to the monastery (PRQD VWKYULRQ , saying, “Behold, thus it has happened that the emperor banished HM[RULY]HLQ  me. And GHY now whoever206 desires the salvation of his soul \XFKY does not deny DMUQHYVTDL the faith SLYVWLa of the Son of God. Let him save his soul \XFKY . Only PRYQRQ behold [10+ lines wanting] 2. those who were present when Pancharis entered the monastery PRQDVWKYULRQ . Grief is listening to them. XI.1 O my beloved, we have almost SDUDY gone in another direction, forgetting the beginning (SURRLYPLRQ  that we had put down on account of the commemoration of my God bearing father Apa Manasse, the one whose commemoration we finished in [6+ lines wanting] [36] 2. the perfect life ELYRa  of this sort. 3. On the occasion then RX?Q when God spoke with the patriarch SDWULDYUFKa Abraham, he did not stop calling him, “Abram,” until the test SHLCUD of the affair was revealed, that is the sacrifice of Isaac, his son. God spoke with him that day, saying, “You will be called207 [6+ lines wanting] 4. great nation H>TQRa and it will extend to the end of the earth, to the very end. You saw that God loved the patriarch SDWULDYUFKa because of his desire for him. 5. This saint then RX?Q loved God and followed him, and God loved him. He honored him with a great h[onor] [8+ lines wanting]    

206 207

Literally, “the one who.” Cf. Gen 22.

120

Chapter 3: Texts and Translations

C. Fragment 1 Frg 1r                Frg 1v            

@HWH)  @D  THR@GZURV  @MHD   @+KH   @H   @LV   @QH   @Q“)   @HQ   @X   @D     

            

   

E> HU> PR> UH)> PS“U>  PP>  W“>  U“Q>  S>  W>  RX>  HV> P“>

            

 RXRP>  RWHQ>  SYD>  WKV>  > >  D>  M>  D)>  Q“>  H>  H> S>

 @XÚ  @EH   @D]H  Y@DHQH+   @P   @D   @QH    @  @NZ   @+   @)   @   @) 

208 Emmel reports that a fragment stuck here at lines ii.5-6 gives the false impression that more text might be legible just after what is marked as the beginnings of the lacunas; whether or not this fragment belongs to the same leaf, and if so, how it relates to it physically, is not clear. 209 Perhaps @OLV; so Emmel. 210 Emmel reports that a fragment stuck upside down here at lines ii.5-6 gives the false impression that more text might be legible just before what is marked as the beginnings of the lacunae; whether or not this fragment belongs to the same leaf, and if so, how it relates to it physically, is not clear. 211 Possibly @U.

121

C. Fragment 1

C. Fragment 1 Frg 1r  

   Frg 1v



] ] Theo]dore ] ]  ] ] ] ] ] ] ]

1

[ [ [



[ 5

[ [ [ [ [ [ [

10

[ [

 ] ] ] f]orever ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ]

1

[

5

[ [ [

[

[ [ [ [ [ [

10 [ [

Chapter 4

Related Texts A. Copto-Arabic Synaxarion1 Translated by Mehdi Aminrazavi. The Twenty-Fourth Day of Tubah (January 19) [684] Anba Abraham (Ephraim) died on the mountain of Fargout known as the Monastery of Jadda. This saint went to the convent of saint Abou Pachomius and remained there several days. When they saw how devout he was, they dressed him in a monk's habit, and he continued to increase his devotions in the place where Pancharis (Bankares) had appeared. Anba Abraham's letter arrived from the city of Constantinople, in which he informed the monks of what Justinian, the (pro-) Chalcedonian emperor, had done to him, since he [Justinian] said: "Come, enter into communion with me and then return to your monastery with your rank, as you were before. If you oppose me, you will never return to the monastery.” Anba Abraham relinquished his office and left the monastery. The wicked emperor sent Bankares (Pancharis) and with him his soldiers with this order: “Whoever obeys the emperor’s faith would remain peacefully in the monastery, and whoever refused would be expelled.” The monks left and dispersed to the deserts and monasteries. As for the saint Anba Abraham, he proceeded to the monastery of Anba Shenoute in the mountain of Atripe, where he lived and began to copy the rules of saint Abou Shenoute [685] by writing them on sheets of paper until he had completed the task. He placed them in jars, which he sealed and sent to the monastery of Anba Moses, advising them (the monks) to safeguard them. In his letter to them, he said: “There are beneficial seeds and fruitful seedlings in these jars.” So they kept them for a period of time. Then, when the vegetables in the monastery of saint Abou Moses were exhausted and they could find no 1 Text from René Basset, Le synaxaire arabe jacobite (Rédaction copte). III. Les mois de Toubeh et d’amchir Texte arabe publié, traduit et annoté. Patrologia orientalis 11, 5 (1915): 684–688. Pages, in square brackets, are those from Basset’s edition.

A. Copto-Arabic Synaxarion

123

seeds to plant, they thought of the jars that saint Anba Abraham had sent them for safekeeping. So they opened them, thinking there were seedlings inside. But what they found were the rules that our father Anba Shenoute had established, for none of the monks who were in the monastery of Abou Shenoute were able to copy them. When the monks of Abou Moses realized this, they rejoiced and copied them quickly. Several days later saint Anba Abraham left as a result of a revelation from the Lord and went to live in his monastery on the rock of Fargout where he built the monastery. Many people gathered around him, and he clothed them in the monk’s habit. Virgins also came to him and asked him to build a refuge so that they might dwell beneath the shelter of his prayer. So he clothed them in the habit and built a monastery for them where they could live. He looked for rules to instruct his children, that is the male and female monks. So he went down to the monastery of Abou Moses and found that the jars [686] that contained the laws had been opened and that they [the monks] had copied the rules. This caused him pain, and he quarreled with the monks, saying, “If these jars had belonged to anyone else but me, you would not have dared to open them.” So the superior of the monastery of Abou Moses prostrated before him and confessed his guilt, asking for forgiveness, saying, “This is a light that has been poured out upon all of us. Doesn’t this allay you?” So he (Abraham) returned to his monastery with the rules which he read to his children, the male and female monks, instructing and exhorting them. One night as he stood in prayer, an angel of the Lord appeared to him, saying, “The Lord calls you to the rank of priesthood.” He answered, “Lord, how can I undertake this [role], since I do not even know a thing from the sacred [liturgical] rules?” So the angel instructed him and ordered him to begin the rule of our father, the great patriarch Severus. So the saint read it immediately in its totality. He went to find the bishop who ordained him as a priest, and they officiated the rule (liturgy). There was a man from the inhabitants of Fargout, who said to his wife, “You know, my sister, this is a costly and painful disaster that has befallen the entire land of Egypt. Let us agree on a plan we can execute.” They took some of their own wheat and poured it into a silo in which there were ten artabas (ardebs) of wheat. They put a Eucharistic host in on top of it and sealed it (the silo). Then he said to her, “Go to the monastery of the nuns, and I will go to that of the monastery of monks of Anba Abraham, and spend the difficult days there. Afterwards we will return to our house and find wheat in abundance and live on it.” This is what they did. [687] And when the difficulties came and food was scarce, he had a dream in which he saw a man hand him half of the host that he had placed at the door of the silo. He awoke trembling in fear, for he found the half of the host truly in his hand.

124

Chapter 4: Related Texts

He arose immediately, went to the monastery of nuns, and asked for his wife. He informed her of what he had seen in the dream and showed her the half of the host that he had been given. She said to him, “I, too, dreamt this very dream,” and she produced the half of the host that she had been given that night. He put the two halves together and they matched perfectly. They knew immediately that this was the very host that they had placed at the opening of the silo. They went home without delay, opened the silo, and found nothing inside, including the host. They were amazed over God’s sense of justice, which does not want injustice, and they informed Anba Abraham. At that time many people gathered around him (Abraham) during the difficult days, and he sustained them and no one was turned away empty handed. Eventually when the bread became scarce, the steward approached him (Abraham) and informed him. So he (Abraham) responded to him, “I will handle it today, and the Lord will not forget us.” Then he (the stewart) went to the place where the bread was kept, gathered up the crumbs and the remains and put them in a basket, and took it and threw it down violently with anger in front of the saint. The saint then ordered them to celebrate the Eucharist. When he was at the Gospel and called on the Lord, they heard a loud noise [688] at that moment. The father turned to the steward and said to him, “Go and see what this loud noise was.” So he left immediately with the brothers and went to the office and opened the door. So much bread fell out that they were not able to shut the door. So when they finished the holy Eucharist, the saint ordered them to set up the tables for the people who were present. Through the blessing of the Lord, they kept eating the bread that came out of the door, unable to close it until the end of the difficulty [famine]. When the Lord showed mercy to his people and the Nile rose, they sowed seeds, but worms ate them. They went to the father and complained to him about the worms. He called upon the Lord in prayer and saw before him a column of fire, and a voice said to him, “Abraham, tell them to do the following and they will be saved, to light a fire in the middle of each field.” So they went and lit a fire in the different fields, and the fire attracted the worms and burned them up. The people planted with great joy and were saved from the worms by the prayers of this saint, Anba Abraham, as James says: “The prayer of the virtuous man is very powerful and produces results” (Jas 5:16). Afterwards the saint increased his devotions. He went on frequent journeys and would return to his monastery and struggle with his body night and day. When he died, he went to find our Lord, the Messiah, in beautiful old age and said, “Here I am with the children you gave me.” May the Lord have mercy on us through his prayer! Amen.

B. Panegyric on Apollo

125

B. Panegyric on Apollo 102 [12] For indeed it was not only the apostolic throne of Alexandria which displayed its light, the holy Dioscorus, set at that time by Christ upon the high-priestly lampstand, but (so did) almost the whole country of Egypt and in addition also the holy community of Pbow, which was reached by the aforementioned tempest not only in former times but also in the days of the emperor Justinian. And who will be able to see, or who will be able to hear the misery of the orthodox at that time? For the pillar of orthodoxy and the veritable athlete of election, the holy Severus, the holy patriarch of Antioch, devoted himself to many journeyings while being watched over, though much more by God, as herald of orthodoxy. The emperor called also the patriarch of Alexandria, our father Theodosius, to him to Constantinople, outwardly as if honouring his priesthood, but actually he [13] wanted to detain him with him in order that his ordination should be invalidated. I shall stop up, said that emperor, these great rivers, that their canals and their backwaters may dry up. I shall hide, he said, the light under the bushel (Matt 5:15; Mark 4:21; Luke 11.33), that the feet of those who run to it shall stumble. What lament then is not for the orthodox at that time? The churches were desolate, your clerics were few. The majority of the orthodox bishops had fallen asleep in the faith, being perfect in the teaching of their father. Thus then when the darkness of the error had spread abroad, the wild beasts spoke out boldly, wolf upon wolf, to advance towards the sheep of the Lord. They who came together at Chalcedon mixed the cup (Rev 18.6) of the Jews’ religion, and he who shall drink it, his reward is the office of archimandrite of Pbow. O wicked demand, O bitter conflict! The command came, the wolf advanced, the emperor’s edict went forth. And as it is written, the emperor sent forth his darts (2 Sam 22:15). He troubled the brethren of the holy community. He multiplied his threats to scatter the sheep of the Lord, if they did not want to transgress the faith of the Lord. In this then were revealed the fountains of spiritual water, that is this holy community and the other congregations which Christ established at that time. But in what way? Great is the history, however of necessity we shall tell it through others. For when the holy brethren saw that their faithful shepherd, the latter-day patriarch, Abraham, who was archimandrite at that time, was taken away from them, and that the transgressor whom the emperor had sent was appointed to stand in the place of this man, all who loved godliness acted with great zeal and chose 2

From K. H. Kuhn, A Panegyric on Apollo Archimandrite of the Monastery of Isaac by Stephen Bishop of Heracleopolis Magna, CSCO 394–95, Scriptores coptici 39–40 (Louvain: Secrétariat du CCSO, 1978), 12–14. Pages, in square brackets, are those in Kuhn’s edition.

