Ibn Abi Useibia and his history of medical writers

Posted on by Roger Pearse

R. Haddad wrote an interesting article Hunayn ibn Ishaq, apologiste chrétien (1974), which I was reading this evening, thanks to the kind gift of a bunch of articles over the weekend.  

On p.293-4 he gives details of the appalling treatment of the great translator by the Caliph al-Mamun, which apparently come from a History of medical writers by a certain Ibn Abi Useibia.  The Arabic text was published in Cairo in 1882 by A. Müller.  I won’t attempt to give the Arabic title, but Muller, Cairo, 1882 was enough for me to find the book in COPAC.  This contains, on p.190-197, a long extract from On his own misfortunes.  

I can’t find any sign of an English translation of Useibia’s work.  The nearest I can come is an extract from it, from 1834, by William Cureton, on physicians from India.  It’s here.  I don’t know how we could get access to the Arabic text; and what other version exists? 

Here is what Haddad says: 

When he returned to Baghdad after a long period in the country of the Rums, Hunayn ibn Ishaq quickly became famous.  Al-Mamun, learning of his ability as a doctor, wanted to make use of him.  But, afraid, in case Ibn Ishaq had been bribed by the Byzantine emperor to kill him, he decided to put him to the test.  After giving him many gifts, he asked him to supply a violent poison, good enough to kill an enemy.  Hunayn put him off by saying that he only concerned himself with useful medicaments, to the exclusion of lethal poisons.  Threats having no effect, the Caliph threw him in prison.  A year later, he was brought out and the demand repeated with strong threats and promises.  But faced with the obstinate refusal of Hunayn, al-Mamun then revealed what he was really thinking, and reassured him, and then he asked to know what were the reasons for such behaviour.  Hunayn replied: 

“Religion and medicine.  Religion, in fact, commands us to do good to our enemies, still more to our friends.  And medicine forbids us to do harm to men… That is why I could not disobey these two noble obligations, and am resigned to die, believing in the God who will not abandon anyone who risks his life to obey him.” 

The words quoted are from Ibn Abi Useibia’s work, apparently, pp.187-8 of the Cairo edition. 

Arabic literature is so unknown in the west.  I’m interested; yet the only guide I can hear of is Brockelmann’s Geschichte der arabischen Literatur, which is multi-volume and, worse, in German.  Why isn’t there an English translation?  Why aren’t all these texts online in English? 

UPDATE: It seems that something does exist in English, in Dwight F. Reynolds, Interpreting the self: autobiography in the Arabic literary tradition.  2001, p.107-118.  This covers the episode when he was entangled by his enemies in a palace intrigue under the Caliph Mutawakkil, and once again ended up in prison. 

Share

Eusebius update

Posted on by Roger Pearse

The proof copy of the paperback of Eusebius of Caesarea, Gospel problems and solutions (Quaestiones ad Stephanum et Marinum) has arrived this evening, and is perfectly fine.  I’ve marked it as approved on the Lightning Source site, so it should now start to trickle through the distribution system.

Once I know that I can order copies myself, then I shall start letting people know that it’s available and emailing all the supporters of the project who kindly expressed interest.

It’s not as massive a tome as the hardback.  But it is still 432 pages of pretty serious work! 

I’ve also commissioned a leaflet to go in the welcome pack of the Oxford Patristics Conference.  The first draft of this arrived today, and looks very good indeed.  The graphic designer that I use, Add Design, produce very professional-looking materials first cut.  I’ll look at it more carefully this evening and decide what revisions I want.

Share

British Library to place 250,000 books online — thanks to Google

Posted on by Roger Pearse

It seems that the BL will allow Google to place 250,000 books published between 1700 and 1870 online.  See AFP article here.

All the works will be available for text search download and reading on the British Library’s website www.bl.uk and at Google Books on books.google.co.uk.

The cost of digitising all 40 million pages will be borne by Google, which has entered similar partnerships with Stanford and Harvard universities in the United States as well as in the Netherlands, Italy and Austria.

BBC article is here, BL press release here (and do read a few other announcements first, and laugh to see how many merely repeat the press release).

This is good news.  More.

Share

UK: Harassment of Christians to resume

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Yesterday the Sunday Telegraph published an interview with Trevor Phillips, the black Ghanaian-born former newsreader placed in charge of the UK Equalities and Human Rights Commission.  There was also a headline article on p.1 and 2 ‘Moslems are integrating better than Christians’, which summarised the interview.

