Author: Roger Pearse

Causing outrage in Ireland now illegal; who’s first to be jailed?

Posted on by Roger Pearse

A new law has been passed in Ireland.  It’s being called a blasphemy law, because this is a Catholic country and voters will suppose that it is intended to protect the Church.  But the real effect is to allow the establishment to silence any criticism of whichever powerful and noisy groups it pleases.  Who these groups are, who are to be above criticism, remains to be seen.

Atheist site Palibandaily has the legal text here:

36. Publication or utterance of blasphemous matter.

(1) A person who publishes or utters blasphemous matter shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable upon conviction on indictment to a fine not exceeding €100,000. [Amended to €25,000]

(2) For the purposes of this section, a person publishes or utters blasphemous matter if (a) he or she publishes or utters matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion, and (b) he or she intends, by the publication or utterance of the matter concerned, to cause such outrage.

(3) It shall be a defence to proceedings for an offence under this section for the defendant to prove that a reasonable person would find genuine literary, artistic, political, scientific, or academic value in the matter to which the offence relates.

37. Seizure of copies of blasphemous statements.

(1) Where a person is convicted of an offence under section 36, the court may issue a warrant (a) authorising any member of the Garda Siochana to enter (if necessary by the use of reasonable force) at all reasonable times any premises (including a dwelling) at which he or she has reasonable grounds for believing that copies of the statement to which the offence related are to be found, and to search those premises and seize and remove all copies of the statement found therein, (b) directing the seizure and removal by any member of the Garda Siochana of all copies of the statement to which the offence related that are in the possession of any person, © specifying the manner in which copies so seized and removed shall be detained and stored by the Garda Siochana.

(2) A member of the Garda Siochana may (a) enter and search any premises, (b) seize, remove and detain any copy of a statement to which an offence under section 36 relates found therein or in the possession of any person, in accordance with a warrant under subsection (1).

(3) Upon final judgment being given in proceedings for an offence under section 36, anything seized and removed under subsection (2) shall be disposed of in accordance with such directions as the court may give upon an application by a member of the Garda Siochana in that behalf.  

I’ve marked a couple of key words in bold.  The law says that if a well-organised group get upset (and the poster intended them to get upset — but I imagine this caveat will have no meaning) that makes it blasphemous. 

Note also 36c; this means that members of the establishment will be excluded from this law, under the usual “it’s art, innit” pretext.

The atheists at Palibandaily say that they are worried.  This must be because they imagine themselves as the intended victims.  They could be, so broad is the scope — they’re right there — but it’s unlikely I think.  The establishment hardly ever worries about atheists.  Indeed in Britain it would be hard to find a figure more at the heart of the establishment than Richard Dawkins.  Indeed an atheist in Scotland is an avid campaigner for laws to ban “hate” — no different in principle or effect.

Likewise an article in the Guardian is here.  The anger in the comments will provoke a wry smile or two from Christians in the UK, about to be jailed if gay pressure groups want them to be.

No-one really knows who the intended victims are.  It is pleasing, in a way, to see these intolerant people now feeling threatened by the sort of laws for which they have so assiduously campaigned.  But it is a pleasure that passes, and I doubt these laws will.  It will only need a small change of political temperature for the same approach to be applied to others.

We live in a period when special interest groups get the government to pass laws allowing them to drag before courts anyone who expresses any objection to them, or their views.  This has happened in Canada, where Ezra Levant is leading the fightback, it is happening in Britain, it is happening here in Ireland.  When I was young, any very strong expression of opinion was likely to be greeted with “It’s a free country.”  No-one says that any more.

All these laws that criminalise opinion or speech or feelings, are evil.  They are always selective, always biased, always political.  To me, government is a utility; a way to get the roads built and the drains to work, and the police to restrain thugs, and the army to defend us from the likes of Kim Il Sung.  I do not want the powerful telling me what to think, what to say, what to write; I do not want them equipping my fellow citizen with the means to drag me into court, pretending “outrage.”

In days gone by, censorship was justified by protecting us from a torrent of filth.  Today we have the torrent of filth.  So… why do we have so much censorship?

FREE SPEECH.  NOW.

Share

Massive French site of translations from Latin, Greek, Syriac, Arabic, Georgian…

Posted on by Roger Pearse

I’ve just come across this French site, http://remacle.org/.  It contains a simply enormous amount of French translations, often with parallel original text.  Partly the site is a portal; but much is actually at the site itself.  It seems to be the work of a collective, although lots of stuff is by  Marc Szwajcer, and on the site itself.  The Armenian history Agathangelos is there.  Agapius is there — I wish I’d known, for I had to scan this myself for my own English translation.  A work by Severus Sebokht on the Astrolabe is there.  Letters of Jerome are there.

Among the gems are the poems of Claudian, and those of Sidonius Apollinaris, including his panegyric for the emperor Majorian, and his panegyric on his ineffectual successor, Anthemius.  Firmicus Maternus is there.  So is a lot of Photius.