126

Chapter 4: Related Texts

to leave the dwelling-place of their fathers lest they should make themselves strangers to the God of their fathers. The affair extended to distant paths, O my beloved, but by going through the thorns they find the lily. For our holy father Apa Apollo is in truth a lily who uprooted himself from among the thorns of the heretics. And thus he departed from Pbow at that time, having kept as apostolic the Constitution of the Apostles3 which says: If the [14] ungodly seize a monastery, flee far away. For it is not the place that commends men, but it is man who commends the place. For thus the three holy children who were in the fiery furnace in Babylon called God to them by their steadfastness (Dan 3:16ff). But as for the Jews, while they still possessed the temple as their sanctuary, this only begotten Son of God departed from their midst because of their hypocrisy. As one taught by God, thus did our father take upon himself the retreat (from the world), wandering in the deserts and ravines and holes of the earth (Heb 11:38), being a sojourner in an alien region, in want, distressed, and grieved (Heb 11:37). After all this it was as if he heard from God what he had said to the patriarch Jacob: Return to the land in which you were born and I shall do good unto you (Gen 31:3). And after many wanderings he came to this very mountain. And only when he stood on it, he heard Isaiah saying: God shall give rest upon this mountain (Isa 25:10), and also David: This is the mountain which God desired and he lived in it (Ps 67:17). As is fitting he, too, said: This is my dwelling-place for ever. I shall live in it (Ps 131:14), for the Lord has chosen it as a monastery for himself.

3

On the Constitution of the Apostles: Constitutiones apostolorum VIII, 34, 8–9. Ed. F. X. Funk, Didascalia et Constitutiones Apostolorum I (Paderborn: libraria Ferdinandi Schoeningh, 1905), 540–43; for a Sahidic version, Paul de Lagarde, Aegyptiaca (Göttingen: Arnoldi Hoyer, 1883), 284, Cannones ecclesiastici, 75. 39–40.

Appendix A

Previously Published Editions of the Manuscript Leaves The following table references previously published editions of the leaves from White Monastery Codices GC and GB published in this volume. Column 1 (Pages) supplies the page numbers (recto/verso) of the original manuscript. Column 2 (Manuscripts) records the call number of the manuscript leaf/leaves following the system adopted by the International Association for Coptic Studies.1 Column 3 gives the published editions of the leaves using the following abbreviations. Zoega’s catalogue supplies only excerpts of varying length. Amél É. Amélineau, Monuments pour servir a l’histoire de l’Égypte chrétienne aux 4., 5., 6., et 7. siècles. Mèmoires 4/2. Paris: Leroux, 1895. Camp GB Antonella Campagnano, ed. Preliminary Editions of Coptic Codices: Monb. GC: Life of Abraham – Encomium of Abraham. CMCL. Rome: Centro Italiano Microfisches, 1985. Camp GC Antonella Campagnano, ed. Preliminary Editions of Coptic Codices: Monb. GC: Life of Abraham – Encomium of Abraham. CMCL. Rome: Centro Italiano Microfisches, 1985. Leipoldt Johannes Leipoldt, Sinuthii Archimandritae Vita et Opera Omnia. CSCO 73, Scriptores Coptici 5. Paris: J. Gabalda, 1913; reprint ed., Louvain: Secrétariat du CSCO, 1954. A Latin translation appears in CSCO 96 (Copt. 8). Munier M. Henri Munier, Catalogue general des antiquités égyptiennes du Musée du Caire.Manuscrits copte. Cairo: L’Institut français d’archéologie orientale, 1916. Zoega Georg Zoega, Catalogus codicum copticorum manuscriptorum qui in Museo Borgiano Velitris adservantur. Rome: Sacra Congregatio de Propaganda Fide, 1810; reprint ed., Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1903; reprint ed., Hildesheim and New York: Georg Olms, 1973.

1 Stephen Emmel, ed., An International Directory of Institutions Holding Collections of Coptic Antiquities Outside of Egypt (Rome: Centro Italiano Microfiches, 1990). See Appendix C.

128

Appendix A: Previously Published Editions

White Monastery codex GC Pages Manuscripts

Editions   

5/6  7-10  11/12  21/22 27/28 49/50  51/52  53-54  55-56  57/58  65/66

FR-BN 12913 f.12 IFAO 5-6   FR-BN 12913 f.13 AT-NB 9550 AT-NB 9549 IFAO 8   AT-BN 9761  AT-BN 9527  AT-BN 9528  AT-BN 9548  IT-NB IB 8 f.44

     

69-70 

IT-NB IB 8 f.45



71-72 

IT-NB IB 8 f.46



83/84  85-86 

FR-BN 12913 f.15 IT-NB IB 8 f.47

 

87-88 

IT-NB IB 8 f.48



97/98  101-104 105/106 107/109

FR-BN 12913 f.14  DE-BS 1607 ff. 9-10 AT-BN 9404 EG-C 3901

White Monastery Codex GB Pages2 Manuscripts 7-10 15/16  23/24 25/26 2



IT-NB IB 2 ff.2-3 

Amél 742–43; Camp GC Camp GC Amél 743–45; Camp GC Camp GC Camp GC Camp GC Camp GC Camp GC Camp GC Camp GC Zoega 547-48 (excerpts); Amél 746-47; Camp GC Zoega 547-48 (excerpts); Amél 748-49; Camp GC Zoega 547-48 (excerpts); Amél 749-51; Camp GC Camp GC Zoega 547–48 (excerpts); Amél 751–52; Camp GC Zoega 547–48 (excerpts); Amél 752–53; Camp GC Camp GC Camp GC Camp GC Munier 62–63; Camp GC

Editions 

AT-BN 942    US-MU 158 ff. 46a/b US-MU 158 ff. 46c/d

Zoega 373–75 (excerpts); Amél 666–68; Camp GB Camp GB Camp GB Camp GB

With the exception of the five leaves that I inspected in person, page numbers derive from the earlier editions, particularly Campagnano’s with its microfiche copies of the manuscript pages, and inspection of the photographs of the Paris pages housed in the Institute for Christian Oriental Research in Mullen Library at the Catholic University of America.

Appendix A: Previously Published Editions

29/30 35/36  47/48  49/50  59/60  63-64  79/80 

FR-BN 78 f. 32 FR-BN 12913 f.1 FR-BN 12913 f.2 US-MU 158 ff. 46e/f FR-BN 12913 f.4 FR-BN 12913 f.3 IT-NB IB 2 f.4 

95/96 

FR-BN 1304 f.114



99/100

IT-NB IB 2 



101/102

IT-NB IB 9 f.1



107-110

IT-NB IB 9 ff.2-3



119-122

IT-NB IB 2 ff.6-7



149-152 153-154 155-156

FR-BN 1303 ff. 30-31 FR-BN 1303 f. 32 FR-BN 1303 f. 33

Amél 745–46; Camp GB Amél 668–69; Camp GB Amél 670–71; Camp GB Camp GB Amél 671–72; Camp GB Amél 672–74; Camp GB Zoega 373–75 (excerpts); Amél 674–75; Camp GB Camp GB Zoega 373–75 (excerpts); Amél 675–77; Camp GB Zoega 548 (excerpts); Amél 754–55; Camp GB Zoega 548 (excerpts); Amél 755–58; Camp GB Zoega 373–75 (excerpts); Amél 677–79; Camp GB Leipoldt 209–11; Camp GB Leipoldt 211–12;Camp GB Leipoldt 212-14;Camp GB

129

Appendix B

Manuscript Pages Listed by Library Austria Österreichische Nationalebibliothek, Vienna P.Vindob. K 942 White Monastery Ms. GB 15-16 P.Vindob. K 9404 White Monastery Ms. GC 105-106 P.Vindob. K 9527 White Monastery Ms. GC 53-54 P.Vindob. K 9528 White Monastery Ms. GC 55-56 P.Vindob. K 9548 White Monastery Ms. GC 57-58 P.Vindob. K 9549 White Monastery Ms. GC 27-28 P.Vindob. K 9550 White Monastery Ms. GC 21-22 P.Vindob. K 9761 White Monastery Ms. GC 51-52 Egypt Coptic Museum, Cairo Ms. 3901

White Monastery Ms. GC 107-108

Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale, Cairo IFAO 5 White Monastery Ms. GC 7-8 IFAO 6 White Monastery Ms. GC 9-10 IFAO 8 White Monastery Ms. GC 49-50 France Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris Copte 78 f.32 Copte 12913 f. 1 Copte 12913 f.12 Copte 12913 f.13 Copte 12913 f.14 Copte 12913 f.15 Copte 1322 f.61

White Monastery Ms. GB 29-30 White Monastery Ms. GB 35-36 White Monastery Ms. GC 5-6 White Monastery Ms. GC 11-12 White Monastery Ms. GC 97-98 White Monastery Ms. GC 83-84 White Monastery Ms. GB frg. 1

Germany Staatsbibliothek, Berlin Or.Ms. 1607 f.9 Or.Ms. 1607 f.10

White Monastery Ms. GC 101-102 White Monastery Ms. GC 103-104

Appendix B: Manuscript Pages Listed by Library

Italy Biblioteca Nazionale “Vittorio Emanuele III”, Naples IB 8 f.44 White Monastery Ms. GC 65-66 IB 8 f.45 White Monastery Ms. GC 69-70 IB 8 f.46 White Monastery Ms. GC 71-72 IB 8 f.47 White Monastery Ms. GC 85-86 IB 8 f.48 White Monastery Ms. GC 87-88 United States of America University of Michigan Library Coptic Ms. 158, 46a-b White Monastery Ms. GB 23-24 Coptic Ms. 158, 46c-d White Monastery Ms. GB 25-26

131

Appendix C

Manuscript Sigla Table The table below gives equivalences between the manuscript sigla found in the directory of Institutions holding Coptic Antiquities of the International Association for Coptic Studies1 and the more commonly used designations associated with the individual institutions. IACS

Library

AT-NB

Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna P.Vindob. K NB K

EG-C

Coptic Museum, Cairo Ms.

EG-CF

Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale, Cairo IFAO

DE-BS

Staatsbibliothek Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin SB Or.

FR-BN

Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris BN Copte

IT-NB

Biblioteca Nazionale “Vittorio Emanuele III,” Naples BN IB

US-MU

University of Michigan Library, Ann Arbor Coptix Ms.

1

Emmel, An International Directory.

Plates

Plate 1 [Codex GC Page 7 = IFAO 5r] Photograph courtesy of the Insitute français d’archéologie orientale. ©IFAO

134

Plates

Plate 2 [Codex GC Page 9 = IFAO 6r] Photograph courtesy of the Insitute français d’archéologie orientale. ©IFAO

Plates

Plate 3 [Codex GC Page [88] = Naples IB 8, 48v] Photograph courtesy of the Biblioteca Nazionale “Vittorio Emanuele III”, Naples Su concessione del Ministero per I Beni e le Attività Culturali

135

136

Plates

Plate 4 [Codex GB Page [15] = Vienna 942r] Photograph courtesy of the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna

Plates

Plate 5 [ Codex GB Page 24 = Michigan 158, 46b] Photograph courtesy of the Special Collections Library, University of Michigan

137

Bibliography Aland, Kurt. “Neue neutestamentliche Papyri II.” New Testament Studies 10 (1963–64): 62–79. __. “Neue neutestamentliche Papyri II.” New Testament Studies 11 (1964–65): 1–21. Alcock, Anthony. The Life of Samuel Kalamon by Isaac the Presbyter. Warminster, England: Aris & Phillips, 1983. __. “Samnj’Ưl of Qalamnjn, Saint.” In The Coptic Encyclopedia, 8 vols., ed. Aziz S. Atiya. New York: Macmillan, 1991, 7.2092–93 Allen, Pauline. “The Definition and Enforcement of Orthodoxy.” In the Cambridge Ancient History, vol. XIV, Late Antiquity: Empire and Successors A.D. 425–600, ed. Averil Cameron, Bryan Ward-Perkins, and Michael Whitby. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000, 811–34. Amélineau, É. Geographie de l’Égypte à l’epoche copte. Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1893; reprint ed., Osnabrück: Otto Zeller, 1973. __. Monuments pour servir a l’histoire de l’Égypte chrétienne aux 4., 5., 6., et 7. siècles. Mèmoires publiés par les members de la mission archéologique français au Caire 4/2. Paris: Leroux, 1895. Atiya, Aziz S., ed. The Coptic Encyclopedia, 8 vols. New York: Macmillan, 1991. Bagnall, Roger S. Early Christian Books in Egypt. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2009. Barker, John W. Justinian and the Later Roman Empire. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 1966. Basset, René. Le synaxaire arabe jacobite (Rédaction copte). Patrologia orientalis 1.3; 3.3; 11.5; 16.3; 17.3; 20.5. Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1916–29. Böhlig, Alexander. Der achmimische Proverbientext nach Ms. Berol. Orient. Oct. 987. Teil I: Text und Rekonstruktion der sahidischen Vorlage. Studien zur Erforschung des christlichen Aegyptens herausgegeben von Alexander Böhlig 3. München: Robert Lerche, 1958. Boon, Amand. Pachomiana latina: Règle et épitres de s. Pachome, épitre de s. Théodore et “liber” de s. Orsiesius. Texte latin de s. Jerome. Bibliothèque de la revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 7. Louvain: Bureaux de la revue, 1932. Brooks-Hedstrom, Darlene Lynn. “‘Your Cell Will Teach You All Things’: The Relationship Between Monastic Practice and the Architectural Design of the Cell in Coptic Monasticism, 400-1000.” Ph.D. diss., Miami University of Ohio, 2001. Cadell, H. and R. Rémondon. “Sens et employs de 72 >2526 dans les documents papyrologiques.” Revue des études grecques 80 (1967): 343–49. Cameron, Averil. Christianity and the Rhetoric of the Empire: The Development of Christian Discourse. Sather Classical Lectures 55. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991. Campagnano, Antonella. “Monaci egiziani fra V e VI secolo.” Vetera Christianorum 15 (1978): 223–46.

