Category: From my diary

Eusebius, Letter to Constantia – an English translation by Cyril Mango

Posted on by Roger Pearse

It’s always a shock to realise that some important early Christian text has never been translated; or, at least, is inaccessible online.  Such was myi feeling on seeing a quotation from the letter of Eusebius of Caesarea to Constantia, sister of the emperor Constantine the Great.  The quotation was:

To depict purely the human form of Christ before its transformation is to break the commandment of God and to fall into pagan error.

The letter has not reached us directly.  Rather it was quoted as part of a dossier of texts assembled by the iconoclast synod of Hieria in 754.  In turn so those sections were also quoted in the acts of the Second Council of Nicaea in 787 AD in order to condemn them.   Other fragments exist, apparently.

I find that a translation of the material from Nicaea 2 was made by Cyril Mango from the PG 20, 1545 f. text, and printed in The Art of the Byzantine Empire 312-1453 (1972, rep. 1986),p. 16-18.  Here it is:

You also wrote me concerning some supposed image of Christ, which image you wished me to send you. Now what kind of thing is this that you call the image of Christ? I do not know what impelled you to request that an image of Our Saviour should be delineated. What sort of image of Christ are you seeking? Is it the true and unalterable one which bears His essential characteristics, or the one which He took up for our sake when He assumed the form of a servant?  . . . Granted, He has two forms, even I do not think that your request has to do with His divine form. . . . Surely then, you are seeking His image as a servant, that of the flesh which He put on for our sake. But that, too, we have been taught, was mingled with the glory of His divinity so that the mortal part was swallowed up by Life. Indeed, it is not surprising that after His ascent to heaven He should have appeared as such, when, while He—the God, Logos—was yet living among men, He changed the form of the servant, and indicating in advance to a chosen band of His disciples the aspect of His Kingdom, He showed on the mount that nature which surpasses the human one—when His face shone like the sun and His garments like light. Who, then, would be able to represent by means of dead colors and inanimate delineations (skiagraphiai) the glistening, flashing radiance of such dignity and glory, when even His superhuman disciples could not bear to behold Him in this guise and fell on their faces, thus admitting that they could not withstand the sight? If, therefore, His incarnate form possessed such power at the time, altered as it was by the divinity dwelling within Him, what need I say of the time when He put off mortality and washed off corruption, when He changed the form of the servant into the glory of the Lord God. . . ? … How can one paint an image of so wondrous and unattainable a form—if the term ‘form’ is at all applicable to the divine and spiritual essence—unless, like the unbelieving pagans, one is to represent things that bear no possible resemblance to anything. . . ? For they, too, make such idols when they wish to mould the likeness of what they consider to be a god or, as they might say, one of the heroes or anything else of the kind, yet are unable even to approach a resemblance, and so delineate and represent some strange human shapes. Surely, even you will agree that such practices are not lawful for us.

But if you mean to ask of me the image, not of His form transformed into that of God, but that of the mortal flesh before its transformation, can it be that you have forgotten that passage in which God lays down the law that no likeness should be made either of what is in heaven or what is in the earth beneath? Have you ever heard anything of the kind either yourself in church or from another person? Are not such things banished and excluded from churches all over the world, and is it not common knowledge that such practices are not permitted to us alone?

Once— I do not know how—a woman brought me in her hands a picture of two men in the guise of philosophers and let fall the statement that they were Paul and the Saviour—I have no means of saying where she had had this from or learned such a thing. With the view that neither she nor others might be given offence, I took it away from her and kept it in my house, as I thought it improper that such things ever be exhibited to others, lest we appear, like idol worshippers, to carry our God around in an image. I note that Paul instructs all of us not to cling any more to things of the flesh; for, he says, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we Him no more.

It is said that Simon the sorcerer is worshipped by godless heretics painted in lifeless material. I have also seen myself the man who bears the name of madness57 [painted] on an image and escorted by Manichees. To us, however, such things are forbidden. For in confessing the Lord God, Our Saviour, we make ready to see Him as God, and we ourselves cleanse our hearts that we may see Him after we have been cleansed. . .

“the man who bears the name of madness” is Mani, of course.

According to David M. Gwynn, “From Iconoclasm to Arianism: The Construction of Christian Tradition in the Iconoclast Controversy”, in: Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 47 (2007), 225–251; 227 (online here), who discusses the letter, its authenticity and reception, further fragments may be added from the writings of the Iconophile Patriarch Nikephorus, which he references thus:

5. The best-known edition of the text is that of H. Hennephof, Textus byzantinos ad iconomachiam pertinentes (Leiden 1969) 42–44, of which there is an English translation in C. Mango, The Art of the Byzantine Empire 312–1453 (Englewood Cliffs 1972) 16–18.  A new Greek edition of the surviving fragments has now been prepared by A. von Stockhausen, in T. Krannich, C. Schubert, and C. Sode, Die ikonoklastische Synode von Hiereia 754 (Tübingen 2002), although in her most recent article Claudia Sode is sceptical that any coherent text can be reconstructed from those fragments: C. Sode and P. Speck, “Ikonoklasmus vor der Zeit? Der Brief des Eusebios von Kaisareia an Kaiserin Konstantia,” JÖByz 54 (2004) 113–134.

It should be noted that Mango in fact does not reference Hennephof, but the PG edition.