“But what is this to me?” I hear you cry, “I don’t speak French.”  But Google translate is really very good for French.  So you really can make use of this, even so.

Stephen C. Carlson’s blog Hypotyposeis is not updated as often as it might be, so I only look in infrequently.  But I owe this tip to him.  Thank you!

Share

Online version of the Codex Sinaiticus; more manuscripts to follow

Posted on by Roger Pearse

We’ve all seen the PR for this online manuscript, which has even caused the servers to crash, although it is back now.  The PR has been very well managed, and it can only be a good thing that more interest is being generated in online manuscripts.  The announcement of more manuscripts at the Virtual Manuscript Room at Birmingham is well-timed.

I learn that the British Library is now beginning a pilot project to place some 250 Greek manuscripts online.  The project will be led by Juan Garces, who has been involved in the Sinaiticus project.  Clearly success begets success, and we can only hope that this marks the beginning of the end of the long hostility of the British Library to putting material on the internet.

Philip Comfort’s book Encountering the Manuscripts  – about New Testament manuscripts, including Sinaiticus – should be selling very well just now!

Share

Struggling a bit with Manuel Paleologus

Posted on by Roger Pearse

In all the textbooks on textual criticism, you will find little mention of a factor that must decide whether texts live or die.  This is the B-word; BOREDOM.  Who can bring themselves to copy a text, if they keep calling asleep or going off to pluck their eyebrows, or sort the rubbish, of whatever?

I’m working on translating Manuel Paleologus’ Dialogue with a Persian at the moment — mainly because Pope Benedict quoted from it and no-one could read the text.  But I am wishing I had not.  It’s really boring, to me anyway.  Worse yet, I find Manuel’s arguments contrived, while his Moslem antagonist makes what seem like reasonable criticisms.

Feeling a little under the weather as well, although that may be due to eating too many strawberries with cream yesterday.  But Manuel isn’t helping. 

Oh well.  Back to it.

On second thoughts, what’s on TV?

Share

Mingana manuscripts ignored, Korans placed online instead

Posted on by Roger Pearse

I saw today an announcement of the Virtual Manuscripts Room at the Mingana collection in Birmingham.  This is now available here.  They’ve scanned 71 mss.  But… disaster; political correctness has struck.  They’ve ignored nearly all the collection, in favour of the stray Islamic items that Mingana picked up.  Only about a dozen Syriac and a handful of Arabic Christian mss have been digitised.  The press release doesn’t even mention non-Islamic items.

I must say that I feel gutted.  Alphone Mingana must be bewailing that he ever left his mss in Birmingham.  Edward Cadbury must be apologising to him and wishing that he had chosen his heirs with more care.

UPDATE: I’ve emailed David Pulford at the library and it seems that JISC — who funded it — is to blame for the way this was presented.  They’re doing some “Digital Islam” thing at the moment, and the press release reflected that pretty much exclusively.  Still wish we had fewer Korans and more digital Dionysius bar Salibi, tho.

 

Share

Agapius now online in English

Posted on by Roger Pearse

I’m done, at last.  The Universal History of the 10th century Arabic Christian writer Agapius is now online in English here.  I hope it is useful!

Share

CSCO Agapius NOT the most recent edition!

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Now here’s a surprise!  The Cheikho CSCO edition came out in 1912.  The PO edition came out starting in 1910 (PO5) 1911 (PO7) 1912 (PO8) and 1915 (PO11).  Even on the face of it, that means that the first fascicle — which covers the time of Jesus — was only just before the CSCO text.

But looking at the CSCO introduction, the first sentence tells us that the text was set up in type five years earlier — that is, in 1907.  Unspecified delays prevented printing until 1912.  So in fact the two editions are quite independent, as regards half of the text.

The introduction goes on by telling us that he must have known Greek letters, as well as Syriac and Arabic; that he must be a Melchite, since he acknowledges the council of Chalcedon and refers approvingly to the see of Rome.

Agapius alludes to the date when he was writing (p. 334 of the CSCO edition), as being the eighth month of 330 A.H. (i.e. AD 942).  Eutychius must precede him slightly, as the latter died at the end of Ragab, 328 AH (11th May 940 AD).  Both authors are mentioned by the Moslem author `Ali Ibn Husain al-Mas`udi (X, 957).

The CSCO text was published in Lebanon, and naturally made use of eastern copies.  For the first part of the work, it used a Bodleian Nicol. manuscript.  Cheikho knows of two more at Sinai, which he could not use.  He was able to use two mss in Beirut, both owned by the St. Joseph Catholic University.  The first, which he calls A, was bought at Emesa (Homs) and dates from the 16th century.  The second (B) was written in Lebanon in 1818.  A third ms. (C) was found in the seminary of the Syrian Patriarch at Scharfa, dating from 1662 AD.  A fourth written in 1882 he had seen in a monastery at Luaize in Lebanon, but this was already lost when he wrote.  A fifth manuscript — he doesn’t say if he used it — was in the Greek Patriarchal library of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. 