140

Bibliography

__., ed. Preliminary Editions of Coptic Codices: Monb. GB: Life of Manasses – Encomium of Moses – Encomium of Abraham. Corpus dei Manoscritti Copti Letterari. Rome: Centro Italiano Microfisches, 1985. __., ed. Preliminary Editions of Coptic Codices: Monb. GB: Life of Manasses – Encomium of Moses – Encomium of Abraham. Corpus dei Manoscritti Copti Letterari. Rome: Centro Italiano Microfisches, 1985) Cauwenbergh, Paul van. Étude sur les moines d’Égypte depuis le Concile de Chalcédoine (451) jusqu’à l’invasion arabe (640). Paris: P. Geuthner, 1914; reprint ed., Milan: Cisalpinop-Goliardica, 1973. Ciasca, P. Augustini. Sacrorum Bibliorum fragmenta copto-sahidica Musei Borgiani iussu et sumptibus S. Congregationis de propaganda fide, vol. 2. Rome: S. Congregationis de propaganda fide, 1889. Coquin, René-Georges. “Abraham of Farshut.” In The Coptic Encyclopedia, 8 vols., ed. Aziz S. Atiya. New York: Macmillan, 1991, 1.11–12. __. “Moïse d’Abydos.” Deuxième journée d’études coptes. Strasbourg 25 mai 1984. Cahiers de la Bibliothèque copte 3. Louvain and Paris: Peeters, 1986, 1–14. __. “Moses of Abydos.” In The Coptic Encyclopedia, 8 vols., ed. Aziz S. Atiya. New York: Macmillan, 1991, 5.1679–81. __. “Victor of Tabennêsê, Saint.” In The Coptic Encyclopedia, 8 vols., ed. Aziz S. Atiya. New York: Macmillan, 1991, 7.2308. Coquin, René-Georges and Maurice Martin. “Dayr AnbƗ Bishoi: History.” In The Coptic Encyclopedia, 8 vols., ed. Aziz S. Atiya. New York: Macmillan, 1991, 3.736–39. __. “Dayr AnbƗ Palaemon.” In The Coptic Encyclopedia, 8 vols., ed. Aziz S. Atiya. New York: Macmillan, 1991, 3.757. __. “Dayr AnbƗ Shinnjdah: History.” In The Coptic Encyclopedia, 8 vols., ed. Aziz S. Atiya. New York: Macmillan, 1991, 3.761–66. __. “Farshut.” In The Coptic Encyclopedia, 8 vols., ed. Aziz S. Atiya. New York: Macmillan, 1991, 4.1092–93. Craster, Edmund. History of the Bodleian Library, 1845-1945. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1952. Crum, Walter E., A Coptic Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1939. __. “Catalogue Général du Musée du Caire: Nos. 9201-9304, Manuscrits Copte. By Henri Munier. Cairo, 1916,” under “Notes on Recent Pubications.” Journal of Egyptian Archeology 4 (1917): 65–70. __. Der Papyruscodex saec. VI–VII der Phillippsbibliothek in Cheltenham. Koptische theologische Schriften. Strassburg: Trübner, 1915. Cyril of Alexandria. St. Cyril of Alexandria: Letters 51-110, trans. by John I. McEnerney. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1987. Dahlman, Brit. Saint Daniel of Sketis: A Group of Hagiographical Texts Edited with Introduction, Translation, and Commentary. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, Studia Byzantina Upsaliensia 10. Uppsala: Uppsala University Library [Distributor], 2007. Davies, Stephen J. The Early Coptic Papacy: The Egyptian Church and Its Leadership in Late Antiquity. Cairo and New York: American University in Cairo Press, 2003. Delehaye, Hippolyte. The Legends of the Saints, trans. by Donald Attwater. New York: Fordham University Press, 1962. Dijkstra, Jitse H. F. Philae and the End of Ancient Egyptian Religion: A Regional Study of Religious Transformation (298–642 CE). Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 173. Leuven: Peeters, 2008. Dijkstra, Jitse and Mathilde van Dijk, eds. The Encroaching Desert: Egyptian Hagiography and the Medieval West. Leiden: Brill, 2006.

Bibliography

141

Dinkler, Erich. Signum Crucis: Aufsätze zum Neuen Testament und zur Christlichen Archäologie. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1967. Elliott, Alison Goodard. Roads to Paradise: Reading the Lives of the Early Saints. Hanover and London: Brown University Press, 1987. Elm, Susanna. ‘Virgins of God’: The Making of Asceticism in Late Antiquity. Oxford Classical Monographs. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994. Emmel, Stephen. An International Directory of Institutions Holding Collections of Coptic Antiquities Outside of Egypt. Rome: Centro Italiano Microfiches, 1990. __. Shenoute’s Literary Corpus, 2 vols. CSCO 599–600, Subsidia 111–12. Louvain: Peeters, 2004. __. “Shenoute the Monk: The Early Monastic Career of Shenoute the Archimandrite.” In Il Monachesimo tra eredità e aperture: Atti del simposio “Testi e temi nella tradizione del monachesimo cristiano” per il 50o anniversario dell’Instituto monastico di Sant’Anselmo, Roma, 28 maggio—1o giugno 2002, ed. By Maciej Bielawski and Daniël Hombergen. Studia Anselmiana 140. Rome: Pontificio Ateneo S. Anselmo, 2004, 151–74. Forget, Jacques, Synaxarium Alexandrinum. CSCO 47–49, 67, 78, 90; Scriptores arabici, ser. 3, vols. 18–19. Beryti: E Typographeo catholico, 1905–26. Frankfurter, David. “Hagiography and the Reconstruction of Local Religion in Late Antique Egypt: Memories, Inventions, and Landscapes.” In The Encroaching Desert: Egyptian Hagiography and the Medieval West, ed. Jitse Dijkstra and Mathilde van Dijk (Leiden: Brill, 2006), 13–37. __. “Syncretism and the Holy Man in Late Antique Egypt.” Journal of Early Christian Studies 11, 3 (2003): 339–85. Frazee, Charles A. “Late Roman and Byzantine Legislation on the Monastic Life from the Fourth to the Eighth Centuries.” Church History 51 (1982): 263–79. Frend, W. H. C. The Rise of the Monophysite Movement: Chapters in the History of the Church in the Fifth and Sixth Centuries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972. Gamble, Harry Y. Books and Readers in the Early Church: A History of Early Christian Texts. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1995. Gascou, Jean. “Metanoia.” In The Coptic Encyclopedia, 8 vols., ed. Aziz S. Atiya. New York: Macmillan, 1991, 5.1608–1611. __. “P. Fouad 87: Les Monastéres pachômiens et l’état byzantine.” Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale 76 (1976): 157–84. __. “Les Pachômiens à Aphrodité.” In Les archives de Dioscore d’Aphrodité cent ans après leur découverte: histoire et culture dans l’Égypte byzantine, ed. Jean-Luc Fournet. Paris: De Boccard, 2008, 275–82. Giorgi, Agostino Antonio. Fragmentum Copticum ex Actis S. Coluthi Martyris Erutum ex Membraneis Vetustissimis Saeculi V ac Latine Redditum. Rome, 1781, 3–4. Goehring, James E. “Abraham of Farshut’s Dying Words: Reflections on a Literary Motif in the Ascetic Literature of Early Christian Egypt.” Coptica 8 (2009): 21–39. __. Ascetics, Society, and the Desert: Studies in Early Egyptian Christianity. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1999. __. “Chalcedonian Power Politics and the Demise of Pachomian Monasticism.” Occasional Paper 15. Claremont, CA: Institute for Antiquity and Christianity, 1989; reprinted in idem, Ascetics, Society, and the Desert, 241–61. __. “Keeping the Monastery Clean: A Cleansing Episode from an Excerpt on of Abraham of Farshut and Shenoute’s Discourse on Purity.” In The World of Early Egyptian Christianity: Language, Literature, and Social Context. Essays in Honor of David W. Johnson, ed. James E. Goehring and Janet Timbie. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University Press, 2007, 158–75.

142

Bibliography

__. The Letter of Ammon and Pachomian Monasticism. Patristische Texte und Studien 27. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1986. __. “The Life and Miracles of Abraham of Farshut: Community Disaster and the Making of a Saint.” In Christianity and Monasticism in Upper Egypt, Vol. 2, Nag Hammadi – Esna, ed. Gawdat Gabra and Hany N. Takla. Cairo and New York: The American University in Cairo Press, 2010, 49–61. __. “New Frontiers in Pachomian Studies.” In The Roots of Egyptian Christianity, ed. Birger A. Pearson and James E. Goehring. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986, 236– 57; reprinted in Goehring, Ascetics, Society, and the Desert, 162–86. __. “Pachomius and the White Monastery.” In Christianity and Monasticism in Upper Egypt, Vol. 1, Akhmim and Sohag, ed. Gawdat Gabra and Hany N. Takla. Cairo and New York: The American University in Cairo Press, 2008, 47–57. __. “Remembering Abraham of Farshut: History, Hagiography, and the Fate of the Pachomian Tradition.” Journal of Early Christian Studies 14 (2006): 1–26. __. “The Ship of the Pachomian Federation: Metaphor and Meaning in a Late Account of Pachomian Monasticism.” In Christianity in Egypt: Literary Production and Intellectual Trends, ed. Paolo Buzi and Alberto Camplani. Studia Ephemeridis Augustinianum 125. Istituto Patristico Augustinianum, 2011, 289–303. Grossmann, Peter. “The Basilica of St. Pachomius.” Biblical Archeologist 42, 4 (1979): 232–36. __. Christliche Architektur in Ägypten. Handbook of Oriental Studies, Section One, The Near and Middle East 62. Leiden: Brill, 2002. __. “Dayr AnbƗ Bishoi: Buildings.” In The Coptic Encyclopedia, 8 vols., ed. Aziz S. Atiya. New York: Macmillan, 1991, 3.740. __. “Dayr AnbƗ Shinnjdah: Architecture.” n The Coptic Encyclopedia, 8 vols., ed. Aziz S. Atiya. New York: Macmillan, 1991, 3.766–69. __. “Pbow: Archaeology.” In The Coptic Encyclopedia, 8 vols., ed. Aziz S. Atiya. New York: Macmillan, 1991, 6.1927–29. Grossmann, Peter and Gary Lease. “Faw Qibli – 1989 Excavation Report.” Göttingen Miszellen 114 (1990): 9–16. Hardy, Edward R. “The Egyptian Policy of Justinian,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 22 (1968): 23–41. __. “Theodosius I.” In The Coptic Encyclopedia, 8 vols., ed. Aziz S. Atiya. New York: Macmillan, 1991, 7.2241. Harnack, Adolf von and Carl Schmidt. “Ein koptisches Fragment einer Moses-Adam Apokalypse.” Sitzungberichte der Deutschen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin 51 (1891): 1045–49. Harvey, Susan Ashbrook. Asceticism and Society in Crisis: John of Ephesus and the Lives of the Eastern Saints. The Transformation of the Classical Heritage 18. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997. __. “Theodora the ‘Believing Queen’: A Study in Syriac Hagiographical Tradition.” Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies (on-line journal) 4,2 (July 2001). Hunger, Herbert. Aus der Vorgeschichte der Papyrussammlung der österreichischen Nationalbibliothek. Mitteilungen aus der Papyrussammlung der Österreichischen Nationalbibliothek (Papyrus Erzherzog Rainer), Neue Series 7. Vienna: Brüder Hollinek, 1962. Hurtado, Larry W. The Earliest Christian Artifacts: Manuscripts and Christian Origins. Grand Rapids, MI and Cambridge, UK: William B. Eerdmans, 2006. __. “The Staurogram in Early Christian Manuscripts: The Earliest Visual Reference to the Crucified Jesus?” In New Testament Manuscripts: Their Text and Their World, ed. Thomas J. Kraus and Tobias Nicklas. Leiden: Brill, 2006, 207–26