It has to be said that Eusebius is not really addressing the idea of icons at all.  The Byzantine veneration of icons is not his concern, for this did not exist.  Rather he is a man who grew up when paganism was triumphant, concerned to prevent the continuation of pagan practices in the newly Christianised populace.

Interesting to learn little snippets about antiquity – such as that an image of Mani was being paraded around in procession by his devotees.  We gain something from every morcel of ancient literature.

Update: A. von Stockhausen writes:

My edition (not critical, but re-instating the fragmentary state of transmission and annotation parallels in his other works) with German translation and short thoughts on Eusebius’ position on images (interpreting prep. ev. III 10,13–19) is online here: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:bvb:29-opus4-81432

Thank you!

Share

From my diary

Posted on by Roger Pearse

I’m working on translating material associated with the council of Hippo in 393.  Not just the Breviarium of the canons, prepared for the council of Carthage in 397; but also a handful of canons that survived in more complete form, more or less by accident, outside of the main flow of canon law transmission.  To do so I work with various tools, including my own QuickLatin tool which I am continuously enhancing with small bits of syntactical information.  But yesterday I had to stop and do some real work on the code base.  I had never implemented code to handle “quidem” and the like, not least because I always know what it means.  But finally this absence annoyed me enough to do something about it.  Two days of hard work later, it is now functioning.

Tomorrow I will get back to working on five canons discovered by Charles Munier in Codex Vercellensi 165, fol. 199, and published in 1968 in the Revue de Droit canonique 12, p.16-29.  This does not seem to be accessible, but he printed the text in his edition of the African canons which I have.  I’m working through the first of these, which restrains clergy from ordaining minors without the permission of their fathers.

The manuscript is at the Biblioteca capitolare in Vercelli; which sounds like the chapter library of the cathedral.  Sadly these do not seem to be online yet; but no doubt they will be one day!

Share

Canons “37b, 38 and 39” of the Breviarium of the Council of Hippo (393)

Posted on by Roger Pearse

In Mansi’s edition of the Breviarium, canon 37 is longer than it is in Munier; and there are two more canons given.  Thankfully Munier does explain this, and in the interests of completeness, I think it’s worth giving the material here, to tie up a loose end.

Around 500 AD Dionysius Exiguus compiled a collection of church canons, which included a good slab of material from Africa.  He gave the canons of the council of 419 and then inserted after them a digest of earlier African canons, which is referred to today as the “Register ecclesiae Carthaginensis“.  The canons are numbered sequentially as if a continuation of the canons of 419.

All this material was translated by the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers collection, so there is no need for me to do so.  But let’s give the Latin from Munier and NPNF English.

The extra material in canon 37 of the Breviarium is in fact from the Register, where it is canon 47.  The Register states that it is from the Council of Carthage on 13 August in 397, the same council at which the Breviarium was compiled.  So this is a little odd.

(“37”) De Donatistis placuit ut consulamus fratres et consacerdotes nostros Siricium et Simplicianum de solis infantibus qui baptizantur penes eosdem, ne quod suo non fecerunt judicio, cum ad ecclesiam Dei salubri proposito fuerint conuersi, parentum illos error impediat ne promoveantur sacri altaris ministri. (Munier, p.186)

Concerning the Donatists it seemed good that we should hold counsel with our brethren and fellow priests Siricius and Simplician concerning those infants alone who are baptized by Donatists: lest what they did not do of their own will, when they should be converted to the Church of God with a salutary determination, the error of their parents might prevent their promotion to the ministry of the holy altar.

From which we may infer that someone in that situation was indeed seeking to be ordained.

The “canon 38” is in fact canons 49 and 50 of the material from the Register, which also assigns it to the Council of Carthage in 397, but to a second session on 28 August.

(38) Honoratus et Urbanus dixerunt : Et illud nobis mandatum est, ut quia proxime fratres nostri Numidiae duo episcopi ordinare praesumpserunt pontificem, nonnisi a duodecim censeatis celebrari episcoporum ordinationes.

Aurelius episcopus dixit: Forma antiqua servabitur, ut non minus quam tres sufficiant, qui fuerint destinati, ad episcopum ordinandum. Praeterea, quia in Tripoli forte et in Arzuge interiacere videntur barbarae gentes – nam in Tripoli, ut asseritur, episcopi sunt quinque. tantummodo, et possunt forte de ipso numero vel duo necessitate aliqua occupari; difficile est enim ut de quolibet numero omnes possint occurrrere – numquid debet hoc ipsum impedimento esse ecclesiasticae utilitati? Nam et in hac ecclesia, ad quam dignata est vestra sanctitas convenire, crebro ac paene per diem dominicam ordinandos habemus; numquidnam frequenter potero duodecim vel decem vel non multo minus advocare episcopos? Sed facile est mihi duos adiungere meae parvitati vicinos. Quapropter cernit mecum caritas vestra hoc ipsum observari non posse.

Sed illud est statuendum, ut quando ad eligendum convenerimus, si qua contradictio fuerit oborta, quia talia tractata sunt apud nos, non praesumant ad purgandum eum qui ordinandus est tres iam, sed postuletur ad numerum supradictorum unus vel duo, et in eadem plebe cui ordinandus est discutiantur primo personae contradicentium, postremo etiam illa quae obiciuntur pertractentur; et cum purgatus fuerit sub conspectu publico, ita demum ordinetur. Si hoc cum vestrae sanctitatis animo concordat, roboretur vestrae dignationis responsione.
Ab universis episcopis dictum est: Satis placet.