A web version of the article is here, but is significantly different from the paper version.   The interview itself, entitled “I’ll defend faith, says equality chief” is here, although the picture, which showed Phillips laughing his head off, has been replaced with a more sober image. 

The articles contained a number of interesting statements made by Phillips.

  • “churches and faith groups have to fall into line with the views of wider society to keep their charitable status”
  • “Churches, mosques, temples, religious organisations of all kinds now have to some extent protection under the law but they also have to obey the law including anti-discrimination law because they are charities, because they offer a public service“
  • Catholic care was a clearer and simpler case. You’re offering a public service and you’re a charity and there are rules about how charities behave. You have to play by the rules. We can’t have a set of rules that apply to one group of people simply because they happen to think it’s right.

The rules to which Phillips refers were drawn up a few years ago, when the regulation of charities was changed to facilitate an attack on the privately run public schools.  They differ in many respects from those previously in force.  Charitable status exempts bodies from the crushing UK taxation.

Phillips is not part of the Charities Commission, but this seems to be a clear statement of the intentions of the establishment.   They state that, unless Christians endorse unnatural vice — which is the point at issue — their charities will be deregistered, and Christians will not be permitted to provide any kind of public service, except by paying a tax that charities endorsing sodomy will not be subject to.  No school, no soup kitchen, no adoption agency, no hospice — none of these aims, all charitable, will be permitted to have charitable status, and all will be taxed as if undertaken for profit. 

None of this rules out further action on “equality” grounds by Mr Phillips’ organisation, of course.  Phillips and his team have already prosecuted commercial businesses and private individuals who are not charities.  This is a further stage, intended to target further Christian groups such as the Salvation Army.

Phillips makes clear that mosques need not fear: “Muslim communities in this country are doing their damnedest to try to come to terms with their neighbours to try to integrate and they’re doing their best…” 

There is a great deal in the article about respect for faith-based beliefs, which at first sight is at odds with the draconian stratements above.  But if read carefully, it explains itself.

  • “there is certainly a feeling amongst some people of belief that they are under siege”
  • Our business is defending the believer. The law we’re here to implement recognises that religious identity is an essential part of this society. It’s an essential element of being a fulfilled human being.
  • I understand why a lot of people in faith groups feel a bit under siege.
  • There are a lot of Christian activist voices who appear bent on stressing the kind of persecution…
  • There are some Christian organisations who basically want to have a fight

All the mentions of Christians are negative.  “People of faith” means Moslems.

The article also signals that the establishment intends to attack the black churches.  These have hitherto been protected to some degree by the unwillingness of the establishment to be seen to attack black institutions.  There has, all the same, been some sniping at them as primitive and backward.  However:

  • I come from that kind of community. We like our faith strong and pretty undiluted. If you come from an Afro-Caribbean Christian background the attitudes to homosexuality are unambiguous, they are undiluted, they are nasty and in some cases homicidal.

In the mouth of a state official, in charge of a body often seen as inquisitorial, this language has a sinister sound.

There is also an attack on the Christian groups that fund the defence of those attacked by his (tax-funded) organisation. 

  • There are some Christian organisations who basically want to have a fight and therefore they’re constantly defining the ground in such a way that anyone who doesn’t agree wholly agree with them about everything is essentially a messenger from Satan.   “I think for a lot of Christian activists, they want to have a fight and they choose sexual orientation as the ground to fight it on. I think that whole argument isn’t about the rights of Christians. It’s about politics. It’s about a group of people who really want to have weight and influence and they’ve chosen that particular ground.

The Christian B&B owners who were denounced by gay activist informers were dragged into court by Phillips, and the prosecution funded by the state.  Clearly the Christian Legal Centre and the Christian Institute are doing the right thing; the accusation is projection, I think.

At one point the article is not clear.  This is when Philips addresses atheism.  

The establishment has encouraged the rise of atheism, in order to attack the Christians.  It is an old trick to deprive some group of their rights by creating a counter-movement and then claiming to be “mediating” between them.  The group you are attacking must therefore either abandon some of what it has always had, or else be seen to be refusing to compromise. 

But it sounds as if the establishment is not entirely satisfied with the performance of its puppets.  There are more comments from Philips in the other article, supposedly summarising the first:

  • [Philips] warned it had become “fashionable” to attack and mock religion, singling out atheist polemicist Richard Dawkins for his views

This suggests to me that they have recognised that Dawkins’ hysterical accusations have become counter-productive.  Dawkins himself has received quite a bit less publicity in the last couple of years, and is perhaps something of an embarassment.