Bibliography

143

Hyvernat, Henry. “Introduction.” In E. Porcher, “Analyse de manuscripts coptes 1311–8 de la Bibliothèque nationale, avec indication des texts bibliques.” Revue d’égyptologie 1 (1933): 105–16. Johnson, David W. “Anti-Chalcedonian Polemics in Coptic Texts, 451–641.” In The Roots of Egyptian Christianity, ed. Birger A, Pearson and James E. Goehring. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986, 216–34. __. A Panegyric on Macarius, Bishop of Tkôw, Attributed to Dioscorus of Alexandria. CSCO 415 (Scriptores coptici 41; Coptic text) and CSCO 416 (Scriptores coptici 42; Eng. trans.). Louvain: Secrétariat du CorpusSCO, 1980. Kaegi, Walter Emil. “Narses.” In The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, 3 vols., ed. Alexander P. Kazhdan et al. New York-Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991, 2.1438. Kasser, Rodolphe. Compléments au dictionnaire copte de Crum. Cairo: L’Institut français d’archéologie orientale, 1964. Kraatz, Wilhelm. Koptische Akten zum ephesinischen Konzil vom Jahre 431. Leipzig: J. C. Henrichs, 1904. Krall, Jakob. Aus einer koptischen Klosterbibliothek II. Mitteilungen aus der Papyrussammlung der Österreichischen Nationalbibliothek (Papyrus Erzherzog Rainer) 2/3. Vienna: K. K. Hofdruck, 1887. Krawiec, Rebecca. Shenoute and the Women of the White Monastery: Egyptian Monasticism in Late Antiquity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. Kuhn, K. H. A Panegyric on Apollo Archimandrite of the Monastery of Isaac by Stephen Bishop of Heracleopolis Magna. CSCO 394–95, Scriptores coptici 39–40. Louvain: Secrétariat du CSCO, 1978. Lampe, G. W. H. A Patristic Greek Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1961. Layton, Bentley. Catalogue of Coptic Literary Manuscripts in the British Library Acquired Since 1906. London: British Library, 1987. __. A Coptic Grammar with Chrestomathy and Glossary: Sahidic Dialect. Porta Linguarum Orientalium 20. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2000. __. “The Monastic Rules of Shenoute.” In Monastic estates in late antique and early Islamic Egypt: Ostraca, papyri, and essays in memory of Sarah Clackson (P. Clackson), ed. Anne Boud'hors, et al. American Studies in Papyrology 46. Cincinnati: American Society of Papyrologists, 2009, 170–77. __. “Social Structure and Food Consumption in an Early Christian Monastery: The Evidence of Shenoute’s Canons and the White Monastery Federation A.D. 385-465.” Muséon 115 (2002): 25–55. __. “Two Unpublished Shenute Fragments Against Kronos: Layton, Brit. Lib., Nos. 90 and 91.” Journal of Coptic Studies 2 (1992): 117–38. Lease, Gary. “The Fourth Season of the Nag Hammadi Excavation 21 December 1979 – 15 January 1980.” Göttingen Miszellen 41 (1980): 75–85. __. “Traces of Early Egyptian Monasticism: The Faw Qibli Excavations.” Occasional Papers 22. Claremont: CA: The Institute for Antiquity and Christianity, 1991. Lefort, L.-Th. S. Pachomii Vitae Sahidice Scriptae. CSCO 99–100 (Scriptores Coptici 9– 10). Paris: e typographeo reipublicae, 1933; reprint ed., Louvain: Secrétariat du CorpusSCO, 1965. __. Les vies coptes de saint Pachôme et de ses premiers successeurs. Bibliothèque du Muséon 16. Louvain: Bureaux du Muséon, 1943. Leipoldt, Johannes. Sinuthii Archimandritae Vita et Opera Omnia. CSCO 73, Scriptores Coptici 5. Paris: J. Gabalda, 1913. Liddell, Henry George, et al. A Greek-English Lexicon. 9 th edition with a supplement. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968.

144

Bibliography

Loebenstein, Helene. “Vom ‘Papyrus Erzherzog Rainer’ zur Papyrussammlung der österreichischen Nationalbibliothek: 100 Jahre Sammeln, Bewahren, Edieren.” In Festschrift zum 100-jährigen Bestehen der Papyrussammlung der österreichischen Nationalbibliothek. Papyrus Erzherzog Rainer (P. Rainer Cent.). Vienna: Bruder Hollinek, 1983, 3–39. MacCoull, Leslie S. B. “‘When Justinian Was Upsetting the World’: A Note on Soldiers and Religious Coercion in Sixth Century Egypt.” In Peace and War in Byzantium: Essays in Honor of George T. Dennis, S.J., ed. Timothy S. Miller and John Nesbitt. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1995, 106–13. Martindale, J. R. The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, 3 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. Maspero, Gaston. Fragments de la version thébaine de l’Ancient Testament. Mémoires publiés par les members de la mission archéologique française au Caire 6. Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1892, 1–296. Meinardus, Otto F. A. Coptic Saints and Pilgrimages. Cairo and New York: American University in Cairo, 2002. Menze, Volker L. Justinian and the Making of the Syrian Orthodox Church. Oxford Early Christian Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. Moussa, Mark R. “Abba Moses of Abydos.” MA Thesis, The Catholic University Of America, 1998. Munier, M. Henri. Catalogue general des antiquités égyptiennes du Musée du Caire. Manuscrits copte. Cairo: L’Institut français d’archéologie orientale, 1916. No. 9250, pp. 62–63. __. “Le Monastère de St. Abraham à Farshout.” Bulletin de la Société d’archéologie d'Alexandria 30 (1936): 2630. Nau, F. N. “Histoire de Dioscore, patriarche d’Alexandrie, écrite par son disciple Théopiste.” Journal Asiatique, série 10, no. 1 (1903): 5–108, 241–310. __. “Histoire des solitaires égyptiens.” Revue d’orient chrétien 14 (1909): 357–79. Orlandi, Tito. “Daniel of Scetis, Saint.” In The Coptic Encyclopedia, 8 vols., ed. Aziz S. Atiya. New York: Macmillan, 1991, 3.692. __. “Literature, Coptic.” In The Coptic Encyclopedia, 8 vols., ed. Aziz S. Atiya. New York: Macmillan, 1991, 5.1454–55. __. Manuscripts from the White Monastery. Corpus dei Manoscritti Copti Letterari. Accessed at http://cmcl.let.uniroma1.it. __. Papiri Copti di Contenuto Teologico. Mitteilungen aus der Papyrussammlung der österreichischen Nationalbibliothek (Papyrus Erzherzog Rainer), Neue Series 9. Vienna: Brüder Hollinek, 1974. __. “Un projet milanais concernant les manuscripts coptes du Monastère Blanc.” Muséon 85 (1972): 403–13. __. Storia della Chiesa di Alessandria, 2 vols. TDSA 17 and 31. Milan: Cisalpino, 1968–70. Papaconstantinou, Arietta. Le culte des saints en Égypte des byzantins aux abbassides: L’apport des inscriptions et des papyrus grecs et coptes. Paris: CNRS Éditions, 2001. __. “Historiography, Hagiography, and the Making of the Coptic ‘Church of the Martyrs’ in Early Islamic Egypt,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 60 (2006): 65–86. Patlagean, Evelyne. “Ancient Byzantine Hagiography and Social History.” In Saints and their Cults: Sociology, Folklore, and History, ed. Stephen Wilson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983, 101–121; originally published as “Ancienne hagiographie Byzantine et histoire sociale. Annales. Économies, Sociétés, Civilisations 23 (1968): 106–126. Quatremère, Étienne. Recherches critiques et historiques sur la langue et la literature de l’Égypte. Paris: Imprimerie impériale, 1808.

Bibliography

145

Quecke, Hans. Untersuchungen zum koptischen Stundengebet. Publications de l’Institut orientaliste de Louvain 3. Louvain: Université Catholique de Louvain – Institut Orientaliste, 1970. Rémondon, R. “Le monastere alexandrin de la metanoia etait-il beneficiaire du fisc ou a son service?” In Studi in Onore de Edoardo Volterra, ed. Edoardo Volterra. Milan: Giuffre, 1971, vol. 5, 769–81. __. “Soldats de Byzance d’après un papyrus trouve à Edfou.” Recherches de papyrologie 1 (1961): 41–94. Robinson, James M. and Bastiaan van Elderen. “The First Season of the Nag Hammadi Excavation 27 November – 19 December 1975.” Newsletter of the American Research Center in Egypt 96 (1976): 18–24 and Göttingen Miszellen 22 (1976): 71–79. __. “The Second Season of the Nag Hammadi Excavation 22 November – 29 December 1976.” Newsletter of the American Research Center in Egypt 99/100 (1977): 36–54 and Göttingen Miszellen 24 (1977): 57–71. Sabersky, H. Ein Winter in Ägypten: Eine Reisebeschreibung. Berlin: Schall und Grund, 1896. Sanders, Henry A. The New Testament Manuscripts in the Freer Collection, Part I, The Washington Manuscript of the Four Gospels. New York: Macmillan, 1912. Schroeder, Caroline T. Monastic Bodies: Discipline and Salvation in Shenoute of Atripe. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 2007. __. “Purity and Pollution in the Asceticism of Shenute of Atripe.” In Papers Presented at the Thirteenth International Conference on Patristic Studies Held in Oxford 1999, ed. M. F. Wiles and E. J. Yarnold. Leuven: Peeters, 2001, 142–47 = Studia Patistica 35 (2001): 142–47 __. “‘A Suitable Abode for Christ’: The Church Building as Symbol of Ascetic Renunciation in Early Monasticism.” Church History 73, 3 (2004): 472–521. Stinde, Julius. Frau Buchholz im Orient. Berlin: Freund & Jeckel, 1888. Timbie, Janet. “A Liturgical Procession in the Desert of Apa Shenoute.” In Pilgrimage and Holy Space in Late Antique Egypt, ed. David Frankfurter. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1998, 415–41. Timm, Stephan. Das christlich-koptische Ägypten in arabischer Zeit. Teil 2 (D-F). Beihefte zum Tübinger Atlas des vorderen Orients Reihe B, Nr. 41/2. Wiesbaden: Ludwig Reichert, 1984. Turner, Eric G. The Typology of the Early Codex. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press, 1977. Valantasis, Richard. Spiritual Guides of the Third Century: A Semiotic Study of the GuideDisciple Relationship in Christianity, Neoplatonism, Hermetism, and Gnosticism, Harvard Dissertations in Religion 17. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991. van Cauwenbergh, Paul. Études sur les moines d’Égypte depuis le Concile de Chalcédoine (451) jusqu’à l’invasion arabe (640). Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1914. van der Vliet, Jacques. “Bringing Home the Homeless: Landscape and History in Egyptian Hagiography.” In The Encroaching Desert: Egyptian Hagiography and the Medieval West, ed. Jitse Dijkstra and Mathilde van Dijk (Leiden: Brill, 2006), 39–55. Van Elderen, Bastiaan. “The Nag Hammadi Excavation.” Biblical Archeologist 42 (1979): 225–231. van Lantschoot, Arn. “Allocution de Timothée d’Alexandrie prononcée a l’occasion de la dédicace de l’église de Pachome a Pboou.” Le Muséon 47 (1934): 13–56. Van Minnen, Peter. “Saving History? Egyptian Hagiography in its Space and Time.” In The Encroaching Desert: Egyptian Hagiography and the Medieval West, ed. Jitse Dijkstra and Mathilde van Dijk (Leiden: Brill, 2006), 57–91. Veilleux, Armand. Pachomian Koinonia, 3 vols. Cistercian Studies 45–47. Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Press, 1980–82.