Honoratus and Urbanus, the bishops, said: We have issued this command, that (because lately two of our brethren, bishops of Numidia, presumed to ordain a pontiff,) only by the concurrence of twelve bishops the ordination of bishops be celebrated.

Aurelius, the bishop, said: The ancient form shall be preserved, that not less than three suffice who shall have been designated for ordaining the bishop. Moreover, because in Tripoli, and in Arzug the barbarians are so near, for it is asserted that in Tripoli there are but five bishops, and out of that number two may be occupied by some necessity; but it is difficult that all of the number should come together at any place whatever; ought this circumstance to be an impediment to the doing of what is of utility to the Church? For in this Church, to which your holiness has deigned to assemble we frequently have ordinations and nearly every Lord’s day; could I frequently summon twelve, or ten, or about that number of bishops? But it is an easy thing for me to join a couple of neighbours to my littleness. Wherefore your charity will agree with me that this cannot be observed.

But this should be decreed, that when we shall have met together to choose a bishop, if any opposition shall arise, because such things have been treated by us, the three shall not presume to purge him who was to be ordained, but one or two more shall be asked to be added to the aforesaid number, and the persons of those objecting shall first be discussed in the same place (plebe) for which he was to be ordained. And last of all the objections shall be considered; and only after he has been cleared in the public sight shall he at last be ordained. If this agrees with the mind of your holiness, let it be confirmed by the answer of your worthiness.

All the bishops said, We are well pleased.

It is shocking to read that “in Arzug the barbarians are so near”… and that Aurelius does not seem to consider this a more pressing concern than these legal minutiae.

The next item, “canon 39” is in fact from the council of 13 September, 401.  It appears as canon 72 in the Dionysius Exiguus’ Register.

(39)  Item placuit de infantibus, quoties inveniuntur certissimi testes, qui eos baptizatos esse sine dubitatione testentur, ne que ipsi sunt per aetatem de traditis sacramentis idonei respondere, absque ullo scrupulo eos esse baptizandos, ne ista trepidatio eos faciat sacramentorum purgatione privari. Hinc etiam legati Maurorum, fratres nostri, consuluerunt, quia multos tales a barbaris redimunt.  – Munier p.201

Likewise it seemed good that whenever there were not found reliable witnesses who could testify that without any doubt they were baptized and when the children themselves were not, on account of their tender age, able to answer concerning the giving of the sacraments to them, all such children should be baptized without scruple, lest a hesitation should deprive them of the cleansing of the sacraments. This was urged by the Moorish Legates, our brethren, since they redeem many such from the barbarians.

Sobering stuff to witness.

Share

From my diary

Posted on by Roger Pearse

I’ve now returned working on the letter of Aurelius and Mizonius, to which the breviarium or summary of the canons of the council of Hippo was attached, and with which it is usually transmitted.  This is basically done, although I’ve had to look up a few phrases.  It was much easier to do, after spending so much time with the canons, than I remembered.  The more Latin we do, the better we get; if, that is, we don’t cheat and gloss over difficulties with a paraphrase.  I’ll post that next week.  I’ll also look at whatever material survives about the Council of Carthage in 397, where the breviarium was compiled.

I’ve continued to work on the Tertullian Project Technical Update.  At the moment that means finding broken links and fixing them as best I can.  Some of these broken links are more than 20 years old.  In many cases all that can be done is to remove them.

One lesson that I have found is never, ever, to rely on images on another site.  There is one page which relies on a photograph of the first page of a manuscript at a famous library.  That photograph was paid for by me.  I commissioned that library, long ago, to make a photograph for me.   This was before digital cameras, so I got a colour slide for my money.  Later they placed an image on their website.  But … it has vanished.  It is no longer there.  Fortunately I kept a copy.

When I created the Roman Cult of Mithras pages, back in 2011 or 2012, one of my motives was to build a directory of images of Mithras online.  There were and are very many such photos, taken by tourists, in high resolution and full-colour.  These are far better than the reference photographs.  So it helps to be able to identify them.  I took a decision when I did so to hold local copies of all the images.  I knew that newspapers sometimes publish good photographs of finds.  I also knew that newspapers do not tend to keep articles online for very long!  Images appear and vanish.  The only solution is to keep the image locally.  The Tertullian Project Technical Update is proving the wisdom of that policy.

Identifying broken links is a chore.  There are various online sites, all of which limit you to a small number of pages unless you pay them.  I had some difficulty finding scripts online, until I thought to add “Github” to the search terms.  Indeed I adapted one PHP script to run locally for my own purposes.  But of course something like the Linkchecker python script is far better, even if it takes ages to run.

I’ve still got quite a few links to fix. That can happen in slow time, as I feel like it.

Share

Canons 37 of the breviarium of the Council of Hippo (393)

Posted on by Roger Pearse

The final canon, 37, in the summary of the canons of the council of Hippo is as follows.  I did get rather stuck at one point, so comments are very welcome.