But this may merely be an excuse for his own organisation to “protect” “believers” — a power play.

Finally some words that Philips must have sniggered silently while uttering:

  • “It seems right that the reach of anti-discriminatory law should stop at the door of the church or mosque. At the moment the law says it [appointing openly gay bishops] is a matter for the Church of England. It’s probably right. “

The game was given away, immediately above the article on p.2, in another article, which explained all: “Church clears the way for gay bishops”.  The same day the BBC was giving the same story:

Legal advice is due to be published as early as Monday saying homosexual clergy in civil partnerships can become bishops.

The move is in response to the Equality Act, which protects from discrimination on the grounds of sexuality.

(My italics).  The appointments in the Church of England have always been controlled by the establishment.  Evidently Phillips knew that other establishment stooges would be responsible for dealing with that.

It’s all strikingly reminiscent of the religious policies of the old Soviet Union.  On the one hand Christian charitable bodies were forbidden; on the other priests were appointed by the KGB, and those who refused to conform to church policies set by the state were demonised.  I was rereading a book by Michael Bordeaux of Keston College this evening, describing the appalling persecution of Russian Baptists in the 1960’s. 

The choice before Christians is clear.  The state has made endorsement of sodomy a shibboleth, deliberately, knowing that it is offensive to most people and condemned by the bible.  Endorse it, they say, or face the consequences. 

In times past similar demands were made, of sacrificing to the genius of Caesar, or bowing the knee to Baal.  Neither, perhaps, seemed very shocking to contemporaries.  “Why can’t they just conform and not cause trouble?” people asked.   The rest of the time they jeered at Christians as “breaking the law”.  The Christians replied that they must obey God, rather than man.

It seems those times are here again.  Some will conform, and will thereby apostasise.  Others will suffer loss.  Many will try to keep their heads down, while informers roam around seeking whom they may denounce.

The situation is not nearly so bad here as it was in Russia, and let us hope that it does not become so.  Rather it resembles the harassment arranged by Julian the Apostate — what Gregory Nazianzen called a “soft persecution”, designed to destroy the churches by harassment.  But the intent is clear.

Let us pray for those who are determined to persecute the church here.  And let us pray for the confessors, those who suffer harassment and persecution because they will not betray Christ.

Share

Book review: After Alexander

Posted on by Roger Pearse

James Romm, Ghost on the throne: The death of Alexander the Great and the War for Crown and Empire, Random House (2011). 368p. $28.95. ISBN: 978-0-307-27164-8.

The story of how Alexander of Macedon inherited the army that had conquered Greece and used it to conquer the world is known to us all.  Much less well known is what happened when, unexpectedly, Alexander died in Babylon in June 323 BC.  He left, as heirs, an unborn child and a half-wit brother, and a group of generals in command of his army.  As might be expected, these generals fell out among themselves, murdered each other, fought over the spoils and, as the memory of their king receded, murdered his heirs and made themselves into kings.  The Successor kingdoms, of the Seleucids, Ptolemies, and Antigonids, define the Hellenistic era.

James Romm has chosen to tell the story of how Alexander died, and how his generals fought and squabbled, down to the extinction of the Macedonian Royal family.  This he does with verve and imagination.  No-one could fault the enthusiasm with which he tells the story, and it should appeal to the general reader.  He also breaks up the narrative of the plotting by interleaving material from the archaeological discoveries at Verginia (ancient Aegae) in Macedonia, where, possibly, the splendid burials are actually those of Philip Arridhaeus and the child Alexander IV. 

The narrative is well plotted, and switches between one group and another are well-signalled and organised.  It would have been very easy to confuse the reader; but this is deftly avoided.  The action in Athens, and the downfall of Phocion and the attempts by the Athenians to regain their liberty are vividly depicted.

Each chapter has a respectable number of footnotes, gathered at the end.  Unfortunately an error in the proof omitted the numerals from the text, making it difficult for me to see how well distributed these were. 

An appendix gives the primary sources, and wisely adds links to online versions on sites such as Lacus Curtius and my own.  I learned from this, indeed, that Photius’ summary of Arrian’s Events after Alexander is online, which I had not known.  Earlier in the book, indeed, I learned that a leaf from the full version is extant in a palimpsest.  The book does not shy away from snippets like this, and is all the better for it.