146

Bibliography

Viaud, Gérard. Les pèlerinages coptes en Égypte d’apres les notes du Qommos Jacob Muyser. Bibliotheque d’études coptes 15. Cairo: Institut français d’archéologie orientale du Caire, 1979, 55–56 and plates 9–10. __. “Pilgrimages.” In The Coptic Encyclopedia, 8 vols., ed. Aziz S. Atiya. New York: Macmillan, 1991, 6.1969–70 Vivian, Tim, ed. Witness to Holiness: Abba Daniel of Scetis. Cistercian Studies Series 219. Kalamazoo, Michigan: Cistercian Publications, 2008. Ward, Benedicta. The Wisdom of the Desert Fathers. Oxford: SLG Press, 1975. White, Hugh G. Evelyn. The Monasteries of the Wâdi ‘n Natrûn: Part II, The History of the Monasteries of Nitria and of Scetis. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1932; reprint ed., New York: Arno Press, 1973. Zoega, Georg. Catalogus codicum copticorum manuscriptorum qui in Museo Borgiano Velitris adservantur. Rome, 1810; reprint ed., Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1903.

Index to the Coptic Texts A. Coptic Words Personal Names

 DEUDP (patriarch) 118.12 DEUD+DP(archimandrite) 72.18; 78.1, 13; 92.17; 94.2; 96.6, 12, 16, 23; 98.7, 10, 15, 18; 100.16, 19, 24, 29; 102.6; 104.2; 106.5, 14, 23; 108.10, 18, 25, 29; 110.15, 23; 112.7, 21; 114.3, 11, 14, 19, 21, 28; 116.7, 18, 24, 27 DEUD+DP(patriarch) 118.12 DTDQDVLRV(archbishop) 104.11, 14 DULRV (heretic) 78.9; 116.11 DVNOKSLRV (monk) 100.9  GLRVNRURV(monk) 100.8  HOLVVDLRV(prophet) 94.14  THRGZURV(Apa) 76.13 THRGZURV(general) 106.16, 18 THRGZURV(?) 104.23 (perhaps the general); 121.3 THRGZVLRV (archbishop) 102.23; 106.2 THRILORV(monk) 84.16, 20, 24; 88.2, 31; 90.24  LHUKPLDV(prophet) 74.30 LVDDN(patriarch) 118.13 LRXV7QLDQRV(emperor) 78.6 – LRXVWLQLDQRV110.22 LRXEHQDULRV(heretic) 116.11 LZ+DQQKV(monk) 84.22; 88.2, 9, 31; 90.24; 108.35; 110.3, 5, 9 LZ+DQQKVSNRXL (monk) 102.22  OHZQ(pope) 78.9

PDQDVVK(Apa) 118.9 PDUNLDQRV(heretic) 116.12 PZXVKV(archimandrite) 110.30 PZXVKV(lawgiver) 74.6; 96.8  QDUVLV(praepositos) 106.15 QHVWZULRV(heretic) 78.9; 116.11 SDQFDULV (monk) 110.25, 29; 118.6 SDWHOIK(monk) 110.25 SDXORV(apostle) 72.5; 76.16 SHYRXU (monk) 110.25 SHWURV(imperial secretary) 102.15 SHWURV(monk) 110.24 SHWUZQLRV (Apa) 84.6; 98.22 SUHVEHXWKV (Syrian monk) 108.19 SYLQWED+VH(archimandrite) 76.7, 29 SD+RPZ(Apa) 76.4, 13; 84.6; 98.21; 104.12; 106.21 – SD+ZPZ86.23 – SD+ZP108.2 – SD+ZPR110.19; 116.3, 6, 22 – SD+RPZ110.3, 8 – SD+ZP(farmer) 100.7  VDPRXKO(prophet) 74.2 VHEDVWLRX(archimandrite) 110.12  YHQRXWH (Apa) 84.7; 86.24; 98.22  +KOLDVlay person) 92.23 +ZUVLKVLRV(Apa) 76.13; 98.22

Geographic Names DQWLQRRX(Antinoë) 114.1 – DQ7QRRX114.7, 12

148

Index to the Coptic Texts

– DQ7QRRX(district of) 92.24 DUDELD(Arabia) 108.27 DWULSH(Atripe) 84.7  LKO(Israel) 106.4  NKPH(Egypt) 74.7; 78.11; 102.5; 108.16, 23; 114.6  OLEDQRV(Lebanon) 110.11  PQWHURQQH+UZPDLRV(Roman Empire) 112.11  QP+DDWH(Nemhaate) 110.24  SERRX(Pbow) 78.14; 112.15 – SEDRX 114.3; 116.23 SROLVQWPQWHUR(Constantinople) 78.12; 114.26  UPRQW(Ermont) 110.25  VXULD(Syria) 108.20  WEHU&ZW(Tberþot) 72.20 7RVWSROLV(Disopolis) 72.18–19 WPRXYRQV(Tmoušons) 100.15 WZY(district or nome) 72.18; 92.24  YPLQ(Šmin) 110.25  MRXERXUH(Djouboure) 92.23  &RRYH(Ethiopia): 102.6

Divine Names, Titles, and Spiritual Entities DQ7NLÑPHQRV(adversary) 88.26 (See also GLDERORV, MDMH, and VDWDQDV) DJJHORV(angel) 104.29 DSRVWRORV(apostle) 82.1 GDLPZQLRQ(demon) 96.20, 22 GLDERORV(devil) 76.23; 78.4; 88.26; 108.26 (See also DQ7NLÑPHQRV, VDWDQDV, and MDMH)

HLZW(Father) 102.9  ,V(Jesus) 104.22 NULWKV(judge) 106.8  QRXWH(God) 72.7,16; 74.1, 17, 21, 22, 28; 76.18, 20; 80.11; 82.3, 5; 84.2, 12, 29; 86.3, 25; 88.21; 90.3, 7; 92.2, 8, 18, 20, 25; 94.8; 96.15; 98.6, 10; 100.16, 23, 28; 102.21; 104.20, 21, 22, 29; 106.32; 108.4, 6, 7, 9; 112.3, 23; 114.14, 22, 25; 116.10, 13, 28; 118.4, 11, 14, 17, 19, 19  SQD(Holy Spirit) 80.16; 90.16; 102.9; 112.2, 22  VDWDQDV(satan) 100.9; 112.20 (See also DQ7NLÑPHQRV, GLDERORV, and MDMH) VZWKU(Savior) 114.17 – VZU74.29  FV(Christ) 76.11; 84.30; 90.15; 102.8; 106.26; 110.20 – FV,V(Christ Jesus) 104.21–22  MDMH(enemy) 88.13, 21 (God as an enemy) (See also DQ7NLÑPHQRV, GL DERORV, and VDWDQDV) MRHLV(Lord) 74.19; 76.27; 78.5; 80.6, 17; 82.1; 84.19, 31; 86.2, 12, 14, 18, 22, 25, 35; 88.11, 24, 34; 90.1, 1, 15, 19; 92.1, 2, 10, 17, 21; 94.10; 106.7; 110.14; 114.16 – MRLV72.12; 90.13; 114.16  YKUH(Son of God) 102.9; 116.10, 12; 118.4

Monastic and Religious Titles

 DSD(Apa) 72.18; 76.4, 12, 13, 13, 29; 78.1, 13; 84.6, 6, 6; 86.23, 23; 92.16; 94.2; 96.6, 12, 16, 23; 98.7, 10, 15, 18, 21, 22, 22, 22; 100.8, 16, 19, 24, 29; 102.6, 22; 104.2, 11, 12, 14; 106.2, 4, 14, 21, 23; 108.10, 18,

B. Greek Words 25; 110.2, 8,15, 19, 23, 30; 112.7, 21; 114.11, 14, 19, 20, 28; 116.3, 4, 6, 7, 17, 21, 24, 27; 118.9 DSH(head, monastic superior) 108.22 (see also DUFKJURV) DUFKJURV(head, monastic superior) 84.30 (see also DSH) DUFKHSLVNRSRV(archbishop) 102.17, 22; 104.3; 106.2; 108.15 DUFKPDQGULWKV(archimandrite) 72.18; 92.16; 104.24, 26, 29; 108.13; 110.14, 16, 30; 114.3; 116.6, 27  HLZW(father) 72.17; 76.30; 78.28; 80.19, 21; 84.5, 24, 29; 86.14, 23, 32; 88.17, 25; 92.16; 94.1; 96.12; 98.18, 21, 23, 25; 100.16, 29; 102.6, 8, 18; 104.6, 7, 8, 12, 28; 106.2, 14, 21; 108.2; 110.8, 19, 27; 112.3; 116.27; 118.9 (see also SURSDWZU) – PQWHLZW(fatherhood) 102.16 HSLVNRSRV(bishop) 78.11; 102.24; 104.2, 9  PDUWXURV(martyr) 106.5 – PQ W PDUWXURV(martyrdom) 116.9  QRPRTHWKV(lawgiver, Moses) 74.6  SDWULDUFKV(patriarch) 118.12, 17 SHWRXDDE(saint) 72.17; 76.29; 82.4, 6, 7, 12, 13, 16; 86.33; 88.19; 92.10, 20; 96.6, 16, 21, 23; 98.4, 7, 10, 15, 17, 20, 25; 100.3, 19, 24, 29, 31; 112.21; 114.14, 18; 116.7, 24; 118.18 SUHVEXWKURV(elder) 100.8 SURHLVWRV(superior) 100.8 SURSDWZU(forefather) 98.21 SURIKWKV(prophet) 72.7; 74.1, 30; 92.16; 96.12; 112.1  VRQ(brother) 76.14; 78.16, 23; 80.3, 25; 82.25; 84.28; 88.10, 12, 23, 31; 90.23; 100.2, 9; 104.24; 106.18, 20, 27, 35; 108.7; 112.9; 114.22  +XJRXPHQRV(superior) 76.5; 78.11, 13, 19

149

Monastic and Religious Terms 

DQDVWURIK(way of life) 72.7; 78.3 – DQDVWUHIK76.14 DQDIRUD(offering/eucharist) 86.35; 88.3 DVNKVLV(ascesis) 76.17; 80.11; 86.7; 88.20 DVNKWKV(ascetic) 76.15, 22  ELRV(life) 72.4; 74.20; 76.6; 78.1; 110.17; 114.23; 118.10  JUDIK(scripture) 74.5

'LNDLZPD(rule) 84.28 (See also HQWROKand QRPRV)  HNNOKVLD(church) 102.18; 104.28; 108.1, 3 HQWROK(commandment) 84.18, 28; 86.12, 14; 88.34; 90.8, 12 (See also GLNDLZPDand QRPRV) – QWROK88.11 HXNWKULRQ(oratory) 82.22  KL(house, monastic) 86.31; 90.24; 100.23; (non-monastic) 116.20; 94.8, 27 – KHL94.11  TKVLDVWKULRQ(altar or sanctuary) 82.23; 100.33 (See also WUDSL]D)  NDTROLNK(catholic) 102.13; 104.28; 108.1, 3 NDWDVWDVLV(way of life) 76.24 NORP(crown) 106.5, 7 NRLQZELRQ(monastery, female) 94.26 (see also PDPRQDVWKULRQVRRX+V PPRQDFRVWRRXand +HQHHWH) NRLQZQLD(federation) 84.6; 106.20, 22, 24, 34; 114.3; 116.3, 4, 21 NRPDULRQ(garden) 80.24 NRVPRV(world) 74.25; 76.25; 84.17; 86.2, 20, 28; 98.23; 104.19 NULVLV(judgement) 86.16 NZZV(corpse) 92.12, 15 NZW(edification) 114.22 