37.  Placuit etiam ut, quoniam praecedentibus conciliis statutum est ne quis Donatistarum cum honore suo recipiatur a nobis, sed in numero laicorum, propter salutem quae nulli deneganda est — tantum autem inopia clericorum ordinandorum in Africa patiuntur ecclesiae, ut quaedam loca omnino deserta sint — servetur quidem in istis quod iam ante decretum est, sed exceptis his quos, aut non rebaptizasse constiterit, aut qui cum suis plebibus ad communionem catholicam transire voluerint. Si enim scriptum est quod duobus si convenerit Christianis, quidquid petierint, impetrabunt, non oportet dubitare quod, remoto scandalo dissensionis, universae plebis, in unitate [pacis]** redacta concordia, idonea sit impetrare de misericordia Domini, ut ipsius pacis compensatione et sacrificio caritatis aboleantur quae, maiorum suorum auctoritatem sequentes, repetitione baptismi commiserunt.

Sed hanc rem placuit non confirmari, priusquam inde transmarina ecclesia consulatur.

Note that “pacis” is found in Mansi’s text, but not in Munier.

Here’s my attempt to translate this:

37.  It was also agreed that, seeing that it was ordained by preceding councils that a Donatist shall be received by us, not with honour, but among the number of the laity; on account of the salvation which must not be refused to any, – for the churches suffer so much from the lack of ordained clergy in Africa, so that some places have been entirely deserted –  it [the rule] shall be maintained even in those who already [crossed over] before it was decreed, but excepting those who either did not wait to be rebaptised, or who wished to cross over to the Catholic communion with their congregation. For if it was written “that if two Christians shall agree,** whatever they ask, they shall obtain”, [then] it is not right to doubt that, having been freed from the scandal of dissention, the concord of the whole laity in [the] unity [of peace] having been restored**, it shall be proper to procure from the mercy of God, that, in a return** of his peace with the return of peace and by the sacrifice of charity, those people shall be abolished who, following the authority of their forefathers, have committed** the repetition of baptism, in exchange for peace itself and by the sacrifice of charity [i.e. thanks to this sacrifice of charity], those things [sc. sins] that following the authority of their ancestors, they committed by the repetition of baptism, may be abolished.

But it was agreed that these things are not to be confirmed, until after the church overseas has been** consulted.

The bit in Italics is an allusion to Mt. 18:19, which in the Vulgate and Douai is:

Iterum dico vobis, quia si duo ex vobis consenserint super terram, de omni re quamcumque petierint, fiet illis a Patre meo, qui in caelis est.

Again I say to you, that if two of you shall consent upon earth, concerning any thing whatsoever they shall ask, it shall be done to them by my Father who is in heaven.

“duobus si convenerit Christianis” – I have assumed this is an impersonal verb plus dative.

“redacta concordia” – I’m reading this as an ablative absolute, “concord having been restored”.

The bit that I am unsure about is “ut ipsius pacis compensatione et sacrificio caritatis aboleantur”.  I don’t see how the dative [update: or not!] fits with the verb, to be honest.  Anybody got any ideas?  And … “compensation”?  [Update: see comment below by Alexander Macaulay – thank you!]

This is the last of the canons in the Breviarium.  Mansi gives a couple more, followed by the signatures of the bishops, but these are not part of the Breviarium, but rather material from the Council of Carthage in 397, in which the Breviarium was put together.  We’ll have a look at this context material in a bit.

Share

Canons 29-36 of the breviarium of the Council of Hippo (393)

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Let’s have a few more canons.

29.  Ut nulli episcopi vel clerici in ecclesia conviventur; nisi forte transeuntes hospitiorum necessitate illic reficiant; populi etiam ab huiusmodi conviviis, quantum potest fieri, prohibeantur.

That none of the bishops or clergy shall dine together in the church; except perhaps those travelling may refresh themselves in that place through the necessity of being guests**; the people shall also be prohibited from meals of this sort, as much as possible.

“hospitiorum”, literally “of hospitalities”?

30.  Ut paenitentibus secundum differentiam peccatorum episcopi arbitrio paenitentiae tempora decernantur.  Et ut presbyteri inconsulto episcopo non reconcilient paenitentes; nisi absentia episcopi, & necessitate cogente.  Cuiuscumque autem paenitentis publicum et vulgatissimum crimen est, quod universam ecclesiam commoverit**, ante apsidam manus ei imponatur.

That, for penitents, the durations of the penitences shall be decided by the decision of the bishop according to the different kinds of sins/sinners.  And that presbyters shall not reconcile penitents without consulting the bishop; except in the absence of the bishop (and) from urgent necessity.**  But wherever the offence of the penitent is public and very widely known, so that it affronted the whole church, hands shall be laid on him in front of the apse (of the church).**

“commoverit” is “noverit” in Mansi, “known.”  “from urgent necessity” is an ablative absolute present, lit. “when necessity is compelling”.  “in front of the apse”, i.e. in full view of everyone.

31. Ut virgines sacrae, cum parentibus a quibus custodiebantur privatae fuerint, episcopi vel presbyteri, ubi episcopus absens est, providentia gravioribus feminis commendentur; aut simul habitantes invicem se custodiant: ne passim vagando ecclesiae laedant existimationem.

That the holy consecrated virgins, when they have been separated from the parents by whom they used to be watched over, [then] bishops or presbyters, where the bishop is absent, shall be entrusted with providing** for these important women shall be entrusted by the providence of the bishop (or presbyter, if the bishop is absent) to more dignified women; or likewise the inhabitants in turn shall watch over themselves: lest by wandering in many places they may injure the reputation of the church.

Treating “providentia” as an accusative present participle of “provideo”, taking the dative.

32.  Ut aegrotantes, si pro se respondere non possint, cum voluntatis eorum testimonium sui** periculo proprio dixerint, baptizentur.