All these, he says, are pretty much identical to the Oxford ms. and all end in the middle of the same sentence, apart from the Scharfa ms. which ends on fol. 104.  He used A and B, with bits of C.

For the second part, he had a photographic copy of the unique Florence manuscript.  He also made use of al-Makin from Paris ms. Arab. 294 — the one which I was sold a wretched  microfilm of — and printed the excerpts from Agapius from it at the end of his edition (which, drat it, I didn’t notice).

Share

Searching for books; Origen, Agapius, and the Didache in Shenouda.

Posted on by Roger Pearse

My trip to the University Library at Cambridge was successful, and they did let me in. I was able to get photocopies of the Baehrens GCS edition of Origen’s Homilies on Ezechiel.  Mind you, it cost 15c per page, which made it costly and prevented me from copying the whole volume.  I wish someone with borrowing privileges would scan all these early GCS editions — they’re all out of copyright.

I also took a look at the CSCO edition of Agapius, by L. Cheikho, from 1912.  I’m not all that impressed by this; if it is using al-Makin to supplement the text then it doesn’t really say so.  The apparatus seemed rather feeble to me.  It does seem to me that a modern critical edition of this text is required.  Modern technology such as multi-spectral imaging should allow the material that was illegible in those days to be read with relative ease.

Some time ago I discussed the Arabic life of the 4th century Coptic churchman Shenouda.  This is of interest because it contains, improbably, a version of the Didache.  It was printed with a French translation in several versions by Amelineau, over a century ago.  Unfortunately all of these are offline.  CUL did have the Vie de Schnoudi volume, but had consigned it to the dungeon which is the “rare books” department.  This means that you can’t photocopy it, which makes getting a copy difficult and costly.  However the version printed in the Monuments pour servir a l’histoire de l’Egypte…, t. IV, in 2 vols, was accessible and could be copied.  The text is found on pp. 289-478; which means photocopying over 150 pages, one page at a time.  However the format is Arabic at the top, French at the bottom, and there isn’t actually that much text on each page; less than in the Patrologia Orientalis editions. 

I would have photocopied this, but a call on my mobile cut short my visit, to attend to family business.  I’ll get a copy of this another day.

Wish it didn’t cost so much, tho.

 

Share

Using Google translate on Manuel Paleologus, and contributing as you do

Posted on by Roger Pearse

I’m trying to finish up various little tasks that I started ages ago.  One of these was a translation of book 7 of the Dialogue with a Persian by Manuel Paleologus, which got Pope Benedict into such hot water with the Moslems awhile back.  I’ve been looking at the French version of this.

Here’s a tip.  Take a single sentence, and run it through Google translate.  You’ll get a box with the French; and opposite it, the English, more or less good.  But… at the bottom right, you’ll get “Contribute a better translation.”  Click this box, and edit the machine translation there into proper English.  Then hit the button and submit it to Google.

Firstly, when you copy back your edited version, it’s in a sensible font rather than Courier (which is what you get otherwise).  Secondly, since Google Translate works by using existing translations of texts, you’re actually increasing their database and making it more likely that the result will work for you next time.

The results, from French, are really very good; better than Systran, which I have used so far.  I need to see how good it is on Italian!

Share

Agapius almost ready

Posted on by Roger Pearse

I’ve finished turning the French translation of the 10th century Arabic Christian historian Agapius into English, formatting it and so forth.  Only a couple of issues remain, but these are important.

People get interested in Agapius for two reasons only, in my experience.  The lesser reason is that he preserves a fragment of Papias not found elsewhere.  This undoubtedly comes from a Syriac version of some lost Greek chronicle.

The main reason is that Shlomo Pines quoted a version of the Testimonium Flavianum as from Agapius, which has since attracted a lot of attention.  Pines made his own translation, using the 1912 CSCO text. 

The passage is found in the second part of Agapius.  This is preserved only in a single damaged manuscript in Florence.  The manuscript breaks off in 776 AD, in the second year of the Caliph al-Mahdi; but the text originally continued to 941 AD.  Quotations from Agapius are found in the 13th century Arabic Christian historian al-Makin.  The CSCO text supplemented the text found in the Florence manuscript from al-Makin. 

Methodologically this seems unsound to me.  We all know that texts tend to grow in transmission, as marginal notes find their way into the text, and additional material gets added.  It would be most interesting to learn whether attention was paid to this.  Since no edition exists of al-Makin, it is rather hard to judge.  Unfortunately the CSCO edition did not come with a translation.  Let’s hope it has a non-Arabic introduction!

Either way I need to look directly at the CSCO edition, and give both passages a special treatment.  So I shall drive up to Cambridge tomorrow, and get copies of the relevant passages.   I think I will take a little digital camera with me and just photograph the pages — the photocopiers at the university library are a disgrace!

Share