150

Index to the Coptic Texts

ORXWKU(basin) 82.22  PD(monastery) 76.21 (see also NRLQZELRQ,PRQDVWKULRQ,VRRX+V PPRQDFRV,WRRX,and +HQHHWH) PDPSUR(gate) 82.15 (see also UR) PDQRXZ+ 80.18(dwelling place, monastic) PDQYZSH 80.5, 20, 25(dwelling place, monastic) PDQ&RHLOH108.5(dwelling place, earth) PDHLQ (signs) 100.30 (See also YSKUH and &RP) PRQDVWKULRQ(monastery) 76.4, 25; 78.12; 82.26; 92.27; 94.15; 96.11, 14; 100.5, 32; 112.7; 114.10; 118.1 (see also NRLQZELRQ,PD,VRRX+V PPRQDFRV, WRRX,and +HQHHWH) PRQDFK(monk, female) 94.16 PRQDFRV(monk) 76.9; 80.13; 98.20; 106.25; 108.20; 112.2, 3, 18; 114.2, 20 – PQWPRQDFRV(monasticism) 74.21  QRPRV(laws) 84.18; 86.12, 14, 22; 90.1, 12; 98.27; 110.18 (See also HQWROK and GLNDLZPD)  RUTRGR[RV(orthodox) 102.13; 104.9; 106.1, 16, 23, 28, 30; 108.21  SH(heaven) 78.29; 86.17; 88.27; 102.7; 104.21 SLVWLV(faith) 72.8; 76.25; 78.21; 82.25; 94.4; 96.17; 102.12; 104.7, 8, 15 (alien faith), 18; 106.6, 9, 28, 31; 108.9; 116.5, 12; 118.3 SROXWLD(discipline) 76.18  USPHHXHcommemoration) 100.31 (of Abraham); 118.8 (of Manasseh) UR (gate) 82.17 (see also PDPSUR)  VNXQK(tabernacle) 72.14 VRRX+VPPRQDFRV 112.3(monastery) (see also NRLQZELRQ,PD, PRQDVWKULRQ,WRRX,and +HQHHWH) VRILD (wisdom) 74.7, 15; 112.23

V5RV(cross) 94.12, 22, 24, 28; 96.4; 106.25 VXQDJH(celebrate the Eucharist) 78.21 ; 96.14, 16; 112.14; 116.21 VXQD[LV(service/synaxis) 88.4 VZPD(body) 84.15; 88.2; 92.11, 12, 13, 18; 100.25 VZRX+PD(assembly hall, monastic) 112.8, 10 VZRX+only)  WRSRVQQHWYZQH(infirmary) 88.5 WRRX(mountain) 80.4, 4, 20, 23; 98.12; 104.18; (monastery) 84.7 (see also NRLQZELRQ,PD,PRQDVWKULRQ, VRRX+VPPRQDFRV,and +HQHHWH) WUDSL]D(table, holy) 102.2 (see also TKVLDVWKULRQ)  RXZYW(worship) 92.3  ILORVRILD(philosophy) 74.20 \DOOHL(sing a psalm) 90.25 \XFK(soul) 74.12; 84.32; 108.28, 34; 118.3, 4  YKL(well) 80.23 YNRO(cave) 104.19 YOKO(prayer) 98.7; 100.16; 102.14 – YOO82.23; 84.4 YSKUH(wonder) 76.6; 78.1; 82.5, 8; 92.8, 13, 22, 25; 96.6, 15; 100.3, 24, 32 (see also PDHLQ and &RP)  +DLUHWKNRV(heretic) 78.7 +HQHHWH(monastery) 94.16; 100.20 (see also NRLQZELRQ,PD, PRQDVWKULRQ,VRRX+V PPRQDFRV,and WRRX) – +HQHWK 108.32; 110.2 +RPRRXVLRQ(consubstantial) 102.10 +RXPLVH(nativity) 86.35 +RXULRQ(gate keeper) 92.28 +XSRWXPD(tunic) 94.3  MDLH(desert) 104.18  &LQRXZ+(way of life) 80.18

B. Greek Words &RP(miracles) 92.7, 22, 25; 96.14; 98.4, 17; 100.23, 25, 26 (See also PDHLQ and YSKUH)

Secular Titles and Terms

151

VWUDWKODWKV(general) 106.16, 33  MRHLV(lord) 102.16; 110.4, 6; 112.10, 14, 16; 116.29

Biblical Books

GRX[(duke) 114.1, 7, 12, 12, 27  NRPHWDWZQ(court) 78.17 – NRPHWDWLRQ78.14 NUDWRV(majesty) 110.3; 112.11  PQWHUR(empire) 78.22; 104.18; 110.4; 112.11; 114.26  SUHSRVLWRV(praepositos) 106.19, 26 – SURSRVLWRV106.15 SURWHNWZU(protector) 92.24  UHIHUHQWDULRV(imperial secretary) 102.15 UUR(emperor) 78.5, 15, 17, 18; 102.12, 16; 104.2, 8, 24; 106.34; 108.11, 12, 15; 110.5, 6, 8, 21, 29; 112.10, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 20; 114.1, 9, 13, 23, 26; 116.5, 8, 14, 16, 19, 20, 22; 118.2 UUZ(empress) 102.24; 108.8, 10, 19, 21; 116.15, 19, 22, 25, 26

JHQKVLV(Genesis) 96.8 HNOKVLDVWKV(Ecclesiastes) 80.9  HXDJJHOLRQ(Gospel) 80.7 – HXDJJHOLRQQNDWDORXNDV(Gospel of Luke) 74.15–16  SDU+RLPLDVWKV(Proverbs, author of ) 96.7  \DOPRV(Psalms) 82.8 – \DOOHL(sing a psalm) 90.25

Months HSKS(Epiphi) 84.3  WZEH(Tobe) 88.9 – WZZEH88.29

B. Greek Words DMJDTRYa 80.21 – DMJDTRYQ74.30 DMJDYSK82.18; 114.21 D>JJHORa104.29 DMJHOKY76.11 D^JLRa102.2 D>JULRa114.18 DMJZYQ106.5 DL>QLJPD106.17; 114.13 DL-UHWKNRYa78.7 DLMWHLCQ94.1; 110.3 DLMZYQ108.5DMOKTZCa96.1 DMOODY72.2; 74.9; 78.24, 29; 84.15; 86.7; 92.12, 13, 15, 19; 104.26; 106.1, 8, 29; 114.4; 116.8 DMPKYQ90.17, 17 DMPHOHLCQ80.22

DMPHOKYa72.9 DMQDJNDY]HLQ102.25 DMQDJNDLCRa78.20 DMQDVWUIKY72.7; 76.14; 78.3 DMQDX[DYQHLQ90.9 DMQDIRUD86.35; 88.3 DMQRYVLRa110.21 DMQWLNHLYPHQRa88.26 DMQWLOHYJHLQ116.7 D-SDQWDCQ78.15 DMSHLOKY106.34 D-SOZCa108.34; 110.19 DMSRYNULVLa102.23 DMSRNULVLDYULRa108.14 DMSRYVWRORa82.1 DMSRWDYVVHLQ108.26, 30 DMUHWKY72.9; 76.7; 78.2; 112.2

152

Index to the Coptic Texts

DMUQHLCVTDL116.12; 118.3 DMUFDLCRa98.21 D>UFHLQ72.4; 84.1; 86.11; 110.22 DMUFKJRYa84.30 DMUFLHSLYVNRSRa102.17, 22; 104.3; 106.2; 108.15 DMUFLPDQGULYWKa72.8; 92.16; 96.13; 104.24, 26, 29; 108.13; 110.14, 16, 30; 114.3; 116.6, 27 DMVHEKYa78.10 D>VNKVLa76.17; 80.11; 86.7; 88.20 DMVNKWKYa76.15, 22 DMVSDY]HLQ84.9; 90.22; 114.7 DMVSDVPRYa90.23 DXMTHQWLYD112.16 DXM]DYQHLQ76.22; 84.12; 90.10 DMILVWDYQDL100.12 D>F DULa110.26  EDVDQLY]HLQ96.24 EDVLOLNRYa112.17 ELYRa72.4; 74.20; 76.6; 78.1; 110.17; 114.23; 118.10 ERKTRYa72.17  JD]RTXODYNLRQ72.11 JDYU72.4; 78.25; 88.18; 100.15, 18; 106.10 JHYHQQD104.27 γενεσθαι 104.25 *HYQKVLa96.8 JUDTKY74.5  GDLPRYQLRQ96.20 GHY72.17, 22; 74.2, 11, 12, 16, 24, 27; 76.1, 2, 5, 7, 10, 12, 14, 18, 23, 24, 28, 31; 78.3, 6, 9, 15, 23; 80.2, 3, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 17, 19, 21; 82.4, 6, 11, 14, 16, 19; 84.1, 3; 86.3, 4, 9, 30, 33, 34; 88.4, 8, 27, 29; 90.24, 25; 92.21; 94.9, 20; 96.1, 2, 3, 5, 11, 18; 98.9; 100.5; 102.8, 14, 18; 104.4; 106.8, 32, 33; 108.2, 12, 24, 29, 33, 35, 35; 110.12, 13, 15; 112.6, 12; 114.6, 27; 116.15, 16, 22, 24; 118.3 GLDYERORa76.23; 78.4; 88.26; 108.26 GLDNRQHLCQ108.20 GLYNDLRa92.7; 98.19; 106.8; 110.12; 112.1 GLNDLRVXYQK92.6; 106.7 GLNDLYZPD84.28 GLVWDY]HLQ94.23

GRXY[114.1, 7, 12, 12, 27 GXQDWRYa78.2  H>TQRa118.16 H>TRa102.17; 104.6, 7 HLMHLMPKYWL 108.3; 110.6 HL?GRa94.1 HLMUKYQK80.3; 84.10 HL>WH… HL>WH84.31; 86.27–28 HMNNOKVLYD76.27; 78.5; 102.13; 104.28; 108.1, 3 HMNWRYa102.13 HMODYFLVWRa74.10 H>P\XFRa74.19 HMQHUJHLCQ82.5; 92.13, 18, 26; 100.26 HMQHYUJHLD96.20, 22, 27 H>QRFRa104.27 HMQWROKY84.18, 28; 86.12, 14; 88.11, 34; 90.8, 12 HM[RULY]HLQ118.2 HM[RULVWLYD106.3 HMSDLQHLCQ72.12 HMSHLY94.27; 112.14 HMSHLGKY78.25; 82.3; 84.11; 102.20; 104.4 HMSLERXOHXYHLQ112.21 HMSLTXPHLCQ86.35 HMSLNDOHLCQ98.9 HMSLQRHLCQ74.11 HMSLYVNRSRa78.11; 102.24; 104.2,9 HMSLVWROKY78.10, 26; 114.1, 6, 26; 118.1 HMSLWLPDCQ112.12 H>WL84.16; 86.7; 100.25 HXMDJJHYOLRQ74.15; 80.7 HXMNDLULYD100.12, 13 HXMNWKYULRQ82.22 HXMODEHYVWDWRa82.26 HXMODEKYa110.27 HXMORJLYD108.35 HXMVHEKYa84.19  K@72.12 K-JRXYPHQRa78.11, 13, 19 K-OLNLYD74.15  TURYQRa78.8; 106.35; 110.8 TXVLDVWKYULRQ82.23; 100.33  LMGLZYWKa104.10 LMVUDKYO106.4  NDTROLQNK102.13; 104.28; 108.1, 3

B. Greek Words NDTDULRYWKa74.12 NDTLVWDYQDL110.11, 16 NDLY (see also ND>Q) 72.4; 88.18 NDLURYa104.7 NDNRXCUJRa112.13 NDOZCa84.20; 90.21 ND>Q72.8; 86.20, 28 NDQRQLNRYa110.19 NDQZYQ104.14 NDWDY72.1, 14; 74.1, 5, 15, 15, 22, 25, 29; 76.15, 19; 78.11; 80.6; 82.1, 7, 24; 84.1, 4; 86.2; 92.9, 21; 94.18; 100.15; 102.17; 104.5, 11, 20; 108.6; 110.26; 112.21; 114.21; 116.20 NDWDODOLYD88.15 NDWDQWDCQ114.25 NDWDYVWDVLa76.24 NDWHYFHLQ102.17 NDWKJRUHLCQ108.28 NDWKYJRURa; 110.23 NDWRUTRXCQ72.9; 74.13 NHOHXYHLQ78.18 NHYOHXVLa112.15, 16 NODYGRa 84.13 NRLQRYELRQ94.26 NRLQZQHLCQ102.12; 108.12, 32, 33 NRLQZQLYD84.6; 106.20, 22, 24, 34; 108.34; 114.3; 116.3, 4, 21 NRYODVLa116.11 NRPLWDCWRQ(Latin comitatus) 78.14, 17 NRVPHLCQ112.1 NRYVPRa74.25; 76.25; 84.17; 86.2, 20, 28; 98.23; 104.19 NRXILY]HLQ82.30 NUDYWRa110.2; 112.11 NULYVLa86.16 NULWKYa 106.8 NZPDYULRQ80.24; 100.11  ODYPSURa74.12 ODRYa104.10; 106.25 OHSWRYQ72.11 ORYJRa108.15 ORLSRYQ76.17, 21; 78.10; 82.9; 108.13; 114.8; 116.4 ORXWKYU82.22 OXSHLCQ86.32  PDNDYULRa76.29; 92.14 PDQLYD108.12 PDYUPDURa102.2 PDYUWXURa106.5

