How the first pages from the White Monastery were discovered

In the 18th century, a chamber in the ruins of the White Monastery at Sohag in Egypt contained piles of loose leaves of a vast and ancient Coptic library.   In previous posts I have noted how the first to learn of the existence of this material was Cardinal Stefano Borgia, secretary  of the Papal missionary organisation, the Propaganda Fidei.  In 1781 he published a Coptic text containing two miracles of the obscure Coptic saint Colluthus from some pages sent to him by a Franciscan missionary in Egypt.¹  The actual transcriber and translator was, of course, not the mighty cardinal but A. Giorgi.

I thought that it would be interesting to see exactly what Borgia said about the find, in his preface.  An English translation is below.

Latin:

ERUDITO LECTORI STEPHANUS BORGIA

Fragmentum sane pretiosum, ac insigne prorsus Actorum S. Coluthi Martyris, quod nunc publici iuris facimus, detectum fuit anno circiter MDCCLXXVIII inter rudera veteris monasterii, quod situm erat prope Thebas in superiore Aegypto, quae urbs caput, & metropolis Thebaidis quondam erat.  Aliter etiam audiebat haec ipsa urbs, quae nimirum dicta quaque est “Diapolis”, vel “Diospolis” (a), & “Hecatompylos”, mutuato posteriori hoc nomine a centum portis, quibus eadem donabatur (b), & ob quas apud Iuvenalem (c) legitur: “Atque vetus Thebe centum iacet obruta portis.”

Thebarum itaque civitas, de qua nunc loquimur, haud permiscenda est cum ceteris eidem homonymis, quas & in Boeotia (quae quidem ob Amphionis fabulam, per quam ab eo condita eiusdem moenia circumferuntur, celebris evasit, quaeque & Heptapylos dicta est ob septem eidem tributas portas, quas respexit Iuvenalis (d), dum ait: “Rari quippe boni: numero vix sunt totidem, quot Thebarum portae, vel divitis ostia Nili” & in Cilicia, & in Corsica, & in Italia tandem, in Lucania nempe, olim exstitisse cognovimus. Hinc factum est, ut Ptolemaeus (a), quo nostras Thebas ab aliis distingueret, civitatem hanc ipsam “μεγάλην” “magnam” scilicet appellaverit.

De loco, in quo huiusmodi fragmentum prostabat, fidem nobis facit Angelus Antonius Bergomas Alumnus Fratrum Minor, Reformator, Nagadae degens, quod oppidum est Aegypti superioris, qui huiusmodi fragmentum ad nos dono misit cum nonnullis aliis, ac singulis quidem membranaceis, atque eodem loco existentibus, tum & Copticis litteris exaratis; inter quae est, quod ceteris praestet, illud, quod Coptice, & Graece uno tempore loquitur, quodque capitula aliquot adhuc integra Evangelii S. Ioannis comprehendit, quae insuper edenda in sacrorum studiorum utilitatem mature curabimus (b). Interim praeclare actum censeri debet cum fragmento, de quo agimus, quod nempe strenuum illustratorem, & interpretem magnum natum fuerit, virum scilicet cl. Augustinum Antonium Georgium Eremitarum Augustinensium Procuratorem generalem, cui commode illud extricandum pro summa sua orientalium fere omnium linguarum peritia, & pro insigni ad ardua quaeque  expedienda alacritate commisimus. Quare cum duo tantum, eaque mutila prodigia contineat fragmentum Actorum S. Coluthi, quae ad eius martyrium patrata perhibentur, ita ad ea supplenda ipse industriam, & animum suum comparavit, ut nil sive verosimilius, sive felicius excogitari posse videatur iis, quae ab eo nunc proponuntur.