That the sick shall be baptised, if they are unable to answer for themselves, when their own people declare** (that there is), in particular danger, evidence of their wish.

Mansi gives “possunt” rather than “possint.”

“sui” gave me quite a bit of trouble, but all the variants seem to understand it as a nominative.  So I treat it as a nominative plural “their own [people]”, and the subject of “dixerint”, treated as subjunctive here “shall say”, because of “cum” meaning “when”.  This understanding is supported by Mansi’s text variant here, “hi qui sui sunt”, “those who are of them”.  Then I assume that some part of “esse” should be understood, followed by “testimonium”, “evidence”.  I’m not quite sure about why “periculo proprio”, either dative or ablative.

33. Ut scenicis vel apostaticis conversis vel reversis ad Dominum gratia vel reconciliatio non negetur.

That grace or reconciliation shall not be denied to actors or apostates converted or reverted to God.

Actors enjoy a poor reputation, I see.

34.  Ut presbyter non consulto episcopo virgines non consecret; crisma vero numquam conficiat.

That a presbyter shall not consecrate virgins without consulting the bishop; indeed he shall never sanctify** the chrism.**

“conficio” is used by Niemeyer “to accomplish the sacrifice of the mass”; Blaise as “consecrate”.  Usually it would be “prepare”.  Chrism is consecrated oil used for anointing during baptism.

35. Ut clerici in aliena civitate non immorentur, nisi causas eorum justas episcopus loci vel presbyteri locorum perviderint.

That clergy shall not linger in a strange town, unless the bishop of the place or the presbyters of the places have been overseeing** their justified lawsuits.

“perviderint” is future perfect active indicative, “shall have overseen”, so a paraphrase seems right here.

The next canon gets quoted a lot.

36.  Ut praeter scripturas canonicas nihil in ecclesia legatur sub nomine divinarum scripturarum.

Sunt autem canonicae scripturae: Genesis. Exodus. Leviticus. Numeri. Deuteronomium. Jesu Nave. Judicum. Ruth. Regnorum libri iiii. Paralipomenon libri ii. Job. Psalterium. Salomonis libri v. liber xii Prophetarum Minorum. Item Isaias. Hieremias. Ezechiel. Danihel. Tobias. Judith. Esther. Esdrae libri ii. Machabeorum libri ii.

Novi autem testamenti: Evangelia libri iiii. Actus Apostolorum liber i. Pauli apostoli epistolae xiiii. Petri ii. Johannis iii. Jude i. Jacobi i. Apocalipsis Johannis.

Ita ut de confirmando isto canone transmarina ecclesia consulatur.

Liceat etiam legi passiones martyrum, cum anniversarii dies eorum celebrantur.

That, other than the canonical scriptures, nothing shall be read in church under the name of the divine scriptures.

Moreover these are the canonical scriptures: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 4 books of Kings, Chronicles 2 books, Job, Psalms, 5 books of Solomon, 12 books of minor prophets.  Likewise Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, 2 books of Ezra, 2 books of Maccabees.

Moreover of the New Testament: Gospels 4 books, Acts of the Apostles 1 book, Letters of the Apostle Paul 14, 2 of Peter, 3 of John, 1 of Jude, 1 of James, the Apocalypse of John.

Thus that the overseas church shall be consulted concerning confirming** this canon.

“confirmando” is a gerundive, requiring to be confirmed, “concerning this canon that needs to be confirmed”.

Only one more (long) canon to go.

Share

Rutilius Namatianus, the Jews, and some notes on the fate of the unique manuscript

Posted on by Roger Pearse

In 1493 a manuscript of the 7-8th century was discovered at the Irish monastery of St. Columbanus at Bobbio in north Italy, which contained some previously unknown ancient works.  One of these was a poem, De reditu suo – On his return – by Rutilius Namatianus, who was Urban Prefect in Rome in 414 AD.  The poem describes his return to Gaul by sea around 416 AD.  It is incomplete, but it lambasts the policy of Stilicho that brought the Goths over the Alps.

The text and English translation of the poem may be found at Bill Thayer’s site Lacus Curtius here, which is now back online.  The text is out of date, tho, as we shall see in a moment.

The poem also contains a passage recounting how Rutilius and his company were harassed by a Jew when they put in to land.  Rutilius does not hold back his feelings about the man and his race.

This I learned of thanks to a link back from an article at a fringe blog named History Reviewed, here.  Here’s the text, overparagraphed by me.

The neighbouring Faleria​ checks our weary course, though Phoebus scarce had reached his mid career. That day it happened merry village-bands along the country cross-roads soothed their jaded hearts with festal observances; it was in truth the day when, after long time restored, Osiris wakes the happy seeds to yield fresh produce. Landing, we seek lodging,​ and stroll within a wood; we like the ponds which charm with their shallow enclosed basin. The spacious waters of the imprisoned flood permit the playful fish to sport inside these preserves.

But we were made to pay dear for the repose of this delightful halting-place by a lessee who was harsher than Antiphates as host!​ For a crabbed Jew was in charge of the spot — a creature that quarrels with sound human food.​ He charges in our bill for damaging his bushes and hitting the seaweed, and bawls about his enormous loss in water we had sipped.

We pay the abuse due to the filthy race that infamously practises circumcision: a root of silliness they are: chill Sabbaths are after their own heart, yet their heart is chillier than their creed. Each seventh day is condemned to ignoble sloth, as ’twere an effeminate picture of a god fatigued.​ The other wild ravings from their lying bazaar methinks not even a child in his sleep could believe.

