Sometime correspondent “Inepti Graeculi” has been working away on some of the untranslated works of Chrysostom, and also some of the mass of literature attributed to him in transmission.
This sort of work is excellent. Voicu has estimated that there are around 1,500 texts which are spuriously attributed to Chrysostom. They are, of course, works which lost their original author, but were considered sufficiently interesting to be preserved; which means that they deserve attention now. These translations should do much to make that happen!
There’s a list of material recently translated by IG at the bottom; but coming soon also is…
Ps.Chrysostom’s In Parabolam Ficu (CPG 4588) – a popular work that argues against the notion that God rejected the Jews (versions found in Syriac, Ethiopic, translated five times into Arabic (!), also in a very important manuscript in Slavonic etc etc. Wrongly ascribed to Severian of Gabala in the Armenian tradition. Voicu assigns this to an anonymous Cappadocian. The amazing Sever Voicu’s short outline of Chrystostom in the Oriental tradition is quite eye-opening.
I have also nearly finished Chrysostom’s Non Esse Desperandum (CPG 4390) which I very much enjoyed
Here are the recent releases!
|In Jordanem Fluvuium||4548||Attributed to Severian of Gabala by Marx (1939) but this was rejected by Altendorf (1957). Calvin should have read this.||0.1||Link|
|De Cognitione Dei||4703||A short homily in which the speaker relates that Christ’s advent brought the knowledge of god (θεογνωσία). He then briefly addresses neophytes and invites the audience to pilgrimage to the Jordan. Possibly delivered at Bethlehem on the night before the celebration of Christ’s baptism||0.1||Link
|Precatio in Obsessos||4710||One of several prayers published by Montfaucon (and reprinted by Migne) as a supplement to the Liturgy ascribed to John Chrysostom. Montfaucon sourced this text from Goar, Rituale Graecorum, Paris, 1647, p. 783. It was not included in Savile’s or Fronto’s Chrysostom edition. This little prayer is still found in the liturgical books of Eastern Orthodox churches.||0.2||Link|
|In Ingressum sanctorum jejuniorum||4665||On fasting and drunkenness. Ascribed to Proclus (Marx, Le Roy, De Aldama) or an anonymous sophistic rhetor (Musurillo)||0.1||Link|
|In sanctum Stephanum 2||4691||One of several homilies on the Protomartyr Stephen among the Ps.-Chrysostomica||0.1||Link|
|Encomium in sanctos martyres||4759||Text: Aubineau (1975)||0.1||Link|
10 thoughts on “A bunch of Chrysostom and ps.Chrysostom now online in English”
Before I visit the links, a question: what are the production-dates assigned to these materials, or, what is the first mention or use made of them?
Many thanks for the plug. Sever Voicu has kindly let me know that the references to Bethlehem and the Jordan in Dei Cognitione are likely metaphorical. I have put up a second version with a correction to that effect in the contents and disclaimer – otherwise the translation remains the same. (I will add details once I get hold of his suggested reference and look into it further)
Huge thanks to Mr Voicu.
@James: no idea. That would probably take a book to resolve.
@IG: thank you!
@j: Heh heh. I’d never noticed.
Has the Epistula ad abbatem (CPG 4734) been translated into English? Also, is a critical Greek text available?
I don’t know anything about this text, ps.Chrysostom, “Epistula ad abbatem” (CPG 4734). Is it interesting, and if so why?
The CPG lists an edition: P.G. Nikolopoulos, “Αἱ εἰς τὸν ᾽Ιωάννην τὸν Χρυσόστομον ἐσφαλμένως ἀποδιδόμεναι ἐπιστολαί” (i.e. Letters wrongly ascribed to John Chrysostom), Athens (1973), p. 455- 478. I don’t know anything about it, but a copy was for sale online for 25 euros.
A copy of the text can be found here under “ad abbatem” – I’ve checked the incipit. This PDF is supposedly from the PG (where there will be a Latin translation, of course), but I suspect that it is actually pirated from the TLG 2062/421. I wasn’t able to find easily the text in Migne (if it is in Migne).
Anything that you can tell me would be useful.
Thank you for your help and timely reply. This text is interesting to me because near the end it provides a translation of the expression “maranatha” which is otherwise unattested in Church history, namely, “I have seen the Lord.” This definition is picked up by later lexicographers, such as the Suda, as one of two possible definitions for “maranatha.” Where it comes from, and how this person arrived at this unique translation, are still unknown. Kind regards.
Interesting – what is your source for this?
I am not sure I understand what it is you are asking, but if you are asking how it is that I know of the uniqueness of this translation, it is from my own research on the matter. Otherwise, I have come across the same text as you have provided me, except on a different site. Kind regards.
Sure – many thanks!