Nos vero, ut quoquo modo huic rerum apparatui sane egregio respondeamus, & orientalis litteraturae studiosis morem geramus, characteris specimen aere insculptum exhibemus, quod nempe ex prioribus fragmenti lineis petitum est, ut proinde ex eo iudicium ferri possit de universa Copticarum litterarum forma, qua quinque omnino membranae, binis in unaquaque scripturae columnis appositis, exaratae sunt, quot nempe a pag. 221. ad pag. 230., quemadmodum recensentur, existunt. Hinc sane colligere est, fragmentum hoc pertinuisse olim ad codicem, in quo forsan alia Sanctorum Martyrum acta continebantur, quodque vulgo “Passionarium” appellari consuevit. Profecto scribendi forma magnam redolet vetustatem, quae ex sententia laudati Georgii nostri, & Raphaelis Tukii natione Aegyptii, & Episcopi Arsenovensis, cui acceptae referri debent editiones peractae Liturgicorum librorum, & Psalmorum Coptice loquentium typis Propagandae Fidei, viri sane utriusque ad iudicium de huiusmodi re recte ferendum perquam idonei, saeculi quinti aetatem citra dubium omne attingat. Nulla in hisce membranis capitulorum vestigia, sive sectionum indicia, neque eo loci, quo ad rem aliam fiat orationis conversio; ut idcirco ubi explicit prioris miraculi narratio per haec verba: “Dantes gloriam Deo, & Sancto Colutho,” continenter, citra ulterioris capituli auspicationem, alterius prodigii descriptio subsequatur per haec verba: “Audite quoque magnum aliud miraculum”. Acta haec Thebanensi, seu Sahidica dialecto, quae in superiore Aegypto obtinebat, non autem Memphitica, seu Alexandrina, quae communiter adhibebatur, concinnata sunt. At non haec nos nunc agimus.

(a) Hinc Manethoni, Africano, & Eusebio Reges Thebani “Diopolitani” nuncupantur.

(b) “Hecatompylos” eadem de causa vocabatur urbs Parthiae maxima, & regia, inter Ecbatana, & Alexandriam Ariae.

(c) Sat. xv. v. 6.

(d) Sat. xiii. v. 26.

(a) Lib. iv. cap. 5.

(b) Vide quae de hoc fragmento adnotavit eruditiss. Andreas Christianus Hwiidius Hauniensis in Specim. ined. versionis Arabico-Samarit. Pentateuchi Romae 1680. pag. 14.

English:

TO THE LEARNED READER, STEPHANUS BORGIA.

This truly precious and altogether remarkable fragment of the Acts of Saint Coluthus the Martyr, which we are now publishing, was discovered (detectum) around the year 1778 among the ruins of an old monastery situated near Thebes in Upper Egypt, a city that was once the capital and metropolis of the Thebaid. This same city was also known by other names: it was called “Diapolis” or “Diospolis” (a), and “Hecatompylos,” the latter name being derived from the hundred gates with which it was endowed (b), and on account of which we read in Juvenal (c): “And ancient Thebes lies buried beneath its hundred gates.”

The city of Thebes of which we now speak, therefore, must not be confused with other cities bearing the same name, which we know to have existed in Boeotia (which indeed became famous because of the legend of Amphion, by whom its walls are said to have been built, and which was also called Heptapylos because of the seven gates attributed to it, as Juvenal (d) had in mind when he said: “for truly the good are rare: they are scarcely as many in number as the gates of Thebes or the mouths of the wealthy Nile)” — and also in Cilicia, in Corsica, and finally in Italy, namely in Lucania. Hence it came about that Ptolemy (a), in order to distinguish our Thebes from the others, called this very city “μεγάλην”—that is, “the Great.”

Concerning the place where this fragment was offered for sale (prostabat), we have the testimony of Angelo Antonio Bergamo, a member of the Order of the Reformed Friars Minor, residing at Nagada, a town in Upper Egypt. He sent this fragment to us as a gift, along with several others, each of them on parchment and found (existentibus) in the same place, and all written in Coptic letters. Among them, the one that stands out above the rest is that which speaks (loquitur) both in Coptic and Greek at the same time, and which contains several chapters—still complete—of the Gospel of Saint John, which we shall take care to publish in due course for the benefit of sacred studies (b). In the meantime, the fragment with which we are now concerned should be considered particularly fortunate, in that it has found a vigorous editor and great interpreter, namely the renowned Father Agostino Antonio Giorgio, Procurator General of the Augustinian Hermits, to whom we conveniently entrusted the task of unraveling it, on account of his supreme expertise in almost all Oriental languages and his notable eagerness to undertake difficult tasks. Therefore, since the fragment of the Acts of Saint Coluthus contains only two miracles—and those mutilated—which are reported to have been performed at the time of his martyrdom, he so applied his industry and mind to supplementing them that it seems impossible for anything to be more plausibly or more successfully devised than what he now proposes.