And would that Judaea had never been subdued by Pompey’s wars and Titus’ military power. The infection of this plague, though excised, still creeps abroad the more: and ’tis their own conquerors that a conquered race keeps down.

Against us rises a North wind; but we too strive with oars to rise, while daylight shrouds the stars. Close at hand Populonia opens up her safe coast, where she draws her natural bay well inland. …

Readers of Horatius, in Lord Macaulay’s Lays of Ancient Rome will be reminded of Lars Porsenna gathering his Etruscans,

From lordly Volaterræ,
Where scowls the far-famed hold
Piled by the hands of giants
For godlike kings of old;
From seagirt Populonia,
Whose sentinels descry
Sardinia’s snowy mountain-tops
Fringing the southern sky;

Rutilius’ unnamed Jew is an unattractive figure.  It is interesting that a man who had held such a high office, and must have travelled with his clients, could be abused like this.  The Urban Prefect was the emperor’s strong-arm boy in the City, after all.  Possibly this suggests that the episode is a literary fiction; or else it testifies to the disturbed state of Italy, only a few years after the Gothic sack of Rome.

But it does provide a vehicle to criticise the Christians, now fully in the saddle in the Roman empire.  The ruinous effects of the rise of superstition and dogma, of heresy trials and smelling-out of dissenters, upon that fragile state, were obvious to anybody.  It is telling that so senior an aristocrat feels quite powerless to do anything about any of these disasters.  A little later he says:

As we advance at sea, Capraria now rears itself — an ill-kept isle full of men who shun the light. Their own name​ for themselves is a Greek one, “monachoi” (monks), because they wish to dwell alone with none to see. They fear Fortune’s boons, as they dread her outrages: would anyone, to escape misery, live of his own choice in misery? What silly fanaticism of a distorted brain is it to be unable to endure even blessings because of your terror of ills? Whether they are like prisoners​ who demand the appropriate penalties for their deeds, or whether their melancholy hearts are swollen with black bile, it was even so that Homer assigned the ailment of excessive bile as cause of Bellerophon’s troubled soul;​ for it was after the wounds of a cruel sorrow that men say the stricken youth conceived his loathing for human kind.

The monks of the late fourth century could be a very rubbishy crew.  In Egypt they were gangs of illiterates, used as muscle by bishops like Theophilus of Alexandria, in their struggles with their personal enemies.  Rutilius has no respect for them.

The text of Rutilius Namatianus reached us in a single manuscript at Bobbio.  Fortunately it was copied.  For in 1706 a French adventurer stole the ancient volume from the abbey.  His name was Comte Claude Alexandre de Bonnival, a successful French military man who had entered Austrian service that year, and was a Major-General in the service of Prince Eugene, campaigning near Turin.

This we learn from a handwritten note by Michel-Ange Carisio, Abbot of Bobbio in 1792, printed in M. Tulli Ciceronis, Orationum pro Scauro, pro Tullio, et in Clodium, fragmenta inedita, ed. Amedeus Peyron, 1824 (online here), p.xx:

Sadly the manuscript was never seen again.  In 1973 a reseacher found a fragment of a leaf of the manuscript, which had become separated from the rest, in a binding from Bobbio.  This restored the endings of a number of lines in book 2.

De Bonneval led a rackety life.  He was a very capable French army officer.  But he was his own worst enemy, and he could never stay out of trouble.  He quarreled with the war minister, the Duc de Vendôme, was condemned to death, after an exchange of insulting letters, in the pleasant manner of the time, and was therefore obliged to flee to Germany.  Prince Eugene took him on, and he was very effective in Austrian service, first against the French and then against the Ottoman Turks.  His reputation increased so much so that he became famous in France, and, his enemies being dead, was pardoned and allowed to return.  But he went back to Austrian service in Italy, where he became notorious for duelling, and then circulated insults about Prince Eugene, despite the warnings of his wife.  Prince Eugene sent him to the Low Countries where he got into more trouble and was condemned to death again, although in fact he only served a year in prison.  In disgrace in Vienna, he then “went Turk”, offered his services to the Ottoman empire, became a Muslim, joined their army and fought against the Austrians and the Russians with distinction.  He was made governor of Chios, but once again fell out with his employers and was banished to the Black Sea.  He died in Constantinople in 1747, apparently without having been condemned to death yet again.  I have read that his “Memoirs” are fakes, however.

If only he had stayed away from Bobbio!

Share

Canons 25-28 of the breviarium of the Council of Hippo (393)

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Let’s have some more of the canons of Hippo.  Dull as they are, they provide context as to what we can expect of a set of canons.

25. Ut primae sedis episcopus non appelletur princeps sacerdotum, aut summus sacerdos, aut aliquid huiusmodi, sed tantum primae sedis episcopus.

That the bishop of the first see shall not be called “chief of the priests” or “highest priest” or something of this sort, but only bishop of the first see.

This also reappears as canon 39 in the Register of canons in the council of Carthage of 419.

26.  Ut clerici edendi vel bibendi causa tabernas non ingrediantur, nisi peregrinationis necessitate.

That clergy shall not enter taverns for the purpose of eating or drinking except from the necessity of a journey.

So does this; canon 40.