The author discusses his approach to the historical record in the preface.  Basically he tells the story straight, just as they tell it, without invention, fiction, or needless imagination.  This is the right approach to take, and the discussion of the issues in the preface is itself a useful education for the sort of reader who will read this.  The bibliography at the end is well chosen to assist that same reader.  It is a book, indeed, that I would have found most interesting in my mid teens, when I was reading books by Leonard Cottrell, or Narrow Pass, Black Mountain.  It gives ordinary people access to history.  It will, undoubtedly, recruit young people to become scholars of the Hellenistic period.

The only problem that I foresee, though, is that, in a way, the story is a depressing tale.  There is no happy ending to all this.  At the end of it all, Alexander’s family are all dead, and most perish miserably.  This is not the fault of the author, of course, but it makes for less than cheering reading at the end of a busy day at work, or on a packed commuter train.  And that is the audience to which this book, surely, is directed.  I don’t feel drawn to read it again, for instance.  I reached the end and felt sad. 

The typesetting is professional, although the proof had various errors of formatting in it.  The maps and illustrations are good, well-drawn, and not distracting. 

The cover, on the other hand, is an unappealing piece of work.  The tired, stale old cliché of some ancient artefact on a coloured background — just like Narrow Pass, Black Mountain, of 40 years ago — is not even as good as that, for the colour is muddied and off-putting.  I am amazed that Random House would put a book out with that cover.  Try again, chaps.  This is a book about people and human interest.  Commission someone to paint a picture of a bunch of Greeks in armour in bright colours before the walls of Babylon, and let the book sparkle on the shelf.  This is a period of history that took place in bright sunlight — let the cover reflect it.

All in all, this is an excellent piece of work.  The scholarship is sound but not intrusive, and the story rattles along.  Recommended.

Share

A note on Evanthius grammaticus

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Bill Thayer of Lacus Curtius emails to ask if I have seen this link.  It’s a parallel Latin text and French translation of Evanthius grammaticus, De fabula and de comoedia excerpta.  I find that the name is also given as Euanthius.  Here’s a few notes on what I can find.

Evanthius (or Euanthius) of Constantinople 1 was a Latin grammarian of the first half of the fourth century, as we learn from a passage in the Chronicon of Jerome recording his death in AD 358.2  The only other ancient author to mention him is the grammarian Rufinus 3 whose commentary on Terence begins with the words:4 “Evanthius in the commentary on the fables of Terence says…” and then gives two brief passages, both of which are found in the introduction to the commentary on Terence that has come down to us under the name of Donatus.  From these we learn that Evanthius wrote a commentary on Terence which included or was introduced by a discussion of the genre5.  This is entitled De Fabula, but it is not clear how it became attached to the work of Donatus.6

The treatise De comoedia appears in the manuscripts prefixed to the scholia on Terence,7  and was edited by Reifferscheid,8 and the modern edition is by Wessner.9  It gives a survey of the origins of tragedy and comedy, then some general statements about the nature of comedy and then a history of the latter, treating satire as a form of comedy.10

Here’s the first couple of lines of De fabula, which I have converted from the French.  It looks like an interesting work.

1. Both tragedy and comedy had their first manifestations in the religious ceremonies with which the ancients consecrated themselves in fulfillment of vows made for benefits received. 2 In fact, when a fire had been lit on the altar and a goat brought, the type of incantations that the sacred choir made in honour of the god Liber was called tragedy.  The etymology of this is either from τράγος and ᾠδή, i.e. the word for a goat, the enemy of the vines, and the word for song (of which Virgil gives full details); or it is because the creator of this poem received a goat in return; or because a full cup of grape wine was given in solemn recompense to the singers or because actors smeared their faces with wine lees,  before the invention of masks by Aeschylus.  Indeed in Greek the lee is called τρύγες. This is why tragedy is so called.

1. Maximillian Dorn, De veteribus grammaticis artis Terentiae iudicibus (1906), p.19, tells us that “Donatus is followed by the most obscure Evanthius, a Byzantine grammarian…”.
2.  “Euanthius”, Real-Encyclopadie VI.1 (1907), p.847, “Euanthius eruditissimus grammaticorum Constantinopli diem obit, in cuius locum ex Africa Chrestus adducitur” (here) — “Evanthius, most learned of grammarians, died at Constantinople, in whose placed Chrestus was brought from Africa.”  3.  So states the RE.
4.  Grammatici latini VI 554,4. See also 565, 5.  “Euanthius in commentario Terentii de fabula [hoc est de comoedia] sic dicit …”.
5.  Robert A. Kaster, Guardians of language: the grammarian and society in late antiquity, p.278-9.
6.  Michael J. Sidnell, Sources of dramatic theory: Plato to Congreve. p.78, n.2.  “The text of De fabula can be found in Donatus/Wessner 1962-3, 1:13-22, and the fullest modern treatment of Evanthius is Cupaiulo’s (Evanthius, ed. Cupaiulo, 1979).” 
7. G. L. Hendrickson, The dramatic satura and the old comedy at Rome, American Journal of Philology 15 (1894), p.14.
8.  Euanthius et Donati commentum de comoedia ex rec. A. Reifferscheid, Breslau (1874).
9.  Evanthius, ‘De fabula: excerpta de Comoedia’, Aeli Donati Commentum Terenti, ed. P. Wessner, 3 vols, Stuttgart 1966, vol. 1.  (Source)
10.  Hendrickson, p.14.