153

μαστιξ 96.26 PHYQ72.8; 74.10; 80.23; 92.11, 14; 104.28; 108.31 PHWDYQRLD110.21 PKYHLMPKYWL 104.25; 108.3; 110.6 PKYQ104.16 PKQXYHLQ78.17 PRYQRQ104.25, 29 PRQDFKY94.16 PRQDFRYa74.21; 76.9; 80.13; 98.20; 106.25; 108.20; 112.2, 3, 18; 114.2, 20 PRQDVWKYULRQ76.4, 25; 78.12; 82.26; 92.27; 94.15; 96.11, 14; 100.5, 32; 112.7; 114.10; 116.19; 118.1, 6 PXVWKYULRQ110.5  QRHLCQ72.15 QRYPRa84.13; 86.12, 14, 22; 90.1, 12; 98.27; 110.18 QRPRTHYWKa74.6 QRXCa78.7; 100.17  R^OZa80.22; 116.8 RMQRPDY]HLQ98.26 R-PRORJHLCQ94.18; 100.20 R-PRRXYVLRa102.10 RMUTRYGR[Ra102.13; 104.9; 106.1, 16, 23, 28, 30; 108.21 RMUIDQRYa74.27 R^VRQ92.13 R^WDQ76.1 RXM104.25, 29 RXMGHY102.25; 114.4 RXMN110.8 RX?Q72.17; 98.25; 100.13, 29; 110.9; 118.11, 18 RX>ULRQ92.28  SDLGHXYHLQ74.4, 7, 9 SDLYGHXVLa74.5, 13 SDLGDJZJHLCQ76.12 SDODYWLRQ116.17 SDUDY92.13 SDUDEDLYQHLQ118.7 SDUDJJHYOHLQ72.5 SDUDYGR[Ra100.33 SDUDNDOHLCQ76.9; 80.14; 82.12, 15; 106.17, 19, 29; 108.4, 21, 23; 116.17 SDUDYJHLQ80.24 SDUDFZUHLCQ98.3 SDUTHYQRa110.7, 9

154

Index to the Coptic Texts

SDULVWDYQDL74.28 SDURLPLDVWKYa96.7 SDWULDYUFKa118.12, 17 SHLYTHLQ76.2; 78.24; 104.24, 24, 26 SHLCUD118.13 SLYQD[94.22 SLYVWLa72.8; 76.25; 78.21; 82.25; 94.4; 96.17; 102.12; 104.7, 8, 15, 18; 106.6, 9, 28, 31; 108.9; 116.9, 12 SLVWRYa116.5 SODY[102.4 SOKYQ90.2 SQHXCPD80.16; 90.16; 106.20; 112.2, 22 SRGDYJUD92.25 SRYOLa78.12; 104.16; 112.25; 114.26 SROLWHLYD76.18 SROLYWHXPD102.7 SRQKURYa108.5 SUDLSRYVLWRa106.15, 19, 26 SUDC[La110.17 SUHYSHLQ90.16 SUHVEXYWHURa100.8 SURHVWZYa100.8 SURIKYWKa72.17; 74.30; 92.16; 96.12; 110.19; 112.1 SURNDLYPHQRQ72.3 SURNRYSWHLQ72.23; 74.14 SURRLYPLRQ118.8 SURSDYWKU98.21 SURYa94.10; 114.22 SURVHYFHLQ84.29; 108.18 SURVNXQHLCQ104.3 SXYUJRa94.6  UHIHUHQGDYULRa102.15 U-ZPDLCRa112.11  VDYU[100.27 VDWDQDCa100.9; 112.20 VKPDLYQHLQ102.4 VNHYSWHVTDL88.15 VNHSDY]HLQ98.6 VNKQKY72.14 VNRSRYa104.21 VRILYD74.7, 15; 112.23 VRIRYa112.22 VSDWDYOK88.16 VSRXGDLCRa74.4 VSRXGKY114.9 VWDYVLa108.31 VWDXURXCQ106.25

VWDXYURa94.12, 22, 24, 28; 94.4; 106.25 VWUDWKODYWKa106.16, 33 VWXCORa 102.1, 3 VXJJHQHLYD72.22 VXQDYJHLQ78.21; 96.14, 16; 112.14; 116.21 VXQDLQHLCQ78.21; 104.15 VXYQD[La88.4 VXQKYTHLD74.25; 84.5 VIDYOPD100.21 VZCPD74.28; 82.10, 30; 84.15; 88.2; 92.11, 12, 13, 18; 100.25; 104.12 VZWKYU74.29  WDUDFKY94.7 WDYIRa92.14 WDYF D 96.19 WHYOHLRa98.20; 112.2 WLHLMPKYWL 108.3; 110.6 WROPDCQ98.24 WRYSRa88.5; 96.17 WRYWH112.17, 19; 116.7, 14 WRYPRa78.9 WUDYSH]D102.2 WULDYa102.9 WXYSRa106.25  X-GUZSLNRYa82.10, 17 X-SRYGXPD94.3  ILORVRILYD74.20 ITRQHLCQ76.26  FDULY]HLQ100.28 FDYUWKa80.2 FHLCPZQ76.27; 78.4 FKYUD72.10 FRUKJHLCQ72.16; 104.22 FUHLYD114.22 FULVWRYa76.11; 84.30; 90.15; 102.8; 104.21; 106.26; 110.20;110.20 FZYUD78.10  \DYOOHLQ90.25 \DOPRYa82.8 \XFKY74.12; 82.20; 84.32; 94.7; 108.28, 34; 118.3, 4  Z-a80.21; 92.12, 14; 112.10, 13, 20 Z@VWH100.11, 33; 102.2

C. Biblical Citations, Allusions, and References

C. Biblical Citations, Allusions, and References Genesis 3:19 22

96.8–9 118.11–15

Exodus 35

72.12–14

1 Samuel 2.26

72.22–74.2

2 Samuel 22:30 4 Kings 13:20-21 Psalms 27:1 44:21 116:15 121:8 124:7-8 145:5-6 Proverbs 12:25 (LXX) 12:27(?) 13:13(?) 29:8 Ecclesiastes 4:12

114.14–16

92.13–15

114.16–17 76.20 92.10 84.26–27 114.14–16 82.8–9

112.24 96.12-13 96.12-13 112.25

Mark 12:41-43 14:1

72.10–12 114.10–11

Luke 2:40 2:42

74.14–16 74.16–17

Acts 7:22

74.5–7

John 21:16

90.21–22

Romans 8:28

82.1–2

1 Corinthians 14:25

76.19–20

2 Corinthians 11:2

76.15–17

Galatians 5:9

90.8

1 Timothy 6:10

90.7

Titus 1:10

90.7

Hebrews 11:32-38 13:7

104.17–20 72.4-8

1 Peter 5:8

108.26-28

1 John 1:1

72.1-2

80.9–10

Lamentations 3:27

74.30–76.1

Matthew 10:23 18:20

104.16–17 80.7–8

155

Index of Subjects Abraham (of Farshut) 1–6, 18–23, 30– 49, 51–64, 66–67, 73, 77, 79, 81, 93, 95, 97, 99, 101,103, 105, 107, 109, 111, 113, 115, 117, 122, 123, 124 Abraham (patriarch) 119 Abraham bar Kayli 54 Abram (patriarch) 119 Adversary 46, 89 (see also devil, enemy, and satan) Altar 40, 46, 101 Angel 105, 123 Antinoë 36, 54, 93, 115 Antony (monk) 44, 56 Apa 20, 25, 34, 41, 45, 47, 53, 66, 73, 77, 79, 85, 87, 93, 95, 97, 99, 101, 103, 105, 107, 109, 111, 113, 115, 117, 119, 126 – Abou 122, 123 – Anba 122–124 Apocalypse of John 43 Apollonius (Pachomian monk) 66 Apostle 83, 126 Arabia 109 Archbishop 34, 37–38, 52–54, 58–60, 103, 105, 107, 109 Archimandrite 1, 33–38, 41–44, 48–49, 51–53, 57–60, 64, 66, 73, 93, 97, 105, 109, 111, 115, 117, 125 Arius (heretic) 79, 117 Ascetic 5, 17, 21, 30, 32, 47, 56, 66, 77 – Ascetic discipline 77 – Ascetic ideology 61, 65 – Ascetic life 35, 42, 44, 64 – Ascetic landscape 32 – Ascetic practices 77, 81, 87 Asceticism 39 Asclepios (monk) 101 Assembly Hall 113 Atripe 2, 32, 38, 42, 45, 49, 52, 61, 66, 85, 122 Athanasius (archbishop) 56, 105

Bankares 37–38, 122 (see Pancharis) Basilica (Pachomian) 42, 58–63 – (White Monastery) 6163 – (Red Monastery) 63 Basin 83 Bimodular script 9, 25 Bishop 34, 36–37, 49, 52, 54, 56, 79, 103, 105, 123, 125 Boat 56, 105 (see also, ship) Body 39, 40, 83, 85, 89, 93, 101, 105, 107, 124 Brother 34, 36, 38–39, 45–46, 62, 66, 77, 79, 81, 83, 85, 89, 91, 101, 105, 107, 109, 113, 115, 124 Byzantine 2, 32, 41, 43, 57, 59, 67 – Byzantium 2 Canopus 58–59 Cave 105 Chalcedon (Council of) 2, 36, 43, 51, 54–55, 60–61 – Chalcedonian 1, 36–37, 42–43, 49, 51–52, 54–60, 64–66, 125 – non-Chalcedonian 1, 4, 32, 37, 48, 51, 53, 56–60, 62, 64–65, 67 – post-Chalcedonian 1 – pro-Chalcedonian 49, 122 Chamberlain (grand) 53 – (imperial) 38 Christ 54, 77, 85, 91, 103, 105, 107, 111, 125 Christianity vii – Coptic Christianity 1–2, 4, 32, 43, 51, 56, 62–63, 67 – Christian heresy 65 Church 1, 77, 79, 125 – Byzantine 43 – catholic 103, 105, 109 – Coptic (Egyptian) 1, 32, 50, 53, 54 – Ethiopic 54 – monastic 47, 61, 63, 64 – Syrian orthodox 51

Index of Subjects Coenobitic federation 47, 52 – Coenobitic life 52 – Coenobitic monasticism 2, 39, 47– 48, 51, 60–61, 67, 81 – Coenobitic tradition 65 Coenobium 57, 62, 65 Commandment 39, 45–47, 85, 87, 89, 91 (see also law and rule) Commemoration (of Abraham) 40, 101 – (of Manasse) 119 Constantinople 8, 25, 34, 36–38, 43, 48, 52–54, 56–57, 66, 122, 125 (see also Imperial city) Constitution of the Apostles 126 Consubstantial 103 Corpse 40, 93 Court 25, 36, 53, 57, 79 Cross 20, 95, 97, 107 Crown 105, 107 Cure 35, 40, 83, 93 (see also, heal) Cyril of Alexandria (archbishop) 42, 53, 60–61 Daniel of Scetis 43, 54–55 Demon 97 – Demonize 54 Desert vii, ix, 38–39, 60, 81, 105, 122, 126 Devil 46, 77, 79, 89, 109 (see also adversary, enemy, and satan) Dioscoros (monk) 101 Diospolis 35, 73 Diple 10, 11, 114 Discourse 32, 101 – non-Chalcedonian 4, 32, 51, 53, 55– 56, 67 – post-Chalcedonian 1 – on purity (Shenoute) 65 – totalizing (Coptic Christianity) 32, 43 District (nome) 35, 73, 93 Duke 36, 54, 115 Dwelling place 39, 41, 81, 109, 126, Ecclesiastes 81 Edification 115 Egyptian 52, 54, 75 – Egyptian Christianity vii – Egyptian Church 1, 54 – Egyptian Monasticism vii, 1, 2, 5, 21, 30, 32, 47, 51–52, 57–62. 64–67 – Lower Egypt 58, 60–61, 66