27.  Ut episcopi trans mare non proficiscantur, nisi consulto primae sedis episcopo suae cuiusque provinciae, ut ab eo praecipue possint formatas accipere. Hinc etiam dirigendae litterae concilii ad transmarinos episcopos.

That bishops shall not travel overseas, except after consulting the bishop of the first see of his own province**, so that from him they shall chiefly be able to receive letters of recommendation**.  From now on also the letters of the council (sing) that need to be sent (gerundive) to overseas bishops.

The “cuiusque” bit is a bit of a guess.  It means “of each”, and is singular, so must line up with suae provinciae.  The “formata” is from Niemeyer, who gives this meaning based on … a canon from an African council!  A bit circular, but the idea of a letter of authorisation is probably right.  Another canon then says that clergy who turn up overseas without such a letter should be shown the door.  Clearly Aurelius of Carthage did not intend to let people bypass him; and other archbishops thought the same.

28.  Ut sacramenta altaris nonnisi a jejunis hominibus celebrentur, excepto uno die anniversario quo Cena Domini celebratur. Nam si aliquorum postmeridiano tempore defunctorum sive episcoporum sive clericorum sive ceterorum commendatio facienda est, solis orationibus fiat, si illi qui faciunt iam pransi inveniantur.

That the sacraments of the altar shall not be celebrated except by men fasting, except on the one anniversary day** on which the Lord’s Supper is celebrated.  For if a service of commendation of some of the dead, whether bishops or clergy, is to be made in the afternoon, let it be with prayers only, if those who shall be available** have already had breakfast.**

“excepto… anniversario” seems to be an ablative absolute.  “inveniantur” is present subjunctive, so we’re rendering all these subjunctives as “shall”, with an eye to a future action.  “faciunt” is present indicative, but refers to a time before the time when people are available to officiate at the service.  I hope that’s right!

There’s a definite air in some of these canons of an exasperated archbishop saying, “OK you bums, listen up and listen gooood….”  It’s noticeable how almost everything is about the clergy, and the laity are almost invisible.  We are not really in the early church any more, but well on our way to the medieval church.

Share

The “Matronae Austriahenae” and a supposed link to “Eostre”

Posted on by Roger Pearse

In the Rhineland, there are over a thousand inscriptions and reliefs dedicated to the “Matronae”.  All of these are Roman, and date to the second-third centuries AD.  There is some kind of close relationship with a particular German tribe, the Ubians.  The reliefs show three women; two older, either side of a younger woman.  In a 2016 thesis available online here, Kevin Worram states:[1]

Despite similarities to certain Celtic goddesses, like the Gallic Matres, the Matronae appear to be particular to this region based on their iconography.2 When depicted artistically, rather than just named on a votive, the Matronae come in a group of three with two older women flanking a younger maiden in the center (See Figure 1). They wear Ubian dresses and hairstyles, suggesting that the Ubians either brought the Matronae with them across the Rhine or adopted them after settling in the Celtic area west of the river.1 Often they have an epithet that ties them to a specific place or to the clan lineage of the devotee. Based on the votives, the Matronae cult seems to have been closely tied to this area and the Ubian population who lived there.

The figure referred to is the altar of Q. Vettius Severus (image via Wikimedia here):

The altar of Q. Vettius Severus. Via Wikimedia.

This is dedicated to the “Matronae Aufaniae”.  The Matronae usually seem to have an epithet like this.  The meanings of these are unknown, but seem to be locations – the “Mothers of Aufania” or something like this.

This leads us straight into the most important fact about the cult of the Matronae.  The fact is that we know nothing about it.

It seems that this Roman cult – presumably a version of a pre-existing Germanic cult – is not referenced in any literary source.  No ancient writer ever mentions such a thing.  Consequently everything that is written on the subject is derived – or not derived – from the inscriptions and reliefs.  These say very little.  For instance, the inscription above reads:

Matronis / Aufaniabus / Q(uintus) Vettius Severus / quaestor c(oloniae) C(laudiae) A(rae) A(grippinensium) / votum solvit l(ibens) m(erito) / Macrino et Celso co(n)s(ulibus)

To the Mothers of Aufania, Q. Vettius Severis, quaestor of the colony of Cologne, freely and deservedly fulfills his vow, Macrinus and Celsus being consuls.

VLSM is just a formula.  The date is 164 AD, the year when those two were consuls.  So … it tells us nothing.  Vettius Severus set up this item, dedicated to the Matronae, to fulfil a vow of some sort.

In 1958 there was a substantial find of inscriptions of this sort, during quarrying at a place named Morken-Harff in the Rheinland.  A dam was found, which had been built out of reused stones.  Over a thousand stones proved to come from 250-300 separate monuments, all fragmentary.[2]  The find was published by Hans-Georg Kolbe, “Die neuen Matroneninschriften von Morken-Harff”, Bonner Jahrbücher 160, (1960), 50-124, plates 10-25.  Unfortunately this is not online.

All the monuments are dedicated to the “Matronae Austriahenae”, with the exception of a dedication to Mercury; no dedications to the Matronae Austriahenae are known from elsewhere.  This must be a local cult.  The meaning of “Austriahenae” is unknown.  Maybe it is a place.  Nobody knows.

I was able to find online this image of one of the finds, an altar:

Inscription:

Matronis / Austriahe/nabus / Q(uintus) Lucretius / Patro pro se / v(otum) s(olvit) l(ibens) m(erito)

To the Matronae Austriahenae, Q. Lucretius Patro for himself freely and deservedly fulfills his vow.