Share

From my diary

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Yet another attempt to install IE9 on my machine has failed.  For a moment this morning it looked as if my attempt to do so had hopelessly corrupted my windows install.  It always fails when restarting on “setting up personalized setting for browser customizations”.  I don’t have any browser customisations — not intentional ones anyway — and I don’t want my “personalised settings” at this price.  I disabled all the add-ons.  But it is telling that attempting to reset IE8 to factory defaults hangs.  I did try deinstalling IE8, but that didn’t help.  All that … for a browser?

Meanwhile … this site is NOT banned in China!  Which is good news. 

The bill for photocopying Bar Hebraeus Chronicon Ecclesiasticum vol. 3 arrived this morning, ca. $50.  I’ve paid it, but it is sobering to see how much it costs just to upload a couple of books.  Vol. 3 is on Archive.org, by the way — but I hope to find the time to rescan the pages, because I think I can do better.

I’m reading a review copy of James Romm’s Ghost on the throne, which Random House sent me yesterday.  It’s very readable and seems to be the sort of thing Michael Grant used to do.  It’s done very well.  A general reader who wants to know what happened after Alexander died will find it very useful.  It is source-driven, thankfully.  I approve!  But I will do a post with a proper review in due course. 

I’ve reached the point at which Alexander is dead and the Athenians are about to drive Aristotle out of the city as a friend of Macedon.  The tactics used by the demagogues are uncommonly like those I have seen used on Wikipedia! 

What I do miss, in the book, is the witty quips of the people under discussion, which appear in volumes like Paley’s Greek Wit.  Dr Romm should be given a copy!

Oh, and the book cover is terrible.  Worse than it appears on the website.

Share

From my diary

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Ordered vol. 2 of Vermaseren’s CIMRM today.  Let’s see if my local library can get it.

Ordered 1,000 flyers from a local designer, to go in the welcome pack of the Oxford Patristics Conference.  These are due by 4th August, so need to be ready by then.  Some poor souls then have to make up those packs by hand.  Also contacted the conference to remind them I exist and intend to have such a flyer.  (Need to think about how personally I am  going to get there, and how to do some kind of book display!)

I also ordered two review copies, one for Vigiliae Christianae, one for the Journal of Theological Studies.  It’s interesting that the journals have a rather stand-offish attitude to publications.  You don’t exactly feel enthused to send them copies.  I wanted to send a copy to the Journal of Early Christian Studies, but I can’t find a contact address!  My email enquiry was ignored.  Rather baffling that.

A couple of days ago I had the offer to review a history of the Successor period, after Alexander, by James Fromm.  I agreed yesterday, and — to my utter astonishment — a copy arrived today.  By international priority post, no less!  That must have cost a bit.  But it’s timely — something to read over the weekend.

I took a load of paperbacks down to the local charity shop — four plastic bags full.  Glad to see the back of books that I know I shall never read again.  I rescued a few from the pile, tho!

I also have a pile of academic books I want to get rid of.  I have an academic in Europe who could use them, and I’d be willing to donate them.  But … you can’t post books from Britain.  You really cannot.  I’ve been into two post offices today, enquiring.  I had with me six small books. Total weight just under 2 kg (about 4 pounds in real weights).  Price to post was over 11GBP (i.e. $17).  It’s more costly for individual books.  If I get 20kg, it will cost me about 90GBP (i.e. $140), just to post them.  Cynically, surface post for printed papers is made more expensive than airmail.

I found myself wondering if the cheapest way to do this is just to hire a student to fly over there by a budget airline with a suitcase.  I bet it would cost less than 90 GBP!

Share

A scholion on Lucian about Mithras, and a translation of Theodoret

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Here’s a couple of stray thoughts, relating to previous posts.