157

– Upper Egypt 2, 5, 16, 32, 47–48, 51– 52, 57–62, 64–67 Ekthesis 9, 25 Elder 101 Elias (of Djouboure) 35, 93 Elisha (prophet) 40, 93 Emperor 2, 20, 32, 36–38, 41, 43, 54–59, 67, 79, 103, 105, 107, 109, 111, 113, 115, 117, 119, 122, 125 Empire 43, 79, 105, 111, 113 Empress 34, 37–38, 53–54, 57, 103, 109, 117 Enemy 46, 89 (see also adversary, devil, and satan) EpƝp (month) 85 Ephesus, Council of 42, 53, 60–61 Ermont 20, 36 Ethiopia 46, 54–55, 103 Eucharist 36, 39, 79, 87, 89, 97, 113, 117, 124 (see also offering)

– Eucharistic host 123 Eunuch 37, 117 Exorcism 40 Faith 37, 64, 73, 77, 83, 95, 97, 105, 107, 109, 117, 119, 125 Farshut 32, 38–39, 40, 48, 73 (see also, Abraham of Farshut) – Fargout 122–23

– monastery of Farshut 34, 39, 40, 44, 48–49 – women’s cloister 49 Father 37, 41, 45–46, 75, 77, 79, 89, 99, 111, 125–26 – Abraham (archimandrite) 73, 81, 87,

93, 95, 97, 99 Apollo (Apa) 41, 126 God (the Father) 103 Manasse (Apa)119 Moses (Apa) 25, 113 Pachomius (Abbot) 105, 109, 111 Palemon (Apa) 64 Shenoute (Abbot) 123 Severus (patriarch) 123 Theodosius (patriarch) 107, 125 Founding father 1, 35, 42, 45–48, 64–65, 85, 87, 89, 99, 103, 105 – Forefather 47, 99 Fatherhood 103 Faw Qibli 62 Feast day 5, 32, 63 – Feast of the Nativity 34, 39 Federation (Pachomian) 1–3, 13, 33, 36, – – – – – – – – – –

158

Index of Subjects

38, 42–43, 45–49, 51–53, 57–62, 64–67, 77, 85, 107, 109, 115, 117 – (Shenoutean) 46–47, 52–53, 56, 61– 67 Garden 39, 81 Gate 83 – Gate Keeper 93 General (rank) 37–38, 107 Genesis 97 God 25, 35, 39, 40–41, 44–46, 73, 75 77, 81, 83, 85, 87, 89, 91, 93, 95, 97, 99, 101, 103, 105, 107, 109, 113, 115, 117, 119, 124–26 – God (the Son) 62, 117, 119, 126 – Godfearing 111 – Godliness 41, 62, 125 – Ungodly 126 Gospel 81 – Gospel of Luke 75 Gout 35, 40, 93 Hagiography 2–3, 45, 50, 54, 56, 58, 67 Head (monastic) 56, 85, 109 Heal 34, 40, 93, 97, 99 (see also, cure) – Health 39, 115 Heaven 45–46, 79, 87, 89, 103, 105 Heresy 42, 65 – Heretic 41, 43, 79, 126 Holy Spirit 55, 81, 91, 103, 113 Horsiesius (Pachomian superior) 19, 35, 42, 47, 59–60, 66, 77, 99 House (monastic) 87, 91, 95 – House (secular) 95, 97, 101, 107, 117, 123 Ideology 3, 32, 43, 48, 50–53, 55–56, 58 – Ascetic ideology 61, 65–66 Imperial City 36, 52, 56–57, 79, 115 Imperial Secretary 53–54, 103 Infirmary 39, 89 Isaac (prophet) 119 Islam 47 Israel 107 Jeremiah (prophet) 75 Jerome 59 Jesus 74–75, 115 John (monk) 34, 38–39, 45, 85, 89, 91, 109, 111 John the Little (monk) 54, 93

John of Diolcos (monk) 93 John I Talaia (Pachomian monk, Alexandrian patriarch) 52, 58 Judas Iscariot 64 Judge (title) 107 Judgement Day 45, 87 Justinian (emperor) 2, 8, 20, 25, 32, 34– 37, 40–41, 43–45, 48–49, 51–52, 54–58, 60, 65–67, 79, 111, 122, 125 Juvenal (heretic) 117 Latin 43, 93 Lawgiver 75 Law (monastic) 39, 45–47, 85, 87, 91, 123 (see also commandments and rules) – (civil) 52 Lebanon 111 Leo (pope) 43, 54–55, 79 – Tome of 43, 54–56, 79 Life of Antony 44, 56 Lord (God) 39–40, 45–47, 73, 75, 77, 79, 81, 83, 85, 87, 89, 91, 93, 95, 107, 111, 115, 123–26 – (emperor) 103, 111, 113, 117 (plural) Manasse (Apa) 119 Marcion (heretic) 117 Martyr 50, 53, 107 – Martyrdom 117 Martyrius (Pachomian archimandrite) 42, 58–59 Memory 1–2, 41–44, 47–48, 50–51, 57, 60, 62, 64, 101 Metanoia 52, 58–61, 66 Miracle 32, 34–35, 38–41, 44–46, 49, 51, 54, 93, 97, 99, 101 (see also signs and wonders) Monastery 81, 99, 126 – of Farshut 34, 38–41, 44–45, 48–49, 81, 83, 93, 95, 97, 101, 123 – of Jadda (Farshut) 48, 122 – of Moses 34, 38–39, 49, 81, 122–24 – of Pachomius 26, 33–35, 37–38, 41, 47–48, 52, 58–63, 66–67, 77, 109, 111, 113, 115, 117, 119, 122 (see also, Metanoia, Pbou, Smin, Tmousons) – of Palemon 64 – Red Monastery 61, 63

Index of Subjects – White Monastery vii, 2–6, 13–18, 20–23, 27–30, 32, 34–35, 38, 44–45, 48–49, 61–63, 65, 66, 81, 85, 122-23 – for women 95, 123–24 Monasticism vii, 2, 4, 47–48, 51, 64, 67, 85 Monk 8, 17, 33–36, 38–39, 47–49, 55, 59–62, 64–66, 76–77, 81, 99, 107, 109, 113, 115, 122–23 Moses (archimandrite) 34, 38–39, 49, 81, 111, 122–23 Moses (lawgiver) 44, 75, 97 Moses of Abydos 5, 23, 25, 55 Mountain 39, 81, 83, 85, 99, 105, 122, 126 Narses (praepositos) 38, 53–54, 107 Nativity of the Lord 34, 39, 87 Nemhaate 20, 36, 111 Nestorius (heretic) 79, 117 Nomina sacra 13, 26 Offering (Eucharist) 87, 89 Oratory 83 Origen/Origenist 57 Orthodox 1, 32, 34, 43, 47, 49, 51, 54, 60, 65, 103, 105, 107, 109, 125 – Orthodoxy 37, 42–43, 60, 125 Pachomius (Apa) 1, 13, 19, 26, 35, 39, 42, 45, 47–49, 52, 59, 61–64, 66, 77, 85, 87, 99, 105, 107, 109, 111, 117, 122 Pachomius (farmer) 101 Pancharis (monk, accuser) 20, 34, 36– 38, 48–49, 54, 60, 64–65, 111, 119, 122 (see Bankares) Panegyric 5, 41, 48 – on Abraham 2, 5–22, 32–67, 72–110 – on Apollo viii, 4, 33, 37–38, 41, 43– 44, 48, 55, 58, 62, 125–26 – on Macarius of Tkôw 42, 102–03, 108–09 – on Moses of Abydos 5 – on Pachomius and Victor 58–59 Paphnutius (Pachomian archimandrite) 42 Paragraphus 11, 26 Patelphe (monk, accuser) 20, 36, 111 Patriarch (monastic) 41, 125–26 – (ecclesiastic) 52, 56, 58–59, 61, 64, 123, 125 – (biblical) 119

159

– Alexandrian patriarchy 59–60 Paul (apostle) 73, 77, 105 Paul of Tabenna (Pachomian monk, Alexandrian patriarch) 52, 58 Pbow 33–34, 38, 41–42, 47–49, 52–53, 58–60, 62–63, 67, 77, 79, 81, 113, 115, 117, 125–26 Persia 47 Pešour (monk, accuser) 20, 36, 111 Peter (imperial secretary) 37, 53–54, 103 Peter (monk, accuser) 20, 36, 111 Petronius (Pachomian superior) 39, 42, 45, 47, 61, 64, 85, 99 Philosophy 75 Pilgrimage 63–64 Praepositos 38, 107 Prayer 25, 99, 101, 123–24 Presbeutes (monk) 109 Prophet (monastic) 73, 93, 97, 111, 113 – (biblical) 75 Protector (title) 93 Proverbs (author of) 97 Psalms 39, 83, 91 Pshintbahse (Pachomian archimandrite) 35–36, 42, 45, 77, 111 Punctuation 11–12, 26 Revelation 34, 38–40, 45, 47, 49, 123 Rhetoric 56 Roman Empire 113 Rule (monastic; see also command ments and law) 34, 38–39, 42, 46– 49, 61, 64–66, 81, 85, 99, 111, 115, 122–23 Sanctuary 62, 83, 126 Saint 5, 17, 19, 25, 32, 40–41, 43–48, 50, 54–57, 64, 73, 77, 79, 83, 87, 89, 93, 97, 99, 101, 111, 113, 115, 117, 119, 122–24 Samuel (prophet) 44, 75 Satan (see also adversay, enemy, and devil) 43, 101, 113 Savior 75, 115 Scetis 54–55 Scripture 35, 75 Sebastian (Pachomian archimandrite) 20, 36, 42, 77, 111 Shenoute (archimandrite) 2, 5–6, 38–39, 42, 45, 47–49, 52–53, 56, 61–67, 81, 85, 87, 95, 99, 122–23

160

Index of Subjects

Ship 34, 38, 40, 93, 97, 99, 107, 115 (see also, boat – barque 96–97 Sign 40, 101 (see also miracles and wonders) Silvanus (priest) 59 Sing (Psalms) 39, 91 Sister (sibling) 35, 44, 75 – (wife and fellow ascetic) 123 Šmin 36, 61, 111 Son of God 62, 117, 119, 126 Soul 75, 85, 109, 119 Staurogram 13 Superior (monastic) 36, 56, 60, 66, 77, 79, 81, 101, 123 Superlinear stroke 10, 12–13, 26, 68, 80 Synaxarion (Copto-Arabic) viii, 4, 32– 33, 37–39, 41, 44, 48–49, 58, 60, 81, 105, 122–24 Syrian 51, 54, 56–57, 109 (monk) Tabernacle 73 Table (see also altar) 103 – (secular) 124 Thebaid 52 Tberþot 35, 73 Theodora (empress) 57 (see also, empress) Theodore (Pachomian superior) 19, 35, 42, 47, 64, 66, 76, 77

Theodore (general) 37–38, 105(?), 107 Theodore 25, 105, 121 Theodosius (archbishop) 34, 37–38, 52– 54, 56–57, 103, 107, 125 Theophilus (archbishop) 59 Theophilus (monk) 34, 39, 45, 85, 89, 91 Timothy Aelurus (Alexandrian patriarch) 59 Timothy II Salofacialus (Pachomian monk, Alexandrian patriarch) 52, 58 Tmoušons 66, 101 Tobe (month) 89 Trinity 103 Tunic 40, 95 Victor (Pachomian archimandrite) 42, 52–53, 59–61 Way of life 73, 77, 79, 81 Well 39, 81 Wisdom 44, 75, 113 Wonder (see also miracles and signs) 40, 45, 77, 83, 93, 97, 101 World 33, 45, 47, 75, 77, 85, 87, 99, 105, 126 Worship 39, 93