For our part, in order to respond in some measure to this truly excellent scholarly undertaking and to gratify students of Oriental literature, we present a specimen of the script engraved on copper, taken from the first lines of the fragment, so that from it a judgment may be formed concerning the whole form of Coptic letters in which all five parchment leaves are written—with two columns of writing on each—namely those which exist from page 221 to page 230, as they are numbered. From this it may be gathered that this fragment once belonged to a codex that perhaps contained other Acts of the Holy Martyrs, and which was commonly called a “Passionarium.” Indeed, the style of writing smacks greatly of antiquity, which, in the opinion of our aforementioned Giorgio and of Raphael Tukius, an Egyptian by birth and Bishop of Arsenopolis—to whom are owed the editions already completed of the Liturgical books and the Psalms in Coptic printed by the Propaganda Fide press, both men highly qualified to make a correct judgment on this matter—unquestionably reaches back to the fifth century. In these leaves there are no traces of chapters or indications of sections, nor any place where the discourse turns to another subject; so that where the account of the first miracle ends with these words: “Giving glory to God and to Saint Coluthus,” the description of the second miracle immediately follows, without any heading of another chapter, with these words: “Hear also another great miracle.” These acts are composed in the Theban, or Sahidic, dialect, which prevailed in Upper Egypt, and not in the Memphitic, or Alexandrian, dialect, which was more commonly used. But we are not concerned with these matters now.

(a) Hence Manetho, Africanus, and Eusebius call the Theban kings “Diopolitans.”

(b) For the same reason, “Hecatompylos” was also the name of the greatest royal city of Parthia, situated between Ecbatana and Alexandria in Aria.

(c) Satires, Book XV, verse 6.

(d) Satires, Book XIII, verse 26.

(a) [second occurrence] Book IV, chapter 5.

(b) [second occurrence] See what the most learned Andreas Christianus Hwiidius of Copenhagen noted about this fragment in his unpublished Specimen of the Arabic-Samaritan Version of the Pentateuch, Rome 1680, page 14.

He then goes on to give the Greek text of a Greek menologium about the saint, and then other bits and pieces, of no importance here.

Borgia is clearly suspicious of the supposed location of the find, in a monastery near Thebes.  It may be that he has enough knowledge of the area, from missionary reports, to realise that this cannot be true.  He repeats the information that he has – plainly from Bergamo – that it was “discovered (detectum) around the year 1778 among the ruins of an old monastery situated near Thebes.”  Then in the next paragraph he refers instead to “the place where it was offered for sale (prostabat)”. No doubt the pages were indeed brought to Luxor – was the antiquity trade already beginning at that date? -, and so were offered to Bergamo at Naqada, just 15 miles away to the north.

Stephen Emmel in his massively scholarly Shenoute’s Literary Corpus vol. 1 (2004), p.20 rightly suggests:

Both the vagueness of the reported provenance and its basic inaccuracy are symptoms of what was no doubt a conscious effort on the part of those in charge of the monastery to keep their treasure secret. Even when subsequent visitors to the monastery asked explicitly about old books, with a view to studying or buying them, the horde of precious parchment fragments was not revealed.(56)

On the other hand, it is reasonable to suppose that it was precisely the steadily growing stream of European visitors interested in antiquity that led to a new regard for the heap of ruined old books in the trash room, which could now be perceived as a valuable commodity. Furthermore, in 1718 a Jesuit mission had been established in Akhmim, across the river from the monastery …

In all this, it is important to remember that archaeology had yet to be invented, and would not be invented until the 20th century.  Indeed the creation of a scientific discipline to uncover the past was prompted precisely by observing the rate at which “everything was being destroyed.”

In this period those in charge at the White Monastery no doubt felt that they were acting very much for the best, turning worthless unreadable rubbish into good solid current coinage – always a pleasant thing – at the expense of rich but daft foreigners.  The same predatory feeling still motivates a very large number of people in Egypt today, of course.

1. Fragmentum Copticum ex Actis S. Coluthi Martyris Erutum ex Membranis Vetustissimis Saeculi V ac. Latine Redditum:  online here.[↩]