Firstly, I can confirm that there is a translation into English of Theodoret’s Fabularum Haereticorum Compendium in the 1990 these by Glenn Melvin Cope, An analysis of the heresiological method of Theodoret of Cyrus in the “Haereticarum fabularum compendium”.  I got hold of a copy today, and all five books are translated.

Secondly … Andrew Eastbourne very kindly translated a scholion on Lucian, which related to Mithras.  I extracted it from Cumont’s Textes et Monumentes and asked him to do the honours.  Here’s what he says:

Cumont cites two scholia on Lucian which discuss Mithra(s), from the edition of Jacobitz.  For a more recent edition, see Rabe, Scholia in Lucianum (1906).[1]

Scholion on Lucian, Zeus Rants / Jupiter tragoedus 8 [cf. Rabe, p. 60]:

This Bendis…[2]  Bendis is a Thracian goddess, and Anubis is an Egyptian [god], whom the theologoi[3] call “dog-faced.”  Mithras is Persian, and Men is Phrygian.  This Mithras is the same as Hephaestus, but others say [he is the same as] Helios.  So then, because the barbarians would take pride[4] in wealth, they naturally also outfitted their own gods most expensively.  And Attis is revered by the Phrygians…

 Scholion on Lucian, The Parliament of the Gods / Deorum concilium 9 [cf. Rabe, p. 212] 

Mithrês [Mithras]…  Mithras is the sun [Helios], among the Persians.[5]

——-
[1] I have noted points where Rabe’s edition differs in substance from the text printed by Cumont.  Rabe’s edition is available online at http://www.archive.org/details/scholiainlucianu00rabe
[2] Lucian’s text here mentions Bendis, Anubis, Attis, Mithrês [Mithras], and Mên.
[3] The Greek term normally refers to poets who wrote about the gods, like Hesiod or Orpheus.  Note that this is an emendation; the mss. read logoi (“words / discourses / accounts”), which Rabe adopts in his edition.
[4] Gk. ekômôn; lit., “wore their hair long / let their hair grow long.”
[5] Rabe’s text:  “Mithras is the same as Helios, among the Persians.”

 I will add this material to my collection of Mithras literary references.

Share

More on the Eusebius and Hegesippus of Rodosto / Raidestos

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Today I managed to get a look at R. Forster’s De antiquitatibus et libris manuscriptis Constantinopolitanis, 1877. [2019 update: now here]  This, if you remember, contains a catalogue of Greek manuscripts said to exist in the 16th century at Rodosto / Raidestos, a town just outside Constantinople.

Well, it does contain such a list.  The list covers two and a bit pages, no less, starting on p.29.  The publication is rather rubbishy, and I wasn’t easily able to work out just where the data came from — the article text was in Latin, and badly structured.   But I laboured through the list of Greek works.  (It was in a rare books room, so I could get no photocopies)

And … I think it’s a hoax.

A lot of books look reasonable to me.  But I don’t believe, or not very much, that the library contained a copy of the lost comedies of Menander.  That is quite unlikely, and appears close to the top of the first page, shortly after some works of Aristotle.

On the second page, close to the bottom, are two entries, one above the other.  These were in Greek, but they read:

History of Hegesippus
Eusebius Pamphilus against Porphyry

This is highly suspicious.  The first of these probably wasn’t extant much after the fall of the Western empire.  But it does appear as bait in various lists of books supposedly extant during the 16th and 17th century, published by Theodor Zahn (my translation here) and Ph. Meyer (ditto).  If it existed, such a book would be beyond price; and that, probably, is precisely why it is listed in book lists designed to tempt western collectors.  Its very presence suggests fraud.

But for this improbability to be followed by yet another lost work primarily of interest to westerners is beyond probability, in my opinion.

I would imagine that the list is a hoax.  It doesn’t look real to me.  Normal medieval catalogues start with biblical works, patristic works, and add other material towards the end.  This one is a mixture of stuff, much of it clearly far more interesting in the west than to any Greek monastic collection.  Close to the top, where the eye will fall on it almost immediately, is something a westerner would want — Menander.  And the two other items?  Well, doubtless there were all sorts of people hunting around Greece in the 16th century, asking after this, asking after that.  What easier than to make up such a list, include a few of the items, inveigle someone to come out with a belt of gold, make the long journey, and then say (with straight face) “Sorry, we’ve lost those; but look what we can sell you!”

Was there ever a collection of books at Rodosto?  Perhaps there was.  It should be investigated, certainly.

But, alas, I can no longer feel any confidence that the Eusebius against Porphyry was ever there.

Share