Useful.  A search in the Clauss-Slaby database here for “austriahenibus” brings up 34 inscriptions, with pictures, mostly of fragments.

About this cult we know nothing.  It is perhaps unfortunate, but when we know nothing, it is very important to acknowledge this.  Failure to do so invariably results in the production of nonsense.

Since 1962, there has been a considerable literature on what this might mean.  Speculation has run rife, for evidence there is none.  In an evil hour the philologists were let loose, and some of these managed to infer from “austria-” a link – presumably based on what they think these words must have sounded like – to the Anglo-Saxon goddess Eostre mentioned by Bede in 725 AD in De ratione temporum.  Bede gives Eostre as the origin of the old English month named Eosturmonath.  The ancient Christian festival of Pasch falls in that month, and so arises the English word “Easter”, familiar to us today.

All this would be very much a fringe interest.  Sadly in the last two years there has been a massive upsurge in social media posts making the extraordinary claim “Easter is pagan! ha ha!”, usually at Christian holidays.  Much of this seems to come from the professional online army of Democrat party, presumably as part of the horrible politics of our day in order to spite their political foes.

These stormtroopers have no idea how this claim could be so, nor do they care.  The object is mockery, not information.  But others have come to their aid.  They claim that Eostre predates Easter.

Sane people point out that Eostre is only recorded once, in 725 AD, while Easter is recorded in the 2nd century AD.  The early Christians did not possess time-machines.  Sadly such obvious responses have little effect.

Lately I have seen the reply that Eostre is recorded as the Matronae Austriahenae.  It seems that one of these people has edited the dreadful Wikipedia article on Eostre to insert material which will infallibly be taken that way.  The reference given has been carefully and selectively quoted to suggest that the name “must be cognate to Eostre”, which is enough for the purpose.  But it leaves a sane man wondering how anybody could know this.

It is curious to learn that people are so certain of the sounds of these words, which they know only from a written form.  They know the origin of words whose sound has not been heard by any man, and  whose meaning is unknown to any man, living, or who have lived, for more than a thousand years.  How odd to be certain that history may be discovered based on nothing more than a supposed sound and a supposed similarity.  Sometimes you wonder whether the humanities is really, as the scientists think, just a game rather than a discipline.

The truth is that nothing whatever is known of the Matronae Austriahenae, except that some Romans dedicated a stone to them in fulfillment of vows between 150-250 AD.  There is no link with Anglo-Saxon goddess five centuries and hundreds of miles further away.  The rest is imaginary.

Share

Canons 21-24 of the breviarium of the Council of Hippo (393)

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Let’s try translating a few more of the canons, in the summary of the canons of Hippo made for the council of Carthage in 397.

21. Ut nemo in precibus vel Patrem pro Filio, vel Filium pro Patre nominet; et cum altari assistitur semper ad Patrem dirigatur oratio. Et quicumque sibi preces aliunde describit, non eis utatur, nisi prius eas cum instructioribus fratribus contulerit.

That no-one in the prayers shall name the Father for the Son, or the Son for the Father; and when he is officiating at the altar, let the prayer be directed always to the father.  And anyone who transcribes the prayers for him from elsewhere, he shall not use them,** unless he has discussed them first with the better-educated brothers.

** “utor” is deponent, and takes the ablative.

22.  Ut nullus clericorum amplius recipiat, quam cuiquam commodaverit, sive pecuniam det, sive quamlibet speciem.

That none of the clergy shall receive more than he lent to anyone, whether he gives money, or in kind,** however much.

** “species” in late Latin is goods, wares, the annona.

23.  Ut in sacramentis corporis et sanguinis Domini, nihil amplius offeratur, quam ipse Dominus tradidit, hoc est panem et vinum aquae mixtum. Primitiae vero seu lac et mel, quod uno die solemnissimo pro infantum mysterio solet offerri, quamvis in altari offerantur, suam tamen habent propriam benedictionem, ut a sacramento dominici corporis et sanguinis distinguantur. Nec amplius in primitiis offeratur quam de uvis et frumentis.

That nothing else shall be offered in the sacraments of the body and blood of the Lord, than the Lord himself handed down, that is bread and wine mixed with water.  But the first-fruits, whether milk or honey, which are accustomed to be offered on one most solemn day for the service of the infants, however much they shall be offered on the altar, they shall have however their own blessing, so that they may be distinguished from the sacrament of the Lord’s body and blood.  Nor shall more in the first fruits be offered than that from grapes and corn.

This is repeated as canon 37 of the Register of canons issued in 419.

24. Ut clerici continentes ad viduas, vel virgines, nisi ex jussu vel permissu episcoporum vel presbyterorum, non accedant; et hoc non soli faciant, sed cum clericis, aut cum his cum quibus episcopus aut presbyter jusserit.  Sed nec ipsi episcopi aut presbyteri soli habeant accessum ad huiusmodi feminas, sed aut ubi clerici praesentes sunt, aut graves aliqui christiani.

That celibate clergy shall not approach widows or virgins, except by order or permission of the bishops of presbyters; and they shall not do so alone, but with clergy, or with those with whom the bishop or presbyter ordered.  But the bishops or presbyters themselves shall not have access to women of this kind, except where either some clergy are present or some respectable Christians.

This is repeated as canon 38 of the Register of canons issued in 419.

Share